content
stringlengths 1
15.9M
|
|---|
\section{Introduction}
For the International Large Detector (ILD) at the International Linear Collider, a gaseous Time Projection Chamber (TPC) is foreseen as the central tracker \cite{Behnke:2013xla}. The TPC provides a large number of measurement points, has a minimal material budget and can identify particles by energy loss (dE/dx) measurements. In the baseline design, the TPC has a pad readout in combination with GEM or Micromegas devices for gas amplification. Because the size of the pads is much larger than the ionization scale, the granularity is a limiting factor in energy loss measurements. A GridPix pixel readout has a much finer granularity and can extract all information from a track.
In this paper the progress towards developing a pixel-based readout for the ILD TPC will be presented.
\section{A GridPix based on the Timepix3 chip}
A GridPix is a readout system consisting of a pixel readout chip and an integrated amplification grid coupled by microelectronic post-processing techniques \cite{Colas:2004ks, Kaminski:2017bgj}. The chip is a Timepix3 chip with \SI{256 x 256}{} pixels with a pixel pitch of \SI{55}{\um} \cite{Poikela:2014joi}. A grid is located \SI{50}{\um} above the chip and supported by SU8 pillars. The \SI{1}{\um} thick Aluminum grid has \SI{35}{\um} diameter circular holes aligned to the pixels. In order to prevent damage from discharges of the grid, the Timepix3 chip has a \SI{4}{\um} thick Silicon-rich Silicon Nitride protective layer.
A GridPix detects ionizing particles through efficient detection of all ionization electrons that are liberated in the gas. Ionisation electrons are drifted towards the readout by an electric field until they reach the amplification region. Here they cause an ionization avalanche that is collected on a single pixel pad. The Timepix3 chip pixels have low electronic noise ($\approx$70 e$^-$) and can register a precise time of arrival (ToA) using a \SI{640}{MHz} TDC. Simultaneously it can record the time over threshold (ToT) using a \SI{40}{MHz} clock. The data-driven readout is performed with a SPIDR board \cite{Visser:2015bsa}.
\section{Results from 2017 testbeam}
A small detector with one Timepix3 based GridPix was tested in July 2017 using a test beam of 2.5 GeV electrons. The results have been previously published in \cite{Ligtenberg:2018sjs}. Here we will restrict ourselves to the most relevant results.
\subsection{Description of the GridPix detector}
The Timepix3 based GridPix is embedded in a small drift volume as shown in figure \ref{fig:detector}. The dimensions of the box are \SI{69x42x28}{mm}. A cathode is located approximately \SI{20}{mm} above the GridPix. The electric field was kept homogeneous using a cage of conductive strips and a guard electrode at a height of \SI{1}{mm} above the GridPix. The volume was flushed with a gas mix of \SI{95}{\percent} \ce{Ar}, \SI{3}{\percent} \ce{CF4}, and \SI{2}{\percent} \ce{iC4H10} called T2K gas, a good candidate for the ILD TPC gas. The electric field was set to \SI{280}{V/cm}, near the value for which the gas reaches its predicted maximal drift velocity of \SI{78.86\pm0.01}{\um/ns} \cite{Biagi:1999nwa}. The hit $z$-position was calculated using the predicted drift velocity and the hit ToA. The grid voltage was \SI{350}{V} ensuring a high gain and consequently a high efficiency. The threshold was set to about \SI{800}{e^-} to reduce the noise to a minimum.
\subsection{Setup at test beam}
The detector was probed with \SI{2.5}{GeV} electrons provided by the ELSA facility in Bonn at a maximum rate set to \SI{10}{kHz}. The setup is shown in figure \ref{fig:setup}. Electrons first passed through a scintillator used as a trigger and then through a Mimosa telescope with 6 silicon detector planes used to give a reference track. The beam entered the GridPix detector drift volume through a \SI{5}{mm} synthetic window. The Timepix3 hits were attributed to a single trigger by considering all hits within \SI{400}{ns} of a trigger.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{img/detector.pdf}
\caption{Schematic drawing of the GridPix detector.}
\label{fig:detector}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{img/setup.pdf}
\caption{Setup with telescope and GridPix detector.}
\label{fig:setup}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Reconstruction and selection}
To reconstruct a track, a straight line was fitted to the hits using a simple linear regression fit. Hits were assigned errors as given in section \ref{sec:hit resolution} in the directions perpendicular to the beam. Because of a multiple scattering at the last telescope plane, only the intercept at this plane was used as a reference. Some basic selections were made to ensure a clean track. Among the most stringent ones are a cut on events with less than 30 hits in the TPC and a hit ToT of at least \SI{0.15}{\us}.
\subsection{Time walk correction}
Time walk is caused by the dependence of the measured ToA on the magnitude of the signal. Using the ToT as measure of signal strength, the time walk can be corrected for, and the resolution can be improved. The correction can be parametrized using the time walk $\delta z_\text{tw}$ as a function of the corrected ToT $t_\text{ToT}$:
\begin{equation}
\delta z_\text{tw} = \frac{c_1}{t_\text{ToT} + t_0},
\label{eq:timewalk}
\end{equation}
where $c_1$ and $t_0$ are constants determined from a fit to the mean track residual in figure \ref{fig:timewalk}. The track residual is defined as the the difference between the hit position and the track fit prediction.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{img/timewalk.pdf}
\caption{Mean track residual in the drift direction fitted with equation \eqref{eq:timewalk}.}
\label{fig:timewalk}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Hit resolution} \label{sec:hit resolution}
The two main contributions to the hit resolution in the pixel plane are a constant contribution caused by the pixel size $d_\text{pixel}$ and a transverse drift component that scales with drift distance and the diffusion coefficient $D_T$. The resolution $\sigma_y$ is given by:
\begin{equation}
\sigma_y^2=\frac{d_\text{pixel}^2}{12} +D_T^2(z-z_0),
\label{eq:sigmay}
\end{equation}
where $z_0$ is the position of the grid. The hit resolution as a function of $z$-position is given in figure \ref{fig:Diffy}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{img/resolutiony.pdf}
\caption{Measured hit resolution in pixel plane (blue points) fitted with the resolution according to equation \eqref{eq:sigmay} (red line), where the hit resolution at zero drift distance $d_\text{pixel}/\sqrt{12}$ was fixed to \SI{15.9}{\um}.}
\label{fig:Diffy}
\end{figure}
Likewise, the main contributions to the resolution in the drift direction are a constant contribution from the time resolution $\sigma_\tau$ of $\SI{1.56}{ns}$, a contribution from other noise sources such as jitter and time walk, and a contribution from longitudinal diffusion with coefficient $D_L$. The resolution $\sigma_z$ is given by:
\begin{equation}
\sigma_z^2=\frac{\sigma_\tau^2 v_\text{drift}^2 }{12}+\sigma_{z0}^2+D_L^2(z-z_0).
\label{eq:sigmaz}
\end{equation}
This resolution is shown in figure \ref{fig:Diffz}, where the hits with a ToT below \SI{0.60}{\us} were shown separately because of the large time walk error they have.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{img/resolutionz.pdf}
\caption{Measured hit resolution in drift direction split by ToT. The hits with a ToT above \SI{0.60}{\us} (blue points) are fitted with the resolution according to equation \eqref{eq:sigmaz} (red line). In the legend the fraction of hits in both selections is given.}
\label{fig:Diffz}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Deformations}
Systematic deviations in the hit position measurements affect the performance of a large TPC and should typically be smaller than \SI{20}{\um} in the bending plane. In figure \ref{fig:deformyexp} and \ref{fig:deformxexp} the mean residuals in the plane, and in the drift direction are calculated for bins of \SI{4x4}{} pixels. In the fiducial area outlined with a black line, the systematic error given as the r.m.s. is \SI{8}{\um} in the pixel plane and \SI{31}{\um} (\SI{0.4}{ns}) in the drift direction.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{img/deformyexp.pdf}
\caption{Mean residuals in the pixel plane at the expected hit position.}
\label{fig:deformyexp}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{img/deformxexp.pdf}
\caption{Mean residuals in the drift direction at the expected hit position.}
\label{fig:deformxexp}
\end{figure}
\section{Particle identification by energy loss (dE/dx) measurements}
By measuring the characteristic energy loss (dE/dx) of a particle in the TPC its species can be identified. The performance here will be presented for an effective track length of \SI{1}{m} that is calculated by stringing 83 single chip tracks from the test beam data together. The energy loss from the data will be compared to the energy loss distribution of a Minimum Ionizing Particle (MIP), estimated by scaling the hit positions of the electron track by a factor 0.7, or effectively scaling a \SI{0.7}{m} electron track to a \SI{1.0}{m} MIP track.
A direct measure of the energy loss with a pixel readout is obtained by counting the number of ionization electrons. However, a few high energy deposits cause fluctuations in the mean. A more reliable estimate can be obtained by several methods.
One simple method that is also commonly adopted for TPC pad readouts is the truncated sum. For the GridPix readout it works in the following steps. First the number of electrons is summed for 20 pixel intervals. Secondly a fixed fraction of the intervals with the highest number of electrons is rejected. For the GridPix readout the best estimate was obtained by rejecting the top \SI{10}{\percent}. Finally, the other \SI{90}{\percent} is summed to retrieve a truncated sum. The result of this procedure for electron and MIP tracks of \SI{1}{\m} is shown in figure \ref{fig:truncatedMean}. The energy loss resolution defined as the standard deviation divided by the mean is \SI{4.1}{\percent} for a \SI{2.5}{GeV} electron.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{img/truncatedMean.pdf}
\caption{Distribution of truncated electrons per meter for the 2.5 GeV electron and the expected distribution for a minimum ionizing particle.}
\label{fig:truncatedMean}
\end{figure}
The truncated mean uses slices of 20 pixels and does not make use of the fine granularity of the pixel readout. If clusters can be resolved, particle identification can be improved by counting the number of primary ionization clusters \cite{Hauschild:2002jh}.
A second method that does make use of the full granularity of the pixel detector is the calculation of a weighted mean distance between the pixel hits in the direction along the track. The mean distance distribution is shown in figure \ref{fig:meanDistance}. The mean distance is also calculated with data from a simulation. The simulation in GEANT4 has layers of gas with a thickness equal to the pixel pitch. In order to match the simulated data to our test beam data the parameters \texttt{Tmax} and \texttt{r} of the \texttt{G4UniversalFluctuation} model and the electron conversion threshold were tuned to \SI{3}{KeV}, 1 and \SI{27}{eV} respectively. The simulation serves as a cross-check for the data and is used to estimate the number of primary clusters, required as input to calculate the weights below.
The weighted mean for a track $\mu'$ is calculated using
\begin{equation}
\mu' = \frac{1}{N_\text{hits}}\sum_{i=0}^{N_\text{hits}} w(d_i) d_i,
\end{equation}
where $N_\text{hits}$ is the total number of hits, $d_i$ is the distance between subsequent hits in the direction along the track and $w(d)$ is the weight as function of the distance. The assigned weights are the expected fluctuations from a pure Poisson distribution divided by the actual fluctuations. The effect is that hits at short distances, which are more likely to come from the same cluster, get a small weight, and hits at larger distances, which are more likely to come from separate clusters, get a larger weight.
The weighted mean distance for an electron from data and simulation and a MIP from scaled data and simulation is shown in figure \ref{fig:weightedMean}. The resolution, again expressed as standard deviation divided by the mean, for an electron with this method is \SI{2.7}{\percent}. However, because the weighted mean distance is not proportional to the energy loss this is not most relevant measure.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{img/meanDistance.png}
\caption{Mean distance between hits for a 2.5 GeV electron from test beam data and from a simulation.}
\label{fig:meanDistance}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{img/weightedMean.png}
\caption{Weighted mean as described in the text for a 2.5 GeV electron from data and simulation and for a MIP from scaled data and simulation.}
\label{fig:weightedMean}
\end{figure}
How well the detector will be able to identify particles can be measured by the separation power $S$, here defined as
\begin{equation}
S=\frac{\mu_e-\mu_\text{MIP}}{\sqrt{(\sigma_{e}^2+\sigma_\text{MIP}^2)/2}},
\end{equation}
where $\mu_e$ and $\mu_\text{MIP}$ are the mean (of the truncated sum or the weighted mean distance) for the electron and a MIP. $\sigma_e$ and $\sigma_\text{MIP}$ are the standard deviation (of the truncated sum or the weighted mean distance) for an electron and a MIP. The separation power $S$ for a \SI{1}{\m} long track of data is 8.8 using a truncated sum and 9.8 using the weighed mean distance.
\section{Quad module development}
A four chip Quad module was developed with all services (low voltage regulator, IO-connections, and cooling) under the active surface. The Quad can be tiled to cover an arbitrary large area. In figure \ref{fig:QuadRender} a computer generated image of the Quad module is shown. Four chips are mounted on a plate that provides the cooling (cold carrier). All four chips are connected to one central wire bond PCB, that is covered with a guard electrode. The LV regulator is mounted on a hollow stump that is used to mount the Quad.
The Quad has an active area coverage of \SI{69}{\percent}. A realistic tiling of the Quad module on the ILD TPC gives a coverage of \SI{59}{\percent}. With this coverage, the effective track length at \SI{90}{\degree} polar angle is \SI{0.78}{\m}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{img/quadRender.png}
\caption{Rendered image of the Quad design}
\label{fig:QuadRender}
\end{figure}
In the design of the Quad module special care has been taken to minimize distortions in the electric field. By simulations requirements were identified to keep the distortions below the \SI{100}{\um} at 5 pixels distance from the edge. The chip to chip distance must remain smaller than \SI{100}{\um}, larger distances for example on the wire bond side have to be bridged by a guard. The height of the guard above the chips must be precise at the \SI{20}{\um} level.
The first Quad modules have been produced, and in October 2018 two Quads were tested one by one at the ELSA facility in Bonn with \SI{2.5}{GeV} electrons. A picture of the setup is shown in figure \ref{fig:QuadSetup}. The Quad module is located inside the test box with the sensitive area facing downwards. The beam passes from left to right through three telescope planes, the Quad test box, and then another three telescope planes. Analysis of the data is ongoing.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{img/quadSetup.png}
\caption{Picture of the Quad setup in the test beam at the ELSA facility in Bonn}
\label{fig:QuadSetup}
\end{figure}
\section{Simulation of ILD TPC with pixel readout}
In order to assess the performance of the ILD TPC with a pixel readout a full simulation was made. As a starting point the ILD DD4HEP simulation (GEANT4) from ILCSoft was taken \cite{ILCSoft, Agostinelli:2002hh}. For single tracks, pixels were simulated by calculating the energy deposit in cylindrical shells with an active volume thickness equal to the pixel width of \SI{55}{\um}. In order to be able to simulate events with many tracks, a slightly larger granularity of \SI{990}{\um} with an interpolation step to \SI{55}{\um} was introduced. Tracks were reconstructed by a Kalman filter, which was also adapted to the pixel readout. From the reconstructed tracks the momentum resolution can be calculated.
In figure \ref{fig:resolutionComparison} the momentum resolution of the TPC for a simulated 50 GeV muon is shown for a pad readout and for a pixel readout. At high momenta above 50 GeV the resolution is primarily limited by measurement errors. The pixel resolution is scaled from a simulation with \SI{100}{\percent} coverage to a realistic \SI{59}{\percent} coverage using a simple $\sqrt{N}$ factor. For all angles, the momentum resolution of a pixel readout is at least \SI{20}{\percent} better than for a pad readout.
The difference is greater in the forward direction, because the number of hits for a pixel readout scales with the track length, whereas for a pad readout the number of hits is determined by the number of active pad rows which scales as the transverse component of the track length.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{img/resolutionGraphs.pdf}
\caption{Momentum resolution ($\sigma_{1/P_T}$) of the TPC for a simulated 50 GeV muon for a pad and pixel readout}
\label{fig:resolutionComparison}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
A GridPix based on the Timepix3 chip was reliably operated in a test beam setup. The resolution was found to be primarily limited by diffusion. Systematic uncertainties are smaller than \SI{10}{\um} in the pixel plane, which is small enough for a large TPC. The energy loss resolution (dE/dx) with a truncated sum is \SI{4.1}{\percent} per meter.
In the next step towards a pixel readout for a TPC at the ILC, a four chip Quad module was developed that can be used to cover arbitrary large areas. Simulations show that a pixel readout for a TPC can give an improvement of at least \SI{20}{\percent} in moment resolution with respect to a pad readout. The Quad module was produced and has been tested in a test beam setup, from which results are expected soon.
|
\section{\label{sec:level1}Introduction}
\par
Discovery of graphene in 2004 \cite{graphene} opens new doors for research in solid state physics and material science. Unique properties of graphene like high electrical and thermal conductivity \cite{graphene, Th}, ballistic transport \cite{BT}, high electron mobility \cite{mob} make it among interesting advanced materials. Integer and half-integer quantum hall effect \cite{QHF, HQHF}, and topological insulator properties observed in the graphene more reveal its high potential. Most important challenge to use the graphene in electronic is absence of the band gap making it unsuitable for field effect transistors. Thereafter, silicene and germanene as counterparts of the graphene were theoretically predicted and experimentally synthesized \cite{si1, ge1}. More single element monolayers has been synthesized in recent years having individual properties. Borophene as a monolayer of boron atoms is a metal with different allotropes \cite{broph}. Antimonene is an indirect semiconductor with ability of tuning its band gap with strain engineering \cite{ant}. Story of two-dimensional (2D) materials enters a new era after discover of transition metal dichalcogenide monolayer (TMD). Unlike graphene, they cover a wide spectrum of band gap and can be used in light emitting diode and optoelectronic industry.
\par In 2016 Mahmood and coworkers prepares a 2D polyaniline sheet via the direct pyrolysis
of hexaaminobenzene trihydrochloride single crystals in solid state \cite{Mahmood}. Synthesized structure has empirical formula of $C_3N$ and a hexagonal lattice composed of six carbon and two nitrogen atoms. Unlike other graphical carbon nitride, the prepared sheet is hole free. Yang et al. \cite{Yang} showed that $C_3N$ sheet is an indirect semiconductor with band gap of $0.39 eV$ and can be changed to a magnetic sheet by partial absorption of hydrogen atoms. Mechanical properties of $C_3N$ sheet has been theoretically studied \cite{Zhou1,Mortazavi,Shi}. In addition, the ability of the sheet for application in lithium-ion battery has attracted some attention \cite{Ion1, Ion2}. We showed that $C_3N$ nanoribbons suffer a transition from semiconductor to half-metal under external electric field and a transition from magnetic metal to semiconductor by passivation of the edge atoms\cite{Bagheri1}. Furthermore, it is shown that a fully hydrogenated $C_3N$ sheet is an insulator with band gap of $5 eV$ \cite{Bagheri2}. Due to similarity with graphene and having band gap, $C_3N$ sheet is a suitable candidate for next-generation electronic devices.
\par Reduce of thermal energy loss in devices is an important challenge in science and industry. Good thermoelectric materials can economize energy waste and increase efficiency. Thermoelectric efficiency of a material is measured by a dimensionless quantity as figure of merit , ZT, given by:
\begin{equation}
ZT=\frac{S^2GT}{\kappa_e+\kappa_{ph}},
\end{equation}
Where $S$ is thermopower, $G$ is electrical conductance and $T$ denotes operating temperature. $\kappa_{ph}(\kappa_{e})$ is lattice (electron) thermal conductance. A lot research has been performed on the thermoelectric properties of nanostructures like quantum dots \cite{QD1, QD2}, quantum wires\cite{Wi1}, and monolayers \cite{Se1, Se2}. Thermal conductivity of $C_3N$ sheet and bilayer has attracted a lot attention in recent years~\cite{new1,new2,new3,new4,new5,new6}. Mortazavi investigated thermal conductivity of $C_3N$ sheet with combination of DFT method and molecular dynamics simulations \cite{new1}. He and coworkers showed that how one can tune themal conductivity of the sheet by adding or removing carbon atoms \cite{new2}. Hong et al. computed thermal conductivity of monolayer and bilayer $C_3N$ sheets using classical molecular dynamics \cite{new3}. Kumar et al showed that thermal conductivity of $C_3N$ sheet is ultralow in comparison to graphene case \cite{new4}. In this research, we investigate thermoelectric properties of $C_3N$ sheet in linear response regime by combination of density functional theory and Green function formalism. It was shown that thermal conductivity of $C_3N$ sheet is one order lower than graphene case so it is suitable for application in thermoelectric devices. Thermopower, electrical conductance, lattice thermal conductance and figure of merit are analyzed as a function of strain. Strain can be used as an important factor to tune the band gap of the sheet. We show that how tensile and compressive strain can affect thermoelectric efficiency of the sheet. In addition, results reveal that the thermoelectric efficiency is strongly dependent transport and strain direction so that there is a noticeable increase in ZT when strain and transport directions are perpendicular to each other. Our analysis reveals that strain direction, kind of strain (tensile or compressive strain), and transport direction (along zigzag or armchair direction) can significantly modulate thermoelectric performance of $C_3N$ sheet. The article is organized as follows: simulation details and theoretical background are presented in next section. Section 3 is devoted to electrical and thermoelectric properties of $C_3N$ sheet under strain. And some sentences are given as a summary at the end of the article.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\includegraphics[height=80mm,width=85mm,angle=0]{band_pure
\caption{\label{band_pure} (a) Band structure of $C_3N$. GGA based results are shown by solid line and dashed line is devoted to HSE calculations.
Inset shows a unit cell of $C_3N$ sheet. Carbon and nitrogen atoms are shown by gray and blue balls, respectively. (b) Projected density of states for carbon and nitrogen atoms. (c) and (d) valance and conduction bloch states, respectively. }
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht] \label{gap_strain}
\includegraphics[height=80mm,width=85mm,angle=0]{gap_strain}
\caption{\label{gap_strain} (a) Conventional unit cell used for strain calculations. (b) Variation of band gap versus strain along zigzag direction (thick lines) and armchair directions (thin lines). }
\end{figure}
\section{\label{sec:level2}Computational method}
\par Electronic calculations are performed using density functional theory implemented in SIESTA package \cite{siesta}. Norm-conserving Troullier-Martins pseudopotential \cite{TM} is used to describe core electrons and Perdew-Burke-Ernzerhof (PBE) generalized gradient approximation (GGA)\cite{PBE} is employed as exchange-correlation functional. Cut-off energy is $100H$ and a $50 \times 50 \times 1$ k-sampling is used to mesh Brillouin zone of a $C_3N$ sheet. Double-zeta single polarized (DZP) basis set is used to describe valance electrons. With respect to the fact that the GGA approximation underestimates the band gap of semiconductors, Heyd-Scuseria-Ernzerhof (HSE) hybrid exchange-correlation functional\cite{HSE} is also used to measure the band gap of samples. All considered structures are optimized so that the force on each atom is less than $0.001 eV/{\AA}$.
\par To investigate mechanical properties of $C_3N$ sheet, a rectangular supercell composed of 16 atoms is considered. For each strain, lattice constant perpendicular to strain direction and position of atoms have been optimized so that force on each atom and stress of the lattice were less than $0.001eV/{\AA}$, and $0.001GPa$, respectively. Brillouin zone of the supercell was meshed by a $40\times 60\times 1$ k-point sampling. Energy dependent electronic transmission of the sheet for each strain is obtained by counting electronic bands crossing each energy. This method is corresponding to obtaining transmission coefficient from nonequilibrium Green function formalism when the structure is perfect and electrodes and scattering region are the same like this study.
\par To compute phonon band structure and phonon transmission coefficient, empirical Tersoff potential\cite{Tersoff} parametrized by Matsunga et al.\cite{MFM} has been employed. Comparison between phonon band structure obtained from DFT method and classical approach (Fig. S1) shows that the Tersoff potential can produce phonon band structure with suitable quality. For computing phonon transmission coefficient, we have used nonequilibrium green function formalism and defined a central region with length of $4 nm$ coupled to two electrodes. Dynamical matrix is obtained from empirical Tersoff potential and retarded Green function is given as:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq1}
G^{r}_{ph}(\omega)=[\omega^2I-K_c-\Sigma^{r}_{ph,L}(\omega)-\Sigma^{r}_{ph,R}(\omega)]^{-1},
\end{equation}
where $K_c$ is mass-weighted force constant of the central region. $\Sigma^r_{ph,L(R)}$ denotes the self-energy due to coupling between central region and left (right) electrode.
\begin{figure}[hb] \label{band_direction_strain}
\includegraphics[height=90mm,width=85mm,angle=0]{band_direction_strain}
\caption{\label{band_direction_strain} Band structure of $C_3N$ sheet under different strains. GGA and HSE results are shown by solid and dashed lines, respectively. }
\end{figure}
\par Thermoelectric properties of the sheet are investigated in linear response regime and by using of Landau formula. Electrical and thermal currents are given as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq2}
I_E=\frac{2e}{h}\int{dET_{e}(E)[f_{L}(E)-f_{R}(E)]},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{Eq3}
I_Q=\frac{2e}{h}\int{dET_{e}(E)[f_{L}(E)-f_{R}(E)](E-E_f)},
\end{equation}
where $T_e(E)$ is electron transmission coefficient and $f_{L, (R)}$ is Fermi distribution function of left (right) electrode. By expanding the Fermi distribution function in terms of potential and temperature up to first order, one can obtain thermoelectric coefficients in the linear response regime. Electrical conductance, thermopower, and electrical thermal conductance are given as:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq4}
G=e^2L_0,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{Eq5}
S=\frac{\Delta V}{\Delta T}|_{I=0}=\frac{L_1}{eTL_0},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{Eq6}
\kappa_e=\frac{1}{T}(L_2-\frac{L_1^2}{L_0}),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{Eq7}
L_n=\frac{2}{h}\int{dE(E-E_f)^nT_{e}(E)(-\frac{\partial{f}}{\partial{E}})}.
\end{equation}
Landau formula for phonons is:
\begin{equation}
I_{ph}=\int_{0}^{\infty}{d\omega \frac{\hbar\omega}{2\pi}T_{ph}(\omega)[n(\omega,T_L)-n_{B}(\omega,T_R)]},
\end{equation}
and phonon thermal conductance in the linear response regime is given as:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq9}
\kappa_{ph}=\int_{0}^{\infty}{d\omega\frac{(\hbar\omega)^2}{2\pi k_BT^2}T_{ph}(\omega)\frac{exp(\frac{\hbar\omega}{k_BT})}{(exp(\frac{\hbar\omega}{k_BT})-1)^2}}.
\end{equation}
Thus, thermoelectric efficiency of the structure is computed as:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq10}
ZT=\frac{S^2GT}{\kappa_{ph}+\kappa_e}
\end{equation}
In following section, we present electrical and thermoelectric properties of $C_3N$ sheet under different conditions.
\section{\label{sec:level3}Results}
\subsection{Electronic properties}
Fig.\ref{band_pure}a shows band structure of a $C_3N$ monolayer based on both GGA and HSE approximations. $C_3N$ sheet is a semiconductor so that valance band maximum (VBM) is located at $M$ high symmetry point and conduction band minimum (CBM) is located in $\Gamma$ point. Energy band gap, $E_g$, is equal to $0.39 eV$ based on GGA approximation. It is well-known that GGA underestimates the band gap. HSE based band structure predicts a higher band gap of $1.06 eV$. Our results are consistent with pervious experimental and theoretical reports \cite{Yang, Zhou1}. The VBM is located near the Fermi level while the CBM is far from it, so the $C_3N$ sheet can be considered as a p-type indirect semiconductor. There is a Dirac point in energy of $-2.3 eV$ in $K$ high symmetry point of Brillouin zone. Position of the Dirac cone is the same as graphene sheet but it is located in negative energies due to existence of nitrogen atoms with five valance electrons in the structure. The Dirac cone we confirmed in experiment of Mahmood et al.\cite{Mahmood}. Unlike the electronic band gap, the position and slope of the Dirac cone is independent from pseudopotentials. Velocity of Dirac fermions is nearly isotropic and equal to $7.6 \times 10^5 m/s$ comparable with that in graphene sheet. Electron effective mass is equal to $0.76 m_e$ in $\Gamma \to K$ direction and $0.56 m_e$ in $\Gamma \to M$ direction. For hole effective mass, it is equal to $0.33 m_e$ in $M \to K $ direction and $0.96 m_e$ in $M \to \Gamma $ direction. Analyzing of electron density of states, DOS, reveals that the valance and conduction band edges are composed of hybridization of p-orbitals of carbon and nitrogen atoms. There is an anisotropy in contribution of atoms in the VBM and CBM so that the VBM is composed of equal contribution of nitrogen and carbon p-orbitals. On contrary, the CBM is belonging to p-orbitals of carbon atoms and there is no contribution from nitrogen ones. Dirac point is also appeared due to hybridization of p-orbitals of carbon and nitrogen atoms but with different weights. Bloch states plotted in Fig.\ref{band_pure}c,d shows that the VBM is coming from $\pi$-hybridization of carbon and nitrogen orbitals, whereas electronic wave function is distributed just on carbon atoms in the CBM as it was predicted by DOS
\par Dynamical stability of the structures can be evaluated using phonon band dispersion. Fig. S1 in supplementary shows phonon band structure of $C_3N$ monolayer. The sheet is dynamically stable because there is no imaginary phonon mode in the band structure. Results prepared using classical approach based on Tersoff parameters is also plotted to compare with DFT-based results. There is a flexural mode with quadratic dispersion around the $\Gamma$ point and two acoustic modes with linear dispersion around $\Gamma$ point. Some active Raman modes are observed in energies higher than $45 meV$. Phonon modes cross each other in $K$ point which is a property of hexagonal lattice. Results obtained from two different methods is the same in energies less than $100 meV$ and some deviation is observed in higher energies. However, qualitative behavior is the same and as a consequence, we have used classical method to compute phonon transmission spectrum in following.
\begin{figure}[ht] \label{Fig_Thermal0}
\includegraphics[height=90mm,width=85mm,angle=0]{Fig_Thermal0}
\caption{\label{Fig_Thermal0} (a) Thermopower, and (b) power factor versus chemical potential. (c) and (d) electronic and phonon transmission coefficient.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[hb] \label{Fig_ZT0}
\includegraphics[height=85mm,width=85mm,angle=0]{Fig_ZT0}
\caption{\label{Fig_ZT0} (a) and (b) phonon and electron thermal conductance as a function of temperature. (c) and (d) shows color map of figure of merit as a function of temperature and chemical potential for strain along zigzag and armchair direction, respectively.}
\end{figure}
\par Two-dimensional materials are grown on a substrate. Difference between lattice parameter of the sheet and the substrate can induce some
compressive or tensile strain in the sheet resulting in changing electronic properties of it. For example, applying tensile strain can change
antimonene from an indirect semiconductor to direct one. Here, we investigate electronic and thermal properties of $C_3N$ sheet under compressive
and tensile uniaxial strain in the range of $-10\%<\epsilon<+10\%$.
Previous reports showed that the sheet is stable in the considered range in this research \cite{Zhou1, new1}.
uniaxial strain is applied along x-direction, zigzag direction (ZZ), and y-direction, armchair direction (AC),
as shown in Fig.\ref{gap_strain}a. For this purpose, we consider a supercell composed of 16 atoms with
orthorhombic shape. Variation of band gap versus strain is plotted in Fig.\ref{gap_strain}b. Electronic
response of $C_3N$ sheet to kind and direction of strain is very interesting and strange. First,
we analyze its response to strain in zigzag direction. Results obtained from both GGA and HSE approximations show
that the change of $E_g$ is significantly dependent on the kind of strain so that variation of $E_g$ is more intensive for compressive strain. Results from GGA approximation show that for compressive strain higher than $\geq0.8{\%}$,
we observe a phase transition from semiconductor to metal. However, the phase transition is not supported by
HSE calculations. Decrease of $E_g$ is slower for tensile strain. We fitted the data with a linear function with standard
error less than $3{\%}$ and found that the slope of variation is three times higher in tensile strain. Band structure of
the sheet under $\epsilon=-10{\%}$ and $+10{\%}$ is plotted in Fig.\ref{band_direction_strain}. A phase transition is observed from indirect semiconductor
to direct one upon applying tensile strain. This shows that $C_3N$ has potential for optoelectronic applications and LED
devices using tensile strain. In addition, the range of $E_g$ obtained from HSE calculations shows that the $C_3N$ sheet can be
used in solar cell devices due to closeness of obtained $E_g$ with silicone one. HSE-based data reveals that the band gap decreases $44{\%}$ for
$\epsilon=-10{\%}$, while the reduction is about $18{\%}$ for $\epsilon=+10{\%}$. The anisotropy can be attributed to inconsistent change of lattice parameter perpendicular to strain direction. For $\epsilon=10{\%}$, a reduction of $0.1\AA$ is measured in the lattice parameter, whereas we observe an increase of $0.2 \AA$ in lattice parameter for $\epsilon=-10{\%}$. The more intense of lattice parameter for compressive strain leads to more changes in bond length between atoms and as a consequence, more intense variation of $E_g$ as a function of compressive strain.
Change of bond length without and with applying strain is expressed in table. S1.
\par Response of the sheet to strain along armchair direction is different. We find that compressive strain induces a transition from indirect semiconductor to direct one. In addition, a transition from semiconductor to metal is observed for compressive strain higher than $4\%$. Results obtained from HSE calculations do not support the transition from semiconductor to metal, but change of band gap from indirect to direct is supported. In addition, variation of band gap versus compressive strain is more intensive for armchair direction. On contrary, variation of band gap for tensile strain is smother for armchair direction than zigzag one. Unlike zigzag direction, no transition from indirect to direct semiconductor is observed for tensile strain. HSE calculations support the observation. Band structure of $C_3N$ sheet under uniaxial strain along armchair direction is plotted in Fig.\ref{band_direction_strain}.
\subsection{Thermal properties}
\begin{figure}[ht] \label{PF_strain_ZZ}
\includegraphics[height=85mm,width=85mm,angle=0]{PF_strain_ZZ}
\caption{\label{PF_strain_ZZ} Power factor versus chemical potential for (a) tensile and (b) compressive strain along zigzag direction.}
\end{figure}
\par Thermopower of pristine $C_3N$ sheet is plotted in Fig.\ref{Fig_Thermal0}a. Thermopower is completely isotropic so that its behavior is independent from electron transport direction. A slight difference in its maximum value in two side of charge neutrally point is observed so that $S_{max}$ is slightly higher in p-doping ($\mu<0$) than n-doping ($\mu>0$). Maximum of thermopower is about $0.5 mV/K$ which is slightly lower than values reported for arsenene and antimonene \cite{Se1,Se2} and higher than $MoS_2$ \cite{Se3}.Unlike thermopower, power factor ($S^2G$) is an anisotropic function and dependent on the electron transport direction. It is clear from Fig.\ref{Fig_Thermal0}b that its value is higher in ZZ than AC. Maximum value of $PF$ obtained for $C_3N$ is equal to values reported for phosphorene ($6 \times 10^{-13} W/K^2$) and lower than arsenene \cite{Se1}. Another difference between $PF$ of $C_3N$ and other 2D materials is existence of maximum of $PF$ close to the Fermi level attributed to the low band gap of the sheet. Peaks of $PF$ are correspond to band edges. Higher value of $PF$ in ZZ direction is directly related to higher value of electron transmission coefficient in that direction. $T_{el}$ in ZZ direction is twice of that in AC direction as it is shown in Fig.\ref{Fig_Thermal0}c. One reason can be related to the higher width of the unit cell used in ZZ direction. However, the main reason of the difference comes from the arrangement of the atoms along the transport direction. Phonon transmission spectrum is also direction dependent so in most range of energy, its value is higher in ZZ direction than AC one. Maximum value of $T_{ph}$ calculated in this research is three times more than value reported for phosphorene, arsenene and $SnS$ monolayer \cite{Se1}. So, it is concluded that $C_3N$ is a very good thermal conductor like its counterpart graphene.
\begin{figure}[hb] \label{K_Z_strain}
\includegraphics[height=75mm,width=75mm,angle=0]{K_Z_strain}
\caption{\label{K_Z_strain} Phonon thermal conductance and maximum of figure of merit for strain along zigzag (thick lines) and armchair (thin lines) directions.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht] \label{ZT_ZZ_AC}
\includegraphics[height=80mm,width=90mm,angle=0]{ZT_ZZ_AC}
\caption{\label{ZT_ZZ_AC} Figure of merit versus temperature when strain is applied along zigzag direction while transport is along armchair direction. (a) Tensile and (b) compressive strain.}
\end{figure}
\par Fig.\ref{Fig_ZT0} shows phonon and electron thermal conductance and figure of merit as a function of chemical potential correspond to n- or p-type doping. In low temperatures, $T<200 K$, phonon thermal conductance is isotropic and increase of temperature induces some anisotropy in it. $\kappa_{ph}$ is more in ZZ direction in high temperatures. Same results were reported in Refs.\cite{new1, new3} obtained from molecular dynamic simulations. Linear increase of $\kappa_{ph}$ in high temperatures is attributed to high energy phonon modes. Indeed, in high temperatures optical phonon modes are contribute in thermal transport. Because Debye temperature of $C_3N$ is much higher than arsenene, or antimonene, saturation of $\kappa_{ph}$ is not observed in $C_3N$ monolayer unlike arsenene or antimonene \cite{Se1, Se4}. However, thermal conductivity of the sheet decreases with increase of temperature \cite{new2, new3} Electron thermal conductance exhibits more intense anisotropy than phonon one. Like $\kappa_{ph}$, $\kappa_{e}$ calculated in ZZ direction is higher than AC one. Increase of temperature increases $\kappa_e$ which was predictable. $\kappa_e$ in AC direction at $400 K$ is equal to that for ZZ direction at $200 K$. Figure of merit shows tow main peaks one in p-type and the other in n-type doping. VBM and CBM has nearly equal distance from the Fermi level in GGA calculation so the position of ZT peaks is symmetric relative to the Fermi level. Increase of temperature widens the ZT peaks. It is observed that p-type doping can produce higher thermoelectric efficiency than n-type one. In addition, ZT is higher in ZZ direction so that $\frac{ZT_{max}(ZZ)}{ZT_{max}(AC)}=1.49$. Maximum of $ZT$ obtained for pristine $C_3N$ monolayer is lower than phosphorene, arsenene, or antimonene because of its higher thermal conductance. However, it is higher than the value was reported for graphene based on molecular dynamic simulations ($ZT=0.08$) \cite{ZT1}, or graphyne with $ZT=0.15$ based on first-principles calculations\cite{ZT1}.
\begin{figure}[ht] \label{ZT_AC_ZZ}
\includegraphics[height=70mm,width=85mm,angle=0]{ZT_AC_ZZ}
\caption{\label{ZT_AC_ZZ} Figure of merit versus temperature when strain is applied along armchair direction while transport is along zigzag direction. (a) Tensile and (b) compressive strain.}
\end{figure}
\par In following, we analyze thermoelectric response of $C_3N$ sheet to uniaxial strain in different directions. Fig.\ref{PF_strain_ZZ} shows $PF$ of the sheet versus strain along ZZ direction. Increase of strain gives rise to reduction of $PF$. The reduction is more intensive in $n$ doping. Another point is appearance of side peaks by applying tensile strain in $p$ doping. Reduction of band gap by strain reduces the gap in conductance and increases oscillation of thermopower and these effects induce some extra peaks in $PF$ spectrum. About compressive strain, the reduction of $PF$ is more intensive in $n$ doping and side peaks are observed in $n$ doping unlike tensile case. Variations of $PF$ as a fuction of strain along AC direction is shows in Fig.{S4}. Unlike ZZ direction, tensile strain along AC direction has no significant effect on the magnitude of $PF$. The reason is attributed to the smooth change of the band gap versus tensile strain in AC as shown in Fig.\ref{gap_strain}b. For compressive strain higher than $4{\%}$, due to transition from semiconductor to metal, the curvature of $PF$ is significantly changed. The changes come from oscillations of the thermopower and gapless electrical conductance which are fundamental features of the metals. As an overall, we find that the $PF$ is reduced by applying strain.
\par Dependence of lattice thermal conductance and maximum of thermoelectric efficiency on the strain is plotted in Fig.\ref{K_Z_strain}. We observe a uniform increase of phonon thermal conductance with increase of tensile strain. Increase is more obvious in ZZ direction than AC one. On contrary, $\kappa_{ph}$ shows oscillatory behavior versus compressive strain along ZZ direction. For Ac strain less than $-6{\%}$, $\kappa_{ph}$ is almost constant and after that a linear increase is observed. Results show that the lattice thermal conductance is always higher in ZZ direction. Applying strain results in decrease of maximum of $ZT$ and this result is independent from strain direction. However, the reduction of $ZT$ is more in ZZ direction. Results show that maximum of figure of merit obtained from tensile strain along AC direction exceeds from that of ZZ direction for $\epsilon>+3{\%}$. $ZT_{max}$ becomes independent from strain direction in high strain. Based on the results, it is clear that strain engineering can be used as valuable tool to tune thermal and thermopower properties of the $C_3N$ sheet. We believe that thermoelectric efficiency of $C_3N$ sheet can be more than values reported in this work if one uses quantum mechanical approach to compute phonon transmission coefficient. Here, we compute phonon transmission coefficient in $\Gamma$ point and averaging of it on the k-space can significantly reduce $T_{ph}$ and as a result increase $ZT$ of the sheet.
\par Until now, we study transport properties of $C_3N$ sheet under condition that strain and transport are parallel. In following, we consider situations in which transport direction and strain are perpendicular to each other i.e. the strain is along $x$ direction (ZZ) while the transport is along $y$ direction (AC) and vice versa. Fig.\ref{ZT_ZZ_AC} shows $ZT$ versus temperature for strain applied along ZZ direction and transport along AC one. We find that the $ZT$ shows nonlinear behavior for tensile strain so that it reduces for $\epsilon=+2{\%}$ and then significantly increases for $3{\%}<\epsilon<6{\%}$ . Threshold temperature in which $ZT$ is higher than $0.001$ is lowered by increase of strain. In addition, we observe a linear behavior for $ZT$ in high temperatures. Although more increase of strain reduces the magnitude of $ZT$, however, it is still higher than $\epsilon=0$ case. Upon applying compressive strain, a substantial increase in $ZT$ is observed that unlike tensile case it never decreases with increase of strain magnitude. Our investigations reveal that for $\epsilon=-10{\%}$ and at $500K$, $ZT$ is 23 times higher than an unstretched sheet in the same temperature.
\par Fig.\ref{ZT_AC_ZZ} shows thermoelectric efficiency of the sheet under conditions that the strain as applied along AC direction, while transport is happened along ZZ direction. Unlike previous case, $ZT$ of unstretched sheet is more in room temperature than that under tensile strain. In addition, behavior of $ZT$ is nonlinear at high temperatures. On the other hand, compressive strain results in the increase of $ZT$. Finite values of $ZT$ at low temperatures and under high tensile strain is a result of transition from semiconductor to metal because of gapless electrical conductance. Obtained results show that magnitude of $ZT$ is lower in this case than the strain along ZZ direction and transport along AC direction. Results prove that thermoelectric abilities of the $C_3N$ sheet are strongly dependent on the strain engineering and transport direction and this phenomenon makes it a promising candidate for thermoelectric applications.
\section{\label{sec:level4}Conclusions}
Ponyaniline sheet is a recently synthesized two-dimensional monolayer with a hexagonal unit cell composed of six carbon and two nitrogen atoms with empirical formula of $C_3N$.
We have investigated the electronic and thermal properties of $C_3N$ sheet under external strain using density functional theory combined with Green function formalism in the linear response regime. We find that the band gap of the sheet decreases with increase of strain magnitude and the slope of the reduction is dependent on the strain direction and kind (tensile or compressive). Our investigations show that thermopower is independent from strain direction, along zigzag or armchair direction, but power factor and as a result figure of merit are strongly dependent. External strain can reduce the thermoelectric efficiency of the sheet when the strain and electron transport are parallel. We show that thermoelectric efficiency of the sheet can be noticeably modified with control of strain and transport direction. Results show that the thermoelectric efficiency increases significantly at room temperature under conditions that strain and transport directions are perpendicular to each other.
\section{Acknowledgment}
We are thankful to the Research Council of the University of Guilan for the partial support of this research.
|
\section{Viterbi algorithm for solving Problem~\ref{prb:burstexporig} or Problem~\ref{prb:burstgeoorig}}
\label{sec:app_viterbi}
We can solve Problem~\ref{prb:burstexporig} or Problem~\ref{prb:burstgeoorig}
using the standard dynamic programming algorithm by~\citet{viterbi:67:dp}.
Off-the-shelf version of this algorithm requires $\bigO{nk^2}$ time. However, we
can easily speed-up the algorithm to $\bigO{nk}$.
To see this, let us first write $o[i, j]$ to express the optimal score for the
$i$th first symbols such that the last level $\ell_i = j$. The Viterbi algorithm
uses the fact that
\[
o[i, j] = -\log p(s_j, \beta \alpha^j) + \min_{j'} o[i - 1, j'] + \pen{j', j}
\]
to solve the optimal sequence. Define two arrays
\[
\begin{split}
a[j] & = \min_{x \geq j} o[i - 1, x] + \pen{x, j} = \min_{j' \geq j} o[i - 1, x]\quad\text{and} \\
b[j] & = \min_{x \leq j} o[i - 1, x] + \pen{x, j}\quad.
\end{split}
\]
By definition, we have
\[
o[i, j] = -\log p(s_j, \beta \alpha^j) + \min_{j' \in \set{a[j], b[j]}} o[i - 1, j'] + \pen{j', j},
\]
that is, we can compute $o[i, j]$ in constant time as long as we have $a[j]$ and $b[j]$.
To compute $a[j]$ fast, note that either $a[j] = j$ or $a[j] = a[j + 1]$, whichever produces
better score. Similarly, due to linearity of $\pen{}$, we have $b[j] = j$ or $b[j] = b[j - 1]$,
whichever produces better score. This leads to a simple dynamic program given in Algorithm~\ref{alg:dp}
that performs in $\bigO{nk}$ time.
\begin{algorithm}[ht]
\ForEach{$i = 1, \ldots, n$} {
compute $a$ and $b$ in $\bigO{k}$ time\;
\ForEach{$j = 0, \ldots, k$} {
$c_1 \leftarrow o[i - 1, a[j]]$\;
$c_2 \leftarrow o[i - 1, b[j]] + \pen{b[j], j}$\;
$o[i, j] \leftarrow \min (c_1, c_2) - \log p(s_i; \beta \alpha^j)$\;
}
}
\caption{$\textit{Viterbi}\xspace(S, \alpha, \beta, \gamma, k, p)$, a dynamic program in order to discover burstiness}
\label{alg:dp}
\end{algorithm}
\section{Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:boundprb}}
\label{sec:app_boundprb}
\begin{proof}
Let $L$ and $\beta$ be the solution to $\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha)$.
Since
\[
- \log \pexp{s ; \lambda} = s \lambda - \log \lambda,
\]
we can decompose the score $\scoreexp{L, S; \alpha, \beta, \gamma}$ as
\[
\sum_{i = 1}^n \beta \alpha^{\ell_i} s_i - \log \beta - \ell_i \log \alpha + \pen{\ell_{i - 1}, \ell_i} \quad.
\]
Define $d = \sum_{i} \max\pr{\ell_i - \ell_{i - 1}, 0}$ and $m = \sum_i \ell_i$.
Let us also write $f(L) = \sum_{i} \alpha^{\ell_i} s_i$.
Then the score becomes
\begin{equation}
\beta f(L) - n\log \beta - m \log \alpha + d \gamma \log n\quad.
\label{eq:score}
\end{equation}
Obviously, $L$ satisfies the constraints posed in \textsc{BndBurst}\xspace.
Moreover, $L$ minimizes $f(L)$ (within the constraints); otherwise we could
replace $L$ with $L'$, making the first term in Eq.~\ref{eq:score} genuinely smaller and keeping the remaining
terms constant. This contradicts the optimality of $L$. Consequently, $L$ solves
\textsc{BndBurst}\xspace.
To prove the remaining claims, first note that $\beta$ optimizing Eq.~\ref{eq:score}
must satisfy
\[
\frac{\partial \scoreexp{}}{\partial \beta} = f(L) - n / \beta = 0,
\]
proving the claim regarding $\beta$.
Since $\ell_i \leq k$, we have $m \leq nk$.
To bound $d$, let us write $e = \sum_i \max\pr{\ell_{i - 1} - \ell_{i}, 0}$.
We have
\[
d - e = \sum_{i = 1}^n \ell_i - \ell_{i - 1} = \ell_n \leq k
\]
and
\[
d + e = \sum_{i = 1}^n \abs{\ell_i - \ell_{i - 1}} \leq nk\quad.
\]
Summing the inequalities leads to $2d \leq (n + 1)k$,
which proves the proposition.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:geoapproxalpha}}
\label{sec:app_geoapproxalpha}
To prove the proposition we need several lemmas.
Throughout this section, we assume that we are given an integer delay sequence $S$,
and parameters $\alpha$, $\gamma$, $k$, and $\epsilon > 0$. We will write $\mu = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i} s_i$ and $c = 1 + \epsilon$.
The first lemma states that the optimal $\beta$ will be between the range that \textit{GeoAlpha}\xspace tests.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:geobounds}
Let $L$ and $\beta$ be the solution of $\textsc{Geo}\xspace(\alpha)$.
Then
$\frac{\mu}{1 + \mu} \leq \beta \leq \frac{\mu}{1/n + \mu}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $\beta$ is optimal we must have
$\partial\scoregeo{S, L; \beta} / \partial \beta = 0$.
This implies that
\[
\sum_{i = 1}^n \frac{s_i}{\beta} = \sum_{i = 1}^n \frac{1}{1 - \beta \alpha^{\ell_i}}
\quad\text{or}\quad
\mu = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i = 1}^n \frac{\beta}{1 - \beta \alpha^{\ell_i}}\quad.
\]
Since $\alpha^{\ell_i} \leq 1$ we must have
\[
\mu = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i = 1}^n \frac{\beta}{1 - \beta \alpha^{\ell_i}} \leq \frac{\beta}{1 - \beta},
\]
which can be rewritten as $\mu / (1 + \mu) \leq \beta$. This gives us the lower bound of
the lemma.
To prove the other bound, note that we must have at least one $\ell_i = 0$.
This leads to
\[
\mu = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i = 1}^n \frac{\beta}{1 - \beta \alpha^{\ell_i}} \geq \frac{1}{n}\frac{\beta}{1 - \beta},
\]
which can be rewritten as
$\mu / (n^{-1} + \mu) \geq \beta$. This proves the upper bound of the lemma.
\end{proof}
Next we show that if we vary $\alpha$ and $\beta$ by little, while keeping $L$
constant, the score will not change a lot.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:geoapprox}
Let $\alpha'$ such that $\alpha^{1 + \epsilon} \leq \alpha' \leq \alpha$ and
let $\beta'$ such that $\beta^{1 + \epsilon} \leq \beta' \leq \beta$.
Then
\[
\scoregeo{L; \alpha', \beta'} \leq (1 + \epsilon)\scoregeo{L; \alpha, \beta}\quad.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We can decompose the score $ \scoregeo{L; \alpha, \beta}$ as
\[
\begin{split}
&\sum_{i = 1}^n - s_i \log \beta - s_i\ell_i \log \alpha - \log (1 - \beta \alpha^{\ell_i}) + \pen{\ell_{i - 1}, \ell_i} \\
& \qquad = D\log \beta + E \log \alpha + C(\alpha, \beta),\\
\end{split}
\]
where $C(\alpha, \beta)$ is the sum of the last two terms, $D = -\sum_{i = 1}^n s_i$,
and $E = -\sum_{i = 1}^n \ell_i s_i$.
Note that $C(\alpha, \beta) \geq 0$ and $C(\alpha, \beta)$ increases
as a function of $\alpha$ and $\beta$. We can now upper bound the score
\[
\begin{split}
\scoregeo{L; \alpha', \beta'}
& = D\log \beta' + E \log \alpha' + C(\alpha', \beta') \\
& \leq D\log \beta^c + E \log \alpha^c + C(\alpha', \beta') \\
& = c D\log \beta + c E\log \alpha + C(\alpha', \beta') \\
& \leq c D\log \beta + c E\log \alpha + cC(\alpha, \beta) \\
& = c\scoregeo{L; \alpha, \beta}\quad.
\end{split}
\]
Since $c = 1 + \epsilon$, this completes the proof.
\end{proof}
We can now prove the main result.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Prop.~\ref{prop:geoapproxalpha}]
Lemma~\ref{lem:geobounds} guarantees that \textit{GeoAlpha}\xspace tests $\beta'$ such that
$(\beta^*)^{1 + \epsilon} \leq \beta' \leq \beta^*$. Let $L'$ be the optimal solution for $\beta'$.
Lemma~\ref{lem:geoapprox} guarantees that
$\scoregeo{S, L^*; \beta'} \leq (1 + \epsilon)\scoregeo{S, L^*; \beta^*}$.
Since $\scoregeo{S, L; \beta} \leq \scoregeo{S, L'; \beta'} \leq \scoregeo{S, L^*; \beta'}$, the result follows.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:geotimealpha}}
\label{sec:app_geotimealpha}
In order to prove the proposition we need
two lemmas. The first lemma is a technical result that is needed to prove the
second lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:difffrac}
Define
\[
h(x, y) = \log \log \frac{y + x}{x}\quad.
\]
Then
\[
h(x_1, y_2) - h(x_1, y_1) \geq h(x_2, y_2) - h(x_2, y_1)
\]
for $x_1 \leq x_2$ and $y_1 \leq y_2$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The partial derivative of $h$ is equal to
\[
\frac{\partial h(x, y)}{\partial x} = \spr{\frac{1}{y + x} - \frac{1}{x}} \frac{1}{\log(y + x) - \log x},
\]
and it is decreasing as a function of $y$.
This implies that
\[
\frac{\partial h(x, y_2)}{\partial x} - \frac{\partial h(x, y_1)}{\partial x} \leq 0,
\]
that is $h(x, y_2) - h(x, y_1)$ is decreasing as a function of $x$,
which proves the lemma.
\end{proof}
Our second lemma essentially shows that \textit{GeoAlpha}\xspace does not test too many values.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:georounds}
Let $n$ be an integer, and let $\mu \geq 1 / n$ be a real number.
Assume $\epsilon > 0$ and let $c = 1 + \epsilon$. Let $r$ be such that
\[
\beta^{(c^r)} \geq \frac{\mu}{1 + \mu}, \quad{where}\quad
\beta = \frac{\mu}{1/n + \mu}
\quad.
\]
Then
\[
r \leq \frac{\log \log (n + 1) - \log \log 2}{\log c} \in \bigO{\frac{\log \log n}{\epsilon}}\quad.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We begin by applying $-\log$ to the inequality $\beta^{(c^r)} \geq \frac{\mu}{1 + \mu}$ and obtain
\[
c^r \log \frac{1/n + \mu}{\mu} \leq \log \frac{1 + \mu}{\mu}\quad.
\]
Another application of $\log$ and using $h$, as defined in Lemma~\ref{lem:difffrac},
leads us to
\[
r\log c \leq h(\mu, 1) - h(\mu, 1/n)\quad.
\]
Since $\mu \geq 1/n$, Lemma~\ref{lem:difffrac} implies
\[
\begin{split}
r \log c & \leq h(\mu, 1) - h(\mu, 1/n) \\
& \leq h(1/n, 1) - h(1/n, 1/n) \\
& = \log \log \frac{1 + 1/n}{1/n} - \log \log \frac{2/n}{1/n} \\
& = \log \log (n + 1) - \log \log 2, \\
\end{split}
\]
which gives us the needed inequality.
Since $1 / \log c \leq \frac{1 + \epsilon}{\epsilon} \in \bigO{1 / \epsilon}$, the result follows.
\end{proof}
We can now prove the main result.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Prop.~\ref{prop:geotimealpha}]
Lemma~\ref{lem:georounds} guarantees that we only test $\bigO{\epsilon^{-1} \log \log n}$ values of $\beta$.
Each test requires $\bigO{nk}$ time, which proves the result.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:geoapprox}}
\label{sec:app_geoapprox}
Assume a delay sequence $S$, parameter $\gamma$,
and an upper bound for levels $k$.
Let $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $L$ be the solution to \textsc{Geo}\xspace.
Let $\mu$ be the average of the $S$.
Write $\Delta_i = \pen{\ell_{i - 1}, \ell_i}$.
Assume that we are given $\epsilon > 0$ and let $c = 1 + \epsilon$.
First, we upper-bound the search space for $\alpha$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:geoapproxupper}
Let $\sigma = \frac{\mu}{1/n + \mu}$ and $\alpha' = \sigma^{\epsilon / k}$.
If $\alpha \geq \alpha'$, then
$\scoregeo{L; \alpha', \beta} \leq
(1 + \epsilon)\scoregeo{L; \alpha, \beta}$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Decompose the score $ \scoregeo{L}$ to
\[
\sum_{i = 1}^n - s_i \log \beta - s_i\ell_i \log \alpha - \log (1 - \beta \alpha^{\ell_i}) + \Delta_i\quad.
\]
Let $C(\alpha)$ be the sum of the last two terms.
Since $C(\alpha) \geq C(\alpha') \geq 0$, we only need to show that
\[
-s_i \log \beta - s_i \ell_i \log \alpha' \leq -cs_i \log \beta - cs_i \ell_i \log \alpha\quad.
\]
To show this, note that Lemma~\ref{lem:geobounds} implies that $\beta \leq \sigma$. We can now bound the first two terms by
\[
\begin{split}
-s_i \log \beta - s_i \ell_i \log \alpha' & = -s_i \log \beta - \epsilon s_i \frac{\ell_i}{k} \log \sigma \\
& \leq -s_i \log \beta - \epsilon s_i \frac{\ell_i}{k} \log \beta \\
& \leq -s_i \log \beta - \epsilon s_i \log \beta \\
& = -cs_i \log \beta \\
& \leq -cs_i \log \beta - cs_i \ell_i \log \alpha\quad.\\
\end{split}
\]
This proves the lemma.
\end{proof}
Next, we lower-bound the search space for $\alpha$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:geoapproxlower}
If there is an index $j$ such that $s_jl_j \neq 0$,
then $\alpha \geq \frac{1}{1 + nk}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
In order for $\alpha$ to be optimal, $\frac{\partial \scoregeo{}}{\partial \alpha} = 0$, or
\[
\sum_{i = 1}^n s_i \ell_i = \sum_{i = 1}^n \frac{\beta \ell_i \alpha^{\ell_i}}{1 - \beta \alpha^{\ell_i}} = \sum_{i = 1}^n f(\alpha, \beta, l_i),
\]
We can upper bound the right-hand side.
If $\ell_i = 0$, then
\[
\frac{\beta \ell_i \alpha^{\ell_i}}{1 - \beta \alpha^{\ell_i}} = 0 \leq \frac{k\alpha}{1 - \alpha}\quad.
\]
If $\ell_i \geq 1$, then
\[
\frac{\beta \ell_i \alpha^{\ell_i}}{1 - \beta \alpha^{\ell_i}}
\leq \ell_i \frac{\beta \alpha}{1 - \beta \alpha}
\leq k \frac{\beta \alpha}{1 - \beta \alpha}
\leq k \frac{\alpha}{1 - \alpha}\quad.
\]
This leads to
\[
\sum_{i = 1}^n s_i \ell_i \leq kn \frac{\alpha}{1 - \alpha}.
\]
Since $s_j l_j \geq 1$, we have
\[
\frac{\alpha}{1 - \alpha} \geq \frac{1}{nk} \sum_{i = 1}^n s_i \ell_i\geq \frac{1}{nk},
\]
which can be rewritten as $\alpha \geq \frac{1}{1 + nk}$.
\end{proof}
The next lemma addressed the case when the condition of the previous lemma fails.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:special}
If $s_il_i = 0$ for all $i$, then $\alpha = 0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We can decompose the score $ \scoregeo{L}$ as
\[
\sum_{i = 1}^n - s_i \log \beta - \log (1 - \beta \alpha^{\ell_i}) + \Delta_i\quad.
\]
This score decreases as a function of $\alpha$, and is minimized when $\alpha = 0$.
\end{proof}
We can now prove the main result.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Prop.~\ref{prop:geoapprox}]
If the condition in Lemma~\ref{lem:special} is triggered, then $\alpha = 0$,
which is tested by \textit{ApproxGeo}\xspace, and Proposition~\ref{prop:geoapproxalpha} guarantees the result.
Otherwise, Lemmas~\ref{lem:geobounds},~\ref{lem:geoapproxupper}~and~\ref{lem:geoapproxlower}
guarantee that \textit{ApproxGeo}\xspace tests $\alpha'$ and $\beta'$ such that
$(\beta^*)^{1 + \epsilon} \leq \beta' \leq \beta^*$ and
$(\alpha^*)^{1 + \epsilon} \leq \alpha' \leq \alpha^*$.
Let $L'$ be the optimal solution for $\alpha'$, $\beta'$.
The proposition follows since
\[
\scoregeo{L'; \alpha', \beta'} \leq
\scoregeo{L^*; \alpha', \beta'} \leq c\scoregeo{L^*; \alpha^*, \beta^*},
\]
where the second inequality is due to Lemma~\ref{lem:geoapprox}.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:geotime}}
\label{sec:app_geotime}
\begin{proof}
Let $\sigma = \mu / (1/n + \mu)$.
Let $m$ be the number of tests for different $\alpha$s.
The stopping condition now guarantees
\[
\pr{\frac{1}{1 + nk}}^{c^{-m}} \leq \sigma^{\epsilon / k},
\]
which can be rewritten as
\[
-c^{-m} \log (1 + nk) \leq \frac{\epsilon}{k}\log \sigma \leq \frac{\epsilon}{k}(\sigma - 1) = \frac{-\epsilon}{k(1 +n\mu)}
\]
Reversing the sign, and taking logarithm leads to
\[
-m \log c \geq \log(\epsilon) -\log(k) -\log(1 + n\mu) - \log \log (1 + nk)
\]
which leads to
\[
\begin{split}
m & \leq \frac{ \log(k) + \log(1 + n\mu) -\log (\epsilon) + \log \log (1 + nk)}{\log c} \\
& \in \bigO{\frac{\log n + \log \mu + \log k - \log\epsilon}{\epsilon}}\quad.
\end{split}
\]
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:expapproxalpha}}
\label{sec:app_expapproxalpha}
To prove the proposition we need several lemmas.
Throughout this section, we assume that we are given a delay sequence $S$,
and parameters $\alpha$, $\gamma$ and $k$. We will write $\mu = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i} s_i$.
First, we need to show that the optimal $\beta$ stays within the bounds used
by \textit{ApproxExp}\xspace.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:expbounds}
Let $\beta$ and $L$ be the solution to $\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha)$. Then
$\frac{1}{\alpha^k \mu} \leq \beta \leq \frac{1}{\mu}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Write $\Delta_i = \pen{\ell_{i - 1}, \ell_i}$.
We can decompose the score $\scoreexp{L; \beta}$ as
\[
\sum_{i = 1}^n \beta \alpha^{\ell_i} s_i - \log \beta - \ell_i \log \alpha + \Delta_i \quad.
\]
Let $g = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i} \alpha^{\ell_i} s_i$.
Due to optimality of $\beta$ we must have
\[
\frac{\partial \scoreexp{}}{\partial \beta} = ng - \frac{n}{\beta} = 0,
\]
that is, $\beta = 1/g$.
As $0 \leq \ell_i \leq k$, we have $\mu \leq g \leq \alpha^k \mu$.
This proves the lemma.
\end{proof}
Our next result is a technical lemma that is needed to control the possible
negative terms in the score.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:geomean}
Let $\beta$ and $L$ be the solution to \textsc{Exp}\xspace.
Let $g = \spr{\prod_{i} s_i}^{1/n}$
be the geometric mean. Then
\[
\sum_{i = 1}^n -\log \beta - \ell_i \log \alpha \geq n \log g\quad.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $f = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i} \alpha^{\ell_i} s_i$ and
$h = \spr{\prod_{i} \alpha^{\ell_i}}^{1/n}$. The arithmetic-geometric mean
inequality states that $hg \leq f$.
By definition, we must have $\beta = 1/f$. This leads to
\[
\begin{split}
\sum_{i = 1}^n -\log \beta - \ell_i \log \alpha & = n \log f - \sum_{i = 1}^n \ell_i \log \alpha \\
& \geq n \log gh - \sum_{i = 1}^n \ell_i \log \alpha \\
& = n \log g + n \log h - \sum_{i = 1}^n \ell_i \log \alpha \\
& = n \log g \quad. \\
\end{split}
\]
This proves the lemma.
\end{proof}
The next lemma shows that if we vary $\beta$ by little while keeping $L$
constant, the score of the solution will not change a lot.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:expapprox}
Let $\beta$ and $L$ be the solution to \textsc{Exp}\xspace.
Let $g = \spr{\prod_{i} s_i}^{1/n}$ be the geometric mean, and let $\psi = n \log g$.
Let $\epsilon_1, \epsilon_2 > 0$ and assume $\alpha'$, $\beta'$ such that
$\beta \leq \beta' \leq \beta(1 + \epsilon_1)$ and
$\alpha \leq \alpha' \leq \alpha(1 + \epsilon_2)$.
Then
\[
\scoreexp{L; \alpha', \beta'} - \psi \leq c(\scoreexp{L; \alpha, \beta} - \psi),
\]
where $c = (1 + \epsilon_1)(1 + \epsilon_2)^k$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Write $\Delta_i = \pen{\ell_{i - 1}, \ell_i}$.
Decompose the score $\scoreexp{L; \alpha, \beta}$ to
\[
\sum_{i = 1}^n \beta \alpha^{\ell_i} s_i - \log \beta - \ell_i \log \alpha + \Delta_i,
\]
and let $C(\alpha, \beta)$ be the sum of last three terms.
Note that $C(\alpha', \beta') \leq
C(\alpha, \beta)$, and due to Lemma~\ref{lem:geomean} $C(\alpha, \beta) \geq \psi$.
Also let $F(\alpha) = \sum_{i = 1}^n \alpha^{\ell_i} s_i$ be the sum of the first term without $\beta$.
We can now write
\[
\begin{split}
\scoreexp{L; \alpha', \beta'} - \psi & = \beta'F(\alpha') + C(\alpha', \beta') - \psi \\
& \leq c\beta F(\alpha) + C(\alpha, \beta) - \psi\\
& \leq c\beta F(\alpha) + c(C(\alpha, \beta) - \psi) \\
&= c(\scoreexp{L; \alpha, \beta} - \psi), \\
\end{split}
\]
which proves the lemma.
\end{proof}
We can now prove the main result.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Prop.~\ref{prop:expapproxalpha}]
Lemma~\ref{lem:expbounds} guarantees that \textit{ApproxExp}\xspace tests $\beta'$ such that
$\beta^* \leq \beta' \leq \beta^*(1 + \epsilon)$. Let $L'$ be the optimal solution for $\beta'$.
Lemma~\ref{lem:expapprox} guarantees that
$\scoreexp{L^*; \beta'} - n \log g \leq (1 + \epsilon)(\scoreexp{L^*; \beta^*} - n \log g)$.
Since $\scoreexp{L; \beta} \leq \scoreexp{L'; \beta'} \leq \scoreexp{L^*; \beta'}$, the result follows.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:exptimealpha}}
\label{sec:app_exptimealpha}
\begin{proof}
Assume that $(1 + \epsilon)^{-r}/\mu \geq 1 / (\alpha^k \mu)$.
Solving for $r$ gives us
\[
r \leq \frac{k \log \alpha }{ \log (1 + \epsilon)} \in \bigO{\epsilon^{-1} k \log \alpha}\quad.
\]
Consequently, \textit{ApproxExp}\xspace has at most $\bigO{\epsilon^{-1} k \log \alpha}$ iterations. Since a single iteration
costs $\bigO{nk}$ time, the result follows.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:expapprox}}
\label{sec:app_expapprox}
We first upper-bound the optimal $\alpha$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:expalphaupper}
Let $\Omega = \max S$ and $\omega = \min S$.
Then $\alpha \leq \Omega / \omega$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assume that $\alpha > \Omega / \omega$.
To prove the result we use the fact that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:lowerimprove}
s_i \lambda' - \log \lambda' \leq s_i \lambda - \log \lambda,
\end{equation}
when $s_i \geq \lambda' \geq \lambda$
or $s_i \leq \lambda' \leq \lambda$.
We claim that $\beta \alpha \geq \omega$. Assume otherwise.
Consider an alternative level sequence $\ell'_i = \max(\ell_i - 1, 0)$
and $\beta' = \beta \alpha$.
Under this transformation, the only modelling terms
in $\pexp{}$
that change are the original levels for which $\ell_i = 0$,
equal to
\[
(\beta' s_i - \log \beta') - (\beta s_i - \log \beta)\quad.
\]
Eq.~\ref{eq:lowerimprove} guarantees that this change is always negative.
In addition, $\Delta_i$ can only decrease. We can repeat this argument until
$\beta \alpha \geq \omega$.
We now split in two separate cases.
Case (\emph{i}):
Assume $\beta \alpha \geq \Omega$. We must have $\beta \alpha = \Omega$.
Otherwise, since $\beta \alpha > s_i$, Eq.~\ref{eq:lowerimprove} now guarantees
that we can safely decrease $\alpha$ at least until $\beta \alpha = \Omega$.
The assumption $\alpha > \Omega / \omega$ implies that $\beta \leq \omega$.
Similarly, we must have $\beta = \omega$.
Otherwise, if we increase $\beta$ and decrease $\alpha$
such that $\beta\alpha$ remains constant, then Eq.~\ref{eq:lowerimprove}
implies that the score decreases until $\beta = \omega$. Consequently, $\alpha = \Omega / \omega$ which
contradicts the assumption $\alpha > \Omega / \omega$.
Case (\emph{ii}):
Assume $\beta \alpha \leq \Omega$. In other words we have
$\beta \leq \omega \leq \beta \alpha \leq \Omega \leq \beta \alpha^2$.
We claim that $\beta = \omega$ or $\Omega = \beta \alpha^2$.
Otherwise, increase $\beta$ and decrease $\alpha$ such that $\beta\alpha$ remains constant;
Eq.~\ref{eq:lowerimprove} states that we can only decrease
the score at least until $\beta = \omega$ or $\Omega = \beta \alpha^2$.
This immediately implies $\alpha \leq \Omega / \omega$, which is a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Prop.~\ref{prop:expapprox}]
Lemma~\ref{lem:expalphaupper} guarantees that \textit{ApproxExp}\xspace
tests $\alpha'$ such that $\alpha \leq \alpha' \leq \alpha\sqrt[2k]{1 + \epsilon}$.
Lemma~\ref{lem:expapprox} now guarantees the approximation ratio of
\[
(1 + \epsilon / 2) \sqrt[2k]{1 + \epsilon}^k \leq (1 + \epsilon),
\]
which proves the result.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:exptime}}
\label{sec:app_exptime}
\begin{proof}
The number of iterations done by \textit{ApproxExp}\xspace is
$\bigO{\epsilon^{-1}k(\log \Omega - \log \omega)}$.
A single iteration requires $\bigO{\epsilon^{-1} nk^2 \log \alpha} \in \bigO{\epsilon^{-1} nk^2 \log(\Omega / \omega)}$ time.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:speedup}}
Let us write $\lambda(\beta)$ to be an optimal solution using $\beta$ as a parameter.
Define
\[
f(L) = \sum_{i = 1}^n s_i \alpha^{\ell_i},
\]
and let $h(\beta) = n / f(\lambda(\beta))$.
Note that we may have several optimal solutions for $\lambda(\beta)$ and they
may yield different values of $f(L)$. We break the ties
with a lexicographical order.
We will first prove that $h$ is monotonic.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:monotone}
$h(\beta_1) \geq h(\beta_2)$ for $\beta_1 \leq \beta_2$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Similar to Eq.~\ref{eq:score}, we can decompose the score $\scoreexp{L, S; \alpha, \beta, \gamma} = \beta f(L) - n \log \beta + C(L)$,
where
\[
C(L) = \sum_{i = 1}^n - \ell_i \log \alpha + \pen{\ell_{i - 1}, \ell_i}\quad.
\]
We will suppress $S$, $\alpha$, and $\gamma$ from the notation since they are constant.
Assume that we have two level sequences $L_1$ and $L_2$. Note that if
\[
\beta f(L_1) - n \log \beta + C(L_1) = \beta f(L_2) - n \log \beta + C(L_2)
\]
then
\[
\beta f(L_1) + C(L_1) = \beta f(L_2) + C(L_2)\quad.
\]
This implies that there are three possible cases:
\emph{(i)}
$L_1$ and $L_2$ yield exact same cost for every $\beta$,
\emph{(ii)}
the cost for $L_1$ is always smaller than the cost for $L_2$, or vice versa, or
\emph{(iii)}
there is exactly one parameter, say $\beta'$, where
$\scoreexp{L_1; \beta'} = \scoreexp{L_2; \beta'}$.
In the first case, we must have $f(L_1) = f(L_2)$.
In the last case, we must have $f(L_1) \neq f(L_2)$.
Assume that $f(L_1) < f(L_2)$. Then for every $\beta \leq \beta'$,
\[
\begin{split}
&\scoreexp{L_1; \beta} - \scoreexp{L_2; \beta} \\
& = \beta (f(L_1) - f(L_2)) + C(L_1) - C(L_2) \\
& \geq \beta' (f(L_1) - f(L_2)) + C(L_1) - C(L_2) \\
& = \scoreexp{L_1; \beta'} - \scoreexp{L_2; \beta'} = 0, \\
\end{split}
\]
and similarly $\scoreexp{L_1; \beta} \leq \scoreexp{L_2; \beta}$, for every $\beta \geq \beta'$.
Let $\beta_1 < \beta_2$, and let $L_1 = \lambda(\beta_1)$ and $L_2 = \lambda(\beta_2)$.
There are four possible cases.
Case (\emph{a}):
If $\scoreexp{L_1; \beta_1} = \scoreexp{L_2; \beta_1}$ and $\scoreexp{L_1; \beta_2} = \scoreexp{L_2; \beta_2}$,
then Case \emph{(i)} guarantees that $f(L_1) = f(L_2)$.
Case (\emph{b}):
If $\scoreexp{L_1; \beta_1} = \scoreexp{L_2; \beta_1}$ and $\scoreexp{L_1; \beta_2} > \scoreexp{L_2; \beta_2}$,
then Case \emph{(iii)} guarantees that $\beta_1 = \beta'$ and $f(L_1) \geq f(L_2)$.
Case (\emph{c}):
If $\scoreexp{L_1; \beta_1} < \scoreexp{L_2; \beta_1}$ and $\scoreexp{L_1; \beta_2} = \scoreexp{L_2; \beta_2}$,
then Case \emph{(iii)} guarantees that $\beta_2 = \beta'$ and $f(L_1) \geq f(L_2)$.
Case (\emph{d}):
If $\scoreexp{L_1; \beta_1} < \scoreexp{L_2; \beta_1}$ and $\scoreexp{L_1; \beta_2} > \scoreexp{L_2; \beta_2}$,
then Case \emph{(iii)} guarantees that $\beta_1 < \beta' < \beta_2$ and $f(L_1) \geq f(L_2)$.
These cases immediately guarantee that $h(\beta_1) = n / f(L_1) \leq n / f(L_2) = h(\beta_2).$
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:speedup}]
Since $\beta^*$ is optimal we must have $\beta^* = h(\beta^*)$.
Assume that $\beta \leq \beta^*$.
Then Lemma~\ref{lem:monotone} states that $\beta' = h(\beta) \leq h(\beta^*) = \beta^*$.
Assume that $\beta^* \leq \beta$.
Then Lemma~\ref{lem:monotone} states that $\beta^* = h(\beta^*) \leq h(\beta) = \beta'$.
\end{proof}
\section{Approximating continuous burstiness}\label{sec:expburst}
In this section we will provide a $(1 + \epsilon)$-approximation algorithms for
$\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha)$ and $\textsc{Exp}\xspace$. The time complexities are stated in Table~\ref{tab:algos}.
\subsection{Approximating $\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha)$}
In this section we introduce an approximation algorithm for $\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha)$. The
general approach of this algorithm is the same as in \textit{GeoAlpha}\xspace: we test several
values of $\beta$, solve the resulting subproblem with \textit{Viterbi}\xspace, and select the
best one. The pseudo-code is given in
Algorithm~\ref{alg:expalpha}.
\begin{algorithm}[ht]
$\mu \leftarrow \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i} s_i$\;
$\beta \leftarrow 1 / \mu$\;
\While {$\beta \geq 1/(\alpha^k\mu)$} {
$L \leftarrow \textit{Viterbi}\xspace(S, \alpha, \beta, \gamma, k, \pexp{})$\;
$\beta \leftarrow \beta / (1 + \epsilon)$\;
}
\Return the best observed $L$ and $\beta$\;
\caption{$\textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace(S, \alpha, \gamma, k, \epsilon)$}
\label{alg:expalpha}
\end{algorithm}
Unlike with \textit{GeoAlpha}\xspace, \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace does not yield an unconditional $(1 +
\epsilon)$-approximation guarantee. The key problem is that since exponential
distribution is continuous, the term $\pexp{s; \lambda}$ may be larger than
$1$. Consequently, $-\log \pexp{s; \lambda}$, as well as the actual score
$\scoreexp{}$, can be negative. However, if the delay sequence has a geometric
mean larger or equal than 1, we can guarantee the approximation ratio.
The proofs for the next two propositions are given in
Appendix~\ref{sec:app_expapproxalpha}--\ref{sec:app_exptimealpha}.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:expapproxalpha}
Assume a delay sequence $S$, and parameters $\alpha$ and $\gamma$,
and an upper bound for levels $k$.
Let $\beta^*$ and $L^*$ be the solution to $\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha(\alpha))$.
Let $g = \spr{\prod_{i} s_i}^{1/n}$ be the geometric mean.
Assume $\epsilon > 0$.
Let $L$, $\beta$ be the solution returned by \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace.
Then
\[
\scoreexp{S, L; \beta} - n \log g \leq (1 + \epsilon)(\scoreexp{S, L^*; \beta^*} - n \log g)\quad.
\]
Moreover, if $g \geq 1$, then
\[
\scoreexp{S, L; \beta} \leq (1 + \epsilon)\scoreexp{S, L^*; \beta^*} \quad.
\]
\end{proposition}
Note that if the geometric mean $g$ is less than 1, then we still have a
guarantee, except now we need to shift the score by a (positive) constant of $-n\log g$.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:exptimealpha}
The computational complexity of
\textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace is $\bigO{\epsilon^{-1}nk^2 \log \alpha}$.
\end{proposition}
\subsection{Approximating $\textsc{Exp}\xspace$}
We now turn to approximating \textsc{Exp}\xspace. The approach here is
similar to the previous approach: we test multiple values
of $\alpha$ and invoke \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace. The pseudo-code for the algorithm
is given in Algorithm~\ref{alg:expapprox}.
\begin{algorithm}[ht]
$\alpha \leftarrow (\max s_i) / (\min s_i)$\;
$c \leftarrow \sqrt[2k]{1 + \epsilon}$\;
\While {$\alpha \geq 1$} {
$L \leftarrow \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace(S, \alpha, \gamma, k, \epsilon / 2)$\;
$\alpha \leftarrow \alpha / c$\;
}
\Return the best observed $L$\;
\caption{$\textit{ApproxExp}\xspace(S, \gamma, k, \epsilon)$}
\label{alg:expapprox}
\end{algorithm}
Next we establish the correctness of the method as well as the running time.
The proofs given in
Appendix~\ref{sec:app_expapprox}--\ref{sec:app_exptime}.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:expapprox}
Assume a delay sequence $S$, a parameter $\gamma$,
and an upper bound for levels $k$.
Let $\alpha^*$, $\beta^*$ and $L^*$ be the solution to \textsc{Exp}\xspace.
Let $g = \spr{\prod_{i} s_i}^{1/n}$ be the geometric mean,
and let $\psi = n \log g$.
Assume $\epsilon > 0$.
Let $L$, $\alpha$, $\beta$ the solution returned by \textit{ApproxExp}\xspace.
Then
\[
\scoreexp{S, L; \alpha, \beta} - \psi \leq (1 + \epsilon)(\scoreexp{S, L^*; \alpha^*, \beta^*} - \psi)\quad.
\]
Moreover, if $g \geq 1$, then
\[
\scoreexp{S, L; \alpha, \beta} \leq (1 + \epsilon)\scoreexp{S, L^*; \alpha, \beta^*} \quad.
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:exptime}
Let $\Omega = \max s_i$ and let $\omega = \min s_i$.
The computational complexity of
\textit{ApproxExp}\xspace is $\bigO{\epsilon^{-2}nk^3 \log^2(\Omega / \omega)}$.
\end{proposition}
\subsection{Speeding up $\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha)$}
Our final step is to describe how can we speed-up the computation of $\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha)$ in practice.
The following proposition allows us to ignore a significant amount of tests.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:speedup}
Assume a delay sequence $S$, and parameters $\alpha$ and $\gamma$.
Let $\beta$ be a parameter, and let $L$ be the optimal solution for $\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha, \beta)$.
Define
\[
\beta' = \frac{n}{\sum_i s_i \alpha^{\ell_i}}\quad.
\]
Let $\beta^*$ be the optimal parameter to $\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha)$. Then
either
\[
\beta^* \leq \min(\beta, \beta') \quad\text{or}\quad
\beta^* \geq \max(\beta, \beta')\quad.
\]
\end{proposition}
Proposition~\ref{prop:speedup} allows us to ignore some tests: Let $\beta_i$ be the parameters
tested by \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace, that is, $\beta_i =
\mu^{-1}(1 + \epsilon)^{-i}$.
Assume that we test $\beta_i$, and compute $\beta'$ as given in Proposition~\ref{prop:speedup}.
If $\beta' > \beta_i$, we can safely ignore testing any $\beta_j$ such that $\beta_i < \beta_j < \beta'$.
Similarly,
if $\beta' < \beta_i$, we can safely ignore testing any $\beta_j$ such that $\beta' < \beta_j < \beta_i$.
The testing order of $\beta_i$ matters since we want to use
both cases $\beta' < \beta_i$ and $\beta' > \beta_i$ efficiently. We propose the following order which worked
well in our experimental evaluation: Let $t$ be the number of different $\beta_i$, and let $m$ be the largest integer
for which $2^m \leq t$. Test the parameters in the order
\[
0, 2^m, 2^{m - 1}, 2^{3(m - 1)}, \ldots, 1, 3, 5, 7, \ldots,
\]
that is, we start with $0$ and increment by $2^m$ until we reach the end of the list. Then we decrease $m$ by 1, and repeat.
During the traverse, we ignore the parameters that were already tested, as well as the redundant parameters.
Interestingly enough, this approach cannot be applied directly to the discrete
version of the problem. First of all, the technique for proving
Proposition~\ref{prop:speedup} cannot be applied directly to the score function
for the geometric distribution. Secondly, there is no closed formula for
computing the discrete analogue of $\beta'$ given in
Proposition~\ref{prop:speedup}.
\section{Approximating discrete burstiness}\label{sec:geoburst}
In this section we will provide a $(1 + \epsilon)$-approximation algorithms for
$\textsc{Geo}\xspace(\alpha)$ and $\textsc{Geo}\xspace$. The time complexities are stated in Table~\ref{tab:algos}.
\subsection{Approximating $\textsc{Geo}\xspace(\alpha)$}
Note that if we knew the optimal $\beta$, then $\textsc{Geo}\xspace(\alpha)$ reduces to Problem~\ref{prb:burstgeoorig},
which we can solve in $\bigO{nk}$ time by applying \textit{Viterbi}\xspace.
The idea behind our approximation is
to test several values of $\beta$, and select the best solution among the tested values.
The trick is to select values densely enough so that we can obtain $(1 + \epsilon)$ guarantee
while keeping the number of tests low, namely $\bigO{\epsilon^{-1}\log \log n}$.
The pseudo-code of the algorithm is given in Algorithm~\ref{alg:geoapproxalpha}.
\begin{algorithm}[ht]
$\mu \leftarrow \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i} s_i$\;
\lIf {$\mu = 0$} {
\Return $L = \enpr{0}{0}$
}
$\eta \leftarrow \mu /(\mu + 1)$\;
$c \leftarrow 1$\;
\While {$\eta^c \leq \mu/(\mu + 1/n)$} {
$\beta \leftarrow \eta^c$\;
$L \leftarrow \textit{Viterbi}\xspace(S, \alpha, \beta, \gamma, k, \pgeo{})$\;
$c \leftarrow c / (1 + \epsilon)$\;
}
\Return the best observed $L$\;
\caption{$\textit{GeoAlpha}\xspace(S, \alpha, \gamma, k, \epsilon)$}
\label{alg:geoapproxalpha}
\end{algorithm}
Next we state that the algorithm indeed yields an
$(1 + \epsilon)$-approximation ratio, and can be executed in
$\bigO{\epsilon^{-1}nk\log \log n}$ time.
The proofs are given in Appendix~\ref{sec:app_geoapproxalpha}--\ref{sec:app_geotimealpha}.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:geoapproxalpha}
Let $S$ be an integer delay sequence, and let $\alpha$, $\gamma$, and $k$ be the parameters.
Let $L^*$, $\beta^*$ be the solution to $\textsc{Geo}\xspace(\alpha)$.
Assume $\epsilon > 0$.
Let $L$, $\beta$ be the solution returned by $\textit{GeoAlpha}\xspace(S, \alpha, \gamma, k, \epsilon)$.
Then
\[
\scoregeo{S, L; \beta} \leq (1 + \epsilon)\scoregeo{S, L^*; \beta^*}\quad.
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:geotimealpha}
The computational complexity of
\textit{GeoAlpha}\xspace is $\bigO{\epsilon^{-1}nk \log \log n}$.
\end{proposition}
\subsection{Approximating $\textsc{Geo}\xspace$}
We now turn to approximating \textsc{Geo}\xspace. The approach here is
similar to the previous approach: we test multiple values
of $\alpha$ and invoke \textit{GeoAlpha}\xspace. The pseudo-code for the algorithm
is given in Algorithm~\ref{alg:geoapprox}.
\begin{algorithm}[ht]
$L \leftarrow \textit{GeoAlpha}\xspace(S, 0, \gamma, k, \epsilon)$\;
$\mu \leftarrow \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i} s_i$\;
$\eta \leftarrow 1 /(1 + nk)$\;
$\sigma \leftarrow \mu/(\mu + 1/n)$\;
$c \leftarrow 1$\;
\While {$\eta^c \leq \sigma^{\epsilon / k}$} {
$\alpha \leftarrow \eta^c$\;
$L \leftarrow \textit{GeoAlpha}\xspace(S, \alpha, \gamma, k, \epsilon)$\;
$c \leftarrow c / (1 + \epsilon)$\;
}
\Return the best observed $L$\;
\caption{$\textit{ApproxGeo}\xspace(S, \gamma, k, \epsilon)$}
\label{alg:geoapprox}
\end{algorithm}
Next we establish the correctness of the method as well as the running time.
The proofs are given in Appendix~\ref{sec:app_geoapprox}--\ref{sec:app_geotime}.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:geoapprox}
Let $L^*$, $\alpha^*$, $\beta^*$ be the solution to \textsc{Geo}\xspace.
Assume $\epsilon > 0$.
Let $L$, $\alpha$, $\beta$ be the solution returned by $\textit{ApproxGeo}\xspace(S, \gamma, k, \epsilon)$.
Then
\[
\scoregeo{S, L; \alpha, \beta} \leq (1 + \epsilon)\scoregeo{S, L^*; \alpha^*, \beta^*}\quad.
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:geotime}
The computational complexity of
\textit{ApproxGeo}\xspace is
\[
\bigO{nk \log \log n(\log n + \log \mu + \log k - \log\epsilon)\epsilon^{-2}}\quad.
\]
\end{proposition}
\section{Concluding remarks}\label{sec:conclusions}
In this paper we presented variants of~\cite{kleinberg:03:burst} for
discovering bursts: instead of deriving the base rate from $\mu$, the average
delay time between the events, we optimize this parameter along with the actual
burst discovery.
We showed that this leads to better burst discovery,
especially if the bursts are long.
We also propose variants, where we optimize the change parameter $\alpha$,
instead of having it as a parameter.
Despite being a minor tweak, the resulting optimization problems are significantly
harder. To solve the problems, we introduce efficient algorithms yielding $(1 +
\epsilon)$ approximation guarantee. These methods are based on testing multiple
values for the base rate, and selecting the burst sequence with the best score.
Despite being similar problems, discrete and continuous versions of the problem
required their own algorithms. In addition, we were able significantly speed-up
the exponential model variant by safely ignoring some candidate values for the base rate.
The approximation algorithms are quasi-linear with respect to sequence length.
However, especially when we optimize $\alpha$, the algorithms depend also on
the actual values of the sequence, see Table~\ref{tab:algos}. A potential future work is to
improve the algorithms, and develop polynomially strong approximation schemes.
The other fruitful direction is to develop heuristics that allow us to ignore
large parts of the parameters, similar to the speed-up we propose for the
exponential model variant of the problem.
\section{Exact algorithm for $\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha)$}\label{sec:exact}
In this section we present an exact polynomial algorithm for solving $\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha)$.
Unfortunately, this algorithm is impractically slow for large sequences: the time complexity is $\bigO{n^3k^4}$ and
the space complexity is $\bigO{n^3k^3}$. Thus, it only serves as a theoretical result.
More practical algorithms are given in the next sections.
In order to solve \textsc{Exp}\xspace we introduce a more complicated optimization problem.
\begin{problem}[\textsc{BndBurst}\xspace]
Given a delay sequence $S = s_1, \ldots, s_n$, a parameter $\alpha$, budget parameters $d$ and $m$,
and a maximum number of levels $k$, find a level sequence $L = \ell_1, \ldots, \ell_n$,
with $0 \leq l_i \leq k$, minimizing
\[
\begin{split}
&\sum_{i = 1}^n \alpha^{l_i} s_i\quad \text{such that} \\
&\sum_i \max\pr{\ell_i - \ell_{i - 1}, 0} = d \quad\text{and}\quad
\sum_i \ell_i = m\quad.
\end{split}
\]
\end{problem}
We will show that this problem can be solved in polynomial time. But before, let
us first show that \textsc{Exp}\xspace and \textsc{BndBurst}\xspace are intimately connected. See Appendix~\ref{sec:app_boundprb} for the proof.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:boundprb}
Assume a delay sequence $S$, and parameters $\alpha$ and $\gamma$, and an upper
bound for levels $k$.
There are budget parameters $d \leq k(n + 1)/2$ and $m \leq kn$ for which
the level sequence $L$ solving \textsc{BndBurst}\xspace also solves
$\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha)$ along with
\[
\beta = \frac{n}{\sum_i s_i \alpha^{\ell_i}}\quad.
\]
\end{proposition}
We can solve \textsc{BndBurst}\xspace with a dynamic program. In order to do this, let us
define a table $o$, where an entry $o[i, j, a, b]$ is the optimal score of the first $i$ symbols
of the input sequence such that
\[
\ell_i = j,\
\sum_{x = 1}^i \max\pr{\ell_x - \ell_{x - 1}, 0} = a, \ \text{and}\
\sum_{x = 1}^i \ell_x = b\quad.
\]
In case, there is no level sequence satisfying the constraints, we set $o[i, j, a, b] = \infty$.
Due to Proposition~\ref{prop:boundprb}, we can limit $a \leq k(n + 1)/2$ and $b \leq kn$.
Consequently, $o$ contains $\bigO{n^3k^3}$ entries.
We can compute a single entry with
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&o[i, j, a, b] \\
&\quad = \alpha^j s_i + \min_{j'} o[i - 1, j', a - \max(0, j - j'), b - j]\quad.
\label{eq:exactdp}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The computation of a single value thus requires $\bigO{k}$ time. So computing the whole table
can be done in $\bigO{n^3k^4}$. Moreover, if we also store the optimal $j'$
as given in Equation~\ref{eq:exactdp}, for each cell, we can recover the level
sequence responsible for every $o[i, j, a, b]$.
Proposition~\ref{prop:boundprb} now guarantees that we can solve \textsc{Exp}\xspace by
comparing the level sequences responsible for $o[n, j, a, b]$, where $j = 0, \ldots, k$, $a = 0, \ldots, (k + 1)n/2$,
and $b = 0, \ldots, kn$.
\section{Experimental evaluation}\label{sec:exp}
In this section we present our experiments.
As a baseline we use method by~\citet{kleinberg:03:burst}, that is, we
derive the parameter $\beta$ from $\mu$, the mean of the sequence.
For exponential model, $\beta = \mu^{-1}$; we refer to this model as
\textit{ExpMean}\xspace. For geometrical model, $\beta = \mu / (\mu + 1)$; we refer to this
approach as \textit{GeoMean}\xspace. Throughout the experiments, we used $\epsilon = 0.05$
and $\gamma = 1$ for our algorithms.
\textbf{Experiments with synthetic data:}
We first focus on demonstrating when optimizing $\beta$ is more
advantageous than the baseline approach.
For our first experiment we generated a sequence of $500$ data points.
We planted a single burst with a varying length $50$--$250$. The burst was
generated with $\pexp{\cdot; 1}$, while the remaining sequence was generated
with $\pexp{\cdot; 2}$. We computed bursts with \textit{ExpMean}\xspace and \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace,
the parameters were set to $k = 1$, $\alpha = 2$. The obtained level sequence
was evaluated by computing the hamming distance, $\sum_i \abs{\ell_i - \ell^*_i}$, where $\ell^*_i$
is the ground truth level sequence.
We repeated each experiment $100$ times.
We see from the results given in Figure~\ref{fig:burstlen} that the bursts
discovered by \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace are closer to the ground truth, on average, than the
baseline. This is especially the case when burst becomes larger. The main
reason for this is that short bursts do not affect significantly the average of
the sequence, $\mu$, so consequently, $\mu$ is close to the base activity
level. As the burst increases, so does $\mu$, which leads to
underestimating of $\beta$.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline]
\begin{axis}[xlabel={length of the implanted burst}, ylabel= {hamming distance},
height = 4cm,
width = 8cm,
cycle list name=yaf,
ymax = 100,
ymin = 0,
xtick = {50, 100, ..., 250}
]
\addplot[yafcolor1] table[x index = 0, y index = 1, header = false] {burstlength2.dat};
\addplot[yafcolor2] table[x index = 0, y index = 2, header = false] {burstlength2.dat};
\node[inner sep = 2pt, pin = {[pin distance = 3mm, pin edge = {thick}, text = black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 1pt]90:\textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace}] at (axis cs: 230, 16.46) {};
\node[inner sep = 2pt, pin = {[pin distance = 3mm, pin edge = {thick}, text = black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 1pt]90:\textit{ExpMean}\xspace}] at (axis cs: 190, 49.58) {};
\pgfplotsextra{\yafdrawaxis{50}{250}{0}{100}}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Hamming distance between the ground truth and the discovered level sequence as a function of the length of the planted burst.
Low values are better.}
\label{fig:burstlen}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline]
\begin{axis}[xlabel={sequence length}, ylabel= {normalized hamming},
height = 4cm,
width = 8cm,
cycle list name=yaf,
xmax = 500,
ymin = 0,
ymax = 0.25,
yticklabel style={/pgf/number format/fixed,/pgf/number format/precision=2},
ytick = {0, 0.05, ..., 0.30},
xtick = {50, 100, ..., 500}
]
\addplot[yafcolor1] table[x index = 0, y expr = {\thisrowno{2} / \thisrowno{0}}, header = false] {sequence_length.dat};
\addplot[yafcolor2] table[x index = 0, y expr = {\thisrowno{3} / \thisrowno{0}}, header = false] {sequence_length.dat};
\node[inner sep = 2pt, pin = {[pin distance = 3mm, pin edge = {thick}, text = black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 1pt]270:\textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace}] at (axis cs: 120, 14.93 / 120) {};
\node[inner sep = 2pt, pin = {[pin distance = 3mm, pin edge = {thick}, text = black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 1pt]90:\textit{ExpMean}\xspace}] at (axis cs: 210, 25.56 / 210 ) {};
\pgfplotsextra{\yafdrawaxis{50}{500}{0}{0.25}}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Hamming distance, normalized by the sequence length, between the
ground truth level sequence and the discovered level sequence as a function of
the sequence length. Low values are better.}
\label{fig:burstlen2}
\end{figure}
Our next experiment is similar, expect now we vary the sequence length, $n$,
(50--500) and set the burst length to be $n/3$. We generated the sequence as
before, and we use the same parameters. In
Figure~\ref{fig:burstlen2} we report,
$\frac{1}{n}\sum_i \abs{\ell_i - \ell^*_i}$,
the number of disagreements compared with the ground truth, normalized by
$n$.
Each experiment was repeated 300 times.
We see that for the shortest sequences, the number of disagreement is same for
both algorithm, around $0.2$--$0.25$. This is due that we do not have enough
samples to override the transition penalty $\pen{}$. Once the sequence becomes
longer, we have more evidence of a burst, and here \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace starts to beat the
baseline, due to a better model fit.
\textbf{Experiments with real-world data:}
We considered two datasets: The first dataset, \dtname{Crimes}, consists of
17\,033 crimes related to narcotics in Chicago between January and October, 2015.
The second dataset, \dtname{Mine}, consists of 909 fatalities in U.S. mining
industry dating from 2000, January.\!\footnote{Both datasets are available at
\url{http://data.gov/}.}
This data is visualized in Figure~\ref{fig:minedata}.
In both datasets, each event has a time stamp: in \dtname{Crimes} we use minutes as granularity, whereas in \dtname{Mine} the time stamp is by the date.
Using these time stamps, we created a delay sequence.
We applied \textit{ApproxExp}\xspace, \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace, and \textit{ExpMean}\xspace to \dtname{Crimes}. We set $k = 4$,
and for \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace and \textit{ExpMean}\xspace we used $\alpha = 2$.
Since \dtname{Crimes} contains events with 0 delay, we added 1 minute to each delay to avoid the pathological case described in Section~\ref{sec:problem}.
The obtained bursts are presented in Figure~\ref{fig:crimes}.
We also applied \textit{ApproxGeo}\xspace, \textit{GeoAlpha}\xspace, and \textit{GeoMean}\xspace to \dtname{Mine}. Here we set $\alpha =
1/2$ and $k = 4$, however the algorithm used only 3 levels. The obtained bursts are presented in Figure~\ref{fig:minedelays}.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline]
\begin{axis}[xlabel={date},
height = 4cm,
width = 18cm,
cycle list name=yaf,
xtick = { -342, -2122, -3972, -5669, -7289, -9036, -10877, -13078, -14844, -17033},
xticklabels = {Oct, Sep, Aug, Jul, Jun, May, Apr, Mar, Feb, Jan},
scaled x ticks = false,
ytick = {0, 1, 2, 4.5, 5.5, 6.5, 7.5, 10, 11},
xmin = {-17033},
ymax = 12,
yticklabels = {1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2},
ymajorgrids = false,
every axis plot post/.append style= {line width=0.5pt} ,
]
\addplot[yafcolor5, const plot]
table[x expr = {-\thisrowno{0}}, y expr = {\thisrowno{1}}, header = false] {chicago_narcotics_approx_compressed.out};
\addplot[yafcolor2, const plot]
table[x expr = {-\thisrowno{0}}, y expr = {\thisrowno{1} + 4.5}, header = false] {chicago_narcotics_alpha_compressed.out};
\addplot[yafcolor3, const plot]
table[x expr = {-\thisrowno{0}}, y expr = {\thisrowno{1} + 10}, header = false] {chicago_narcotics_mean_compressed.out};
\node[anchor = west, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 0pt] at (axis cs: -17033, 3) {\textit{ApproxExp}\xspace};
\node[anchor = west, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 0pt] at (axis cs: -17033, 8.5) {\textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace};
\node[anchor = west, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 0pt] at (axis cs: -17033, 12) {\textit{ExpMean}\xspace};
\pgfplotsextra{\yafdrawxaxis{0}{-17033}\yafdrawyaxis{0}{2}\yafdrawyaxis{4.5}{7.5}\yafdrawyaxis{10}{11}}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Discovered bursts in \dtname{Crimes} dataset.}
\label{fig:crimes}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline]
\begin{axis}[xlabel={year (from 2000)}, ylabel= {days w/o fatality},
height = 3.2cm,
width = 9cm,
cycle list name=yaf,
clip mode = individual,
xticklabels = {00, 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15},
xtick = {0, 96, 174, 247, 307, 369, 429, 503, 570, 623, 658, 730, 766, 802, 843, 886}
]
\addplot[yafcolor5, only marks, mark = *, mark size = 0.3]
table[x expr = {\coordindex}, y index = 0, header = false] {fatalities_delays.dat};
\pgfplotsextra{\yafdrawaxis{0}{907}{0}{66}}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}\\
\caption{The delay sequence \dtname{Mine}, as well as the discovered bursts.}
\label{fig:minedata}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline]
\begin{axis}[xlabel={year (from 2000)},
height = 3.7cm,
width = 9.3cm,
cycle list name=yaf,
clip mode = individual,
xticklabels = {00, 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15},
xtick = {0, 96, 174, 247, 307, 369, 429, 503, 570, 623, 658, 730, 766, 802, 843, 886},
ytick = {0, 1, 3.5, 4.5, 5.5, 8, 9, 10},
ymax = 11,
yticklabels = {1, 2, 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 3},
ymajorgrids = false,
]
\addplot[yafcolor5, const plot]
table[x index = 0, y expr = {\thisrowno{1}}, header = false] {fatalities_delays_approx_compressed.out};
\addplot[yafcolor2, const plot]
table[x index = 0, y expr = {\thisrowno{1} + 3.5}, header = false] {fatalities_delays_mean_compressed.out};
\addplot[yafcolor3, const plot]
table[x index = 0, y expr = {\thisrowno{1} + 8}, header = false] {fatalities_delays_mean_compressed.out};
\node[anchor = west, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 0pt] at (axis cs: 0, 2) {\textit{ApproxExp}\xspace};
\node[anchor = west, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 0pt] at (axis cs: 0, 5.5) {\textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace};
\node[anchor = west, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 0pt] at (axis cs: 0, 10) {\textit{ExpMean}\xspace};
\pgfplotsextra{\yafdrawxaxis{0}{907}\yafdrawyaxis{0}{1}\yafdrawyaxis{3.5}{5.5}\yafdrawyaxis{8}{10}}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The delay sequence \dtname{Mine}, as well as the discovered bursts.}
\label{fig:minedelays}
\end{figure}
In \dtname{Mine}, the results by \textit{GeoAlpha}\xspace and \textit{GeoMean}\xspace are the same.
However, we noticed that the results differ if we use different $\alpha$. The
biggest difference between \textit{ApproxGeo}\xspace and \textit{GeoAlpha}\xspace is the last burst:
\textit{GeoAlpha}\xspace (and \textit{GeoMean}\xspace) set the last burst to be on level 2, while
\textit{ApproxGeo}\xspace uses level 1. The reason for this is that \textit{ApproxGeo}\xspace selects $\alpha$ to
be very close to $0$, that is, much smaller than $1/2$, the parameter used by
the other algoritms. This implies that when going one level up, the model
expects the events to be much closer to each other.
In \dtname{Crimes}, \textit{ApproxExp}\xspace and \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace discover burstier structure than
\textit{ExpMean}\xspace. \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace uses 4 different levels. Interestingly enough, in
this level sequence, we spent most of the time at level 1, and we descended to
level 0 for 3 short bursts. In other words, in addition to finding crime
streaks, \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace also found three short periods when narcotics related
crime rate was lower than usual. \textit{ApproxExp}\xspace also spends most of its time on level
1 but often descends on level 0, while also highlighting one burst in early
January.
\textbf{Number of \textit{Viterbi}\xspace calls:}
Next, we study relative efficiency when compared \textit{Viterbi}\xspace. Since all 4
approximation schemes use \textit{Viterbi}\xspace as a subroutine, a natural way of measuring
the efficiency is to study the number of \textit{Viterbi}\xspace calls. We report the number of
calls as a function of $\epsilon$ for datasets \dtname{Mine} and
\dtname{Crimes} in Figure~\ref{fig:calls}. Here, we did not use the speed-up version
of \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace.
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[xlabel={parameter $\epsilon$}, ylabel= {tests},
title = {\scriptsize\dtname{Mine}},
height = 3.5cm,
width = 8.7cm,
cycle list name=yaf,
tick scale binop = \times,
xticklabel = {\pgfmathparse{\tick}$2^{-\pgfmathprintnumber{\pgfmathresult}}$},
yticklabel = {\pgfmathparse{\tick}$2^{\pgfmathprintnumber{\pgfmathresult}}$},
xtick = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9},
ymax = 25,
legend style = {at = {(0, 1)}, anchor = {north west}}
]
\addplot[yafcolor1] table[x expr = {\coordindex}, y index = 1, header = false] {geo_tests.dat}
node[sloped, pos = 0.5, text = black, font = \scriptsize, above, inner sep = 2pt] {\textit{GeoAlpha}\xspace};
\addplot[yafcolor2] table[x expr = {\coordindex}, y index = 3, header = false] {geo_tests.dat}
node[sloped, pos = 0.5, text = black, font = \scriptsize, above, inner sep = 2pt] {\textit{ApproxGeo}\xspace};
\pgfplotsextra{\yafdrawaxis{0}{9}{3.3}{25}}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[xlabel={parameter $\epsilon$}, ylabel= {tests},
title = {\scriptsize\dtname{Crimes}},
height = 3.5cm,
width = 8.7cm,
cycle list name=yaf,
tick scale binop = \times,
xticklabel = {\pgfmathparse{\tick}$2^{-\pgfmathprintnumber{\pgfmathresult}}$},
yticklabel = {\pgfmathparse{\tick}$2^{\pgfmathprintnumber{\pgfmathresult}}$},
xtick = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9},
ytick = {5, 10, 15, 20, 25},
ymax = 28,
legend style = {at = {(0, 1)}, anchor = {north west}}
]
\addplot[yafcolor1] table[x expr = {\coordindex}, y index = 1, header = false] {exp_tests.dat}
node[sloped, pos = 0.5, text = black, font = \scriptsize, above, inner sep = 2pt] {\textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace};
\addplot[yafcolor2] table[x expr = {\coordindex}, y index = 3, header = false] {exp_tests.dat}
node[sloped, pos = 0.5, text = black, font = \scriptsize, above, inner sep = 2pt] {\textit{ApproxExp}\xspace};
\pgfplotsextra{\yafdrawaxis{0}{9}{2.3}{28}}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Number of \textit{Viterbi}\xspace calls as a function of $\epsilon$. Both $x$ and
$y$-axis are logarithmic. We set $k = 4$, $\alpha = 0.5$ for \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace, and
$\alpha = 2$ for \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace. Here, we did not use the speed-up version of \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace.}
\label{fig:calls}
\end{figure}
We see that the behaviour depends heavily on the accuracy parameter $\epsilon$:
for example, if we use $\epsilon = 0.5$, then \textit{GeoAlpha}\xspace uses
17 calls while \textit{ApproxGeo}\xspace uses 561 calls; if we set $\epsilon = 2^{-9}$, then
\textit{GeoAlpha}\xspace needs 3453 calls while \textit{ApproxGeo}\xspace needs 32\,810\,406 calls.
This implies that we should not use extremely small $\epsilon$, especially
if we also wish to optimize $\alpha$. Nevertheless, the algorithms are
fast when we use moderately small $\epsilon$.
\textbf{Effect of a speed-up:}
Finally, we compare the effect of a speed-up for \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace
described in Section~\ref{sec:expburst}. Here we used both datasets
\dtname{Mine} and \dtname{Crimes} to which we apply \textit{ExpAlpha}\xspace with $k = 5$ and $\alpha = 2$.
We vary $\epsilon$ from $2^{-13}$ to $1/2$ and compare the plain version
vs. speed-up in Figure~\ref{fig:speedup}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[xlabel={parameter $\epsilon$}, ylabel= {tests},
title = {\scriptsize\dtname{Crimes}},
height = 3.5cm,
width = 8cm,
cycle list name=yaf,
tick scale binop = \times,
xticklabel = {\pgfmathparse{\tick}$2^{-\pgfmathprintnumber{\pgfmathresult}}$},
xtick = {1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13},
legend pos = {north west}
]
\addplot[yafcolor1] table[x expr = {\coordindex + 1}, y index = 1, header = false] {speedup_narc.dat};
\addplot[yafcolor2] table[x expr = {\coordindex + 1}, y index = 2, header = false] {speedup_narc.dat};
\legend {plain, speed-up}
\node[coordinate,pin={[inner sep = 2pt, pin edge = {thick, yafaxiscolor, shorten <=2pt}]205:{\scriptsize $28\,394$}}] at (axis cs:13, 28394) {};
\node[coordinate,pin={[inner sep = 2pt, pin distance = 3mm, pin edge = {thick, yafaxiscolor, shorten <=2pt}]115:{\scriptsize $622$}}] at (axis cs:13, 622) {};
\pgfplotsextra{\yafdrawaxis{1}{13}{9}{28394}}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[xlabel={parameter $\epsilon$}, ylabel= {tests},
title = {\scriptsize\dtname{Mine}},
height = 3.5cm,
width = 8cm,
cycle list name=yaf,
tick scale binop = \times,
xticklabel = {\pgfmathparse{\tick}$2^{-\pgfmathprintnumber{\pgfmathresult}}$},
xtick = {1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13},
legend pos = {north west}
]
\addplot[yafcolor1] table[x expr = {\coordindex + 1}, y index = 1, header = false] {speedup_mine.dat};
\addplot[yafcolor2] table[x expr = {\coordindex + 1}, y index = 2, header = false] {speedup_mine.dat};
\legend {plain, speed-up}
\node[coordinate,pin={[inner sep = 2pt, pin edge = {thick, yafaxiscolor, shorten <=2pt}]205:{\scriptsize $28\,394$}}] at (axis cs:13, 28394) {};
\node[coordinate,pin={[inner sep = 2pt, pin distance = 3mm, pin edge = {thick, yafaxiscolor, shorten <=2pt}]115:{\scriptsize $312$}}] at (axis cs:13, 312) {};
\pgfplotsextra{\yafdrawaxis{1}{13}{9}{28394}}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Number of tests needed as a function of $\epsilon$. Speed-up (see, Section~\ref{sec:expburst}) vs. vanilla version.}
\label{fig:speedup}
\end{figure}
We see in Figure~\ref{fig:speedup} that the we gain significant speed-up as we
decrease $\epsilon$: At best, we improve by two orders of magnitude.
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
Many natural phenomena occur unevenly over time, and one of the classic data mining
tasks is to discover bursts, time intervals, where events occur at
abnormally high rate. In this paper we revisit a seminal work by
\citet{kleinberg:03:burst} that has been used, for example, in discovering trends in citation
literature~\citep{chen:06:citespace}, analyzing topics~\citep{mane:04:topic},
recommending citations~\citep{he:11:citation}, analyzing
disasters~\citep{fontugne:11:disaster}, and analyzing social
networks~\citep{backstrom:06:group} and blogs~\citep{kumar:03:bursty}.
\citet{kleinberg:03:burst} discovers bursts by modelling the time between
events with an exponential model with varying rate parameter. The rate
starts at the base level $\beta$ and can be
raised (multiple times) by a change parameter $\alpha$, but it cannot descend $\beta$. Every time
we raise the parameter, we need to pay a penalty. In the original approach,
the change rate $\alpha$ is given as a parameter and the
base rate is selected to be $\beta = 1/\mu$, where $\mu$ is the average of the
sequence.
We argue that this choice of $\beta$ is suboptimal: (\emph{i}) it does not
maximize the likelihood of the model, and, more importantly, (\emph{ii}) a more
optimized $\beta$ may reveal bursts that would have gone undetected.
We propose a variant of the original burstiness problem, where we are no longer
given the base parameter $\beta$ but instead we are asked to optimize it along
with discovering bursts. We also consider variants where we optimize $\alpha$ as well.
These tweaks are rather mundane from the problem definition
point of view but it leads to a surprisingly difficult optimization problem.
We consider two different models for the delays: exponential and geometric.
First, we will show that we can solve our problem for exponential model in
polynomial time, when $\alpha$ is given. Unfortunately, this algorithm requires $\bigO{n^3k^4}$ time,\!\footnote{
Here, $n$ is the sequence length and $k$ is the maximum number of times the rate can be increased.}
thus being impractical. Even worse, we cannot apply the same approach for
geometric model. This is a stark contrast to the original approach, where the
computational complexity is $\bigO{nk}$.
Fortunately, we can estimate burst discovery in quasi-linear
time w.r.t.\ the sequence length; see Table~\ref{tab:algos} for a summary of
the algorithms. We obtain $(1 + \epsilon)$ approximation guarantee for the geometric
model. We also obtain, under some mild conditions, $(1 + \epsilon)$ approximation guarantee
for the exponential model.
In all four cases, the algorithm is simple: we test
multiple values of $\beta$ (and $\alpha$), and use the same efficient dynamic program that is
used to solve the original problem. Among the tested sequences we select the best one.
The main technical challenge is to test the multiple values of $\alpha$ and $\beta$
such that we obtain the needed guarantee while still maintaining a quasi-linear running time with respect to sequence length.
The remainder of the paper is as follows. We review the original burstiness
problem in Section~\ref{sec:prel}, and define our variant in
Section~\ref{sec:problem}. We introduce the exact algorithm in
Section~\ref{sec:exact}, and present the approximation algorithms in
Section~\ref{sec:geoburst}--\ref{sec:expburst}. In Section~\ref{sec:related}, we
present the related work. In Section~\ref{sec:exp}, we compare demonstrate
empirically that our approach discovers busts that may go unnoticed. We
conclude with discussion in Section~\ref{sec:conclusions}.
The proofs are given in Appendix, available in the full version of this paper.
\begin{table*}
\caption{Summary of algorithms discussed in this paper.
Here $k$ is the number of allowed levels,
$n$ is the length of the sequence, $\mu$ is the arithmetic mean, and $g$ is the geometric mean,
$\Omega$ is the maximum of the sequence, and
$\omega$ is the minimum of the sequence. We assume that $\omega > 0$.
$\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha, \beta)$ is the original problem considered by~\citet{kleinberg:03:burst},
and $\textsc{Geo}\xspace(\alpha, \beta)$ is a minor variation of the problem.
The remaining results are the main contribution of this paper.
}
\begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}lrr}
\toprule
Problem & guarantee & running time \\
\midrule
$\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha, \beta)$ & exact & $\bigO{nk}$ \\
$\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha)$ & exact & $\bigO{n^3k^4}$ \\
$\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha)$ & $\mathit{SOL} - n \log g \leq (1 + \epsilon)(\mathit{OPT} - n\log g)$ & $\bigO{\epsilon^{-1}nk^2 \log \alpha}$ \\
$\textsc{Exp}\xspace$ & $\mathit{SOL} - n \log g \leq (1 + \epsilon)(\mathit{OPT} - n\log g)$ & $\bigO{\epsilon^{-2}nk^3 \log^2 (\Omega / \omega)}$ \\[2mm]
$\textsc{Geo}\xspace(\alpha, \beta)$ & exact & $\bigO{nk}$ \\
$\textsc{Geo}\xspace(\alpha)$ & $\mathit{SOL} \leq (1 + \epsilon)\mathit{OPT}$ & $\bigO{\epsilon^{-1} nk \log \log n}$ \\
$\textsc{Geo}\xspace$ & $\mathit{SOL} \leq (1 + \epsilon)\mathit{OPT}$ & $\bigO{\epsilon^{-2} nk \log (n \mu k / \epsilon) \log \log n}$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular*}
\label{tab:algos}
\end{table*}
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec:prel}
In this section, we review the setting proposed by~\citet{kleinberg:03:burst},
as well as the dynamic program used to solve this setting.
Assume that we observe an event at different time points, say $t_0, \ldots,
t_n$. The main idea behind discovering bursts is to model the delays between
the events, $s_i = t_i - t_{i - 1}$: if the events occur at higher pace, then
we expect $s_i$ to be relatively small.
Assume that we are given a sequence of delays $S = s_1, \ldots, s_n$.
In order to measure the burstiness of the sequence,
we will model it with an exponential distribution,
$\pexp{s ; \lambda} = \lambda \exp\fpr{-\lambda s}$.
Larger $\lambda$ dictates that the delays should be shorter, that is, the
events should occur at faster pace.
The idea behind modelling burstiness is to allow the parameter $\lambda$
fluctuate to a certain degree: We start with $\lambda = \beta$, where $\beta$
is a parameter. At any point we can increase the parameter by multiplying with
another parameter $\alpha$. We can also decrease the parameter by dividing
by $\alpha$. We can have multiple increases and decreases, however, we cannot
decrease the parameter below $\beta$. Every time we change the rate from $x$ to $y$, we have
to pay a penalty, $\pen{x, y; \gamma}$, controlled by a parameter $\gamma$.
More formally,
assume that we have assigned the burstiness levels for each
delays $L = \ell_1, \ldots, \ell_n$, where each $\ell_i$ is a non-negative integer.
We will refer to this sequence as the \emph{level sequence}.
For convenience, let us write $\ell_0 = 0$.
Then the score of burstiness $\scoreexp{L, S; \alpha, \beta, \gamma}$ is equal to
\[
\sum_{i = 1}^n -\log \pexp{s_i ; \beta\alpha^{\ell_i}} + \pen{\ell_{i - 1}, \ell_i; \gamma}\quad.
\]
The first term---negative log-likelihood of the data---measures how well the
burstiness model fits the sequence, while the second term penalizes the erratic
behavior in $L$. Ideally, we wish to have both terms as small as possible.
To reduce clutter we will often ignore $\gamma$ in notation, as
this parameter is given, and is kept constant.
We will use the penalty function given in~\citep{kleinberg:03:burst},
\[
\pen{x, y} = \max(y - x, 0) \gamma \log n,
\]
where $n$ is the length of the input sequence. Note that $\pen{}$ depends on $\gamma$ and $n$
but we have suppressed this from the notation to avoid clutter.
We can now state the burstiness problem.
\begin{problem}[$\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha, \beta)$]
\label{prb:burstexporig}
Given a delay sequence $S$, parameters $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$, and a
maximum number of levels $k$, find a level sequence $L = \ell_1, \ldots,
\ell_n$, where $\ell_i$ is an integer $0 \leq \ell_i \leq k$,
minimizing $\scoreexp{L, S; \alpha, \beta, \gamma}$.
\end{problem}
Two remarks are in order: First of all, the original problem definition given
by~\citet{kleinberg:03:burst} does not directly use $k$, instead the levels are only limited
implicitly due to $\pen{}$. However, in practice, $k$ is needed by the dynamic
program, but it is possible to select a large enough $k$ such that enforcing
$k$ does not change the optimal sequence~\citep{kleinberg:03:burst}. Since our complexity
analysis will use $k$, we made this constraint explicit. Secondly, the parameter $\beta$
is typically set to $1 / \mu$, where $\mu = \frac{1}{n} \sum s_i$ is the average delay.
We also study an altenative objective.
Exponential distribution is meant primarily for real-valued delays. If the delays
are integers, then the natural counterpart of the distribution is the geometric distribution
$\pgeo{s ; \lambda} = (1 - \lambda)\lambda^s$.
Here, \emph{low} values of $\lambda$ dictate that the delays should occur faster.
We can now define
\[
\scoregeo{L, S; \alpha, \beta, \gamma} = \sum_{i = 1}^n -\log p_{\mathit{geo}}(s_i ; \beta\alpha^{\ell_i}) + \pen{\ell_{i - 1}, \ell_i}\,.
\]
Note that in $\scoreexp{}$ we use $\alpha > 1$ while here we use $\alpha < 1$.
We can now define a similar optimization problem.
\begin{problem}[$\textsc{Geo}\xspace(\alpha, \beta)$]
\label{prb:burstgeoorig}
Given an integer delay sequence $S$, parameters $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$, and a
maximum number of levels $k$, find a level sequence $L = \ell_1, \ldots,
\ell_n$, where $\ell_i$ is an integer $0 \leq \ell_i \leq k$,
minimizing $\scoregeo{L, S; \alpha, \beta, \gamma}$.
\end{problem}
We can solve Problem~\ref{prb:burstexporig} or Problem~\ref{prb:burstgeoorig}
using the standard dynamic programming algorithm by~\citet{viterbi:67:dp}.
Off-the-shelf version of this algorithm requires $\bigO{nk^2}$ time. However, we
can easily speed-up the algorithm to $\bigO{nk}$; for completeness we present this speed-up in Appendix~\ref{sec:app_viterbi}.
\section{Problem definition}\label{sec:problem}
We are now ready to state our problem.
The difference between our setting and Problem~\ref{prb:burstexporig} is that
here we are asked to optimize $\beta$, and possibly $\alpha$, along with the levels, while in the
original setting $\beta$ was given as a parameter.
We consider two problem variants. In the first variant, we optimize $\beta$
while we are given $\alpha$.
\begin{problem}[$\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha)$]
Given a delay sequence $S$, parameters $\alpha$, $\gamma$, and a
maximum number of levels $k$, find a level sequence $L = \ell_1, \ldots,
\ell_n$, where $\ell_i$ is an integer $0 \leq \ell_i \leq k$,
\emph{and a parameter $\beta$},
minimizing $\scoreexp{L, S; \alpha, \beta, \gamma}$.
\end{problem}
In the second variant, we optimize both $\alpha$ and $\beta$.
\begin{problem}[$\textsc{Exp}\xspace$]
Given a delay sequence $S$, a parameter $\gamma$, and a
maximum number of levels $k$, find a level sequence $L = \ell_1, \ldots,
\ell_n$, where $\ell_i$ is an integer $0 \leq \ell_i \leq k$,
\emph{and parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta$},
minimizing $\scoreexp{L, S; \alpha, \beta, \gamma}$.
\end{problem}
While this modification is trivial and mundane from the problem definition
point of view, it carries several crucial consequences. First of all,
optimizing $\beta$ may discover bursts that would otherwise be undetected.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline]
\begin{axis}[
height = 3cm,
width = 9cm,
cycle list name=yaf,
clip mode = individual,
]
\addplot[only marks, mark size = 0.3, mark = *, yafcolor3, mark options = {line width = 0.5pt}]
table[x expr = \coordindex, y index = 0, header = false] {meanvsexact.dat};
\coordinate (b1) at (0, -0.7cm);
\coordinate (b2) at (0, -1cm);
\coordinate (b3) at (0, -1.3cm);
\node[anchor = east, font = \scriptsize] at (1.2cm, -0.7cm) {ground truth};
\node[anchor = east, font = \scriptsize] at (1.2cm, -1cm) {$\beta = 1 / \mu$};
\node[anchor = east, font = \scriptsize] at (1.2cm, -1.3cm) {$\beta = $ exact};
\coordinate (s) at (axis cs:100, 0);
\coordinate (e) at (axis cs:400, 0);
\drawinterval{b1-|s}{b1-|e}{interval};
\coordinate (s) at (axis cs:161, 0);
\coordinate (e) at (axis cs:221, 0);
\drawinterval{b2-|s}{b2-|e}{interval, yafcolor2};
\coordinate (s) at (axis cs:301, 0);
\coordinate (e) at (axis cs:376, 0);
\drawinterval{b2-|s}{b2-|e}{interval, yafcolor2};
\coordinate (s) at (axis cs:100, 0);
\coordinate (e) at (axis cs:375, 0);
\drawinterval{b3-|s}{b3-|e}{interval, yafcolor5};
\pgfplotsextra{\yafdrawaxis{1}{500}{0}{13}}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{A toy data set $S$ with a burst between 100 and 400. Low values indicate
short delays, bursts. The indicated regions are
(\emph{i}) the ground truth,
(\emph{ii}) bursts discovered with $\beta = 1 / \mu$, where $\mu$ is the average delay, and
(\emph{iii}) bursts discovered with $\beta$ set to the exact value of the generative model.
}
\label{fig:meanvsexact}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline]
\begin{axis}[xlabel={parameter $\beta$}, ylabel= {score},
height = 3cm,
width = 8.5cm,
cycle list name=yaf,
clip mode = individual,
xtick = {0.02, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6}
]
\addplot[yafcolor5] table[x index = 0, y index = 1, header = false] {nonconvex.dat};
\pgfplotsextra{\yafdrawaxis{0.02}{0.66}{672}{826}}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Score $\pexp{S, L^*; \alpha, \beta, k}$ as a function of $\beta$,
where $\alpha = 2$, $k = 4$, and $L^*$ is the optimal level sequence for the given parameters.
Low
values are better.
}
\label{fig:nonconvex}
\end{figure}
\begin{example}
Consider a sequence given in Figure~\ref{fig:meanvsexact}, which shows a
sequence of $500$ delays. The burst between 100 and 400 is generated using
exponential model with $\lambda = 1/2$, the remaining delays are generated
using $\lambda = 1$. We applied \textit{Viterbi}\xspace with $\beta^{-1}$ equal to the average
of the sequence, the value used by~\citet{kleinberg:03:burst}, and compare it to $\beta = 1/2$,
which is the correct ground level of the generative model.
The remaining parameters were set to $\alpha = 2$, $\gamma = 1$, and $k = 1$. We see that in the
latter case we discover a burst that is much closer to the ground truth.\qed
\end{example}
Our second remark is that if $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are given, one can easily discover the
optimal bursts using \textit{Viterbi}\xspace. The optimization becomes non-trivial when we need to optimize $\alpha$ and $\beta$
as well. To make matters worse, the score as a function of $\beta$ is non-convex, as
demonstrated in Figure~\ref{fig:nonconvex}. Hence, we can easily get stuck
in local minima.
Next,
we introduce discrete variants of $\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha)$ and \textsc{Exp}\xspace.
\begin{problem}[$\textsc{Geo}\xspace(\alpha)$]
Given an integer delay sequence $S$, parameters $\alpha$, $\gamma$, and a
maximum number of levels $k$, find a level sequence $L = \ell_1, \ldots,
\ell_n$, where $\ell_i$ is an integer $0 \leq \ell_i \leq k$,
\emph{and a parameter $\beta$},
minimizing $\scoregeo{L, S; \alpha, \beta, \gamma}$.
\end{problem}
\begin{problem}[$\textsc{Geo}\xspace$]
Given an integer delay sequence $S$, a parameter $\alpha$, and a
maximum number of levels $k$, find a level sequence $L = \ell_1, \ldots,
\ell_n$, where $\ell_i$ is an integer $0 \leq \ell_i \leq k$,
\emph{and parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta$},
minimizing $\scoregeo{L, S; \alpha, \beta, \gamma}$.
\end{problem}
Despite being very similar problems, we need to analyze these problems
individually. We will show that $\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha)$ can be solved exactly in
polynomial time, although, the algorithm is too slow for practice.
This approach does not work for other problems but we will show
that all four problems can be $(1 + \epsilon)$-approximated efficiently.
Before we continue, we need to address a pathological case when solving
\textsc{Exp}\xspace: the problem of \textsc{Exp}\xspace is illdefined if the delay sequence
$S$ contains a zero. To see this, assume that $s_i = 0$. Then a level sequence
$\ell_i = 1$, and $\ell_j = 0$, for $j \neq i$, with $\alpha = \infty$ and
$\beta = 1$ leads to a score of $-\infty$. This is because $\pexp{s_i; \beta\alpha} = \infty$
and the remaining terms are finite. This is why we assume that whenever we deal with
\textsc{Exp}\xspace, we have $s_i > 0$.
If we have $s_i = 0$, then we can either set $\alpha$ manually by using $\textsc{Exp}\xspace(\alpha)$
or shift the delays by a small amount.
\section{Related work}\label{sec:related}
\textbf{Discovering bursts}
Modelling and discovering bursts is a very well-studied topic in data mining.
We will highlight some existing techniques.
We are modelling delays between events, but we can alternatively model
event counts in some predetermined window: high count indicate burst.
\citet{ihler:06:adaptive} proposed modelling such a statistic with Poisson
process, while \citet{fung:05:burst} used Binomial distribution.
If the events at hand are documents, we can model burstiness
with time-sensitive topic models~\citep{wang:06:tot,leskovec:06:topic,kawamae:11:trend}.
As an alternative methods to discover bursts, \citet{zhu:03:wavelet} used
wavelet analysis, \citet{vlachos:04:identify} applied Fourier analysis, and
\citet{he:10:topic} adopted concepts from Mechanics.
\citet{lappas:09:burst} propose discovering maximal bursts with large discrepancy.
\textbf{Segmentation}
A sister problem of burstiness is a classic segmentation problem. Here instead
of penalizing transitions, we limit the number of segments to
$k$. If the overall score is additive w.r.t. the segments, then this problem
can be solved in $\bigO{n^2k}$ time~\citep{bellman:61:on}. For certain cases, this problem
has a linear time solution~\citep{galil:90:linear}. Moreover, under some mild assumptions we
can obtain a $(1 + \epsilon)$ approximation in linear time~\citep{guha:06:estimate}.
\textbf{Concept drift detection in data streams:} A related problem setting to
burstiness is concept drift detection. Here, a typical goal is to have an
online algorithm that can perform update quickly and preferably does not use
significant amount of memory. For an overview of existing techniques see an
excellent survey by~\citet{gama:14:survey}. The algorithms introduced in this
paper along with the original approach are not strictly online because in every
case we need to know the mean of the sequence. However, if the mean is known,
then we can run \textit{Viterbi}\xspace in online fashion, and,
if we are only interested in the burstiness of a current symbol,
we need to maintain only $\bigO{k}$ elements, per $\beta$.
|
\section{Introduction and main result}
The main object of this paper is the computation of various ideal zeta
functions associated to the class-$2$-nilpotent Lie rings $L_{m,n}$
defined in \cite{BermanKlopschOnn/18}.
\subsection{Ideal zeta functions of Lie rings and
algebras}\label{subsec:ideal}
Let $R$ be the ring of integers $\mathcal{O}$ of a number field or a compact
discrete valuation ring, such as the completion $\mathcal{O}_\mathfrak{p}$ of $\mathcal{O}$
at a nonzero prime ideal $\mathfrak{p}$ or a formal power series ring of the
form $\ensuremath{\mathbb{F}_q}\llbracket T \rrbracket$. Let $L$ be a nilpotent $R$-Lie
algebra which is free of finite rank over~$R$. The \emph{ideal zeta
function} of $L$ is the Dirichlet generating series
$$\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L}(s) = \sum_{I \triangleleft L} |L : I |^{-s},$$
enumerating $R$-ideals in $L$ of finite index in $L$. Here $s$ is a
complex variable.
Assume now that $R=\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}$ is the ring of integers of a number
field~$K$. For a nonzero prime ideal $\mathfrak{p} \in\Spec(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}})$ we write
$\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathfrak{p}}$ for the completion of $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}$ at $\mathfrak{p}$, a complete
discrete valuation ring of characteristic zero and residue field
$\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}/\mathfrak{p}$ of cardinality $q = q_\mathfrak{p}$, say. We consider
$L(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathfrak{p}}):=L\otimes_{\mathcal{O}}\mathcal{O}_{\mathfrak{p}}$ as an $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathfrak{p}}$-Lie
algebra. Little more than the Chinese Reminder Theorem is necessary to
obtain the Euler product
$$\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L}(s) = \prod_{\mathfrak{p} \in\Spec(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}})}
\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}_\mathfrak{p})}(s);$$
cf.\ \cite[\S~3]{GSS/88}. A deep theorem, in contrast, asserts that
all the Euler factors $\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}_\mathfrak{p})}(s)$ are rational
functions in $q_{\mathfrak{p}}^{-s}$; cf.\
\cite[Theorem~3.5]{GSS/88}. Computing these rational functions is, in
general, a hard problem.
\subsection{The Lie rings $L_{m,n}$ and their ideal zeta functions}
In the current paper we compute explicitly, for any given $m,n\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}$,
the ideal zeta functions of the $\mathfrak o$-Lie algebras $L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o):=
L_{m,n} \otimes_\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}} \mathfrak o$, where $L_{m,n}$ is the class-$2$-nilpotent
Lie ring introduced in \cite{BermanKlopschOnn/18} and $\mathfrak o$ is a
compact discrete valuation ring of arbitrary characteristic. Our main
Theorem~\ref{thm:main} expresses the ideal zeta functions
$\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)}(s)$ as rational functions in $q$ and
$q^{-s}$, where $q$ is the residue field cardinality of $\mathfrak o$, in
terms of Igusa functions. To recall the definition of the Lie ring
$L_{m,n}$, put
\begin{alignat*}{2}
\ensuremath{\mathbf{E}} &= \ensuremath{\mathbf{E}}(m,n) = \{ \ensuremath{\mathbf{e}} \mid \ensuremath{\mathbf{e}} = (e_1,\dots,e_n) \in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}_0^n, & e_1 + \dots +
e_n &= m-1\},\\ \ensuremath{\mathbf{F}} &= \ensuremath{\mathbf{F}}(m,n) = \{ \ensuremath{\mathbf{f}} \mid \ensuremath{\mathbf{f}} = (f_1,\dots,f_n) \in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}_0^n,
&\; f_1 + \dots + f_n &= m\}.
\end{alignat*}
The Lie ring $L_{m,n}$ has generators
$$\{x_\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}} \mid \ensuremath{\mathbf{e}} \in \ensuremath{\mathbf{E}} \} \cup \{ y_\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}} \mid \ensuremath{\mathbf{f}} \in \ensuremath{\mathbf{F}} \} \cup \{ z_j \mid j\in[n]\},$$
subject to the defining relations
\begin{equation}\label{equ:def.rel}
[x_\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}},x_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}'}] = [y_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}},y_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}'}] = [x_\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}},z_j] =
[y_\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}},z_j] = [z_j,z_{j'}]= 0
\end{equation}
for all $\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}},\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}'\in\ensuremath{\mathbf{E}}$, $\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}},\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}'\in \ensuremath{\mathbf{F}}$, $j,j' \in [n]$ and,
for all $\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}\in\ensuremath{\mathbf{E}}$ and $\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}} \in \ensuremath{\mathbf{F}}$,
\begin{equation}\label{def:relation}
[x_\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}},y_\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}] = \begin{cases} z_i & \textup{ if $\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}-\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}$ is the $i$th
standard basis vector of $\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}^n$,}\\ 0 & \textup{
else.} \end{cases}
\end{equation}
Clearly $Z(L_{m,n}) = L_{m,n}':= [L_{m,n},L_{m,n}] = \langle z_1,\dots,z_n
\rangle$. In particular, $L_{m,n}$ is nilpotent of class~$2$. Setting
$$ e(m,n) = \# \ensuremath{\mathbf{E}} = \binom{n+m-2}{n-1}, \quad f(m,n) = \# \ensuremath{\mathbf{F}} = \binom{n+m-1}{n-1},$$
and further
$$d(m,n) = f(m,n) + e(m,n), \quad h(m,n) = d(m,n) + n,$$ we find that
$$\ensuremath{{\rm rk}}_{\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}}(L_{m,n}/ L_{m,n}') = d(m,n),\quad \ensuremath{{\rm rk}}_{\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}}(L_{m,n}') =
\ensuremath{{\rm rk}}_{\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}}(Z(L_{m,n})) = n, \quad \ensuremath{{\rm rk}}_{\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}}(L_{m,n}) = h(m,n).$$
We recall further from \cite{SV1/15} the definition of the \emph{Igusa
zeta function of degree $n$}
\begin{align}
I_n(Y; \ensuremath{\mathbf{X}}) &=\sum_{I\subseteq \{1,\dots,n\}} \binom{n}{I}_{Y}
\prod_{i\in I}\frac{X_i}{1-X_i}
=\frac{1}{1-X_n} \sum_{I\subseteq \{1,\dots,n-1\}} \binom{n}{I}_{Y}
\prod_{i\in I}\frac{X_i}{1-X_i}\nonumber\\
&= \frac{\sum_{w\in S_n}
Y^{\ell(w)} \prod_{j\in \Des(w)}
X_j}{\prod_{i=1}^n(1-X_i)}\;\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{Q}}(Y,\ensuremath{\mathbf{X}}),\label{def:igusa}
\end{align}
where $\ell$ denotes the classical Coxeter length function on the
Coxeter group $S_n$ and the descent statistic $\Des$ is defined via
$\Des(w) = \{i\in \{1,\dots,n-1\} \mid w(i+1)<w(i) \}$. Moreover, for
$I=\{i_1,\dots,i_l\}\subseteq\{1,\dots,n\}_<$, the associated
\emph{Gaussian multinomial} is the polynomial
\begin{equation*}\label{def:gaussian.multi} \binom{n}{I}_Y = \binom{n}{i_{l}}_Y
\binom{i_{l}}{i_{l-1}}_Y \cdots \binom{i_2}{i_1}_Y \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}} [Y],
\end{equation*}
defined in terms of the \emph{Gaussian binomials} \begin{equation*}\label{def:gauss}
\binom{a}{b}_Y = \frac{\prod_{i=a-b+1}^a (1-Y^i)}{\prod_{i=1}^b
(1-Y^i)}\in \ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}[Y]
\end{equation*}
for $a,b\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}_0$ with $a\geq b$. It is well known that the ideal zeta
function $\zeta_{\mathfrak o^d}(s) = \zeta^{\triangleleft}_{\mathfrak o^d}(s)$ of the abelian
$\mathfrak o$-Lie algebra $\mathfrak o^d$, enumerating all $\mathfrak o$-submodules of
finite index in $\mathfrak o^d$, is given by
\begin{equation}\label{equ:abel}
\zeta_{\mathfrak o^d}(s) = \frac{1}{\prod_{i=0}^{d-1}(1-q^{i-s})} =
I_d(q^{-1};(q^{(d-i)(i-s)})_{i=d-1}^0);
\end{equation}
cf., for instance, the first entry in the table on p.~218 of
\cite{GSS/88} (with $m=1$ and $r=0$). The main result of this paper is
the following.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:main}
For any compact discrete valuation ring $\mathfrak o$, with residue field
cardinality $q$,
\begin{equation}\label{equ:equ.main}
\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)}(s) = \zeta_{\mathfrak o^{d(m,n)}}(s) \cdot
I_n\left(q^{-1};\left( q^{a^{\triangleleft}_i(m,n) -s\, b^{\triangleleft}_i(m,n)}
\right)_{i=n-1}^0\right),\end{equation} where, for
$i\in\{0,1,\dots,n-1\}$,
\begin{align}
a^{\triangleleft}_i(m,n) &= (n-i)(i + d(m,n)),\nonumber \\
b^{\triangleleft}_i(m,n) &= n - i + e(m,n) + \sum_{j=i+1}^n
e(m,j).\label{num.data
\end{align}
\end{theorem}
\begin{example}\label{exa:23}
For $(m,n)=(2,3)$ we obtain
$$\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{2,3}(\mathfrak o)}(s) = \frac{1+q^{9-7s} +q^{10-7s}+
q^{18-10s} +q^{19-10s} +
q^{28-17s}}{\left(\prod_{i=0}^8(1-q^{i-s})\right)(1-q^{27-12s})(1-q^{20-10s})(1-q^{11-7s})}.$$
This formula exemplifies what seems to be a general phenomenon:
cancellations as observed in \eqref{equ:abel} do not appear to
affect the Igusa function of degree $n$ occurring in
\eqref{equ:equ.main}.
\end{example}
\subsection{Mal'cev's correspondence}
Nilpotent Lie rings play an important role in the theory of finitely
generated, torsion-free nilpotent groups. Indeed, by the Mal'cev
correspondence, each such group $G$ has an associated nilpotent Lie
ring $\textup{L}_G$ such that, for almost all rational primes~$p$, the
ideal zeta function $\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{\textup{L}_G(\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}_p})}(s)$ is equal to
the \emph{local normal subgroup zeta function}
$\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{G,p}(s) := \sum_{H \triangleleft_p G} |G:H|^{-s}$, enumerating the
normal subgroups of $G$ of finite $p$-power index; cf.\
\cite[Theorem~4.1]{GSS/88}. In nilpotency class two, one may turn
instead to the Lie ring $L_G := Z(G) \oplus G/(Z(G))$. It is not hard
to show that the identity
$\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_G(\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}_p})}(s) = \zeta^{\triangleleft}_{G,p}(s)$ holds for
\emph{all} primes~$p$. Every class-$2$-nilpotent Lie ring arises in
this way. Theorem~\ref{thm:main} thus yields, as a corollary, all
local normal subgroup zeta functions of the nilpotent groups
$\Delta_{m,n}$ associated to the Lie rings
$L_{m,n} = L_{\Delta_{m,n}}$, and thus the (global) \emph{normal zeta
function}
$$\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{\Delta_{m,n}}(s) := \sum_{H \triangleleft \Delta_{m,n}}|
\Delta_{m,n}:H|^{-s} = \prod_{p \textup{
prime}}\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{\Delta_{m,n},p}(s) = \prod_{p \textup{
prime}}\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}_p})}(s) = \zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,n}}(s).$$
It was in this context of subgroup growth of finitely generated
nilpotent groups that ideal zeta functions of Lie rings were first
studied systematically.
We are not aware of any subgroup-growth-theoretic interpretation of
the ideal zeta functions $\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_G(\mathfrak o)}(s)$ if $\mathfrak o$ is not
of characteristic zero with prime residue field, i.e.\ of the form
$\mathfrak o=\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}_p}$.
\subsection{Previous work}
Theorem~\ref{thm:main} was previously known in a number of extremal
cases.
\begin{example}\label{exa:heisenberg}
For $n=1$, the Lie rings $L_{m,1}$ are all isomorphic to the
\emph{Heisenberg Lie ring}
$$\ensuremath{\mathfrak{h}} = \langle x,y,z \mid [x,y]=z, [x,z]=[y,z]=0\rangle_{\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}}.$$
Theorem~\ref{thm:main} thus confirms and extends the well-known,
prototypical formula
\begin{equation}\label{eq:heisenberg}
\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{\ensuremath{\mathfrak{h}}(\mathfrak o)}(s) =
\frac{1}{(1-q^{-s})(1-q^{1-s})(1-q^{2-3s})};
\end{equation}
cf.\ \cite[Proposition~8.1]{GSS/88}. For $n>1$, however, the Lie
rings $L_{m,n}$ are pairwise non-isomorphic. For practical
purposes, we may thus restrict attention to $n\geq 2$ as in
\cite{BermanKlopschOnn/18}.
\end{example}
\begin{example}\label{exa:indec}
For $n=2$, the Lie rings $L_{m,2}$ are the Lie rings associated, by
the Mal'cev correspondence, to the indecomposable
$\mathfrak{D}^*$-groups of odd Hirsch length $2m+3$ featuring in the
classification up to commensurability of the finitely generated
class-$2$-nilpotent groups with $2$-dimensional centre, developed in
\cite{GSegal/84}. Their local normal zeta functions, and thus the
ideal zeta functions of the Lie rings $L_{m,2}(\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}_p})$, are
essentially computed in \cite[Proposition~2]{Voll/04}, in agreement
with the relevant special cases of Theorem~\ref{thm:main}.
\end{example}
\begin{example}\label{exa:grenham}
For $m=1$, the Lie rings $L_{1,n}$ are the Lie rings associated to
the so-called \emph{Grenham groups} $G_{n+1}$. These
class-$2$-nilpotent groups have presentations
\begin{equation*}\label{equ:grenham.pres}
G_{n+1} = \langle x,y_1,\dots,y_n, z_1,\dots,z_n \mid \forall
i\in\{1,\dots,n\}:\;[x,y_i]=z_i, \textup{ $z_i$ central}\rangle.
\end{equation*}
The normal zeta functions of these groups, and thus the ideal zeta
functions of the Lie rings $L_{1,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}_p})$, are computed in
\cite[Theorem~5]{Voll/05}.
\end{example}
\subsection{Related work}
The paper \cite{BermanKlopschOnn/18}, which introduced the groups
$\Delta_{m,n}$, computes their \emph{pro\-isomorphic zeta functions}
$\zeta^{\wedge}_{\Delta_{m,n}}(s)$, enumerating the subgroups of
finite index in $\Delta_{m,n}$ whose profinite completions are
isomorphic to that of~$\Delta_{m,n}$. By general principles, these
zeta functions also satisfy Euler product decompositions indexed by
the rational primes, whose factors are rational functions in
$p^{-s}$. In the notation of the current paper,
\cite[Theorem~1.4]{BermanKlopschOnn/18} establishes that the Euler
factor $\zeta^{\wedge}_{\Delta_{m,n},p}(s)$ of
$\zeta^{\wedge}_{\Delta_{m,n}}(s)$ at a rational prime~$p$,
enumerating the relevant subgroups of $\Delta_{m,n}$ of $p$-power
index, is of the form
$$\zeta^{\wedge}_{\Delta_{m,n},p}(s) = I_1(p^{-1}; z_{n+1}) \cdot
I_n(p^{-1}; (z_i)_{i=1}^n)$$ for explicitly given ``numerical data''
$z_i = p^{a^{\wedge}_i(m,n)-s\ b_i^{\wedge}(m,n)}$, for integers
$a^{\wedge}_i(m,n)$, $b_i^{\wedge}(m,n)$, comparable to (but different
from) those given in~\eqref{num.data}.
The \emph{subgroup zeta functions} $\zeta_{\Delta_{m,n}}(s) = \sum_{H
\leq \Delta_{m,n}} | \Delta_{m,n}:H|^{-s}$, enumerating \emph{all}
finite index subgroups of the groups $\Delta_{m,n}$, are known
explicitly only for $m=1$, i.e.\ the Grenham groups from
Example~\ref{exa:grenham}; cf.\ \cite{VollBLMS/06}.
For a nonzero prime ideal $\mathfrak{p}$ in a number ring $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}$, the
$\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathfrak{p}}$-ideal zeta functions
$\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathfrak{p}})}(s)$ should not be confused with
the $\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}_p}$-ideal zeta functions of $L_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathfrak{p}})$, considered
as $\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}_p}$-Lie algebras. For $n=1$, i.e.\ in the case of the Heisenberg
Lie ring $\ensuremath{\mathfrak{h}} \cong L_{m,1}$ (see Example~\ref{exa:heisenberg}), the
latter have been computed for primes $p$ which are unramified in
$\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}$ in \cite{SV1/15} and for primes $p$ which are non-split in
$\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}$ in \cite{SV2/16}. In the paper \cite{CSV/19} we generalize
these computations to cover the ideal zeta functions of algebras
arising from a large class of Lie rings, including the Grenham Lie
rings $L_{1,n}$, via base extensions with various compact discrete
valuation rings. The paper gives a survey of applications of Igusa
functions in the area of zeta functions of groups and rings, and is
built on a generalization of Igusa functions.
\subsection{Organization and notation}
We prove Theorem~\ref{thm:main} in Section~\ref{sec:main.thm}, using
the general method introduced in \cite{Voll/05}. In
Section~\ref{sec:cor.por} we collect a number of corollaries and
porisms, notably pertaining to global analytic properties of ideal
zeta functions, functional equations satisfied by local ideal zeta
functions, their behaviour at zero, topological and reduced ideal zeta
functions, graded ideal zeta functions, and the representation zeta
functions associated to the groups $\Delta_{m,n}$.
We write $\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}= \{1,2,\dots\}$ and $X_0= X \cup \{0\}$ for a subset
$X\subseteq \ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}$. Given $n\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}_0$, we write $[n]=\{1,2,\dots,n\}$. The
notation $I = \{i_1,\dots,i_\ell\}_<\subseteq \ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}_0$ indicates that
$i_1 < i_2 < \dots < i_\ell$.
We write $\Mat_{a,b}(R)$ for the set of $a\times b$ matrices over a
ring~$R$. The ring's units are denoted by $R^*$. We write
$\Mat_{a}(R)$ instead of $\Mat_{a,a}(R)$. Given matrices
$A_1,\dots,A_n$ with the same number of rows, we write $\left( A_1
\mid \dots \mid A_n\right)$ for their juxtaposition (or
concatenation). We write $\Id_{n}$ for the $n\times n$-identity matrix
and $\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}_{a,b}$ for the zero matrix
$(0)_{ij}\in\Mat_{a,b}(R)$. Sometimes we write $\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}$ for a zero
matrix whose dimensions are clear from the context.
We denote by $\mathfrak o$ a compact discrete valuation ring of arbitrary
characteristic, with maximal ideal $\mathfrak{p}$, uniformizer $\pi \in
\mathfrak{p}\setminus \mathfrak{p}^2$, and residue field cardinality $q$. The
$\mathfrak{p}$-adic valuation on $\mathfrak o$ will be denoted by $\val_{\mathfrak{p}}$.
Given a property $P$, the ``Kronecker delta'' $\delta_P$ is equal to
$1$ if $P$ holds and equal to $0$ otherwise.
\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:main}}\label{sec:main.thm}
We maintain, to a large extent, the notation of \cite{Voll/05}.
Throughout, $m,n\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}$ with $n\geq 2$ are arbitrary but fixed.
\subsection{Commutator matrix}
A key object in the computation of various zeta functions associated
to the Lie ring $L_{m,n}$ is its \emph{commutator matrix} with respect
to a $\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}$-basis. Consider the ordered (!) $\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}$-basis
$$\mathcal{B}_{m,n} = (x_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}}, y_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}}, z_1,\dots,z_n)_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}} \in \ensuremath{\mathbf{E}}, \,\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}} \in \ensuremath{\mathbf{F}}}$$
of $L_{m,n}$, where both the elements $x_\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}$ and $y_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}}$ are
given, respectively, in \emph{reverse lexicographical ordering}, viz.\
the ordering obtained from the usual lexicographical orderings on
$\ensuremath{\mathbf{E}}$ resp.\ $\ensuremath{\mathbf{F}}$ but read backwards; cf.\
Example~\ref{exa:examples}~\eqref{exa23}.
Recall that the commutator matrix $M_{m,n}$ of $L_{m,n}$ with respect
to $\mathcal{B}_{m,n}$ is given as follows. For $i,j\in[d(m,n)]$ and
$w_i,w_j\in\mathcal{B}_{m,n}$, write
$[w_i,w_j] = \sum_{k=1}^n \lambda_{ij}^k z_k$, for structure
constants~$\lambda_{ij}^k\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}$. Then set $\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}=(Y_1,\dots,Y_n)$ and
$$M_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}) = \left( \sum_{k=1}^n \lambda_{ij}^kY_k \right)_{ij} \in \Mat_{d(m,n)}(\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}[\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}]).$$
To give a general, explicit description of $M_{m,n}$ we introduce the
following notation. For $e\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}$ and a variable $Y$, write
$$\ensuremath{\mathbf{S}}_e(Y) = Y \cdot \Id_e \in\Mat_e(\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}[Y])$$
for the generic $(e\times e)$-scalar matrix. Set
$\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}'=(Y_2,\dots,Y_n)$. We set $\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{m,1}(Y) = Y\in\Mat_1(\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}[Y])$
and define recursively, for $n\geq 2$,
\begin{multline}\label{equ:coma}
\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}) = \left( \begin{matrix} \ensuremath{\mathbf{S}}_{e(1,n-1)}(Y_1)&&&& \\
\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{1,n-1}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}') & \ensuremath{\mathbf{S}}_{e(2,n-1)}(Y_1) & &&\\
&\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{2,n-1}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}') &\ddots&&\\
&&\ddots&\ensuremath{\mathbf{S}}_{e(m-1,n-1)}(Y_1)&\\
&&&\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{m-1,n-1}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}')&\ensuremath{\mathbf{S}}_{e(m,n-1)}(Y_1)\\
&&&&\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{m,n-1}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}')
\end{matrix} \right).
\end{multline}
Note that $\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{1,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}) =
(Y_1,\dots,Y_n)^{\trans}\in\Mat_{n,1}(\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}[\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}])$. Moreover, one
checks easily that
$$\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}) \in\Mat_{f(m,n),e(m,n)}(\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}[\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}]),$$ say by using
parts~(1) and~(2) of the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:aux}\
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\sum_{j=1}^m e(j,n-1) = e(m,n)$,
\item $e(m,n) + f(m,n-1) = f(m,n)$,
\item $\sum_{j=1}^ne(m,j) = f(m,n)$
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Trivial. (One may want to use parallel summation for (1) and (3);
cf.\ \cite[p.~174]{GKP/94}.)
\end{proof}
Various examples of $\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{m,n}$ are given in
Example~\ref{exa:examples}. The following is evident.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:coma}
If $\ensuremath{\mathbf{y}} = (y_1,\dots,y_n)\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{F}_q}^n \setminus \{ \mathbf{0} \}$,
then $\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{y}})$ has full rank~$e(m,n)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proposition}\label{pro:coma}
The commutator matrix of $L_{m,n}$ with respect to the $\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}$-basis
$\mathcal{B}_{m,n}$ is
$$M_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}) = \left( \begin{matrix} & -\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})^{\trans} \\ \ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}) & \end{matrix} \right)\in \Mat_{d(m,n)}(\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}[\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}]).$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Given the defining relations \eqref{equ:def.rel} it is clear that
the $(i,j)$-entry of $M_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})$ vanishes if $i$ and $j$ are
either both at most or both greater than~$e(m,n)$. The antisymmetry
of $M_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})$ is also evident, as $L_{m,n}$ is a Lie ring. To
justify the specific shape of $\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})$, recall that its
columns are indexed by the generators $x_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}}$, $\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}} \in \ensuremath{\mathbf{E}}$,
whereas its rows are indexed by the generators $y_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}}$, $\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}} \in
\ensuremath{\mathbf{F}}$, of $L_{m,n}$. By definition of the commutator matrix
$M_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})$, the entry in position $(x_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}},y_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}})$ is $Y_i
\,\delta_{[x_\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}},y_\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}]=z_i}$ for all $i\in[n]$;
cf.\ \eqref{def:relation}.
Crucially, both sets of generators are ordered
reverse-lexicographically. Therefore, for $j=1,\dots,m$, the
``$j$-th column block'' $B_{m,n}^{(j)}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})$ of~$B_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})$,
comprising columns numbered
$$\sum_{s< j}e(s,n-1)+1,\dots,\sum_{s\leq j}e(s,n-1),$$ echos the
relations involving generators $x_\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}$ indexed by elements
$\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}_0^n$ with first coordinate $m-j$, i.e.\ of the form
$$\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}} = (m-j,\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}') \textup{ for some } \ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}'\in \ensuremath{\mathbf{E}}(j,n-1).$$
Likewise, for $i=1,\dots,m+1$, the ``$i$-th row block'' of
$B_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})$, comprising rows numbered
$$\sum_{r<i}e(r,n-1)+1,\dots,\sum_{r \leq i}e(r,n-1),$$ echos the
relations involving generators $y_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}}$ indexed by elements
$\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}_0^n$ with first coordinate $m-i+1$, i.e.\ of the form
$$\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}} = (m-i+1,\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}') \textup{ for some } \ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}'\in \ensuremath{\mathbf{F}}(i-1,n-1).$$
We describe in detail the submatrices of the column block
$B_{m,n}^{(j)}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})$ defined by its intersection with the $i$-th
row blocks of $B_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})$, thereby justifying the claim that
\begin{equation*}\label{equ:col.block}
B_{m,n}^{(j)}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}) = \left( \begin{matrix} \ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}_{e(j-1,n),e(j,n-1)}
\\ \ensuremath{\mathbf{S}}_{e(j,n-1)}(Y_1)\\ \ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{j,n-1}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}')
\\ \ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}_{(f(m,n)-f(j,n)),e(j,n-1)} \end{matrix}\right).
\end{equation*}
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $i < j$, then the relevant rows of $B^{(j)}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})$
comprise the relations between generators indexed by elements of
the form
\begin{alignat*}{1}
\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}} &= (m-j, \ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}'),\\
\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}} &= (m-i+1, \ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}')
\end{alignat*}
However, $(m-i+1) - (m-j) = j-i+1 \geq 2$, so
$[x_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}},y_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}}]=0$ for the relevant elements, and hence the
relevant submatrix of $B^{(j)}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})$ is
$\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}_{e(j-1,n),e(j,n-1)}$.
\item If $i=j$, then the relevant rows of $B^{(j)}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})$
comprise the relations between generators indexed by elements of
the form
\begin{alignat*}{1}
\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}} &= (m-j, \ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}'),\\%& \quad e_2+\dots + e_n &= j-1\\
\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}} &= (m-j+1, \ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}')
\end{alignat*}
As $[x_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}},y_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}}]=z_1\delta_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}'=\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}'}$, the relevant
submatrix of $B^{(j)}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})$ is $\ensuremath{\mathbf{S}}_{e(j,n-1)}(Y_1)$.
\item If $i = j+1$, then the relevant rows of $B^{(j)}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})$
comprise the relations between generators indexed by elements of
the form
\begin{alignat*}{2}
\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}} &= (m-j, \ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}')& \textup{ for some }\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}'\in \ensuremath{\mathbf{E}}(j,n-1),\\ \ensuremath{\mathbf{f}} &=
(m-j, \ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}'),& \textup{ for some }\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}'\in \ensuremath{\mathbf{F}}(j,n-1).
\end{alignat*}
This justifies the claim that the relevant submatrix of
$B^{(j)}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})$ is $B_{j,n-1}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}')$.
\item If $i>j+1$, then the relevant rows of $B^{(j)}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})$
comprise the relations between generators indexed by elements of
the form
\begin{alignat*}{1}
\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}} &= (m-j, \ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}'),\\
\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}} &= (m-i+1,\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}').
\end{alignat*}
However, $(m - i + 1) - (m-j) = j-i+1 < 0$, so $[x_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{e}}},y_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{f}}}]=0$
for the relevant elements, and hence the relevant submatrix of
$B^{(j)}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})$ is $\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}_{(f(m,n)-f(j,n)),e(j,n-1)}$.\qedhere
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{example}\label{exa:examples}\
\begin{enumerate}
\item For $n=2$, we obtain
$$\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{m,2}(Y_1,Y_2) = \left( \begin{matrix} Y_1 &&& \\Y_2 & Y_1 &&
\\ & Y_2 & \ddots && \\ && \ddots& Y_1 \\ &&&Y_2 \end{matrix}
\right) \in\Mat_{m+1,m}(\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}[Y_1,Y_2]).$$ Up to a simple reordering of
rows and columns and swapping the variables $Y_1$ and~$Y_2$, the
matrix $M_{m,2}(Y_1,Y_2)$ is the commutator matrix described in
\cite[Theorem~4]{Voll/04} (essentially \cite[Theorem~6.3]{GSegal/84})
associated to the {indecomposable $\mathfrak{D}^*$-group}
$\Delta_{m,2}$; cf.\ Example~\ref{exa:indec}.
\item For $m=1$, we obtain
$$M_{1,n}(Y_1,\dots,Y_n) = \left( \begin{matrix} &-Y_1&-Y_2&
\dots& -Y_n \\Y_1&&&&\\Y_2 &&&& \\ \vdots &&& \\
Y_n&&& \end{matrix} \right) \in\Mat_{n+1}(\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}[Y_1,\dots,Y_n]),$$
the commutator matrix of the {Grenham Lie ring} $L_{1,n}$ with respect
to the $\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}$-basis $(x,y_1,\dots,y_n, z_1,\dots,z_n)$; cf.\
Example~\ref{exa:grenham}.
\item \label{exa23} For $m=2$, $n=3$,
$$\mathcal{B}_{2,3} = \left\{ e_{(1,0,0)}, e_{(0,1,0)},e_{(0,0,1)},
\,
f_{(2,0,0)},f_{(1,1,0)},f_{(1,0,1)},f_{(0,2,0)},f_{(0,1,1)},f_{(0,0,2)},\,
z_1,z_2,z_3 \right\},$$ yielding
$$\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{2,3}(Y_1,Y_2,Y_3) = \left( \begin{array}{c|cc} Y_1 && \\ \hline Y_2 & Y_1 & \\ Y_3& &Y_1 \\ \hline &Y_2& \\ &Y_3&Y_2\\ &&Y_3 \end{array} \right).$$
\end{enumerate}
\end{example}
\subsection{Informal overview of the proof}
We use the general method introduced in \cite{Voll/05}. The fact that
there only the case $\mathfrak o=\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}_p}$ is treated explicitly is
inconsequential: all that is needed is the fact that $\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}_p}$ is a
compact discrete valuation ring.
According to \cite[Lemma~1]{Voll/05} (essentially
\cite[Lemma~6.1]{GSS/88}) there exists a rational function
$A^{\triangleleft}_{m,n}$ in $q$ and $q^{-s}$ such that
\begin{equation*}\label{equ:zeta.AJM}
\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)}(s) = \zeta_{\mathfrak o^{d(m,n)}}(s)
\frac{1}{1-q^{d(m,n) n-s\, h(m,n)}}A^{\triangleleft}_{m,n}(q,q^{-s});
\end{equation*}
cf.\ Remark~\ref{rem:gafa} below. The function $A^{\triangleleft}_{m,n}$ may be
viewed as a generating function enumerating the values of two
integer-valued functions $w$ and $w'$ on the set $\ensuremath{\mathcal{V}}_n$ of homothety
classes of lattices in $Z(L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)) \cong \mathfrak o^n$, viz.\ vertices
in the affine Bruhat-Tits building of type $\widetilde{A_{n-1}}$
associated to the group $\GL_n(k)$, where $k = \textup{Frac}(\mathfrak o)$ is
the field of fractions of the local ring~$\mathfrak o$:
\begin{equation}\label{equ:Amn}
A^{\triangleleft}_{m,n}(q,q^{-s}) = \sum_{[\Lambda'] \in \ensuremath{\mathcal{V}}_n} q^{d(m,n)
w([\Lambda'])-s \,w'([\Lambda'])}.
\end{equation}
The function $w$ captures the ($\log_q$ of the) {index} of the maximal
integral element $\Lambda'_{\max}$ of $[\Lambda']$ in
$Z(L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o))$. It is a simple function of the {elementary
divisors} of $\Lambda'_{\max}$ relative to $\mathfrak o^n$; cf.\
\eqref{equ:w}. The function $w'$ records, in addition, the index in
$L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)$ of the lattice $X([\Lambda'])$ in $L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)$,
defined by the condition
\begin{equation}\label{def:X}
X([\Lambda'])/\Lambda'_{\max} = Z(L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)/\Lambda'_{\max});
\end{equation}
see~\eqref{def:w'}. We will use the interpretation of this index as
the index of the kernel of a system of linear congruences on
$\mathfrak o^{d(m,n)}$ provided by~\cite[Theorem~6]{Voll/05}; see
Proposition~\ref{lem:w'}.
The discussion so far applies, \emph{mutatis mutandis}, to (the
$\mathfrak o$-points of) any class-$2$-nilpotent Lie ring. In general, the
index of $X([\Lambda'])$ in the Lie ring's abelianization will depend
in an arithmetically subtle way on $[\Lambda']$. The key to the proof
of Theorem~\ref{thm:main} is the realization that, for the Lie rings
$L_{m,n}$, the index of $X([\Lambda'])$ depends solely, and in a
($\log_q$-)linear fashion, on the elementary divisors of
$\Lambda'_{\max}$. Consequently, the rational function $A^{\triangleleft}_{m,n}$
may be expressed in terms of an Igusa function of degree $n$. In the
course of the proof of these facts we will compute the relevant
($\log_q$-)linear functionals explicitly, making heavy use of the
combinatorial description~\eqref{equ:coma} of the commutator
matrix~$M_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}})$.
\begin{remark}\label{rem:gafa}
\cite[Lemma~1]{Voll/05} does not hold in the generality proclaimed
in \cite{Voll/05}. To apply for a prime $p$, the centre of the
reduction of $G_p$ modulo $p$ needs to coincide with the reduction
modulo $p$ of the centre of~$G_p$. This condition is satisfied
generically, but may fail for finitely many primes. (The main
results of \cite{Voll/05} are unaffected by this, as they are only
stated (and known to hold only) for almost all primes $p$.) In the
case of the groups $\Delta_{m,n}$, this set of exceptional primes is
indeed empty, as one checks without difficulty, so the conclusion of
\cite[Lemma~1]{Voll/05} applies for all primes~$p$. I am grateful to
the referee for pointing out these facts.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Parametrizing lattices}\label{subsec:lattices}
We recall, e.g.\ from \cite{Voll/05}, a parametrization of maximal
integral lattices inside $\mathfrak o^n$. Let $\Lambda'\leq \mathfrak o^n$ be a
maximal $\mathfrak o$-sublattice, i.e.\ $\pi^{-1}\Lambda'\not\leq \mathfrak o^n$,
where $\pi\in \mathfrak{p} \setminus \mathfrak{p}^2$ is a uniformizer. The lattice
$\Lambda'$ is said to be of \emph{type}
$\nu(\Lambda') = (I, \ensuremath{\mathbf{r}}_{I})$ if
$$I = \{ i_1,\dots,i_\ell\}_< \subseteq [n-1], \quad \ensuremath{\mathbf{r}}_{I} = (r_{\iota})_{\iota\in I}\in \ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}^I,$$
and $\Lambda'$ has elementary divisors
\begin{equation}\label{eq:el.div}
\left( (1)^{(i_1)}, (\pi^{r_{i_1}})^{(i_2-i_1)}, \dots, (\pi^{\sum_{\iota\in I}r_\iota})^{(n-i_\ell)}\right) =: (\pi^\nu)\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}^n.
\end{equation}
Clearly $|\mathfrak o^d:\Lambda'| = q^{\sum_{\iota\in I} r_\iota(n-\iota)}$,
whence, in the notation of \cite[Definition~2]{Voll/04},
\begin{equation}\label{equ:w}
w([\Lambda']) = \sum_{\iota\in I} r_\iota(n-\iota).
\end{equation}
It is well known and not hard to show (cf., for instance,
\cite[Lemma~2]{Voll/05}) that
\begin{equation}\label{equ:f}
f_{I,\ensuremath{\mathbf{r}}_I}(q) := \#\{ \Lambda'\leq \mathfrak o^d \mid \Lambda' \textup{ maximal and of type $(I, \ensuremath{\mathbf{r}}_{I})$}\} = \binom{n}{I}_{q^{-1}} q^{\sum_{\iota\in I}r_\iota\iota(n-\iota)}.
\end{equation}
Here $\binom{n}{I}_{q^{-1}}$ is the value of the Gaussian multinomial
$\binom{n}{I}_Y\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}[Y]$ at $Y=q^{-1}$. Of central importance in the
following is the elementary fact that the group
$\Gamma_n := \GL_n(\mathfrak o)$ acts transitively on the set of maximal
lattices of given type $\nu$. Denoting, for $i\in[n]$, by
$\varepsilon_i$ the $i$-th standard basis vector of $\mathfrak o^n$, the
lattice
$$\Lambda'= \bigoplus_{i=1}^n(\pi^\nu)_i \mathfrak o \varepsilon_i$$ is
evidently of type $\nu$. The stabilizer subgroup $\Gamma_{\nu}$ of
$\Lambda'$ in $\Gamma_n$ is easily described explicitly, but we will
not need such a description. What we will need are two facts. First,
$\Gamma_\nu$ contains the (Borel) subgroup $B_n$ of lower-triangular
matrices in $\Gamma_n$. (Note that the matrix description of
$\Gamma_{\nu}$ on p.~1203 of \cite{Voll/10} in terms of block matrices
which are block upper-triangular modulo $p$ is given with respect to
the reverse ordering of the elementary divisors~\eqref{eq:el.div}.)
Second, the orbit-stabilizer-theorem gives us a bijection between
maximal lattices of type $\nu$ and cosets
in~$\Gamma_n/\Gamma_\nu$. Fix a coset $\alpha\Gamma_\nu$. We claim
that, after a permutation of the rows if necessary (corresponding to a
monomial change of $\mathfrak o$-basis for $\mathfrak o^n$), it contains a
representative of the form
$$\alpha_0 = \left( \begin{matrix} &&&\alpha_{1n}\\&& \alpha_{2\,n-1}
& \alpha_{2\,n}\\ & \adots&&\vdots\\\alpha_{n1}& \dots &
\alpha_{n\, n-1} & \alpha_{n\,n}\end{matrix}\right)\in\Gamma_n.$$
Indeed, if the $(1,n)$-entry of $\alpha_0$ is a unit (as we may assume
without loss of generality), we may use it to ``clear'' the remaining
entries in the first row of $\alpha_0$ by right-multiplication by a
suitable element of $B_n\leq \Gamma_{\nu}$. The claim follows
inductively.
We write $\alpha_0 = (\alpha^{(1)} \mid \dots \mid \alpha^{(d)})$,
i.e.\ $\alpha^{(j)}$ denotes the $j$-th column of $\alpha_0$. Note
that the antidiagonal entries of $\alpha_{0}$ are all units:
$\alpha_{j,n+1-j}\in\mathfrak o^*$ for all~$j\in[n]$.
\subsection{Solving linear congruences}
Let $\Lambda' \leq \mathfrak o^n$ be a maximal lattice of type $(I,\ensuremath{\mathbf{r}}_I)$,
corresponding to a coset $\alpha\Gamma_\nu$ as described in
Section~\ref{subsec:lattices}. By \cite[Theorem~6]{Voll/05} the index
$|L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o): X([\Lambda'])|$ equals the index in $\mathfrak o^{d(m,n)}$
of the following system of linear congruences, where we write
$\ensuremath{\mathbf{g}} = (\ensuremath{\mathbf{g}}^{(1)},\ensuremath{\mathbf{g}}^{(2)})\in \mathfrak o^{e(m,n)}\times \mathfrak o^{f(m,n)}
\cong \mathfrak o^{d(m,n)}$:
\begin{equation}\label{equ:lincon}
\forall j\in [n]:\; \ensuremath{\mathbf{g}} M_{m,n}(\alpha^{(j)}) \equiv 0 \bmod
(\pi^{\nu})_j.
\end{equation}
Set $r := \sum_{\iota \in I} r_\iota$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:bigmatrix}
\eqref{equ:lincon} holds if and only if $\ensuremath{\mathbf{g}}^{(1)} \equiv 0 \bmod (\pi^r)$ and
\begin{equation}\label{equ:bigmatrix}
\ensuremath{\mathbf{g}}^{(2)} \left( \pi^r \ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{m,n}(\alpha^{(1)}) \mid \dots \mid
\pi^{\sum_{\iota \geq j} r_\iota} \ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{m,n}(\alpha^{(j)}) \mid \dots
\mid \ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{m,n}(\alpha^{(n)})\right) \equiv 0 \bmod (\pi^r).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By multiplying each of the congruences in \eqref{equ:lincon} by the
appropriate power of the uniformizer $\pi$ we may consider them all
as congruences modulo $(\pi^r)$. By concatenating the relevant
matrices, we obtain that \eqref{equ:lincon} is equivalent to the
single congruence
\begin{equation}\label{equ:biggermatrix}
\ensuremath{\mathbf{g}} \left( \pi^r M_{m,n}(\alpha^{(1)}) \mid \dots \mid \pi^{\sum_{\iota \geq j} r_\iota} M(\alpha^{(j)}) \mid \dots \mid M_{m,n}(\alpha^{(n)})\right) \equiv 0 \bmod (\pi^r).
\end{equation}
Note that the vector $\alpha^{(n)}\in\mathfrak o^n$ is nonzero modulo
$\mathfrak{p}$. By Proposition~\ref{pro:coma} and Lemma~\ref{lem:coma},
$$\ensuremath{\mathbf{g}} M_{m,n}(\alpha^{(n)}) = \ensuremath{\mathbf{g}} \left( \begin{matrix} &
-\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{m,n}(\alpha^{(n)})^{\trans} \\ \ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{m,n}(\alpha^{(n)})
& \end{matrix} \right) \equiv 0 \bmod (\pi^r)$$ thus only holds if
$\ensuremath{\mathbf{g}}^{(1)}\equiv 0 \bmod (\pi^r)$. Deleting the first $e(m,n)$ rows
from the matrix in \eqref{equ:biggermatrix} one sees that, in this
case, \eqref{equ:lincon} is equivalent to \eqref{equ:bigmatrix}.
\end{proof}
Note that, in the $f(m,n)\times (e(m,n)\cdot n)$ matrix in
\eqref{equ:bigmatrix}, the first $i_1$ blocks
$\pi^r \ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{m,n}(\alpha^{(j)})$, $j\in[i_1]$, i.e.\ the first
$e(m,n)\cdot i_1$ columns, are of course redundant. Recall from
\cite[Def.~2]{Voll/04} that, with $X([\Lambda'])$ defined as
in~\eqref{def:X},
\begin{equation}\label{def:w'}
w'([\Lambda']) = \log_q(|\mathfrak o^n:\Lambda'|) + \log_q(|L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o):X([\Lambda'])|).
\end{equation}
\begin{proposition}\label{lem:w'}
The index of the lattice of elements $\ensuremath{\mathbf{g}}\in\mathfrak o^{d(m,n)}$
satisfying the simultaneous congruences \eqref{equ:lincon} equals
$$q^{\sum_{\iota \in I}r_\iota\left(e(m,n) + \sum_{j=\iota+1}^n e(m,j)\right)}.$$
In other words,
$$w'([\Lambda']) = \sum_{\iota \in I}r_\iota\left( n - \iota + e(m,n) + \sum_{j=\iota+1}^n e(m,j)\right).$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
For $j=1,\dots,n$, write
$$B_j := \pi^{\sum_{\iota \geq j}r_\iota}
\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{B}}_{m,n}(\alpha^{(j)})\in\Mat_{f(m,n), e(m,n)}(\mathfrak o)$$
for the $j$-th column block of the matrix in~\eqref{equ:bigmatrix}.
Note that $\val_\mathfrak{p}(B_j) = \sum_{\iota\geq j}r_\iota \in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}_0$. Set
$$B := (B_1 \mid \dots \mid B_n) \in \Mat_{f(m,n), n e(m,n)}(\mathfrak o).$$
In the light of Lemma~\ref{lem:bigmatrix} we need to prove that the
index in $\mathfrak o^{f(m,n)}$ of the solutions of the congruence
$$\ensuremath{\mathbf{g}}^{(2)} B \equiv 0 \bmod (\pi^r)$$ equals $q^{\sum_{\iota\in I}
r_\iota\left(\sum_{j=\iota+1}^n e(m,j)\right)}$. For this it suffices to show
that
\begin{equation}\label{equ:equiv}
B \textup{ is equivalent to }(\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}_{f(m,n),ne(m,n)-f(m,n)}
\mid D_{f(m,n)})\in\Mat_{f(m,n),ne(m,n)}(\mathfrak o),
\end{equation}where
$$D_{f(m,n)} := \left(\begin{matrix}&&&&\Id_{e(m,n)}
\\ && \pi^{\sum_{\iota\geq n-1}r_\iota} \Id_{e(m,n-1)} && \\ & \adots&
&&\\ \pi^r \Id_{e(m,1)}&&&&\end{matrix} \right)\in
\Mat_{f(m,n)}(\mathfrak o).$$
We proceed inductively, replacing $B$
successively by equivalent matrices.
We first note that the top $e(m,n)$ rows of $B_n$ form a matrix
$\ensuremath{\widetilde}{B} \in \GL_{e(m,n)}(\mathfrak o)$, as $\alpha_{1n}\in \mathfrak o^*$. We use
$\ensuremath{\widetilde{B}}$ to clear---by suitable column operations---all other entries in
the top $e(m,n)$ rows of $B$. Note that this does not affect the last
$e(m,j)$ columns in either of the matrices $B_j$, $j=1,\dots,n-1$, nor
the valuations of these matrices. We now use $\ensuremath{\widetilde{B}}$ to clear---by
suitable row operations---all entries of $B$ below $\ensuremath{\widetilde{B}}$, leaving the
other columns unaffected. We may then also assume that $\ensuremath{\widetilde{B}} =
\Id_{e(m,n)}$.
We have thus replaced $B$ by an equivalent matrix of the form
$$\left(\begin{matrix} & & & \Id_{e(m,n)}\\B_1'& \cdots &
B_{n-1}'& \end{matrix}\right),$$ where, for each $j=1,\dots,n-1$,
the matrix $B_j'$ has valuation $\sum_{\iota\geq j}r_\iota$ and the
matrices $\left(\begin{matrix} \ensuremath{\mathbf{z}} \\ B_j'\end{matrix} \right)$ and
$B_j\in\Mat_{f(m,n),e(m,n)}(\mathfrak o)$ coincide in their last $e(m,j)$
columns. Set
$$B'= (B_1'\mid \dots \mid B_{n-1}') \in
\Mat_{f(m,n-1),(n-1)e(m,n)}(\mathfrak o).$$ The top $e(m,n-1)$ rows and
last $e(m,n-1)$ columns of $B_{n-1}'$ form a matrix
$\pi^{\sum_{\iota\geq n-1}r_\iota} \ensuremath{\widetilde}{\ensuremath{\widetilde{B}}}$ for
$\ensuremath{\widetilde}{\ensuremath{\widetilde{B}}}\in\GL_{e(m,n-1)}(\mathfrak o)$. We may use it to clear all other
entries in the top $e(m,n-1)$ rows of $B'$. Note that this does not
affect the last $e(m,j)$ columns in either of the matrices $B_j'$,
$j=1,\dots,n-2$, nor the valuations of these matrices. We now use
$\pi^{\sum_{\iota\geq n-1}r_\iota} \ensuremath{\widetilde}{\ensuremath{\widetilde{B}}}$ to clear all entries
of $B'$ below~$\ensuremath{\widetilde}{\ensuremath{\widetilde{B}}}$, leaving the other columns unaffected. We
may then also assume that $\ensuremath{\widetilde}{\ensuremath{\widetilde{B}}}= \Id_{e(m,n-1)}$.
We have thus replaced $B'$ by an equivalent matrix of the form
$$\left(\begin{matrix} & & & \pi^{\sum_{\iota\geq
n-1}r_\iota}\Id_{e(m,n-1)}\\B_1''& \cdots &
B_{n-2}''& \end{matrix}\right),$$ where, for $j=1,\dots,n-2$, the
matrices $B_j''\in\Mat_{f(m,n-2),e(m,n)}(\mathfrak o)$ each have valuation
$\sum_{\iota \geq j} r_\iota$ and the matrices $\left(\begin{matrix}
\ensuremath{\mathbf{z}} \\ B_j''\end{matrix} \right)$, $\left(\begin{matrix} \ensuremath{\mathbf{z}}
\\ B_j'\end{matrix} \right)$, and
$B_j\in\Mat_{f(m,n),e(m,n)}(\mathfrak o)$ coincide in their last $e(m,j)$
columns.
The claim \eqref{equ:equiv} follows by continuing inductively in
this manner.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Completion of the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:main}}\label{subsec:completion}
We are now ready to complete the computation of the rational function
$A^{\triangleleft}_{m,n}(q,q^{-s})$ featuring in~\eqref{equ:zeta.AJM}. Indeed,
using \eqref{equ:Amn}, \eqref{equ:w}, \eqref{equ:f}, and
Proposition~\ref{lem:w'}, we obtain
\begin{align*}
{A^{\triangleleft}_{m,n}(q,q^{-s})} &= \sum_{[\Lambda'] \in \ensuremath{\mathcal{V}}_n}
q^{d(m,n) w([\Lambda'])-s\,w'([\Lambda'])} \\ &= \sum_{I \subseteq
[n-1]} \sum_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{r}}_I \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}^I} f_{I,\ensuremath{\mathbf{r}}_I}(q)
q^{\sum_{\iota\in I} r_\iota\left((n-\iota)d(m,n)-s \left(n-\iota +
e(m,n) + \sum_{j=\iota+1}^n e(m,j)\right)\right)}\\ &= \sum_{I
\subseteq [n-1]} \binom{n}{I}_{q^{-1}} \sum_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{r}}_I\in \ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}^I}
q^{\sum_{\iota\in I}r_\iota \left((n-\iota) \left( \iota +
d(m,n)\right)-s\left(n - \iota + e(m,n) + \sum_{j=\iota+1}^n
e(m,j) \right)\right)} \\ &= \sum_{I \subseteq [n-1]}
\binom{n}{I}_{q^{-1}} \prod_{i\in I} \frac{q^{a^{\triangleleft}_i(m,n)-s\,b^{\triangleleft}_i(m,n)}}{1- q^{a^{\triangleleft}_i(m,n)-s\, b^{\triangleleft}_i(m,n)}},
\end{align*}
with $a^{\triangleleft}_i(m,n)$ and $b^{\triangleleft}_i(m,n)$ defined as in
\eqref{num.data}. Using Lemma~\ref{lem:aux} (3) one easily computes
$(a_0^{\triangleleft}(m,n),b_0^{\triangleleft}(m,n)) = (d(m,n)n,h(m,n))$, whence, using
\eqref{def:igusa}, we obtain that
$$\frac{1}{1-q^{d(m,n)n -s\, h(m,n)}} A^{\triangleleft}_{m,n}(q,q^{-s}) = I_n\left(q^{-1};\left( q^{a^{\triangleleft}_i(m,n) -s\, b^{\triangleleft}_i(m,n)} \right)_{i=n-1}^0\right).$$
Theorem~\ref{thm:main} follows now from \eqref{equ:zeta.AJM}.
\section{Corollaries and porisms}\label{sec:cor.por}
We record a few consequences of Theorem \ref{thm:main} and its
proof. Throughout, $\mathfrak o$ denotes, as before, a compact discrete
valuation ring. Let $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}$ be the ring of integers of a number field
$K$, with Dedekind zeta function $\zeta_K(s)$. We set
$L_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}) := L_{m,n} \otimes_\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}$.
\subsection{Global analytic properties}\label{subsec:global}
\begin{corollary} The ideal zeta function
$\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}})}(s)$ has abscissa of convergence
$\alpha^{\triangleleft}(m,n) = d(m,n)$ and allows for meromorphic continuation
to (at least) the complex half-plane
$$\left\{ s\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{C}} \mid \Re(s) > \beta^{\triangleleft}(m,n) \right\},$$ where
$$\beta^{\triangleleft}(m,n) := \max \left\{
\frac{a_i^{\triangleleft}(m,n)-1}{b_i^{\triangleleft}(m,n)}\mid
i=0,\dots,n-1\right\},$$ and even the whole complex plane if
$n\leq 2$. In any case, the continued function has a simple pole at
$s=\alpha^{\triangleleft}(m,n)$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
It is well known (see \eqref{equ:abel}) that
$\zeta_{\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}^d}(s) = \prod_{i=0}^{d-1} \zeta_K(s-i)$, has abscissa
of convergence $s=d$, and admits meromorphic continuation to the
whole complex plane to a function that has a simple pole at
$s=d$. It thus suffices to note that the Euler product
\begin{equation}\label{equ:euler}
\prod_{\mathfrak{p} \in \Spec(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}})\setminus \{ (0) \}} I_n\left(q_{\mathfrak{p}}^{-1};
\left(q_{\mathfrak{p}}^{a^{\triangleleft}_i(m,n)-s\,b_i^{\triangleleft}(m,n)}\right)_{i=n-1}^0\right)
\end{equation}
has
\begin{itemize}
\item[(A)] abscissa of convergence
$\max \left\{ \frac{a_i^{\triangleleft}(m,n)+1}{b_i^{\triangleleft}(m,n)}\mid
i=0,\dots,n-1\right\} < d(m,n)$
and
\item[(B)] meromorphic continuation to
$\left\{ s\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{C}} \mid \Re(s) > \beta^{\triangleleft}(m,n) \right\}$.
\end{itemize}
To verify (A) we observe that the Euler factors of \eqref{equ:euler}
may be written in the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:frac}\frac{\sum_{w\in S_n}
q_{\mathfrak{p}}^{-\ell(w)}\prod_{j\in\Des(w)}q_{\mathfrak{p}}^{a^{\triangleleft}_j(m,n)-s\,b_j^{\triangleleft}(m,n)}}{\prod_{i=0}^{n-1}\left(1-q_{\mathfrak{p}}^{a^{\triangleleft}_i(m,n)-s\,b_i^{\triangleleft}(m,n)}\right)}.\end{equation}
Both numerator and denominator of this expression are given by
bivariate polynomial expressions in $q_{\mathfrak{p}}$ and $q_{\mathfrak{p}}^{-s}$
with integer coefficients. The abscissa of convergence of
the Euler product
$$\prod_{\mathfrak{p} \in \Spec(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}})\setminus \{ (0) \}}\frac{1}{\prod_{i=0}^{n-1}\left(1-q_{\mathfrak{p}}^{a^{\triangleleft}_i(m,n)-s\,b_i^{\triangleleft}(m,n)}\right)}$$ arising from the denominators of~\eqref{eq:frac} is $\max \left\{ \frac{a_i^{\triangleleft}(m,n)+1}{b_i^{\triangleleft}(m,n)}\mid
i=0,\dots,n-1\right\}$.
We omit the elementary proof of the fact that this quantity is
dominated by $d(m,n)$. It is a simple exercise to check that it
dominates the abscissa of convergence of the Euler product
$$\prod_{\mathfrak{p} \in \Spec(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}})\setminus \{ (0) \}}\sum_{w\in S_n} q_{\mathfrak{p}}^{-\ell(w)}\prod_{j\in\Des(w)}q_{\mathfrak{p}}^{a^{\triangleleft}_j(m,n)-s\,b_j^{\triangleleft}(m,n)}$$
over the numerators of~\eqref{eq:frac}. The latter is given, for
instance, by the formula in \cite[Lemma~5.4]{duSWoodward/08}.
To verify claim (B), we employ \cite[Lemma~5.5]{duSWoodward/08} and
note that
$$\max \left\{ \frac{-\ell(w) + \sum_{j\in \Des(w)}
a^{\triangleleft}_j(m,n)}{\sum_{j\in \Des(w)} b^{\triangleleft}_j(m,n)} \mid w\in
S_n\setminus\{e\}\right\}$$ is attained at one of the elements
$w\in S_n$ with $\# \Des(w)=1$.
The stronger claim for $n=2$ follows from the observation that the
Euler product \eqref{equ:euler} is
\begin{multline*}
\prod_{\mathfrak{p}\in\Spec(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}})\setminus\{(0)\}} \frac{1 +
q_{\mathfrak{p}}^{(1-s)(2m+1)}}{(1-q_{\mathfrak{p}}^{2m+2-s(2m+1)})(1-q_\mathfrak{p}^{2(2m+1)-s(2m+3)})}
=
\\\frac{\zeta_K((2m+1)s-2m-2)\zeta_K((2m+3)s-2(2m+1))\zeta_K((s-1)(2m+1))}{\zeta_K((s-1)(4m+2))}.
\end{multline*}
For $n=1$ it follows from the fact that
$\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,1}(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}})}(s) =
\zeta_K(s)\zeta_K(s-1)\zeta_K(3s-2)$; see \eqref{eq:heisenberg}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
It remains an interesting challenge to determine the maximal domain
of meromorphicity of the global ideal zeta functions
$\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}})}(s)$ for general $m$ and $n$. The good
analytic properties for $n\leq 2$ are, in any case, exceptional: for
$n>2$, the numerator of an Igusa function of degree $n$ will not, in
general, factor nicely; see, for instance, Example~\ref{exa:23}
(where we obtain
$\beta^{\triangleleft}(2,3) = \max\{\frac{11-1}{7},\frac{20-1}{10}\} =
\frac{19}{10} < 9 = \alpha^{\triangleleft}(2,3)$).
\end{remark}
\subsection{Local functional equations}
\begin{corollary}
$$\left. \zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)}(s)\right|_{q \rightarrow q^{-1}}
= (-1)^{h(m,n)}
q^{\binom{h(m,n)}{2}-s\,(d(m,n)+h(m,n))}\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)}(s).$$
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Cf.\ \cite[Theorem~4]{Voll/05}.
\end{proof}
For \emph{almost all} residue field characteristics, these functional
equations had been established, in greater generality,
in~\cite[Theorem~C]{Voll/10}; see also \cite[Theorem~1.2 and
Corollary~1.3]{Voll/17}.
\subsection{$\mathfrak{p}$-Adic behaviour at zero}
Rossmann has put forward the remarkable expectation that quite general
local zeta functions associated with nilpotent algebras of
endomorphisms should have predictable behaviour at~$s=0$. The
following consequence of Theorem~\ref{thm:main} establishes
\cite[Conjecture~IV ($\mathfrak{P}$-adic form)]{Rossmann/15} in the
relevant special cases.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:pad}
$$\left.\frac{\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)}(s)}{\zeta_{\mathfrak o^{h(m,n)}}(s)}\right|_{s=0}
= 1$$
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof} Note that both $\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)}(s)$ and
$\zeta_{\mathfrak o^{h(m,n)}}(s)$ have a simple pole at $s=0$. By
\eqref{equ:abel} it suffices to observe that
$$I_n\left(q^{-1};\left( q^{(n-i)(i + d(m,n))}\right)_{i=n-1}^0 \right) =\zeta_{\mathfrak o^n}(-d(m,n)) = \frac{1}{\prod_{i=0}^{n-1}(1-q^{d(m,n)+i})}.\qedhere $$
\end{proof}
\subsection{Topological and reduced ideal zeta functions}\label{subsec:top.red}
The next corollaries concern the \emph{topological} and \emph{reduced
ideal zeta functions} associated to the Lie rings
$L_{m,n}$. Informally, these are two related (but distinct) limiting
objects capturing the behaviour of $\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)}(s)$ as
`$q\rightarrow 1$'; see \cite{Rossmann/15} and \cite{Evseev/09},
respectively, for details and precise definitions.
For our purposes, the following \emph{ad hoc} definitions may
suffice. Let $Z(s) = I_n(q^{-1};\left(x_i\right)_{i=1}^n)$ for
numerical data $x_i = q^{a_i-b_is}$, for integers $a_i\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}_0$,
$b_i\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}$. Define the \emph{topological zeta function}
$Z_{\topo}(s)\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{Q}}(s)$ via
$$Z(s) = Z_{\topo}(s) (q-1)^{-n} + O((q-1)^{-n+1})$$ and the
\emph{reduced zeta function}
$$Z_{\red}(Y) := I_n(1;(Y^{b_i})_{i=1}^n)\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{Q}}(Y).$$ We omit the
proofs of the following simple calculations.
\begin{lemma}\
\begin{enumerate}
\item $Z_{\topo}(s) = \frac{n!}{\prod_{i=1}^n(b_is-a_i)},$
\item
$Z_{\red}(Y) = \frac{\sum_{w\in S_n} \prod_{j\in \Des(w)}
Y^{b_j}}{\prod_{i=1}^n(1-Y^{b_i})}.$
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{corollary}
$$\left.Z_{\red}(Y)(1-Y)^n\right|_{Y=1} = s^{-n} \left. Z_{\topo}(s^{-1})\right|_{s=0} = \frac{n!}{\prod_{i=1}^n b_i} \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{Q}}_{>0}.$$
\end{corollary}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:topo}\
\begin{enumerate}
\item The topological ideal zeta function of $L_{m,n}$ is given by
$$\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,n},\topo}(s) =
\frac{n!}{\left(\prod_{j=0}^{d(m,n)-1}(s-j)\right)\left(
\prod_{i=0}^{n-1}(b_i^{\triangleleft}(m,n)s-
a_i^{\triangleleft}(m,n))\right)}\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{Q}}(s).$$
It has degree $-h(m,n)$ in $s$, a simple pole at $s=0$ with residue
$\frac{(-1)^{h(m,n)-1}}{(h(m,n)-1)!}$ and satisfies
$$\left.s^{-h(m,n)} \zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,n},\topo}(s^{-1})\right|_{s=0} =
\frac{n!}{\prod_{i=0}^{n-1} b_i^{\triangleleft}(m,n)} =:
\mu^{\triangleleft}_{m,n}\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{Q}}_{>0},$$ a nonzero rational number satisfying
$\mu^{\triangleleft}_{m,n} h(m,n)!\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}$.
\item The reduced ideal zeta function of $L_{m,n}$ is given by
$$\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,n},\textup{red}}(Y) = \frac{\sum_{w\in S_n} \prod_{j\in \Des(w)} Y^{{b^{\triangleleft}_{n-j}(m,n)}}}{(1-Y)^{d(m,n)} \prod_{i=0}^{n-1} (1-Y^{b^{\triangleleft}_{i}(m,n)})}.$$
It has degree $-d(m,n)-h(m,n)$ in $Y$, a pole of order $h(m,n)$ at
$Y=1$, and satisfies
$$
\left.\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,n},\textup{red}}(Y)(1-Y)^{h(m,n)}\right|_{Y=1}
= \mu^{\triangleleft}_{m,n} \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{Q}}_{>0}.$$\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
\begin{example}
For $(m,n)=(2,3)$ (see Example~\ref{exa:23}) we obtain
$$\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{2,3},\textup{top}}(s) = \frac{1}{5\left( \prod_{i=0}^8 (s-i)\right) (4s-9)(s-2)(7s-11)}$$
and
$$ \zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{2,3},\textup{red}}(Y) = \frac{1 + 2 Y^7 + 2 Y^{10} + Y^{17}}{(1-Y)^9 (1-Y^7)(1-Y^{10})(1-Y^{12})},$$
whence
$$\mu_{2,3}^{\triangleleft} = \frac{1}{140}.$$
\end{example}
\begin{remark}
Together, corollaries~\ref{cor:pad} and \ref{cor:topo} confirm the
conjectures in \cite[Sections~8.1 and~8.2]{Rossmann/15} in the
relevant special cases.
It remains an interesting challenge to give an intrinsic, algebraic
interpretation of the ``multiplicities'' $\mu_{m,n}^{\triangleleft}$. That
they occur as invariants of both the reduced and the topological
zeta functions seems remarkable.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Graded ideal zeta functions}
Let $R$ be a ring as in Section~\ref{subsec:ideal}. The \emph{graded
Lie algebra associated to} $L_{m,n}(R) := L_{m,n}\otimes_\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}} R$ is the
$R$-Lie algebra
$$\gr L_{m,n}(R) = \underbrace{L_{m,n}(R) / L_{m,n}(R)'}_{=:L^{(1)}}
\oplus \underbrace{L_{m,n}'(R)}_{=:L^{(2)}}.$$ An $R$-ideal $I$ of
$\gr L_{m,n}(R)$ is \emph{graded} if
$I = (I\cap I^{(1)}) \oplus (I\cap I^{(2)})$. The \emph{graded ideal
zeta function} of $L_{m,n}(R)$ is the Dirichlet series
$$\zeta^{\triangleleft_{\gr}}_{L_{m,n}(R)}(s) = \sum_{I \triangleleft_{\gr} \gr
L_{m,n}(R)} | \gr L_{m,n}(R):I|^{-s};$$ enumerating the graded
ideals of $\gr L_{m,n}(s)$ of finite index; cf.\ \cite{Rossmann/18}
and \cite{LeeVoll/18}. One advantage of writing
$\zeta^{\triangleleft}_{L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)}$ in terms of the generating function
$A^{\triangleleft}_{m,n}(q,q^{-s})$ defined in \eqref{equ:Amn} (see
\eqref{equ:zeta.AJM}) is that a trivial modification yields a formula
for the graded ideal zeta function. Indeed,
\begin{equation*}\label{equ:graded.zeta.AJM}
\zeta^{\triangleleft_{\gr}}_{L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)}(s) =\zeta_{\mathfrak o^{d(m,n)}}(s)
\frac{1}{1-q^{-s\,h(m,n)}}A^{\triangleleft_{\gr}}_{m,n}(q,q^{-s}),
\end{equation*}
where
$$A^{\triangleleft_{\gr}}_{m,n}(q,q^{-s}) = \sum_{[\Lambda'] \in \ensuremath{\mathcal{V}}_n}q^{-s
w'([\Lambda'])};$$ cf.\ \cite[Example~1.6]{LeeVoll/18}. Modifying
the computation in Section~\ref{subsec:completion} yields the
following result.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:main.gr}
$$\zeta^{\triangleleft_{\textup{gr}}}_{L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)}(s) = \zeta_{\mathfrak o^{d(m,n)}}(s) \cdot
I_n\left(q^{-1};\left( q^{i(n-i) -s b^{\triangleleft}_i(m,n)}
\right)_{i=n-1}^0\right),$$
where, for $i\in\{0,1,\dots,n-1\}$, the numerical data
$b^{\triangleleft}_i(m,n)$ is as in \eqref{num.data} in Theorem~\ref{thm:main}.
\end{theorem}
All the results recorded in Section~\ref{subsec:global} to
\ref{subsec:top.red} have ``graded analogues''. We only note here the
behaviour of $\zeta^{\triangleleft_{\textup{gr}}}_{L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)}(s)$ at $s=0$, to be
compared with Corollary~\ref{cor:pad}.
\begin{corollary}
$$\left.\frac{\zeta^{\triangleleft_{\textup{gr}}}_{L_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)}(s)}{\zeta_{\mathfrak o^{d(m,n)}}(s)\zeta_{\mathfrak o^n}(s)}\right|_{s=0}
= \frac{n}{h(m,n)}.$$
\end{corollary}
This behaviour is analogous to that observed for some (and conjectured
for all) free nilpotent Lie rings, but not universal;
cf.\ \cite[Conjecture~6.11 and Remark~6.13]{LeeVoll/18}.
\subsection{Representation zeta functions}
Let $\ensuremath{\mathbf{G}}_{m,n} = \ensuremath{\mathbf{G}}_{L_{m,n}}$ be the unipotent group scheme
associated to the nilpotent Lie ring $L_{m,n}$ as in
\cite[Section~2.4]{StasinskiVoll/14}. Given a ring of integers $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}$
of a number field~$K$, the group $G = \ensuremath{\mathbf{G}}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}})$ is a finitely
generated torsion-free nilpotent group of nilpotency class $2$ and
Hirsch length $h(m,n)\cdot |K:\ensuremath{\mathbb{Q}}|$. (For $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}=\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}$ we recover the
groups $\Delta_{m,n}=\ensuremath{\mathbf{G}}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}})$ from \cite{BermanKlopschOnn/18}.)
Denote by
$$\zeta_{G}(s) = \sum_{n=1}^\infty \ensuremath{\widetilde}{r}_n(G)n^{-s}$$ the
\emph{representation zeta function} of $G$, encoding the numbers
$\ensuremath{\widetilde}{r}_n(G)$ of twist-isoclasses of irreducible complex
$n$-dimensional representations of $G$; see, for instance,
\cite[Section~1.1]{StasinskiVoll/14}, for background.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:rep} For all $m,n\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}$,
$$\zeta_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{G}}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}})}(s) = \frac{\zeta_K(se(m,n)-n)}{\zeta_K(se(m,n))}.$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} By \cite[(1.4)]{StasinskiVoll/14}, the representation
zeta function $\zeta_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{G}}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}})}(s)$ is an Euler product of
representation zeta functions of the form
$\zeta_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{G}}_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}_\mathfrak{p})}(s)$, where $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathfrak{p}}$ is the
completion of $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}$ at a nonzero prime ideal $\mathfrak{p}$. We fix such
an ideal $\mathfrak{p}$ and write $\mathfrak o = \ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathfrak{p}}$ and $q=q_{\mathfrak{p}}$ for
the residue field cardinality of $\mathfrak o$. We use the notation and
results of \cite[Section~2]{StasinskiVoll/14}, specifically those
for nilpotency class $2$ in \cite[Section~2.4]{StasinskiVoll/14}, to
compute the rational function
$\zeta_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{G}}_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)}(s)\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{Q}}(q^{-s})$ (cf.\
\cite[Corollary~2.19]{StasinskiVoll/14}) explicitly. The quantity
$r$ is equal to $d(m,n)$. For $N>0$ we find
$W_N(\mathfrak o) = (\mathfrak o/\mathfrak{p}^N)^n \setminus (\mathfrak{p}/\mathfrak{p}^N)^n$, whereas
$W_0(\mathfrak o) = \bf0$, whence
$$\# W_N(\mathfrak o) = \begin{cases} (1-q^{-n})q^{nN} & \textup{ if } N>0,\\ 1 & \textup{ otherwise.}\end{cases}$$
One checks immediately that, for all $N\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}_0$,
$$\ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}^{\mathfrak o}_{N,\ensuremath{\mathbf{a}}} = \# W_N(\mathfrak o) \, \delta_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{a}} = ((0)^{(e(m,n))},(N)^{(\lfloor d(m,n)/2 \rfloor -e(m,n))})}.$$
Indeed, by Lemma~\ref{lem:coma}, for $N>0$ and any
$\ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}\in W_N(\mathfrak o)$, the two matrices
$$M_{m,n}(\ensuremath{\mathbf{y}}) \text{ and } \left( \begin{matrix} & -\Id_{e(m,n)} & \\ \Id_{e(m,n)} && \\&& \end{matrix}\right)\in\Mat_{d(m,n)}(\mathfrak o/\mathfrak{p}^N).$$
are equivalent. By \cite[Proposition~2.18]{StasinskiVoll/14}, it
follows that
\begin{align*}
\zeta_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{G}}_{m,n}(\mathfrak o)}(s) &= \sum_{N\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}_0,\, \ensuremath{\mathbf{a}} \in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}_0^{\lfloor d(m,n)/2\rfloor}} \ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}^{\mathfrak o}_{N,\ensuremath{\mathbf{a}}} q^{-s\sum_{i=1}^{\lfloor d(m,n)/2 \rfloor} (N-a_i)s} \\
&= 1 + \sum_{N\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}} (1-q^{-n})q^{nN}(q^{-s})^{Ne(m,n)}\\ &= 1 + (1-q^{-n})\frac{q^{n-se(m,n)}}{1-q^{n-se(m,n)}} = \frac{1-q^{-se(m,n)}}{1-q^{n-se(m,n)}}.
\end{align*}
The result follows from the well-known Euler factorization
$\zeta_K(s) = \prod_{\mathfrak{p}} (1-q_{\mathfrak{p}}^{-s})^{-1}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
For $n=1$, Theorem~\ref{thm:rep} generalizes the well-known formulae
for the representation zeta functions of the Heisenberg groups
$\ensuremath{\mathbf{H}}(\mathfrak o) = \ensuremath{\mathbf{G}}_{m,1}(\mathfrak o)$; see Example~\ref{exa:heisenberg} and
\cite[Theorem~B]{StasinskiVoll/14}. For $m=1$, we recover the
representation zeta functions of the Grenham groups $G_{n+1}$ (see
Example~\ref{exa:grenham}), computed by Snocken in his PhD-thesis
(see~\cite[Example~6.2]{Snocken/14}).
\end{remark}
We note an immediate consequence of Theorem~\ref{thm:rep} regarding
the topological representation zeta function
$\zeta_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{G}}_{m,n},\topo}(s)\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{Q}}(s)$ of $\ensuremath{\mathbf{G}}_{m,n}$;
cf.\ \cite[Definition~3.6]{Rossmann/16b}.
\begin{corollary}
$$\zeta_{\ensuremath{\mathbf{G}}_{m,n},\topo}(s) = \frac{se(m,n)}{se(m,n)-n}.$$
\end{corollary}
Consequently, all questions raised in
\cite[Section~7]{Rossmann/16b}---except possibly Question~7.3---have
positive answers for the group schemes $\ensuremath{\mathbf{G}}_{m,n}$.
\begin{funding}
I am grateful for support by the German-Israeli Foundation for
Scientific Research and Development (GIF) through grant no.\ 1246.
\end{funding}
\begin{acknowledgements}
I thank Angela Carnevale for stimulating discussions and a very
helpful $\textsf{maple}$-sheet. To Tobias Rossmann I am grateful for
many valuable conversations, in particular about topological and
reduced zeta functions. I thank Uri Onn for teaching me many things
over the years (including the word ``porism'') and Mark Berman for
helpful comments on a draft of this paper. To an anonymous referee I
am greatly indebted for numerous insightful comments and corrections
of errors and oversights.
\end{acknowledgements}
\def$'${$'$}
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $G$ be a group and $M$ be a $G$-module. Symmetric cohomology $HS^*(G,M)$ was introduced by M. Staic \cite{staic} as a variant of classical group cohomology. A. Zarelua's prior definition \cite{zarelua} of exterior cohomology $H^*_\lambda(G,M)$ is very closely related to this, as shown in \cite{p}. Namely, we proved in \cite{p} that the symmetric cohomology has a functorial decomposition
$$HS^*(G,M)=H^*_\lambda(G,M)\oplus H^*_\delta(G,M),$$
where $H^i_\delta(G,M)=0$ when $0\leq i\leq 4$ or $M$ has no elements of order two.
There are natural homomorphisms $\alpha^n:HS^n(G,M)\to H^n(G,M)$ (and $\beta^n:H^n_\lambda(G,M)\to H^n(G,M)$), which are isomorphisms for $n=0,1$ and a monomorphism for $n=2$. This was shown by Staic in \cite{staic_h2}. According to our results in \cite{p}, the map $\alpha^n$ is an isomorphism for $n=2$ if $G$ has no elements of order two. In this case, $\alpha^3$ is a monomorphism. More generally, $\alpha^n$ is an isomorphism if $G$ is torsion free.
Classical $H^2(G,M)$ classifies extensions of $G$ by $M$. Staic showed in \cite{staic_h2} that $HS^2(G,M)$ classifies a subclass of extensions of $G$ by $M$, namely those that have a section preserving inversion.
It is also well-known that $H^3(G,M)$ classifies the so-called crossed extensions of $G$ by $M$ \cite{L1}, or equivalently $H^3(G,M)$ classifies $2$-groups $\Gamma$, with $\pi_0(\Gamma)=G$ and $\pi_1(\Gamma)=M$.
The main result of this paper is that for groups $G$ with no elements of order $2$ the group $HS^3(G,M)$ classifies crossed extensions of $G$ by $M$ with a certain condition on the section.
There has been interest in the mathematical community in exploring symmetric cohomology. Several papers have already been published on this topic, e.g. \cite{problems},\cite{singh3}, \cite{singh}, \cite{todea}.
\section{Preliminaries}
\subsection{Preliminaries on symmetric cohomology of groups}\label{psc}
Let $G$ be a group and $M$ be a $G$-module. Recall that the group cohomology $H^*(G,M)$ is defined as the cohomology of the cochain complex
$C^*(G,M)$, where the group of $n$-cochains of $G$ with coefficients in $M$ is the set of functions from $G^n$ to $M$:
$C^n(G,M)=\left\{\phi:G^n\to M\right\}$ and coboundary map $d^n:C^n(G,M)\to C^{n+1}(G,M)$ is defined by
\begin{align*}
d^n(\phi)(g_0,g_1,\cdots ,g_n)&=g_0\cdot \phi(g_1,\cdots ,g_n)\\
&+\sum_{i=1}^n(-1)^i\phi(g_0,\cdots ,g_{i-2},g_{i-1}g_i,g_{i+1},\cdots , g_n)\\
&+(-1)^{n+1}\phi(g_0,\cdots ,g_{n-1}).
\end{align*}
A cochain $\phi$ is called \emph{normalised} if $\phi(g_1,\cdots,g_n)=0$ whenever some $g_j=1$. The collection of normalised cochains is denoted by $C^*_N(G,M)$ and the classical normalisation theorem claims that the inclusion $C^*_N(G,M) \to C^*(G,M)$ induces an isomorphism on cohomology.
In \cite{staic} Staic introduced a subcomplex $CS^*(G,M)\subset C^*(G,M)$, whose homology is known as the symmetric cohomology of $G$ with coefficients in $M$ and is denoted by $HS^*(G,M)$. The definition is based on an action of $\Sigma_{n+1}$ on $C^n(G,M)$ (for every $n$) compatible with the differential. In order to define this action, it is enough to define how the transpositions $\tau_i = (i,i + 1)$,
$1 \leq i \leq n$ act. For $\phi \in C^n(G,M)$ one defines:
$$(\tau_i \phi)(g_1, g_2, g_3, \cdots , g_n) = \begin{cases} -g_1\phi(g_1^{-1}, g_1g_2, g_3,\cdots , g_n), \quad {\rm if} \ i=1,\\
-\phi(g_1, \cdots , g_{i-2}, g_{i-1}g_i, g_i^{-1}, g_ig_{i+1},\cdots , g_n),& 1 < i < n,\\
-\phi(g_1, g_2, g_3,\cdots , g_{n-1}g_n, g_n^{-1}) , \quad {\rm if} \ i=n.
\end{cases}$$
Denote by $CS^n(G,M)$ the subgroup of the invariants of this action. That is, $CS^n(G,M)= C^n(G,M)^{\Sigma_{n+1}}$. Staic proved that $CS^*(G,M)$ is a subcomplex of $C^*(G,M)$ \cite{staic}, \cite{staic_h2} and hence the groups $HS^*(G,M)$ are well-defined. There is an obvious natural transformation
$$\alpha^n:HS^n(G,M)\to H^n(G,M), \ \ n\geq 0.$$
According to \cite{staic},\cite{staic_h2}, $\alpha^n$ is an isomorphism if $n=0,1$ and is a monomorphism for $n=2$. For extensive study of the homomorphism $\alpha^n$ for $n\geq 2$ we refer to \cite{p}.
Denote by $CS^*_N(G,M)$ the intersection $CS^*(G,M)\cap C^*_N(G,M)$. Unlike to the classical cohomology the inclusion $CS_N^*(G,M)\to CS^*(G,M)$ does not always induces an isomorphism on cohomology. The groups $H_\lambda^*(G,M)=H^*(CS_N^*(G,M)$ are isomorphic to the so called \emph{exterior cohomology of groups} introduced by Zarelua in \cite{zarelua}. According to \cite{p} the canonical map
$$\gamma_n:H_\lambda^n(G,M)\to HS^n(G,M)$$
induced by the inclusion $CS^*_N(G,M)\to CS^*(G,M)$, is an isomorphism if $n\leq 4$, or $M$ has no elements of order two.
\subsection{Symmetric extensions and $HS^2$} It is a classical fact, that $H^2(G,M)$ classifies the extension of $G$ by $M$ and $H^3(G,M)$ classifies the crossed extensions of $G$ by $M$. One can ask what objects classify the symmetric cohomology groups $HS^2(G,M)$ and $HS^3(G,M)$. The answer to this question in the dimension two was given in \cite{staic_h2}. The aim of this work is to prove a similar result in the dimension three.
Let $G$ be a group and $M$ be a $G$-module. Recall that an extension of $G$ by $M$ is a short exact sequence of groups
$$0\to M\xto{i} K\xto{p} G\to 0$$
such that for any $k\in K$ and $m\in M$, one has $ki(m)k^{-1}=i(p(k)m)$. An $s$-section to this extension is a map $s:G\to K$ such that $p\circ s(x)=x$ for all $x\in G$. Let ${\bf Extgr}(G,M)$ be the category whose objects are extensions of $G$ and $M$ and morphisms are commutative diagrams
$$\xymatrix{0\ar[r] &M\ar[d]^{id}\ar[r]^i &K\ar[d]\ar[r]^{p}&G\ar[r]\ar[d]^{id}&0\\ 0\ar[r]& M\ar[r]^{i'} &K'\ar[r]^{p'}&G\ar[r]&0}$$
The set of connected components of the category ${\bf Extgr}(G,M)$ is denoted by ${\sf Extgr}(G,M)$. It is well-known that there exists a natural map ${\sf Extgr}(G,M)\to H^2(G,M),$ which is a bijection. To construct this map, one needs to choose an $s$-section $s$ and then define $f\in C^2(G,M)$ by
$$s(x)s(y)=i(f(x,y))s(xy).$$
One checks that $f$ is a $2$-cocycle and its class in $H^2$ is independent of the chosen $s$-section $s$.
Let $0\to M\xto{i} K\xto{p} G\to 0$ be an extension and $s$ be a $s$-section. Then $s$ is called \emph{symmetric} if $s(x^{-1})=s(x)^{-1}$ holds for all $x\in G$. An extension is called \emph{symmetric} if it possesses a symmetric $s$-section. The symmetric extensions form a full subcategory ${\bf ExS}(G,M)$ of the category ${\bf Extgr}(G,M)$. The set of connected components of ${\bf ExS}(G,M)$ is denoted by ${\sf ExS}(G,M)$. The main result of \cite{staic_h2} claims that the restriction of the bijection ${\sf Extgr}(G,M)\to H^2(G,M)$ on ${\sf ExS}(G,M)$ yields a bijection ${\sf ExS}(G,M)\to HS^2(G,M)$.
\subsection{Crossed Modules}\label{23} Recall the classical relationship between third cohomology of groups and crossed modules.
A crossed module is a
group homomorphism $\partial : T\to R$ together with an action of
$R$ on $T$ satisfying:
$$\partial (^rt)=r\partial (t)r^{-1} \ {\rm and} \
^{\partial t}s=tst^{-1}, \ r\in R, t,s\in T.$$
It follows from the definition that the image $Im (\partial)$
is a normal subgroup of $R$, and the kernel $Ker (\partial)$ is in the
center of $T$. Moreover the action of $R$ on $T$ induces an
action of $G$ on $Ker (\partial)$, where $G=Coker \ \partial$.
A {\it morphism } from a crossed module $\partial : T\to R$ to a crossed module $\partial' : T'\to R'$ is a
pair of group homomorphisms $(\phi:T\to T', \psi: R \to R')$ such
that
$$\psi\circ \partial = \partial '\circ \phi, \ \
\phi (^rt)=\, ^{\psi(r)}\phi (t), r\in R, t\in T.$$
For a group $G$ and for a $G$-module $M$ one denotes by ${\bf Xext}(G,M)$
the category of exact sequences
$$0\to M\to T \xto{\partial} R\to G\to 0,$$
where $\partial:T\to R$ is a crossed module and the
action of $G$ on $M$ induced from the crossed module structure
coincides with the prescribed one. The morphisms in ${\bf Xext}(G,M)$ are
commutative diagrams
$$\xymatrix{0\ar[r] &M \ar[r]\ar[d]^{id} & T \ar[d]^\phi\ar[r]^\partial &R \ar[r]^p\ar[d]^\psi &G \ar[r]\ar[d]_{id} & 0\\
0\ar[r] &M \ar[r] & T' \ar[r]^{\partial'} &R' \ar[r]^{p'} &G \ar[r] & 0}$$
where $(\phi, f)$ is a morphism of
crossed modules $(T,G,\partial) \to (T',G',\partial')$. We
let ${\sf Xext}(G,M)$ be the class of the connected components of the
category ${\bf Xext}(G,M)$. Objects of the category ${\bf Xext}(G,M)$ are called \emph{crossed extensions} of $G$ by $M$.
It is a classical fact (see for example \cite{L1}) that there is a canonical bijection
$$\xi:{\sf Xext}(G,M)\to H^3(G,M).$$
The map $\xi$ has the following description. Let $0\to M \to T \xto{\partial} R\xto{p} G\to 0$ be a crossed extension. An \emph{$s$-section} of it is a pair of maps $(s:G\to R, \sigma:G\times G\to T)$ for which the following hold
$$ps(x)=x, \quad s(x)s(y)=\partial(\sigma(x,y))s(xy), \ x,y\in G.$$
An $s$-section is called \emph{normalised} if $s(1)=1$ and $\sigma(1,x)=1=\sigma(x,1)$ for all $x\in G$.
It is clear that every crossed extension has a normalised s-section. Any (normalised) $s$-section $(s, \sigma)$ gives rise to a (normalised) $3$-cocycle $f\in Z^3(G,M)$ defined by
\begin{equation}\label{3cycle}
f(x,y,z)=\,^{s(x)} \sigma(y,z)\sigma(x,yz)\sigma(xy,z)^{-1}\sigma(x,y)^{-1}\end{equation}
To make dependence of $f$ on $\sigma$ and $s$ we sometimes write $f_\sigma$ or even $f_{s,\sigma}$ instead of $f$. Then the map $\xi$ assigns the class of $f$ in $H^3(G,M)$ to the class of
$0\to M \to T \xto{\partial} R\xto{p} G\to 0$ in ${\sf Xext}(G,M)$.
\section{A characterisation of symmetric cocycles}
In this section we prove the following auxilary results, which will be used in the next section.
\begin{Le}\label{i} i) If $\phi \in CS^n_N(G,M)$, $n\geq 2$ then $\phi(g_1, \cdots, g_n)=0$, whenever $g_{i+1}=g_i^{-1}$ for some $1\leq i\leq n-1.$
\end{Le}
\begin{proof} i) By definition we have $(\tau_i(\phi)+\phi)(g_1,\cdots,g_n)=0$ for any $g_1,\cdots,g_n\in G$. If $g_{i+1}=g_i^{-1}$ for some $i$, then $\tau_i(\phi)(g_1,\cdots,g_n)=0$ by the normalisation condition. Hence $\phi(g_1, \cdots, g_i,g_i^{-1},\cdots, g_n)=0$.
\end{proof}
The converse in general is not true, however we have the following important fact.
\begin{Le}\label{ii} If $\phi\in C^n_N(G,M)$ is a cocycle, $n\geq 2$, then $\phi\in CS^n_N(G,M)$ iff $\phi(g_1, \cdots, g_n)=0$, whenever $g_{i+1}=g_i^{-1}$ for some $1\leq i\leq n-1.$
\end{Le}
\begin{proof} Thanks to Lemma \ref{i} we need to prove that $\tau_i(\phi)+\phi=0$, if $\phi(g_1, \cdots, g_n)=0$, whenever $g_{k+1}=g_k^{-1}$ for some $1\leq k\leq n-1.$
By assumption
\begin{align*}
x_1\phi(x_2,\cdots ,x_{n+1})+\sum_{k=1}^n(-1)^k\phi(x_1,\cdots x_{k}x_{k+1},\cdots , x_{n+1})&\\
+(-1)^{n+1}\phi(x_1,\cdots ,x_{n})=0.
\end{align*}
for any $x_1,\cdots,x_{n+1}\in G$.
First we take
$$x_k=\begin{cases} g_1, & k=1,\\ g^{-1}_1, & k=2,\\ g_1g_2,&k=3,\\ g_{k-1},& k\geq 4.\end{cases}
$$
to obtain
$$(\tau_1\phi+\phi)(g_1,\cdots, g_n)=0.$$
Next, fix $1<i<n$ and put
$$x_k=\begin{cases} g_k, & k\leq i,\\ g^{-1}_i, & k=i+1,\\ g_ig_{i+1},&k=i+2,\\ g_{k-1},&k\geq i+3.\end{cases}
$$
to obtain
$$((-1)^{i}\tau_i\phi+(-1)^{i+2}\phi)(g_1,\cdots, g_n)=0.$$
Thus $\tau_i\phi+\phi=0$, $1<i<n$.
Finally, we take
$$x_k=\begin{cases} g_k, & k\leq n,\\ g_{n}^{-1},& k=n+1.\end{cases}
$$
to obtain
$$((-1)^{n-1}\tau_n\phi+(-1)^{n+1}\phi)(g_1,\cdots, g_n)=0.$$
Thus $\tau_n\phi+\phi=0$ and Lemma follows.
\end{proof}
In particular a cocycle $\phi\in C^3_N(G,M)$ is symmetric (and hence defines a class in $HS^3(G,M)=H^3_\lambda(G,M)$ iff
$$\phi(x,x^{-1},y)=\phi(x,y,y^{-1})$$
for all $x,y\in G$.
Next, Lemma helps us to distinguish boundary elements in $CS^3_N(G,M)$.
\begin{Le} Suppose $\phi(x,y,z)$ is a (normalised) symmetric cocycle. Also suppose that it is a coboundary: so there exists a $g(x,y) \in C^2_N(G,M)$ such that
$$\phi(x,y,z) = xg(y,z)-g(xy,z)+g(x,yz)-g(x,y).$$
Then $g$ is symmetric iff $ g(x,x^{-1})=0$ for all $x\in G$.
\end{Le}
\begin{proof} Recall that $g$ is symmetric iff
$$g(x,y)=-xg(x^{-1},xy)=-g(xy,y^{-1}).$$
If these conditions hold, we can take $y=x^{-1}$ to obtain
$$g(x,x^{-1})=-g(1,x)=0,$$
because $g$ is normalised. Conversely, assume $g(x,x^{-1})=0$ for all $x\in G$. Since $\phi$ is symmetric we have
$$0=\phi(x,y,y^{-1})=xg(y,y^{-1})-g(xy,y^{-1})+g(x,1)-g(x,y)$$
and
$$0=\phi(x,x^{-1},z)=xg(x^{-1},z)-g(1,z)+g(x,x^{-1}z)+g(x,x^{-1}).$$
Since $g$ is normalized we have $g(x,1)=g(1,z)=0$. By assumption, we also have $g(y,y^{-1})=0=g(x,x^{-1})$. Hence,
$$g(x,y)+g(xy,y^{-1})=0 \ \ {\rm and} \ \ g(x,x^{-1}z)+g(x,x^{-1}z)=0.$$
Replacing $z$ by $xy$ in the last equality, one gets symmetric conditions on $g$.
\end{proof}
\section{Third symmetric cohomology and crossed modules}
We start with proving the following result, which links symmetric cocycles and crossed modules. Our notations are the same as at the end of Section \ref{23}.
\begin{Pro}\label{3} The class of $0\to M \to T \xto{\partial} R\xto{p} G\to 0$ in ${\sf Xext}(G,M)$ lies in the image of the composite map
$$HS^3(G,M)\xto{\alpha^3} H^3(G,M)\xto{\xi^{-1}} {\sf Xext}(G,M)$$
iff the crossed extension $0\to M \to T \xto{\partial} R\xto{p} G\to 0$ has a normalised $s$-section $(s,\sigma)$ for which the following two identities hold
\begin{align*}
^{s(x)}\sigma(x^{-1},y)\sigma(x,x^{-1}y)&=\sigma(x,x^{-1}),\\
\sigma(x,y)\sigma(xy,y^{-1})&=\,^{s(x)}\sigma(y,y^{-1}).
\end{align*}
\end{Pro}
\begin{proof} In fact $f=f_{\sigma,\tau}$ is symmetric iff
$$f(x,x^{-1},y)=0=f(x,y,y^{-1})$$
thanks to Lemma \ref{ii}.
By definition of $f$ these conditions are equivalent to
$$^{s(x)}\sigma(x^{-1},y)\sigma(x,x^{-1}y)\sigma(1,y)^{-1}\sigma(x,x^{-1})^{-1}=1$$
and
$$^{s(x)}\sigma(y,y^{-1})\sigma(x,1)\sigma(xy,y^{-1})^{-1}\sigma(x,y)^{-1}=1$$
Since $\sigma(1,-)=1=\sigma(-,1)$, we obtain
$$^{s(x)}\sigma(x^{-1},y)\sigma(x,x^{-1}y)=\sigma(x,x^{-1})$$
and
$$^{s(x)}\sigma(y,y^{-1})=\sigma(x,y)\sigma(xy,y^{-1})$$
and we are done.
\end{proof}
\begin{De} A normalised $s$-section $(s,\sigma)$ of a crossed extension $$0\to M \to T \xto{\partial} R\xto{p} G\to 0$$ is called weakly symmetric if the following identities hold
\begin{itemize}
\item[i)] $s(x^{-1})=s(x)^{-1}$,
\item[ii)] $\sigma(x,x^{-1})=1$, $x,y\in G$.
\end{itemize}
\end{De}
We have the following easy fact.
\begin{Le}\label{v} Let $G$ be a group which has no elements of order two. Then any crossed extension $0\to M \to T \xto{\partial} R\xto{p} G\to 0$ has a weakly symmetric $s$-section.
\end{Le}
\begin{proof} In this case $G\setminus \{1\}$ is a disjoint union of two element subsets of the form $\{x,x^{-1}\}$, $x\not=1$. Let us choose a representative in each class. If $x$ is a representative, we set $s(x)$ to be an element in $p^{-1}(x)$. We then extend $s$ to whole $G$ by $s(1)=1$ and $s(x^{-1})=s(x)^{-1}$, where $x$ is a representative. We see that for $y=x^{-1}$, one has $s(x)s(y)s(xy)^{-1}=1$. Thus one can choose $\sigma$ with property $\sigma(x,x^{-1})=1$ and lemma follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{De}\label{6} A weakly symmetric $s$-section $(s,\sigma)$ of a crossed extension $$0\to M \to T \xto{\partial} R\xto{p} G\to 0$$ is called symmetric if the following identities hold
\begin{itemize}
\item[i)] $\sigma(x,y) \cdot \, ^{s(x)}\sigma(x^{-1},xy)=1$, $x,y\in G$.
\item[ii)] $\sigma(x,y)\cdot \sigma(xy,y^{-1})=1$, $x,y\in G$.
\end{itemize}
A crossed extension $0\to M \to T \xto{\partial} R\xto{p} G\to 0$ is called symmetric if it has a symmetric $s$-section.
\end{De}
Symmetric crossed extensions of $G$ by $M$ form a subset ${\sf XextS}(G,M)$ of the set of ${\sf Xext}(G,M)$.
\begin{Th} Let $G$ be a group which has no elements of order two, then there is a natural bijection
$$HS^3(G,M)\cong {\sf XextS}(G,M).$$
\end{Th}
\begin{proof} By Lemma \ref{v} any crossed extension has a weakly symmetric $s$-section $(s,\sigma)$. By Proposition \ref{3} the corresponding $3$-cocycle is
symmetric if
\begin{align*}
^{s(x)}\sigma(x^{-1},y)\sigma(x,x^{-1}y)&=1,\\
\sigma(x,y)\sigma(xy,y^{-1})&=1.
\end{align*}
Now, if we replace $x$ by $x^{-1}$ in the first identity and then act by $s(x)$, we see that these conditions are exactly ones in the Definirion \ref{6}. Hence by Proposition \ref{3}, the image of the composite map $$HS^3(G,M)\xto{\alpha^3} H^3(G,M)\cong {\sf Xext}(G,M)$$ is exactly ${\sf XextS}(G,M)$. On the
other hand, since $G$ has no elements of order two, the map $\alpha^3$ is injective. This follows from the part ii) of Corollary 4.4 \cite{p}, because $HS^3=H^4_\lambda$, thanks to Theorem 3.9 \cite{p}. It follows that the induced map $HS^3(G,M)\to {\sf Xext}(G,M)$ is a bijection.
\end{proof}
\section{Interpretation in terms of 2-groups} For us (strict) 2-groups are group objects in the category of small categories. Thus it is a category $\sf C$ (in fact a groupoid) equipped with a bifunctor $\cdot:\sf C \times C\to C$, $(a,b)\mapsto a\cdot b$ which is strictly associative and satisfies group object axioms. These objects are also known under the name categorical groups and 1-cat-groups see, \cite{L2}. Recall the relationship between crossed modules and 2-groups \cite{L2}. Let $\partial:T\to R$ be a crossed module. It defines a 2-group $\mathsf{Ca}_{T\to R}$. Objects of $\mathsf{Ca}_{T\to R}$ are elements of $R$. A morphism from $r\in R$ to $r'\in R$ is an element $t\in T$ such that
$$r'=\partial(t)r,$$
In this situation we use the notation $r\xto{t}r'$. The composite of arrows $r\xto{t}r'\xto{t'}r''$ is $r\xto{t't}r''$. It is clear that $r\xto{1} r$ is the identity arrow ${{\sf Id}}_r$ in the category $\mathsf{Ca}_{T\to R}$. Any morphism in $\mathsf{Ca}_{T\to R}$ is an isomorphism. The inverse of $r\xto{t}r'$ is $r'\xto{t^{-1}}r$. As usual we set $M=\mathop{\sf Ker}\nolimits (\partial)$. Observe that any $m\in M$ defines an endomorphism $r\xto{m}r$ of $r\in R$ and conversely, any endomorphism of $r$ has this form.
The bifunctor $$ \mathsf{Ca}_{T\to R} \times \mathsf{Ca}_{T\to R} \xto{\cdot} \mathsf{Ca}_{T\to R}$$
given on objects by the multiplication rule in the group $R$, while on morphisms it is given by
$$(r\xto{t} z) \cdot (x\xto{s} y)=rx\xto{t(\,^zs)} zy, \ \ r,x,y,z\in R, s,t\in T.$$
In particular, we have
$$(x\xto{t} y) \cdot {\sf Id}_z =xz\xto{t} yz, $$
$${{\sf Id}}_r \cdot (x\xto{t}y)=rx\xto{^rt} ry.$$
It is well-known that any 2-group is isomorphic to the 2-group of the form $\mathsf{Ca}_{T\to R}$. For a uniquely defined (up to isomorphism) crossed module $\partial:T\to R$, see for example \cite{L2}.
In particular crossed modules gives rise to monoidal categories. So, we can consider monoidal functors. We recall the corresponding definition. Let
$\sf C$ and $\sf D$ be 2-groups. An \emph{$s$-functor} $\sf C\to D$ is a pair $(F,\xi)$, where $F:\sf C\to D$ is a functor and
$\xi$ is a natural transformation from the composite functor ${\sf C \times C} \xto{\cdot} {\sf C} \xto{F} \sf D$ to the composite funtor ${\sf C \times C} \xto{F\times F} {\sf D\times D} \xto{\cdot} \sf D$
Thus for any objects $x$ and $y$ of $\sf C$ we have a morphism $\xi_{x,y}:F(x\cdot y) \to F(x)\cdot F(y)$, which is natural in $x$ and $y$.
In what follows, we will assume that $(F,\xi)$ is normalised, meaning that $F(1)=1$ and $\xi_{x,y}={\sf Id}$, if $x=1$ or $y=1$. Thus for any object $x$ we have a morphism $\xi(x,x^{-1}):1\to F(x)\cdot F(x^{-1})$, which will be play an important role later.
An $s$-functor is \emph{monoidal} if for any objects $x,y,z$ of the category $\sf C$ the diagram
$$\xymatrix{F(x\cdot y\cdot z)\ar[rr]^{\xi_{x\cdot y,z}}\ar[d]^{\xi_{x,y\cdot z}}
&&F(x\cdot y)\cdot F(z)\ar[d]^{\xi_{x,y}\cdot {\sf Id}_{F(z)}} \\ F(x)\cdot F(y\cdot z)\ar[rr]_{{\sf Id}_{F(x)}\cdot \xi_{y, z}}
&&F(x)\cdot F(y)\cdot F(z)}$$
commutes.
Let $0\to M \to T \xto{\partial} R\xto{p} G\to 0$ be a crossed extension. In this situation we have two 2-groups ${\sf Ca}_{T\to R}$ and ${\sf Ca}_G$. The second one is $G$ considered as a discrete category (equivalently, the $2$-group, corresponding to the crossed module $1\to G$). The homomorphism $p$ yields the strict monoidal functor ${\sf Ca}_{T\to R} \to {\sf Ca}_G$, which is still denoted by $p.$
One can consider sections of $p$. We will ask different level of compatibility of sections with monoidal structures. The weakest condition to ask to such a section is to be a functor. Since ${\sf Ca}$ is a discrete category, we see that such a section of the functor $p$ is nothing but a set section of the map $p:R\to G$. Next, is to ask to the functor ${\sf Ca}_G\to {\sf Ca}_{T\to R}$ to be an $s$-functor. Call them $s$-sections of $p$. One easily, observes that there is a one-to-one correspondence between $s$-sections $(F,\xi)$ of the functor $p$ and $s$-sections of a crossed extension $0\to M \to T \xto{\partial} R\xto{p} G\to 0$. In fact, if $(s,\sigma)$ is an $s$-section,
then $(F,\xi)$ is an $s$-functor ${\sf Ca}_G \to {\sf Ca}_{T\to R}$, for which $F\circ p={\sf Id}_{{\sf Ca}_G}$. Here the functor $F$ and natural transformation $\xi$ are defined as follows. Since ${\sf Ca}_G$ is a discrete category, the functor $F$ is uniquely determined by the rule:
$$F(g)=s(g), \ g\in G.$$
Next, the natural transformation $\xi$ is uniquely determined by the family of morphisms
$$\xi_{g,h}=\left(s(gh)\xto{\sigma(g,h)} s(g)s(h)\right), \ g,h\in G.$$
Even stronger assumption is to ask to the pair $(F,\xi)$ to be a monoidal functor. As the following well-known result shows this condition is a 2-dimensional analogue of a splitting in a short exact sequence.
\begin{Pro} The class of a crossed extension
$$0\to M \to T \xto{\partial} R\xto{p} G\to 0$$
is zero iff the strict monoidal functor $p:{\sf Ca}_{T\to R} \to {\sf Ca}_G$ has a section ${\sf Ca}_G \to {\sf Ca}_{T\to R}$, which is monoidal. That is there exists an $s$-section $(s,\sigma)$ of $0\to M \to T \xto{\partial} R\xto{p} G\to 0$, for which the corresponding $s$-functor $(F,\xi)$ is monoidal.
\end{Pro}
Since we did not find appropriate reference we give the proof.
\begin{proof} Let $(s,\sigma)$ be an $s$-section of $0\to M \to T \xto{\partial} R\xto{p} G\to 0$. Then the diagram in the definition of the monoidal functor for $(F,\xi)$ has the form
$$\xymatrix{s(x\cdot y\cdot z)\ar[rr]^{\sigma(x\cdot y,z)}\ar[d]^{\sigma(x,y\cdot z)}
&&s(x\cdot y)\cdot s(z)\ar[d]^{\sigma(x,y)} \\ s(x)\cdot s(y\cdot z)\ar[rr]_{^{s(x)} \sigma(y, z)}
&&s(x)\cdot s(y)\cdot s(z)}$$
Thus commutativity of this diagram is equivalent to the vanishing of the 3-cocycle $f$ in (\ref{3cycle}).
So, if part is done. Conversely, if $f_\sigma$ defined in (\ref{3cycle}) is a coboundary and
$$f_\sigma(x,y,z)=xk(y,z)-k(xy,z)+k(x,yz)-k(x,y)$$
for a function $k:G^2\to M$, then $(s,\tau)$ is also an $s$-section for which $f_\tau=0$. Here $\tau(g,h)=\sigma(g,h)-k(g,h)$.
\end{proof}
We now introcuce another conditions to an $s$-functor $(F,\xi)$, which are weaker then the monoidal functor.
\begin{De} An $s$-functor $(F,\xi)$ is called symmetric, if
$$\xymatrix{
F(x)\ar[rrr]^{\xi(xy,y^{-1})}\ar[drrr]_{{\sf Id}_{F(x)}\cdot \xi(y,y^{-1})}
&&&F(xy)\cdot F(y^{-1})\ar[d]^{\xi(x,y)\cdot {\sf Id}_{F(y^{-1})}}\\
&&&F(x)\cdot F(y)\cdot F(y^{-1})
}
$$
and
$$\xymatrix{
F(y)\ar[rrr]^{\xi(x,x^{-1}y)}
\ar[drrr]_{\xi(x,x^{-1})\cdot {\sf Id}_{F(y)}}
&&&F(x)\cdot F(x^{-1}y)\ar[d]^{{\sf Id}_{F(x)}\cdot \xi(x^{1},y)}\\
&&&F(x)\cdot F(x^{-1})\cdot F(y)
}
$$
\end{De}
Then we have the following obvious facts:
\begin{itemize}
\item Any monoidal functor is symmetric $s$-functor.
\item The $s$-functor corresponding to an $s$-section $(s,\sigma)$ is symmetric, if $(s,\sigma)$ satisfies the condition listed in Proposition \ref{3}.
\end{itemize}
Thus 2-groups, for which the corresponding class in $H^3(G,M)$ lies in the image of $HS^3(G,M)$ can be characterized, as those, for which there exists a symmetric $s$-functor ${\sf Ca}_G \to {\sf Ca}_{T\to R}$, which is a section of $p:{\sf Ca}_{T\to R}\to {\sf Ca}_G $.
|
\section{Methods of oxygen abundance determinations} \label{sec:method}
One of the commonly used methods of the oxygen abundance determination in
low-metallicity SFGs is the direct method based on the determination
of the electron temperature $T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc iii}) from the
[O~{\sc iii}] $\lambda$4363/($\lambda$4959 + $\lambda$5007) emission-line
ratio and on the relation between $T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc ii}) and
$T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc iii}) obtained by, for example, \citet{I06} from the
photoionized H~{\sc ii} region models. The knowledge of the
temperatures and the presence of [O~{\sc ii}] and [O~{\sc iii}] emission lines
in the SDSS spectra allowed us to determine the abundances of these two most
abundant oxygen ions in the H~{\sc ii} regions and thus the total oxygen
abundances for a large sample of SFGs. However, the
[O~{\sc iii}]$\lambda$4363~$\AA$
emission line is weak in most SDSS spectra of low-metallicity SFGs and is
detected with low signal-to-noise ratio introducing large uncertainties
in the determination of the electron temperature and oxygen abundance.
Therefore, for these galaxies, other methods based on strong emission lines
are needed to more reliably derive their metallicities.
In this paper we have developed a purely empirical strong-line method
based on the SDSS DR14 sample aiming to apply it for selection of
the extremely low-metallicity SFG candidates. This method uses the spectroscopic
properties of well-studied
lowest-metallicity galaxies and is calibrated with the direct method.
For the strong-line method the most natural is to use the emission-line fluxes
of oxygen, the most abundant heavy element. The common approach in the past
was to use the relation
between the metallicity and the sum of the fluxes of strong oxygen lines
in the optical range, R$_{23}$~=~([O~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$3727 +
[O~{\sc iii}]$\lambda$4959 + [O~{\sc iii}]$\lambda$5007)/H$\beta$.
The problem with this method is that
the relation between the metallicity and R$_{23}$ consists of low-
(12~+~logO/H~$\la$~8.0) and high-metallicity (12 + logO/H $\ga$ 8.0) branches
and thus the same value of R$_{23}$ corresponds to two metallicities
\citep[e.g. ][]{P80,EP84,M91}. Therefore, other constraints separating low-
and high-metallicity branches are needed to resolve this ambiguity.
One of the possible
solutions is to use the relation between the metallicities and
[N~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$6584/H$\alpha$ emission line flux ratios which
monotonically increase with metallicity and thus this relation
is not degenerate \citep[e.g. ][]{V98,PP04}. However, the use of this
relation for the determination of the oxygen abundances
is limited because the [N~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$6584 emission line is
very weak or undetected in low-metallicity galaxies with high-excitation
H~{\sc ii} regions. We have used this line (or the
upper limit of its flux) to separate low- and high-metallicity branches.
Adopting [N~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$6584/H$\beta$ $\la$ 0.2
would then select objects located on the low-metallicity branch of
the logR$_{23}$ -- 12~+~logO/H relation.
To construct the logR$_{23}$ -- 12~+~logO/H diagram
we select $\sim$ 2000 SDSS DR14 SFGs in which the [O~{\sc iii}] $\lambda$4363
emission line is detected with an accuracy better than 25\% (see Sect.~\ref{S2})
allowing for a reliable oxygen abundance determination (grey dots
in Fig.~\ref{fig1}a). Additionally,
all these galaxies show in their spectra [O~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$3727~$\AA$,
[O~{\sc iii}]~$\lambda$4959~$\AA$, $\lambda$5007~$\AA$ and have
[O~{\sc iii}]~$\lambda$4959/H$\beta$~$\ge$~0.2. These data are supplemented
by various samples of SFGs with reliably detected
[O~{\sc iii}] $\lambda$4363~$\AA$ emission lines in their spectra: a sample of
extremely low-metallicity SFGs with 12~+~logO/H~$\leq$~7.35
\citep[filled symbols in
Fig.~\ref{fig1}a; ][ and references therein]{H17,An19,I18}, a sample
of SFGs with highest O$_{32}$ =
[O~{\sc iii}]$\lambda$5007/[O~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$3727 ratios of
$\sim$ 20 -- 40 \citep[asterisks in
Fig.~\ref{fig1}a; ][ and references therein]{I17}, a sample of Lyman continuum
leaking galaxies with O$_{32}$ ratios in the range $\sim$ 5 -- 28
\citep[crosses in Fig.~\ref{fig1}a; ][ and references therein]{I18b}, and a
sample of SFGs used for the primordial He abundance determination
\citep[open circles in Fig.~\ref{fig1}a; ][ and references therein]{I2014b}.
We note that two encircled filled circles indicate the location
of star-forming regions 3 and 4 in SBS~0335$-$052W \citep{I09} with
undetected [O~{\sc iii}] $\lambda$4363~$\AA$ line. They are shown because of
their extremely low oxygen abundances, which are among the lowest known and considerably lower
than the luminosity-weighted oxygen abundance 7.12 of SBS~0335$-$052W
\citep{IT07}. The electron temperatures and
the oxygen abundances in these objects are derived by \citet{IT07} using the
semi-empirical method. However, we have not used them in our subsequent
fitting of relations for the abundance determination.
It is also worth to mention SFG~J0811$+$4730 because of showing the
lowest luminosity-weighted oxygen abundance 12~+~logO/H = 6.98$\pm$0.02
known so far \citep[filled star in Fig.~\ref{fig1}a; ][]{I18}.
\begin{figure*}
\hspace{0.0cm}\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=0.48\linewidth]{R23_O_TeII_DR14_1.ps}
\hspace{0.3cm}\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=0.48\linewidth]{OII_NII_DR14.ps}
\caption{{\bf a)} log(R$_{23}$ -- 0.08O$_{32}$) - $T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc ii})
relation for SFGs. {\bf b)} Relation between the extinction-corrected
[O~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$3727/H$\beta$ and [N~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$6584/H$\beta$
flux ratios. The solid line corresponds to [O~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$3727 =
20$\times$[N~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$6584.
Symbols in both panels are as in Fig. \ref{fig1}.}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure*}
It is important that the data include the objects with the highest O$_{32}$
which are indicators of a very high ionization parameter $U$ that is the
measure of the number of ionizing photons per one ion in the
H~{\sc ii} region. The use of these galaxies allows us to eliminate the
dependence of the calibration relation on $U$.
For the sake of comparison, we show in Fig.~\ref{fig1}a some simple calibration
relations produced in the past. Three of them, those by \citet{S89a},
\citet{P00} and \citet{Y07}, are linear. We note that these relations
reproduce the oxygen abundances reasonably well (within $\sim$ 0.2 dex)
of the extremely low-metallicity SFGs
with log R$_{23}$ $<$ 0.5 shown by filled symbols. On the other hand, SFGs with
highest O$_{32}$ at logR$_{23}$ $>$ 0.5 (asterisks and three SFGs shown by filled
circles) considerably deviate from both the SDSS SFGs and linear relations.
We note the relatively high scatter of filled symbols in the diagram which
we attribute to the ionization parameter varying in a large range.
To minimize the scatter caused by various ionization parameters we show in
Fig. \ref{fig1}b the relation log(R$_{23}$--0.08O$_{32}$) -- 12~+~logO/H.
The distributions of SFGs
in Fig. \ref{fig1}b show a much lower scatter than in Fig. \ref{fig1}a.
The data in Fig. \ref{fig1}b can be reproduced by the linear relation
\begin{equation}
12+\log\frac{\rm O}{\rm H} = 0.950\log({\rm R}_{23}-0.08{\rm O}_{32})+6.805, \label{eq:fit}
\end{equation}
shown by a solid line.
\begin{figure*}
\hspace{0.0cm}\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=0.48\linewidth]{differences2_1.ps}
\hspace{0.5cm}\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=0.48\linewidth]{differences3_1.ps}
\caption{{\bf a)} Distribution of differences between oxygen abundances
12 + logO/H derived by the semi-empirical and the direct methods for the sample
from Table \ref{tab2} excluding galaxies with non-detected
[O~{\sc iii}]~$\lambda$4363$\AA$ emission lines.
{\bf b)} As in {\bf a)} but for differences
between 12 + logO/H derived by our new strong-line and the direct methods.
{\bf c)} As in {\bf a)} but for differences
between 12 + logO/H derived by the strong-line and the semi-empirical methods
for all SFGs from Table \ref{tab2}. {\bf d)} As in {\bf c)} but for
differences between 12 + logO/H derived by the strong-line method and the
strong-line method by \citet{Y07}. {\bf e)} As in {\bf c)} but for
differences between 12 + logO/H derived by the strong-line method and the
P-method \citep[eq. 23 in ][]{PT05}. {\bf f)} As in {\bf c)} but for
differences between 12 + logO/H derived by the strong-line method and the
P-method \citep[Eq. 24 in ][]{PT05}.
In all panels, galaxies with observed and non-observed
[O~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$3727 emission line are shown by filled and
open circles, respectively. Solid horizontal lines indicate average abundance
differences
and dotted horizontal lines indicate $\pm$1$\sigma$ dispersions of the sample
around the average values.}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure*}
\section{Selection of candidates to the extremely low-metallicity SFGs in SDSS DR14}
\label{sec:XMD}
We applied Eq.~\ref{eq:fit} for selection of candidates to the extremely
low-metallicity SFGs with
12~+~logO/H~$<$~7.4. It is seen in Fig.~\ref{fig1}b that these low
metallicities correspond to (R$_{23}$ -- 0.08O$_{32}$) $\la$ 4. We also
adopted an upper limit of [N~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$6584/H$\beta$ $\leq$ 0.2 to
exclude the contamination of the sample from objects on the upper branch
of the logR$_{23}$ -- 12~+~logO/H relation, and put a low limit
[O~{\sc iii}]$\lambda$4959/H$\beta$ $\ga$ 0.2 to exclude the galaxies which
were not tested in Sect. \ref{sec:method} with the direct method because of
the very weak [O~{\sc iii}]$\lambda$4363~$\AA$ emission line.
The [O~{\sc ii}] $\lambda$3727~$\AA$, [O~{\sc iii}] $\lambda$4959~$\AA$, $\lambda$5007~$\AA$
emission line intensities are needed to derive 12 + logO/H by the strong-line
method discussed in Sect. \ref{sec:method}. However, most of SDSS
lowest-metallicity galaxies are at low redshifts. Therefore, the
[O~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$3727~$\AA$ emission line is outside the wavelength range
of $\sim$ 3800 -- 9200~$\AA$ in
spectra of galaxies with $z$ $\la$ 0.02 selected in DR9 and earlier releases,
precluding the determination of metallicity while spectra of DR10 and
later releases are obtained in a larger wavelength range of
$\sim$ 3600 -- 10300~$\AA$ including the rest-frame wavelength of
[O~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$3727~$\AA$ emission line. To avoid this difficulty
with spectra of DR9 and earlier releases some
prescriptions are needed to estimate the intensity of the
[O~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$3727~$\AA$
emission line from intensities of other lines.
In particular, \citet{I12} and \citet{G15,G17} used for that
[O~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$7320~$\AA$, $\lambda$7330~$\AA$ emission lines. However,
these lines are relatively weak or undetected
introducing large uncertainties.
Additionally, for galaxies at redshifts
$z$ $\sim$ 0.02 -- 0.03, their observed wavelengths are close to the wavelength
$\sim$ 7500~$\AA$ of strong telluric absorption. Keeping in mind these
caveats, we decide to use the
[O~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$7320~$\AA$, $\lambda$7330~$\AA$
emission lines if detected for the determination of the
[O~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$3727~$\AA$ emission line flux from the relation
\citep{A84,I06}
\begin{equation}
\log I({\rm [O~II]}\lambda 3727) = 0.961 + \frac{8110}{T_{\rm e}({\rm O~II})}+
\log I({\rm [O~II]}\lambda 7325), \label{I3727}
\end{equation}
where $I$([O~{\sc ii}] $\lambda$7325) =
$I$([O~{\sc ii}] $\lambda$7320) + $I$([O~{\sc ii}] $\lambda$7330)
and $T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc ii}) is the electron
temperature in the O$^+$ zone of the H~{\sc ii} region from where [O~{\sc ii}]
emission lines originate. Thus the electron temperature $T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc ii}) is
needed to derive $I$([O~{\sc ii}] $\lambda$3727) using Eq. \ref{I3727}.
\begin{figure}
\hspace{0.0cm}\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=0.96\linewidth]{R23_O32_O_poor_2log.ps}
\caption{Log(R$_{23}$ -- 0.08O$_{32}$) - (12 + logO/H) relation for
SFGs with 12~+~logO/H $\leq$ 7.4 from Table \ref{tab2}. The SFGs from the SDSS
with 12 +logO/H derived by our newly introduced direct method and by the
semi-empirical method are shown by open circles and open triangles, respectively.
Other symbols and the solid line are the same as in Fig. \ref{fig1}b.
Solid lines connect different observations of the same object.
Some extremely low-metallicity SFGs from the literature are labelled.}
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\hspace{0.0cm}\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=0.96\linewidth]{spectra1.ps}
\caption{SDSS spectra of the two lowest-metallicity galaxies represented
in Table \ref{tab2}. Insets in both panels show expanded segments of the spectra
for a better view of the [O~{\sc iii}] $\lambda$4363~$\AA$ emission lines.}
\label{fig5}
\end{figure}
There is no need to use Eq. \ref{I3727} if [O~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$3727~$\AA$ is observed.
If it is not observed but [O~{\sc iii}]~$\lambda$4363~$\AA$ is detected, then both
$T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc iii}) and $T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc ii}) can be derived.
The most complicated case for SDSS spectra of
low-metallicity galaxies is when both [O~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$3727~$\AA$
and [O~{\sc iii}]~$\lambda$4363~$\AA$ emission lines are not detected. Then some
estimates of the electron temperature $T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc ii}) are needed to use
the Eq. \ref{I3727}. To do that we consider the relation between
$T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc ii}) and log(R$_{23}$ -- 0.08O$_{32}$) for the galaxies with
spectra where the [O~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$3727~$\AA$ line is present and the
[O~{\sc iii}]~$\lambda$4363~$\AA$ line is detected with a relative error better than
25\%. This allowed us to derive both $T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc ii}) with good accuracy
and R$_{23}$ -- 0.08O$_{32}$. The relation is shown in Fig. \ref{fig2}a. It is
seen that $T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc ii}) at high R$_{23}$ -- 0.08O$_{32}$ varies in a
wide range, but it is nearly constant with the value of $\sim$ 15500~K at lower
R$_{23}$ -- 0.08O$_{32}$. This constancy is due to the fact that
$T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc iii}) at low R$_{23}$ -- 0.08O$_{32}$ asymptotically approaches
the value $\sim$ 22000~K. It is also worth to note that {\sc cloudy}
photoionization
models of hottest H~{\sc ii} regions predict $T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc iii}) and
$T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc ii}) of $\sim$ 22000~K -- 24000~K and $\sim$ 15500~K,
respectively \citep{F98,F13}.
We adopt the value $T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc ii}) = 15500~K for the determination of
$I$([O~{\sc ii}] $\lambda$3727) in the lowest-metallicity
galaxy candidates for which the condition R$_{23}$ -- 0.08O$_{32}$ $<$ 5
is satisfied corresponding to 12~+~logO/H~$\la$~7.5.
We used the extinction-corrected
[N~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$6584 emission line to estimate the
[O~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$3727 emission-line flux for objects with undetected
[O~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$7325 emission in their spectra. To find the relation
between [N~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$6584 and [O~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$3727 fluxes we
show in Fig. \ref{fig2}b the diagram [N~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$6584/H$\beta$ --
[O~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$3727/H$\beta$ for SDSS DR14 SFG spectra with detected
[N~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$6584 and [O~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$3727 lines. We see
that
\begin{equation}
[{\rm OII}]\lambda3727 = 20\times[{\rm NII}]\lambda6584 \label{eq:NII}
\end{equation}
at low
[N~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$6584/H$\beta$ $\leq$ 0.1. The determination of the
[O~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$3727 flux for higher [N~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$6584/H$\beta$
is subject to much larger uncertainties and the use of Eq. \ref{eq:NII}
would in general result in overestimation of the [O~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$3727 flux
and correspondingly in overestimation of the oxygen abundance.
We applied this relation for selection of extremely low-metallicity candidates
keeping in mind that the oxygen abundance in selected SFGs with
[N~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$6584/H$\beta$ = 0.1 -- 0.2 might be overestimated.
Nevertheless, additional spectroscopic observations of selected
galaxies including the [O~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$3727~$\AA$ emission line are
needed to verify and improve our indirect determination of its flux.
Three methods are used to derive the oxygen abundances. First is the direct
method using prescriptions by \citet{I06}.
A two-zone photoionised H~{\sc ii} region model was adopted: a high-ionisation
zone with temperature $T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc iii}), where [O~{\sc iii}] lines
originate, and a low-ionisation zone with temperature $T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc ii}),
where the [O~{\sc ii}] lines originate. For $T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc ii}),
the relation between the electron temperatures $T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc iii}) and
$T_{\rm e}$(O~{\sc ii}) from \citet{I06} is used.
Ionic and total oxygen abundances are derived
using expressions for oxygen ionic abundances by \citet{I06}.
The second, semi-empirical method proposed by \citet{IT07} is based on
the determination of the electron temperature from the strong oxygen
emission lines in the galaxies with undetected [O~{\sc iii}]~$\lambda$4363~$\AA$
emission line, while ionic and total oxygen abundances are derived in the way
used by the direct method.
Finally, the third method is the strong-line method (Eq. \ref{eq:fit}) developed
in this paper. This simplest method is purely empirical and does not
require determination of physical conditions in the H~{\sc ii} region, at
variance with the two other methods.
We selected 66 extremely low-metallicity SFGs in the entire SDSS
spectroscopic data base for which at least one of the
three values of 12~+~logO/H derived by each of three methods is less than 7.4.
The list of these SFGs is shown in Table~\ref{tab1} and oxygen abundances
derived by all three methods
to check their mutual consistency are presented in
Table~\ref{tab2}. The Tables also include coordinates, redshifts, line
intensities, equivalent widths of the H$\beta$ emission line,
and integrated characteristics, such as SDSS absolute magnitudes
$M_g$ in the $g$-band and stellar masses $M_\star$ derived from the fitting
of SDSS spectra. The selected galaxies are located mainly at very low
redshifts, have faint absolute magnitudes and low stellar masses,
characterising them as dwarf star-forming galaxies. The
[O~{\sc iii}]~$\lambda$4363~$\AA$ emission line is detected in most selected galaxies
allowing the 12 + logO/H determination by the direct method.
A notable feature
is that all three methods give consistent results with a dispersion
less than 0.1 dex in most cases (Table~\ref{tab2}).
In Fig. \ref{fig3} we compare oxygen abundances derived by our strong-line
method with those derived by the direct, semi-empirical, and some other
strong-line methods in the literature. The agreement between 12+logO/H derived
with the direct method that derived with our newly developed strong-line
metnod is somewhat better than that derived with the semi-empirical method.
This is more clearly seen in Figs. \ref{fig3}a and \ref{fig3}b, in which we show
only galaxies with detected [O~{\sc iii}]~$\lambda$4363~$\AA$ emission line.
On average, the oxygen abundances derived by the strong-line and semi-empirical
methods are respectively by $\sim$ 0.04 dex and $\sim$ 0.08 dex higher than
those derived by the direct method.
In Fig.~\ref{fig3}c we compare oxygen abundances derived by the strong-line
and the semi-empirical methods which on average are consistent within
$\sim$ 0.05 dex.
The strong-line method developed
in this paper and semi-empirical method are likely more preferable
compared to the direct method for galaxies with weak
[O~{\sc iii}]~$\lambda$4363~$\AA$ emission, detected
with poor signal-to-noise ratio.
In Fig.~\ref{fig3}d -- \ref{fig3}f we compare our strong-line method with
some previously proposed strong-line methods from the literature.
\citet{Y07} presented a simple
relation between 12~+~logO/H and R$_{23}$ which on average gives oxygen
abundances consistent with our strong-line method (Fig.~\ref{fig3}d).
However, at lowest 12~+~logO/H $\la$ 7.1, the relation by \citet{Y07}
predicts oxygen abundances by as much as $\sim$ 0.2 higher than those
obtained with our strong-line method. \citet{PT05} develop their
strong-line method by introducing the parameter
P = [O~{\sc iii}]$\lambda$5007/([O~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$3727 +
[O~{\sc iii}]$\lambda$5007) which takes into account the dependence on
the ionization parameter. They present two relations for their method which
we compare in Figs.~\ref{fig3}e and \ref{fig3}f with our strong-line method.
Two features of this comparison are worth to note: 1) a larger dispersion of
objects compared to that in Fig.~\ref{fig3}c and 2) a systematic offset of
average values of $\Delta$(12~+~logO/H) from the zero value indicating that
the two modifications of the P-method give systematically higher 12~+~logO/H,
by $\sim$ 0.02 (Fig.~\ref{fig3}e) and by $\sim$ 0.10 (Fig.~\ref{fig3}f).
Finally, we note that there is no difference between the galaxies
with observed and non-observed [O~{\sc ii}] $\lambda$3727 emission line
in all panels of Fig.~\ref{fig3} (filled and open circles, respectively)
implying reliability of calculated intensities of this line.
From the above comparison we conclude that our simple strong-line method
is likely the most reliable for the oxygen abundance determination of extremely
low-metallicity galaxies.
\begin{figure*}
\hspace{0.0cm}\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=0.48\linewidth]{diagnDR12_O2O3_DR14.ps}
\hspace{0.2cm}\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=0.48\linewidth]{oiii_oii_c2_DR14_3.ps}
\caption{{\bf a)} Diagnostic diagram [O~{\sc iii}] $\lambda$5007/H$\beta$ -
[O~{\sc ii}] $\lambda$3727/H$\beta$. Open circles and open triangles are the
extremely low-metallicity SFG candidates selected in this paper with oxygen
abundances derived by the direct and semi-empirical methods, respectively.
Other symbols are the same as in
Fig. \ref{fig1}. The shaded region indicates the location of the extremely
low-metallicity SFGs with 12 + logO/H in the range 6.62 -- 7.39. Dotted
and dashed lines are the lines of constant O$_{32}$ and of constant
R$_{23}$ -- 0.08O$_{32}$ (or constant 12 + log O/H), respectively, labelled with their values. The values
R$_{23}$ -- 0.08O$_{32}$ = 0.75, 1.5, 2.5, and 3.75 correspond to oxygen
abundances 12~+~log~O/H = 6.69, 6.97, 7.18, and 7.35, respectively.
{\bf b)} The diagram O$_{32}$ -- R$_{23}$. Symbols, lines, labels
and shaded region follow the definitions provided for {\bf a)}.}
\label{fig6}
\end{figure*}
The lowest-metallicity segment of the log(R$_{23}$--0.08$\times$O$_{32}$) --
12~+~logO/H relation with 66 selected extremely low-metallicity SDSS SFGs (open
circles and open triangles)
and some well-studied galaxies from the literature (filled symbols) is shown
in Fig. \ref{fig4}. Some well-known, extremely low-metallicity SFGs are labelled in the figure.
The oxygen abundances for all galaxies shown in the Figure are derived by 1) the direct method if the [O~{\sc iii}]~$\lambda$4363~$\AA$ emission line is
detected (open circles) or by the 2) semi-empirical method otherwise (open
triangles) while the relation for
the strong-line method determined by Eq. \ref{eq:fit} is shown by the solid
line. Thirty six SDSS galaxies shown in
Table \ref{tab2} were previously recovered by our team
\citep[e.g. ][]{G15,G17,IT07,I12,I18}. Three objects, I Zw 18SE, I Zw 18NW, and
J0811$+$4730, are presented in both the SDSS and comparison samples and
connected by solid red lines.
It is seen in Fig. \ref{fig4} that selected SDSS galaxies (open circles
and open triangles) are evenly distributed around the solid line implying that
our newly proposed strong-line method
(Eq. \ref{eq:fit}) reasonably well reproduces galaxy metallicities. A considerable number of SFGs have 12~+~logO/H lower than in the
prototypical galaxy I~Zw~18. Two of these galaxies, J0811$+$4730
(see also Sect. \ref{sec:method}) and
J1234$+$3901 are very close to or below
the luminosity-weighted value 12~+~logO/H = 7.0, representing the
lowest-metallicity galaxies known so far. In fact, using
Large Binocular Telescope observations that have high signal-to-noise ratio
\citet{I18} have confirmed
that J0811$+$4730 has the lowest luminosity-weighted metallicity among all
low-redshift SFGs with $z$ $\la$ 0.1 \citep{I18}.
We note that metallicities in regions 3 and 4 of the galaxy
SBS~0335$-$052W are even lower \citep{I09}. However, the
[O~{\sc iii}]~$\lambda$4363~$\AA$
emission line is not detected in spectra of these regions and their oxygen
abundances are derived by the semi-empirical method. Furthermore, two other
brighter regions 2 and 1 of SBS~0335$-$052W have higher oxygen abundances
(Fig.~\ref{fig4}) indicating an abundance gradient in this galaxy. This gradient
results in a higher luminosity-weighted oxygen abundance of 7.12 averaged over
the entire galaxy SBS~0335$-$052W. \citet{An19} reported the very low oxygen
abundance 12~+~logO/H~=~6.96$\pm$0.09 in the H~{\sc ii} region \#7 of DDO~68
derived by the direct method. However, the oxygen abundance in this region
is derived with low accuracy and needs to be confirmed with higher precision.
Furthermore, oxygen abundances in other H~{\sc ii} regions of DDO~68 are
considerably higher than in the region \#7 \citep{P05,IT07,IT09}.
We note that spectra of all these regions are not present in the SDSS data base.
One of the lowest-metallicity SFGs among
selected SDSS galaxies is J1234$+$3901. A single high-excitation H~{\sc ii}
region is observed in this galaxy with an oxygen
abundance of 6.98 and 7.03 derived by the strong and direct methods,
respectively.
The SDSS spectra of this galaxy and another lowest-metallicity galaxy
J0811$+$4730 from Table \ref{tab2} are shown in Fig. \ref{fig5}. The
[O~{\sc iii}]~$\lambda$4363~$\AA$ emission line is clearly detected in both
spectra allowing the oxygen abundance determination by the direct method.
The galaxy J1234$+$3901 at the redshift of 0.1330 is one of the
most distant and luminous galaxies in Table \ref{tab2}. Additional observations
with higher signal-to-noise ratio are needed to confirm the extremely low
metallicity of this galaxy.
\section{Diagnostic diagrams} \label{diagn}
\citet{I12,I18} and \citet{G17} proposed to use the
Baldwin, Phillips and Terlevich (BPT) \citep{BPT81} diagnostic diagram
[O~{\sc iii}]$\lambda$5007/H$\beta$ vs. [N~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$6584/H$\alpha$
for the selection of the extremely low-metallicity SFGs. They have shown
that these galaxies are located in the lower-left corner of the diagram far from
the main sequence of SFGs in the region defined by relations
[O~{\sc iii}]$\lambda$5007/H$\beta$ $<$ 4 and
[N~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$6584/H$\alpha$ $<$ 0.03 corresponding to
[N~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$6584/H$\beta$ $<$ 0.1. However, the use of this diagram
is limited because of the weakness of the [N~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$6584~$\AA$
emission line. In many galaxies this line is not detected.
Alternatively, the diagram
[O~{\sc iii}]$\lambda$5007/H$\beta$ vs. [O~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$3727/H$\beta$
can be used as the [O~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$3727~$\AA$
emission line in galaxies with low metallicities is approximately 20 times
brighter than the [N~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$6584~$\AA$ emission line.
We note that the [O~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$3727/H$\beta$ ratio is sensitive
to dust extinction. However, in low-metallicity galaxies the internal
extinction is low. It is derived from the Balmer hydrogen decrement after
correction of emission line intensities for the Milky Way extinction. Both
extinctions are applied to obtain extinction-corrected line
intensities in the [O~{\sc iii}]$\lambda$5007/H$\beta$ --
[O~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$3727/H$\beta$ diagram.
We show this diagram in Fig. \ref{fig6}a.
The shaded region indicates the
location of lowest-metallicity galaxies with 12 + logO/H $\leq$ 7.35. Dashed
lines indicate the lines of equal R$_{23}$ -- 0.08O$_{32}$ corresponding to
equal metallicities according to Eq. \ref{eq:fit}.
The SFGs selected in this paper and shown in Table \ref{tab2} are
represented in the Figure by open circles and open triangles and are located in
the shaded region.
The range of [O~{\sc ii}] $\lambda$3727/H$\beta$ $<$ 2 is somewhat larger than
$\la$ 1 tested by galaxies with 12 + logO/H derived by the direct method (filled
symbols in Fig. \ref{fig6}a). Therefore,
metallicities in galaxies with [O~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$3727/H$\beta$ = 1 -- 2
need to be confirmed with the direct method.
Additionally, for selection of extremely low-metallicity galaxies, the
O$_{32}$ -- R$_{23}$
diagram can be used, as proposed by \citet{I18}. This diagram for selected SDSS
galaxies (open circles and open triangles) and galaxies from the comparison sample (filled symbols)
is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig6}b. Similar to the diagram in Fig.~\ref{fig6}a these
galaxies are located far from the main-sequence SFGs (grey dots).
We note a wide range of O$_{32}$ with the highest values reaching values up to
$\sim$ 15. However, most of the extremely low-metallicity SFGs have O$_{32}$ $<$3.
The shaded region corresponds to that in Fig.~\ref{fig6}a. It indicates
the location of extremely low-metallicity SFGs with 12 + logO/H $\leq$ 7.35.
\section{Conclusions \label{S4}}
We present results of a search for the extremely low-metallicity star-forming
galaxies (SFGs) from the Data Release 14 of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey
(SDSS DR14).
Our main results are as follows.
1. A new, simple, purely empirical strong-line method based on the
[O~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$3727~$\AA$ and [O~{\sc iii}]~$\lambda$4959~$\AA$, $\lambda$5007~$\AA$
emission lines is developed for the oxygen abundance determination at low
metallicities and to search for such extremely low-metallicity galaxies.
This method is a modification of the well-known
R$_{23}$ method and takes into account the dependence of oxygen emission-line
fluxes not only on the metallicity but also on the ionization parameter
in the H~{\sc ii} region. We adopt that the
O$_{32}$ = [O~{\sc iii}]$\lambda$5007/[O~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$3727 emission-line
ratio serves as a measure of the ionization parameter.
This method was calibrated using observations with high signal-to-noise ratios
(S/N)
of a large sample of SDSS galaxies with detected
[O~{\sc iii}]~$\lambda$4363~$\AA$
emission applying the direct method in combination with other samples
of SFGs with reliably derived oxygen abundances via the direct method.
2. Several selection criteria were applied to build a sample of the extremely
low-metallicity SFGs. First, the SDSS galaxies were preselected using
a criterion [N~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$6584/H$\beta$ $\leq$0.2. This allows
us to exclude high-metallicity objects located on the upper branch of the
R$_{23}$ -- 12~+~logO/H diagram. Then, all SFGs with
[O~{\sc iii}]$\lambda$4959/H$\beta$ $\leq$ 0.2 were excluded because
the [O~{\sc iii}]~$\lambda$4363~$\AA$ emission line was not detected in these
SFGs and thus their abundances derived by the strong method were
not tested by the direct method. Finally, the remaining SFGs satisfying
condition R$_{23}$ -- 0.08O$_{32}$ $\la$ 4, corresponding to
12~+~logO/H~$<$~7.4, were included in the final list of candidates to the
lowest-metallicity SFGs.
3. We selected 66 emission-line galaxies with 12~+~logO/H~$\leq$~7.35 in the
entire SDSS DR14 using a new strong-line method. Some selected galaxies
have 12~+~logO/H as low as 7.0 and therefore belong to the lowest-metallicity
SFGs known so far. Results of the metallicity determination by the
new strong-line method are compared with those derived by a semi-empirical
method \citep{IT07}, by a direct method, and by some strong-line methods
from the literature. We find a good agreement
between 12~+~logO/H derived by all three first methods with deviations less than
0.1 dex, on average. The agreement with some methods selected from the
literature is not as good. However, the SDSS spectra of many selected SFGs
have relatively low S/N. Furthermore, in 61 percent of SFGs the
[O~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$3727~$\AA$ emission line is outside the wavelength range of
SDSS spectra because of their low redshifts $z$ $\la$ 0.02. Therefore, its
fluxes were estimated from the fluxes of weak
[O~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$7320~$\AA$, 7330~$\AA$ or [N~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$6584~$\AA$
emission lines. We conclude that new observations with higher S/N and including
[O~{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$3727~$\AA$ emission
line are needed to confirm the low metallicity of these selected galaxies.
4. We propose the use of two diagnostic diagrams,
[O~{\sc iii}]$\lambda$5007/H$\beta$ --
[O~{\sc ii}]$\lambda$3727/H$\beta$ and O$_{32}$ -- (R$_{23}$ -- 0.08O$_{32}$)
for the selection of the extremely low-metallicity SFGs.
\acknowledgements
Y.I.I. and N.G.G. thank the hospitality of the Max-Planck
Institute for Radioastronomy, Bonn, Germany.
They acknowledge support from the
Program of Fundamental
Research of the Department of Physics and Astronomy (Project
No. 0117U000240) of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine.
Funding for the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) has been provided by the
Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Participating Institutions, the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Science Foundation,
the U.S. Department of Energy, the Japanese Monbukagakusho, and the Max Planck
Society. The SDSS Web site is http://www.sdss.org/.
The SDSS is managed by the Astrophysical Research Consortium (ARC) for the
Participating Institutions. The Participating Institutions are The University
of Chicago, Fermilab, the Institute for Advanced Study, the Japan Participation
Group, The Johns Hopkins University, Los Alamos National Laboratory, the
Max-Planck-Institute for Astronomy (MPIA), the Max-Planck-Institute for
Astrophysics (MPA), New Mexico State University, University of Pittsburgh,
Princeton University, the United States Naval Observatory, and the University
of Washington.
|
\section{Introduction}
\subsection{State-space models, problem statement and review}
Let $t$ denote a discrete-time index. State-space models are defined
by a latent Markov process $(X_{t})_{t\ge1}$ and observation process
$(Y_{t})_{t\ge1}$, $(X_{t},Y_{t})$ taking values in a measurable
space $(\mathsf{X}\times\mathsf{Y},\mathcal{B}(\mathsf{X})\otimes\mathcal{B}(\mathsf{Y}))$
and satisfying
\[
X_{t+1}|\{X_{t}=x\}\sim f(\cdot|x),\enskip Y_{t}|\{X_{t}=x\}\sim g(\cdot|x),\enskip
\]
for $t\ge1$ with $X_{1}\sim\mu(\cdot)$. In the following we assume that $\mathsf{X}\subseteq\mathbb{R}^{d_{x}}$
and $\mathsf{Y}\subseteq\mathbb{R}^{d_{y}}$,
and use $f(\cdot|x)$, $g(\cdot|x)$ and $\mu(\cdot)$ to denote densities
with respect to the corresponding Lebesgue measure. State inference
given a realization of the observations $Y_{1:T}=y_{1:T}$ for some
fixed $T\in\mathbb{N}$ requires the posterior density
\begin{align*}
\pi\left(x_{1:T}\right):=p(x_{1:T}|y_{1:T})\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\\
\propto\mu(x_{1})g(y_{1}|x_{1})\prod_{t=2}^{T}f(x_{t}|x_{t-1})g(y_{t}|x_{t}),
\end{align*}
and expectations w.r.t. to this density. This is known as smoothing in the literature. For non-linear non-Gaussian state-space models,
this problem is complex as this posterior and its normalizing constant
$p(y_{1:T})$, often called somewhat abusively likelihood,
are intractable. We provide here a means to obtain unbiased
estimators of $\pi(h):=\int h(x_{1:T})\pi(x_{1:T})\mathrm{d}x_{1:T}$ for some function $h:\mathsf{X}^{T}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$.
Particle methods return asymptotically consistent estimators which
are however biased for a finite number of particles. Similarly MCMC
kernels, such as the iterated Conditional Particle Filter (i-CPF)
and PIMH \cite{andrieu2010particle}, can be used for approximating
smoothing expectations consistently but are also biased for a finite
number of iterations. Additionally, although theoretical bounds on
the bias are available for particle \cite{delmoral2007bias}, PIMH \cite{andrieu2010particle} and
i-CPF \cite{chopin2015particle,andrieu2018uniform,lee2018coupled} estimators, these bounds are usually not sharp and/or rely on strong mixing assumptions which are not satisfied by most realistic models. Unbiased
estimators of $\pi(h)$ computed on parallel machines can be combined
into asymptotically valid confidence intervals
as either the number of machines, the time budget, or both go to infinity \cite{Glynn1991}.
Recently, it has been shown in \cite{jacob2017smoothing,lee2018coupled}
that it is possible to obtain such unbiased estimators by combining
the i-CPF algorithm with a debiasing scheme for MCMC algorithms proposed
initially in \cite{glynn2014exact} and further developed in \cite{jacob2017unbiased}.
These unbiased smoothing schemes couple two i-CPF kernels using common
random numbers and a coupled resampling scheme. After a brief review
of particle methods and of PIMH, we propose in Section \ref{sec:Methodology}
an alternative methodology relying on coupling two PIMH kernels.
The method is easily implementable as it does not require any modification of the
PF algorithm.
It can also
be used in scenarios where simulation from the Markov transition
kernel of the latent process involves a random number of random variables,
whereas the
methods proposed in \cite{jacob2017smoothing,lee2018coupled} would not be directly applicable to these settings. Additionally it
does not require being able to evaluate pointwise the transition density contrary to the coupled conditional backward sampling PF scheme of \cite{lee2018coupled}. Section \ref{sec:guidelines}
presents an analysis of the methodology when $T$ is large. In Section \ref{sec:Numerical-experiments}, the method
is demonstrated on a L\'evy-driven stochastic volatility
model and a stochastic kinetic model.\footnote{Code to reproduce figures is provided at \url{https://github.com/lolmid/coupled_pimh}}
\subsection{Particle methods}
Particle methods are often used to approximate smoothing expectations \cite{doucet2009tutorial,kantas2015particle}.
Such methods rely on sampling, weighting and resampling a set of $N$
weighted particles $(X_{t}^{i},W_{t}^{i})$, where $X_{t}^{i}\in\mathsf{X}$
denotes the value of the $i^{th}$ particle at iteration $t$ and
$W_{t}^{i}$ its corresponding normalized weight, i.e. $\sum_{i=1}^{N}W_{t}^{i}=1$.
Letting $q_{1}(x_{1})$, $q_{t}(x_{t}|x_{t-1})$, denote the proposal
density at time $t=1$ and at time $t\geq2$ respectively, weighting
occurs according to the following `incremental weights':
\begin{align*}
w_{1}(x_{1})&:=\frac{g(y_{1}|x_{1})\mu(x_{1})}{q_{1}(x_{1})}\quad\text{for}\quad t=1,\\
w_{t}(x_{t-1},x_{t})&:=\frac{g(y_{t}|x_{t})f(x_{t}|x_{t-1})}{q_{t}(x_{t}|x_{t-1})}\quad\text{for}\quad t\geq 2.
\end{align*}
We assume that $w_{1}(x_{1})>0$ and $w_{t}(x_{t-1},x_{t})>0$ for $t=2,...,T$ and all $x_{1:T}$. Pseudo-code for a standard PF is presented in Algorithm
\ref{alg:pf} where we let $r(\cdot|\mathbf{W}_{t})$, with $\mathbf{W}_{t}:=\left(W_{t}^{1},...,W_{t}^{N}\right)$, denote the resampling distribution, a probability distribution on
$[N]^{N}$ where $[N]:=\{1,...,N\}$. We say that a resampling scheme is unbiased if $\sum_{i=1}^{N}r(A_{t}^{i}=k|\mathbf{W}_{t})=NW_t^{k}$.
All standard resampling schemes -multinomial, residual and systematic- are unbiased \cite{doucet2009tutorial}.
This PF procedure outputs an approximation $p_{N}(y_{1:T})$ of $p(y_{1:T})$ and an approximation
$\pi_{N}(\mathrm{d}x_{1:T})$ of the smoothing distribution $\pi(\mathrm{d}x_{1:T})$.
Under weak assumptions, it can be shown that $p_{N}(y_{1:T})$,
resp. $\pi_{N}(h):=\sum_{i=1}^{N}W_{T}^{i}h\left(X_{1:T}^{i}\right)$,
is an asymptotically consistent (in $N$) estimator of $p(y_{1:T})$,
resp. of $\pi(h)$. However, whereas $p_{N}(y_{1:T})$ is unbiased
(\cite{Del_Moral_2004}, Section 7.4.1), $\pi_{N}(h)$ admits an asymptotic bias
of order $C/N$ for a constant $C$ which is typically impossible
to evaluate and for which only loose bounds are available under realistic
assumptions \cite{delmoral2007bias}. In the following by a call to
the PF, $(X_{1:T},p_{N})\sim\text{PF}$, we mean
a procedure which runs Algorithm \ref{alg:pf} and returns $p_{N}:=p_{N}(y_{1:T})$
(dependence on observations is notationally omitted) and a sample
from the approximate smoothing distribution $X_{1:T}\sim\pi_{N}\left(\cdot\right)$, i.e. output $X_{1:T}^i$ with probability $W_T^i$.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Particle Filter\label{alg:pf}}
\textsf{For $i\in[N]$, sample }$X_{1}^{i}\stackrel{i.i.d.}{\sim}q_{1}(\cdot)$\textsf{,
compute weights $W_{1}^{i}\propto w_{1}(X_{1}^{i})$ and set ${p}_{N}(y_{1})=\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^{N}w_{1}(X_{1}^{i})$.}
\textsf{For $2\le t\le T$:}
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textsf{Sample particle ancestors $A_{t-1}^{1:N}\sim r(\cdot|\mathbf{W}_{t-1})$.}
\item \textsf{For $i\in[N]$, sample $X_{t}^{i}\sim q_{t}(\cdot|X_{t-1}^{A_{t-1}^{i}})$
and set $X_{1:t}^{i}=\{X_{1:t-1}^{A_{t-1}^{i}}, X_{t}^{i}\}$.}
\item \textsf{Compute weights $W_{t}^{i}\propto w_{t}(X_{t-1}^{A_{t-1}^{i}},X_{t}^{i})$
and set $p_{N}(y_{1:t})=p_{N}(y_{1:t-1})\cdot\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^{N}w_{t}(X_{t-1}^{A_{t-1}^{i}},X_{t}^{i})$.}
\end{enumerate}
\textsf{Output $\pi_{N}(\mathrm{d}x_{1:T}):=\sum_{i=1}^{N}W_{T}^{i}\delta_{X_{1:T}^{i}}(\mathrm{d}x_{1:T})$
and $p_{N}(y_{1:T})$.}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{PIMH method}
An alternative way to estimate $\pi(h)$ consists of using an MCMC scheme targeting $\pi$. The PIMH algorithm achieves this by building a Markov chain on an extended space admitting a stationary distribution $\bar{\pi}$ with marginal $\pi$ using the PF described in Algorithm \ref{alg:pf}
as proposal distribution \cite{andrieu2010particle}. Algorithm \ref{alg:pimh} provides pseudo-code
for sampling the PIMH kernel, where $(X_{1:T}^{(n)},p_{N}^{(n)})$
denotes the current state of this Markov chain and $a\wedge b$ means $\min(a,b)$.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{PIMH kernel $P((X_{1:T}^{(n)},p_{N}^{(n)}),(\cdot,\cdot))$\label{alg:pimh}}
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textsf{Sample $(X_{1:T}^{*},p_{N}^{*})\sim\text{PF}$. }
\item \textsf{Set $(X_{1:T}^{(n+1)},p_{N}^{(n+1)})=(X_{1:T}^{*},p_{N}^{*})$
with probability }$\alpha(p_{N}^{(n)},p_{N}^{*}):=1\wedge\frac{p_{N}^{*}}{p_{N}^{(n)}}.$
\item \textsf{Otherwise set $(X_{1:T}^{(n+1)},p_{N}^{(n+1)})=(X_{1:T}^{(n)},p_{N}^{(n)}).$}
\end{enumerate}
\end{algorithm}
Validity and convergence properties of PIMH rely on viewing
it as an Independent Metropolis--Hastings (IMH) sampler on an extended space. For ease of presentation, we detail this construction for an unbiased resampling scheme satisfying additionally $r(A_t^{i}=k|\mathbf{W}_{t})=W_{t}^{k}$ for all $i,k\in[N]$. The PF of Algorithm \ref{alg:pf}
implicitly defines a distribution $\psi$ over $N\times T$ particle
coordinates and $N\times(T-1)$ ancestors. We use $\zeta$ to denote
a sample from $\psi$, where $\zeta\in\mathcal{X}:=\mathsf{X}^{NT}\times\{1,...,N\}^{N(T-1)}$,
and the density of $\psi$ is given by
\[
\psi(\zeta)=\left(\prod_{i=1}^{N}q_{1}(x_{1}^{i})\right)\prod_{t=2}^{T}\left(r(a_{t-1}^{1:N}|\mathbf{w}_{t-1})\prod_{i=1}^{N}q(x_{t}^{i}|x_{t-1}^{a_{t-1}^{i}})\right).
\]
We let $b_{t}^{j}$ denote the index of the ancestor particle of $x_{1:T}^{j}$
at generation $t$, which may be obtained deterministically from the
ancestry, using $b_{t}^{j}=a_{t}^{b_{t+1}^{j}}$ with
$b_{T}^{j}=j$. From \cite{andrieu2010particle}, for $(j,\zeta)\in\{1,...,N\}\times\mathcal{X}$,
we express the target $\bar{\pi}(j,\zeta)$ of the resulting IMH sampler
as
\begin{align*}
\bar{\pi}(j,\zeta) & =\frac{\pi(x_{1:T}^{j})}{N^{T}}\frac{\psi(\zeta)}{q_{1}(x_{1}^{b_{1}^{j}})\prod_{t=2}^{T}r(b_{t-1}^{j}|\mathbf{w}_{t-1})q_{t}(x_{t}^{b_{t}^{j}}|x_{t-1}^{b_{t-1}^{j}})}
\end{align*}
Running a PF and sampling from $\pi_{N}$ corresponds to sampling from the proposal $\bar{q}(j,\zeta)=\psi(\zeta)W_{T}^{j}$
and \cite[Theorem 2]{andrieu2010particle} shows that $\bar{\pi}(j,\zeta)/\bar{q}(j,\zeta)=p_{N}(y_{1:T})/p(y_{1:T})$
where for a given $(j,\zeta)$ we understand $p_{N}(y_{1:T})$
as a deterministic map from $\{1,...,N\}\times\mathcal{X}$ to $\mathbb{R}^{+}$.
As a result, samples from $\bar{\pi}$ can be obtained asymptotically
through accepting proposals with probability $\alpha(p_{N}^{(n)},p_{N}^{*})$.
We can thus estimate $\pi(h)$ by averaging over iterations $h(X_{1:T}^{n})$.
As shown in \cite[Theorem 6]{andrieu2010particle},
we can also estimate $\pi(h)$ by averaging over iterations $\pi_{N}^{(n)}(h)=\sum_{i=1}^{N}W_{T}^{i,n}h (X_{1:T}^{i,n})$, hence reusing all the particle
system used to generate the \emph{accepted }proposal
at iteration $n$ as $\bar{\pi}(\pi_{N}(h))=\pi(h)$.
As such, although Algorithms \ref{alg:pimh} and \ref{alg:couplepimh}
are stated in terms of proposing and accepting
$(X_{1:T},p_{N})$, it is possible to consider them instead as proposing
and accepting $(J,\zeta)$. In \cite{leemurrayjohansen2019}, it is shown that $r(A_t^{i}=k|\mathbf{W}_{t})=W_{t}^{k}$ is unnecessary. We only need to use an unbiased resampling scheme to obtain a valid PIMH scheme. This is achieved by defining an alternative target $\bar{\pi}$ on $\{1,...,N\}\times\mathcal{X}$ such that $X_{1:T}^{J}\sim \pi$ under $\bar{\pi}$ and $\bar{\pi}(j,\zeta)/\bar{q}(j,\zeta)=p_{N}(y_{1:T})/p(y_{1:T})$ also hold. It is also established in \cite{leemurrayjohansen2019} that one can even used adaptive resampling procedures \cite{doucet2009tutorial,del2012adaptive}.
If we denote by $Z$ the error of the log-likelihood estimator, i.e.
$Z:=\log\{p_{N}(y_{1:T})/p(y_{1:T})\}$, the PIMH algorithm induces
a Markov chain with transition kernel $Q(z,\mathrm{d}z')$ given by
\begin{equation}
\left\{1\wedge\exp(z'-z)\right\} g(\mathrm{d}z')+\left\{ 1-\alpha(z)\right\} \delta_{z}(\mathrm{d}z'),\label{eq:PforZ}
\end{equation}
where $g(\mathrm{d}z)$ is the distribution of $Z$ under the law of the particle
filter and $\alpha(z):=\int\left\{ 1\wedge\exp(z'-z)\right\} g(\mathrm{d}z')$
is the average acceptance probability from state $z$. Although not
emphasized notationally, both $g(z)$ and $\alpha(z)$ are functions
of $N$. Through an abuse of notation, we denote the invariant density
of the above chain with $\pi(z)=g\left(z\right)\exp\left(z\right)$.
Such a reparameterization has also been used in previous work to analyze
the PIMH and the related particle marginal MH algorithm \cite{pitt2012some,doucet2015biometrika}.
\section{Methodology\label{sec:Methodology}}
\subsection{Unbiased MCMC via couplings}\label{sec:couplingMCMC}
`Exact estimation' methods provide unbiased estimators
of expectations with respect to the stationary distribution of a Markov
chain using coupling techniques \cite{glynn2014exact,jacob2017unbiased}. In the following
we use these tools to couple PIMH kernels and estimate smoothing expectations,
after briefly reviewing the general approach.
Consider two $\mathsf{U}-$valued
Markov chains, $U:=(U^{(n)})_{n\ge0}$ and $\tilde{U}:=(\tilde{U}^{(n)})_{n\ge0}$,
each evolving marginally according to a kernel $K(u,\mathrm{d}u')$ with stationary
distribution $\lambda$ and initialized from $\eta$ so that $U^{(n)}\stackrel{d}{=}\tilde{U}^{(n)}$
for all $n\geq1$, where $\stackrel{d}{=}$ denotes equality in distribution.
We couple these two chains so that $U^{(n)}=\tilde{U}^{(n-1)}$
for $n\ge\tau$, where $\tau$ is an almost surely finite meeting
time. In this case, we see that for non-negative integers $k<t$ we
have the following telescoping-sum decomposition
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{E}[h(U^{(t)})] =&\mathbb{E}[h(U^{(k)})+\sum_{l=k+1}^{t}(h(U^{(l)})-h(U^{(l-1)}))] \\
=&\mathbb{E} [h(U^{(k)})+\sum_{l=k+1}^{t\land(\tau-1)} (h(U^{(l)})-h(\tilde{U}^{(l-1)}))].
\end{align*}
As a result, under integrability conditions which will be made precise
in the sequel, taking the limit as $t\rightarrow\infty$ suggests
an estimator $H_{k}(U,\tilde{U}):=h(U^{(k)})+\sum_{l=k+1}^{\tau-1}(h(U^{(l)})-h(\tilde{U}^{(l-1)}))$
with expectation $\lambda(h)$. A way to construct such chains considered
in \cite{glynn2014exact,jacob2017unbiased,heng2017unbiased,middleton2018unbiased}
relies on sampling independently $(U^{(0)},U^{(1)})\sim \eta(\mathrm{d}u_{0})K(u{}_{0},\mathrm{d}u_{1})$
and $\tilde{U}^{(0)}\sim \eta(\mathrm{d}u_{0})$, and then successively
sampling $(U^{(n+1)},\tilde{U}^{(n)})$ from $\bar{K}((U^{(n)},\tilde{U}^{(n-1)}),(\cdot,\cdot))$ such that $U^{(n+1)}=\tilde{U}^{(n)}$
with positive probability, ensuring that both chains evolve marginally
according to $K$. Furthermore,
averaging $H_{l}(U,\tilde{U})$ over a range of values $l\in\{k,k+1,...,m\}$,
for some $m\geq k$, preserves unbiasedness, suggesting the following
`time-averaged' unbiased estimator of $\mu(h)$
\begin{align}
H_{k:m} =\frac{1}{m-k+1}\sum_{l=k}^{m}h(U^{(l)})+\nonumber \enskip \qquad\qquad\qquad \\ \sum_{l=k+1}^{\tau-1}\min\left(1,\frac{l-k}{m-k+1}\right)(h(U^{(l)})-h(\tilde{U}^{(l-1)}))\nonumber \\
:=\text{MCMC}_{k:m}(h)+\text{BC}_{k:m}(h).\label{eq:timeaveraged}
\end{align}
We view $\text{MCMC}_{k:m}(h)$ as the standard MCMC sample average
up to time $m$, discarding the first $k$ iterates as `burn-in'.
The second term, $\text{BC}_{k:m}(h)$, is the `bias correction' term
with $\text{BC}_{k:m}(h):=0$ if $\tau-1<k+1$. The estimator requires
only that two chains be simulated until meeting at time $\tau$, after
which, if $\tau<m$, only one chain must be simulated up to $m$.
By \cite[Proposition 3.1]{jacob2017unbiased}, the validity of the
resulting estimators is guaranteed under the following assumptions.
We discuss these assumptions for PIMH in Section \ref{sec:validity}.
\begin{assumption}
\label{assumption:marginal}Each chain is initialized marginally from
a distribution $\eta$, evolves according to a kernel $K$, and is
such that $\mathbb{E}[h(U^{(n)})]\to\lambda(h)$ as $n\to\infty$. Furthermore,
there exist constants $\eta>0$ and $D<\infty$ such that $\mathbb{E}[\left|h(U^{(n)})\right|{}^{2+\eta}]<D$
for all $n\geq0$.
\end{assumption}
\begin{assumption}
\label{assumption:meetingtime}The two chains are such that the meeting
time $\tau=\inf\{n\geq1:\ U^{(n)}=\tilde{U}^{(n-1)}\}$ satisfies $\mathbb{P}[\tau>n]\leq D\delta^{n}$,
for some constants $0<D<\infty$ and $\delta\in(0,1)$. The chains
stay together after meeting, i.e. $U^{(n)}=\tilde{U}^{(n-1)}$ for all
$n\geq\tau$.
\end{assumption}
\begin{prop}\cite{jacob2017unbiased}\ Under Assumptions \ref{assumption:marginal}
and \ref{assumption:meetingtime}, the estimator $H_{k:m}$ obtained by these coupled chains is unbiased, has finite variance and finite expected
cost.
\end{prop}
\subsection{Coupled PIMH}\label{sec:coupledPIMH}
To obtain unbiased estimators of $\pi(h)$, we use the framework detailed in Section \ref{sec:couplingMCMC} for
$K=P$ the transition kernel of PIMH and $\lambda=\bar{\pi}$ the corresponding invariant distribution of PIMH
defined on $\mathsf{U}:=\{1,...,N\}\times\mathcal{X}$. This requires introducing a coupling of PIMH kernels.
For IMH chains, a natural choice of initialization of the chain is from the proposal
distribution. We adopt this in the following, sampling both \textsf{$(X_{1:T}^{(0)},p_{N}^{(0)})\sim\text{PF}$}
and \textsf{$(\tilde{X}_{1:T}^{(0)},\tilde{p}_{N}^{(0)})\sim\text{PF}$}.
However, in contrast to previous constructions \cite{jacob2017unbiased,heng2017unbiased,middleton2018unbiased},
our method allows the chains to couple at time $\tau=1$
through re-using the initial value $(\tilde{X}_{1:T}^{(0)},\tilde{p}_{N}^{(0)})$
as a proposal for the first chain. %
We summarize the resulting procedure in Algorithm \ref{alg:couplepimh}. To simplify presentation of the algorithm, we use the convention $\alpha(\tilde{p}_{N}^{(-1)},p_{N}^{*}):=1$.
Finally, although the coupling scheme is framed in terms of PIMH, it is clear that this
algorithm and estimators apply equally to any IMH algorithm.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{Coupled PIMH\label{alg:couplepimh}}
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textsf{Sample $(X_{1:T}^{(0)},p_{N}^{(0)})\sim\text{PF}$, set $n=1$ and $\tau=\infty$.}
\item \textsf{While $n<\max(m,\tau)$}
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textsf{Sample $(X_{1:T}^{*},p_{N}^{*})\sim\text{PF}$.}
\item \textsf{Sample $\mathit{\mathfrak{u}}\sim\mathcal{U}\left[0,1\right]$.}
\item \textsf{If $\mathit{\mathfrak{u}}\le\alpha\left(p_{N}^{(n-1)},p_{N}^{*}\right)$
set \[(X_{1:T}^{(n)},p_{N}^{(n)})=(X_{1:T}^{*},p_{N}^{*})\]
else
$(X_{1:T}^{(n)},p_{N}^{(n)})=(X_{1:T}^{(n-1)},p_{N}^{(n-1)}).$}
\item \textsf{If $\mathit{\mathfrak{u}}\le\alpha(\tilde{p}_{N}^{(n-2)},p_{N}^{*})$
set
\[
(\tilde{X}_{1:T}^{(n-1)},\tilde{p}_{N}^{(n-1)})=(X_{1:T}^{*},p_{N}^{*})
\]
else $(\tilde{X}_{1:T}^{(n-1)},\tilde{p}_{N}^{(n-1)})=(\tilde{X}_{1:T}^{(n-2)},\tilde{p}_{N}^{(n-2)}).$}
\item \textsf{If $\mathit{\mathfrak{u}}\le\alpha\left(p_{N}^{(n-1)},p_{N}^{*}\right)\wedge\alpha(\tilde{p}_{N}^{(n-2)},p_{N}^{*})$
set $\tau=n$.}
\item \textsf{Set $n \leftarrow n+1$.}
\end{enumerate}
\item \textsf{Return $H_{k:m}$ as in (\ref{eq:timeaveraged})}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{algorithm}
At each iteration $n$ of Algorithm \ref{alg:couplepimh} the proposal
$(X_{1:T}^{*},p_{N}^{*})$ can be accepted by one, both or neither
chains with positive probability. The meeting time $\tau$
corresponds to the first time the proposal $(X_{1:T}^{*},p_{N}^{*})$
is accepted by both chains. We can also return another unbiased estimator $\bar{H}_{k:m}$ of the form (\ref{eq:timeaveraged})
with $h(X_{1:T})$ replaced by $\pi_{N}(h)$ as
we have previously seen that $\bar{\pi}(\pi_{N}(h))=\pi(h)$.
The Rao-Blackwellised estimator $\bar{H}_{k:m}$ will typically outperform significantly $H_{k:m}$ when we are interested in
smoothing expectations of functions of states close to $T$. For functions of states close to the origin, e.g. $h(x_{1:T})=x_{1}$, we have
$\bar{H}_{k:m} = H_{k:m}$ with high probability if $N$ is moderate because of the particle degeneracy problem \cite{doucet2009tutorial,jacob2015path,kantas2015particle}.
This is illustrated in Appendix \ref{subsec:raoblackstochkinetic}.
\subsection{Validity and meeting times\label{sec:validity}}
The validity of our unbiased estimators is ensured if the following weak assumptions are satisfied.
\begin{assumption}
\label{assumption:marginaldistributions}There exist constants $\eta>0$
and $D<\infty$ such that $\mathbb{E}\left[|h(X_{1:T}^{(n)})|{}^{2+\eta}\right]<D$
for all $n\geq0$.
\end{assumption}
\begin{assumption}
\label{assumption:marginaldistributionsjoint}There exist constants $\eta>0$
and $D<\infty$ such that
$\mathbb{E}\left[|\sum_{i=1}^N W_T^{i,(n)} h(X_{1:T}^{i,(n)})|{}^{2+\eta}\right]<D$
for all $n\geq0$.
\end{assumption}
\begin{assumption}
\label{assumption:pf}The resampling scheme is unbiased and there exist
finite constants $(\bar{w_{t}})_{t=1}^{T}$ such that $\sup_{x\in\mathsf{X}}$
$w_{1}(x)\le\bar{w}_{1}$ and $\sup_{(x,x')\in\mathsf{X}\times\mathsf{X}}$
$w_{t}(x,x')\le\bar{w}_{t}$ for $t\in\{2,...,T\}$.
\end{assumption}
\begin{prop}
\label{thm:validity} Under Assumptions \ref{assumption:marginaldistributions}
and \ref{assumption:pf}, resp. Assumptions \ref{assumption:marginaldistributionsjoint}
and \ref{assumption:pf}, the estimator $H_{k:m}$, resp. $\bar{H}_{k:m}$, of $\pi(h)$ obtained from Algorithm
\ref{alg:couplepimh} is unbiased and has finite variance and finite expected
cost.
\end{prop}
To establish the result for $H_{k:m}$, note that Assumption \ref{assumption:marginaldistributions} and
our construction implies Assumption
\ref{assumption:marginal} for $\lambda=\bar{\pi}$. Assumption \ref{assumption:pf}
provides verifiable and sufficient conditions to ensure uniform ergodicity of PIMH \cite[~Theorem 3]{andrieu2010particle}.
Hence it follows from \cite[Proposition 3.4]{jacob2017unbiased} that the geometric bound on the tails of $\tau$ is satisfied.
Additionally, Algorithm \ref{alg:couplepimh} ensures that the chains stay together
for all $n\ge\tau$ so Assumption \ref{assumption:meetingtime} is satisfied. A similar reasoning provides the result for $\bar{H}_{k:m}$.
We have the following precise description of the distribution of the
meeting time $\tau$ for Algorithm \ref{alg:couplepimh}. Let $\text{Geo}(\gamma)$ denote the geometric distribution on the strictly positive integers
with success probability $\gamma$.
\begin{prop}
\label{prop:mtdist}
The meeting time satisfies $\tau|Z^{(0)}\sim\emph{\text{Geo}}(\alpha(Z^{(0)}))$ and $\mathbb{P}[\tau=1]\geq\frac{1}{2}$. Additionally, we have
$\lim_{N\rightarrow\infty}\mathbb{P}[\tau=1]=1$ under Assumption \ref{assumption:pf}.
\end{prop}
We recall here that $\alpha(z)$ is the average acceptance probability from state $z$. The geometric distribution result follows from Proposition \ref{prop:stochasticdominatingcoupling} in Appendix. The rest of the proposition follows from
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{P}[\tau=1]&=\int\alpha(z)g(\mathrm{d}z)\\
&=\iint\left\{1\wedge\exp(z'-z)\right\}g(\mathrm{d}z)g(\mathrm{d}z').
\end{align*}
It entails trivially that $\mathbb{P}[\tau=1]\geq\frac{1}{2}$. Noting that $\lim_{N\rightarrow\infty}Z=0$
a.s. under $g$ (which is dependent on $N$) under Assumption \ref{assumption:pf}, see e.g. \cite{Del_Moral_2004}, we obtain $\lim_{N\rightarrow\infty}\mathbb{P}[\tau=1]=1$ by dominated convergence, thus $\lim_{N\rightarrow\infty}\text{BC}_{k:m}(h)=0$.
\subsection{Unbiased filtering}
A PF generates estimates $p_{N}(y_{1:t})$ of $p(y_{1:t})$ at all times $t=1,\ldots,T$. These estimates can be used to perform one step
of coupled PIMH for $T$ pairs of Markov chains, each pair corresponding to
one of the smoothing distributions $p(x_{1:t}|y_{1:t})$. This requires some additional bookkeeping
to keep track of the meeting times and unbiased estimators associated with each $p(x_{1:t}|y_{1:t})$ but can be used to
unbiasedly estimate expectations with respect to all filtering distributions $p(x_t|y_{1:t})$. This was not directly feasible with coupled i-CPF in \cite{jacob2017smoothing}.
In particular, this allows us to estimate unbiasedly the predictive likelihood terms $p(y_t|y_{1:t-1})$
which can be used for a goodness-of-fit test \cite{gerlach1999diagnostics}.
\section{Analysis \label{sec:guidelines}}
\subsection{Meeting time: large sample approximation\label{subsec:CLT}}
We investigate here the distribution of the meeting time in the large
sample regime, i.e. in the interesting scenarios where $T$ is large. Under strong mixing assumptions, \cite{berard2014lognormal}
showed that letting $\frac{T}{N}=\gamma$ for some $\gamma>0$ then the following Central Limit Theorem (CLT) holds:
$Z\stackrel{d}{\rightarrow}\mathcal{N}\left(-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^{2},\sigma^{2}\right)$
as $T\rightarrow\infty$ where $\sigma^{2}=\gamma\bar{\sigma}^{2}$
for some $\bar{\sigma}^{2}>0$. Empirically, this CLT appears to hold for many realistic models not satisfying these strong mixing assumptions \cite{pitt2012some,doucet2015biometrika}.
Under this CLT, using similar regularity conditions as in \cite{schmon2018large},
it can be shown that the Markov kernel $Q$ defined in (\ref{eq:PforZ})
converges in some suitable sense towards the Markov kernel
$Q_{\sigma}$ given by
\begin{equation*}
\left\{1\wedge\exp(z'-z)\right\}g_{\sigma}(z')\mathrm{d}z'+\left\{ 1-\alpha_{\sigma}(z)\right\} \delta_{z}(\mathrm{d}z'),\label{eq:approxP}
\end{equation*}
where $g_{\sigma}(z)=\mathcal{N}\left(z;-\frac{1}{2}\gamma\bar{\sigma}^{2},\gamma\bar{\sigma}^{2}\right)$
and $\alpha_{\sigma}(z):=\int\left\{1\wedge\exp(z'-z)\right\}g_{\sigma}(z')\mathrm{d}z'$
denotes the average acceptance probability in $z$. For this limiting kernel\footnote{Note that $Q_{\sigma}$ is not uniformly ergodic whereas $Q$ is under Assumption \ref{assumption:pf}.},
the following result holds.
\begin{prop}
\label{prop:approxchain} \cite[Corollary 3]{doucet2015biometrika} The
invariant density of $Q_{\sigma}$ is $\pi_{\sigma}(z)=\mathcal{N}\left(z;\frac{1}{2}\sigma^{2},\sigma^{2}\right)$
and its average acceptance probability is given by
\[
\alpha_{\sigma}(z):=1-\Phi\left(\frac{z+\frac{\sigma^{2}}{2}}{\sigma}\right)+e^{-z}\Phi\left(\frac{z-\frac{\sigma^{2}}{2}}{\sigma}\right),
\]
where $\Phi$ denotes the cumulative distribution function of the
standard Normal distribution.
\end{prop}
Under this large sample approximation, the probability $\mathbb{P}[\tau=n]$ can be written as
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E}\left[\mathbb{P}[\tau=n|Z^{(0)}]\right]=\int\alpha_{\sigma}(z)(1-\alpha_{\sigma}(z))^{n-1}g_{\sigma}(z)\mathrm{d}z,\label{eq:limptau}
\end{equation}
thus $\mathbb{P}[\tau=1]=\frac{1}{2}\left\{1+\exp(\sigma^{2})\text{Erfc}(\sigma)\right\}$, Erfc denoting the complementary error function.
Similarly we see that the expected meeting time is given by
$\mathbb{E}[\tau]=\mathbb{E}_{g_{\sigma}}\left[\alpha_{\sigma}(Z)^{-1}\right]$.
This allows us to approximate numerically expectations, quantiles
and probabilities of $\tau$ as a function of $\sigma$, the standard
deviation of $\log p_{N}(y_{1:T})$ under the law of the particle filter.
Figure \ref{fig:psummary} displays $\mathbb{P}[\tau=1]$ and $\mathbb{E}[\tau]$ as a function of $\sigma$. We see that $\mathbb{P}[\tau=1]=0.71$ for $\sigma=1$ rising to $\mathbb{P}[\tau=1]=0.95$ for $\sigma=0.1$. The expected meeting time $\mathbb{E}[\tau]$ is also the expected number of iterations to return an unbiased estimator for $m=0$ and grows relatively benignly with $\sigma$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{ptau_summary.pdf}
\caption{$\mathbb{P}[\tau=1]$ (left) and $\mathbb{E}[\tau]$ (right) as a function of the standard deviation $\sigma$ of $\log {p}_N(y_{1:T})$. \label{fig:psummary}
}
\end{centering}
\end{figure}
We compare the distribution of the meeting times with its large sample approximation (\ref{eq:limptau}) on a
stationary auto-regressive (AR) model $X_{t}\sim\mathcal{N}(aX_{t-1},1)$
and $Y_{t}\sim\mathcal{N}(X_{t},\sigma_{y}^{2})$ with $a=0.5$ and
$\sigma_{y}^{2}=10$ on a simulated dataset of $T=100$. Estimates
of $\mathbb{P}[\tau\ge n]$ were obtained empirically for a range
of values of $N$ and compared with the predicted values based on
the estimated variance $\sigma^{2}$ of $\log p_{N}(y_{1:T})$
using $10^{5}$ runs of coupled PIMH.
Varying $N$ between 10 and 110, $\sigma^{2}$ was between 0.2 and 3.0 in this range.
The tail probabilities of the meeting time over this range are shown
in Figure \ref{fig:lgssmmt}.
Confidence intervals for the estimates of $\mathbb{P}[\tau\ge n]$
are shown in Figure \ref{fig:lgssmmt} with error bars indicating
$\pm2$ standard deviations. We see that there is a satisfactory agreement, with
predicted tail probabilities closely matching confidence intervals
for each value, and larger values of $N$ leading as expected to shorter
meeting times on average.%
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{centering}
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{tailproblgssm}
\par\end{centering}
\par\end{centering}
\caption{Empirical estimates of $\mathbb{P}[\tau\ge n]$ (with $\pm2$ standard errors) and comparison with the large sample approximation for toy example.\label{fig:lgssmmt}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{On the selection of $N$ for large $m$}\label{guide}
We provide here a heuristic for selecting $N$ to minimize the variance of $H_{k:m}$ at fixed
computational budget when both $m$ and $T$ are large. We will minimize the computational inefficiency defined by
\[
\text{C}[H]:=\mathbb{V}[H_{k:m}]\times N
\]
as the running time is proportional to $N$. For $m$ sufficiently large, we expect that $\tau <m$ with
very high probability and so the time to obtain a single unbiased
estimator is $m$. We note that increasing
$N$ typically leads to a decreasing asymptotic variance of the ergodic averages
associated with the PIMH chain and from Proposition \ref{prop:mtdist}
a reduction in the bias correction, however at the cost of more computation.
For large $m$, we also expect that the dominant term of $\mathbb{V}[H_{k:m}]$
will arise from $\text{MCMC}_{k:m}(h)$ and will be essentially the asymptotic variance of $h$ given
by $\mathbb{V}_{\pi}[h] \text{IF}(h)$ divided by $(m-k+1)$, where $\text{IF}(h)$ is the Integrated Autocorrelation Time (IACT) of $h$ for the PIMH kernel.
For $N$ sufficiently large, we expect that $X_{1:T}$ and $p_{N}$ are approximately
independent under the PF proposal. By a reasoning similar to the proof of \cite[Lemma 4]{pitt2012some}, $\text{IF}(h)$ will then be approximately proportional to $\text{IF}(\sigma)$ defined in Eq.\ (11) in \cite{pitt2012some}. This is illustrated in Appendix \ref{sec:inefficiency} where we plot $\text{IF}(h)$ for a variety of test functions for a range of $N$ against $\text{IF}(\sigma)$ over the corresponding range of $\sigma$ and show that they are indeed approximately proportional.
Minimizing $\text{IF}[H]$ w.r.t.\ $N$ is then approximately equivalent to minimizing $\text{IF}(\sigma)/\sigma^{2}$ as $\sigma^{2}$ is typically
inversely proportional to $N$. This minimization has already been carried out in \cite{pitt2012some} where it was found
that the minimizing argument is $\sigma=0.92$. Practically, this means that one should select $N$ to ensure that
the standard deviation of $\log p_{N}(y_{1:T})$ is equal approximately to this value. The resulting value of $N$ is expected to be close to the value of $N$ minimizing $\text{C}[H]$, which is approximately proportional to $\text{IF}(h)/\sigma^{2}$. This is verified in Figure \ref{fig:toyineffopt} on the AR example of Section \ref{subsec:CLT}. Note that these guidelines do not apply to $\bar{H}_{k:m}$ for $h$ a function of states close to $T$ as it is not true that
$\pi_{N}(h)$ and $p_{N}$ are approximately independent.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{lgssm_IACT_s2_largem.pdf}
\caption{ $\text{IF}(h_i)/\sigma^{2}$ for $h_1=x_1$, $h_2=x_T$, $h_3=\sum_t x_t$ and $h_4=\sum_t x_t^2$ as a function of $\sigma^{2}$.\label{fig:toyineffopt}
}
\end{centering}
\end{figure}
\section{Numerical experiments\label{sec:Numerical-experiments}}
We apply the methodology to two models where the transition density
of the latent process is analytically intractable but simulation from it is possible.
However, this involves sampling a random number of random variables.
The unbiased smoother proposed in \cite{jacob2017smoothing} relies on common random numbers
and it is unclear how one could implement it in this context. The coupled conditional backward sampling PF scheme proposed in \cite{lee2018coupled}
does not apply as we cannot evaluate the transition density pointwise.
In both scenarios, we use the bootstrap PF with multinomial resampling, that is $q_{1}(x_{1})=\mu(x_{1})$ and $q_{t}(x_{t}|x_{t-1})=f(x_{t}|x_{t-1})$, and Assumption \ref{assumption:pf}
is satisfied.
\subsection{Stochastic kinetic model}
We consider a stochastic kinetic model represented by a jump Markov process introduced in \cite{golightly2005bayesian}.
Such models describe a system of chemical reactions in continuous
time, with a reaction occurring under the collision of two species
at random times. The discrete number of each species describes the
state with jumps representing the change in a particular species.
The discrete valued state $(X_{t,q})_{t\ge0,1\le q\le Q}$ comprises
a $Q$-vector of species at each time, where one of $R$ reactions
may occur at any random time, given by hazard functions $f_{r}$ for
$r\in\{1,...,R\}$. The effect of such a reaction is described by
a stoichiometry matrix $S$, where the instantaneous change in the
number of species $q$ for a certain reaction $r$ out of a possible
$R$ different reactions is encoded in element $S_{q,r}$. For the prokaryotic autoregulation model and parameterisation considered in \cite{golightly2017efficient},
the state is a four dimensional vector evolving according to $8$
possible reactions, for which the stoichiometry matrix is given by
\begin{align*}
S &=\left(\begin{array}{cccccccc}
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -1 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & -2 & 2 & 0 & -1\\
-1 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 1 & -1 & 0 & 0\\
-1 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0
\end{array}\right),\\
f(X,c) &=(c_{1}X_{4}X_{3},c_{2}(k-X_{4}),c_{3}X_{4},c_{4}X_{1},\\&c_{5}X_{2}(X_{2}-1)/2,c_{6}X_{3},c_{7}X_{1},c_{8}X_{2})'.
\end{align*}
Coefficients $c_{1:8}$ and $k$ are parameters of the model, given
by $c=(0.1,0.7,0.35,0.2,0.1,0.9,0.3,0.1)$ and $k=10$. We collect $T=100$ noisy observations of the latent process at regular intervals of length $\Delta=0.1$, i.e.
\[
Y_{t}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 1 & 2 & 0
\end{array}\right)X_{\Delta t}+\epsilon_{t},\quad \epsilon_{t}\stackrel{i.i.d}{\sim}\mathcal{N}(0,I_{2}).
\]
We fix the initial condition $X_{0}=(8,8,8,5)$.
To simulate synthetic data and to run the bootstrap PF, we sample the latent process $X_t$ using Gillespie's direct method \cite{gillespie1977exact},
whereby the time to the next event is exponential with rate $\sum_{r=1}^{R}f_{r}(X,c)$
and reaction $r$ occurs with probability $f_{r}(X,c)/\sum_{r=1}^{R}f_{r}(X,c)$.
The estimated survival probabilities
of the meeting time $\tau$, with $\pm2$ standard errors, computed using 500 independent runs of coupled PIMH are plotted in Figure \ref{fig:stochkin},
along with the probabilities obtained from the large sample approximation
in Section \ref{subsec:CLT},
showing good agreement between the two.
In Figure \ref{fig:sksderr} we display the unbiased smoothing estimators obtained by averaging the unbiased estimators obtained over 500 independent runs for $N=1,000,k=m=0$ and the corresponding confidence intervals. Alternative choices of $k,m$ can lead to improved performance at fixed computational budget \cite{jacob2017unbiased,middleton2018unbiased}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{centering}
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{tailprobstochastic_kinetic}
\par\end{centering}
\label{fig:predictedtaugsss-1
\par\end{centering}
\caption{Empirical estimates of $\mathbb{P}[\tau\ge n]$ (with $\pm2$ standard errors) and comparison with those implied by the large sample approximation for stochastic kinetic model.}
\label{fig:stochkin}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{centering}
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{skunbiased_est}
\par\end{centering}
\label{fig:predictedtaugsss-1
\par\end{centering}
\caption{Unbiased estimates of $\mathbb{E}(X_{1,t}\vert y_{1:T})$ (red) (with $\pm3$ pointwise standard errors) and $X_{1,t}$ (blue) for Markov jump process.}
\label{fig:sksderr}
\end{figure}
\subsection{L\'evy-driven stochastic volatility}
Introduced in \cite{barndorff2001non}, L\'evy-driven stochastic volatility
models provide a flexible model for the log-returns of a financial
asset. Letting $(Y_{t})$ denote the log-return process, we have
\[
Y_{t}=\mu+\beta V_{t}+V_{t}^{1/2}\epsilon_{t},\qquad\epsilon_{t}\stackrel{i.i.d.}{\sim}\mathcal{N}(0,1),
\]
where $V_{t}$ (termed the `actual volatility') is treated as a stationary
stochastic process. The latent state comprises the pair
of actual and spot volatility $X_{t}=(V_{t},W_{t})$. In the terminology of \cite{barndorff2002econometric},
the integrated volatility is the integral of the spot volatility and
the actual volatility is an increment of the integrated volatility
over some unit time. Initializing $Z_{0}\sim\Gamma(\xi^{2}/\omega^{2},\xi^{2}/\omega^{2})$, the process evolves through sampling the following
random variables and recursing the state $X_{t}=(V_{t},W_{t})$ according
to
\begin{align*}
K &\sim\text{Poisson}(\lambda\xi^{2}/\omega^{2}),\quad C_{1:K} \stackrel{i.i.d.}{\sim}\mathcal{U}[t-1,t], \\
E_{1:K}&\stackrel{i.i.d.}{\sim}\text{Exp}(\xi/\omega^{2}),\quad
W_{t}=e^{-\lambda}W_{t-1}+\sum_{j=1}^{K}e^{-\lambda(t-C_{j})}E_{j}, \\
V_{t}&=\frac{1}{\lambda}(W_{t-1}-W_{t}+\sum_{j=1}^{K}E_{j}).
\end{align*}
In particular, conditionally on $X_{t-1}$, simulation of
$X_{t}$ requires a random number of random numbers sampled
at each iteration. The parameters $(\xi,\omega^{2})$ denote the stationary
mean and variance of the spot volatility respectively, $\lambda$
describes the exponential decay of autocorrelations, $\beta$ denotes
the risk premium for excess volatility and $\mu$ the drift of the
log-return. In the following we perform unbiased smoothing of $X_{t}$
using $T=500$ data from the S\&P 500 index used in \cite{chopin2013smc2}. A summary
of the data and parameter inference is included in Appendix \ref{subsec:datasummary}.
\begin{figure}
\subfloat[Empirical ($\pm2$ standard errors) and predicted tail probabilities implied by large-sample approximation ${\mathbb{P}[\tau\ge n]}$.]
{\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{tailprob_sv}
\par\end{centering}
\centering{}\label{fig:mtsv}}
\begin{centering}
\subfloat[{Estimates of $(m-k+1)\mathbb{V}[H_{k:m}]/(\mathbb{V}_\pi[h] \sigma^{2})$ ($\pm3$ standard errors) computed using 10,000 runs.}]{\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{sv_ineff_against_sigma}
\par\end{centering}
\centering{}\label{fig:svineff}}
\subfloat[Unbiased estimates of $\mathbb{E}(W_{t}\vert y_{1:T})$ of the S\&P 500
over 2005-2007 and confidence intervals at $\pm3$ standard errors. ]{\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{svunbiased_est}
\par\end{centering}
\centering{}\label{fig:mtsv-1}}
\par\end{centering}
\centering{}
\caption{Distribution of meeting times (top), computational inefficiency (bottom) and smoothing state estimators for L\'evy-driven stochastic volatility applied to real data (bottom).}
\label{fig:svmt}
\end{figure}
The empirical distributions of the meeting time for for $N\in\{100,...,500\}$ obtained using $1,000$ runs
are shown in Figure \ref{fig:svmt}, again showing good agreement with the large-sample approximation.
We then obtain unbiased estimators $H_{k:m}$ for $h(x_{1:T})=\sum_{t=1}^T v_{t}$ using $k=20,m=512$ over this grid of $N$.
Figure \ref{fig:svineff} plots $(m-k+1)\mathbb{V}[H_{k:m}]/(\mathbb{V}_\pi[h] \sigma^{2}$). We expect this function to be close to $\text{IF}(h)/\sigma^{2}$ as $m\rightarrow\infty$ and $\text{IF}(h)/\sigma^{2}$ to be minimized around 0.92. The experiments are consistent with this result. Figure \ref{fig:mtsv-1} presents the unbiased estimates of the spot volatility
$W_{t}$ obtained by averaging the unbiased estimates obtained over 1,000 runs and the corresponding confidence intervals for $k=m=0$ and $N=100$. Different choices of $k,m$ could
lead to improved performance at fixed computational budget.
\section{Discussion}
We have introduced a simple approach to perform unbiased smoothing
in state-space models and we have provided guidance on the choice of tuning parameters through
appealing to a large sample approximation.
We have established the validity of the estimators when the incremental weights
are bounded (Assumption \ref{assumption:pf}) which ensures uniform ergodicity of the PIMH.
Rejection sampling is possible under a similar assumption and would provide
exact samples from the smoothing distribution. However the expected number of trials before acceptance of such
a rejection scheme increases typically exponentially fast with $T$.
If we are only interested in obtaining unbiased smoothing estimators and if the CLT discussed
in Section \ref{subsec:CLT} holds, we expect our coupling scheme to only require increasing $N$ linearly with $T$ to control $\sigma$ and thus the corresponding expectation of the meeting time.
Finally, the scheme proposed here can be extended to obtain unbiased estimators of expectations
with respect to any posterior distribution by replacing the particle filter proposal within the IMH by Annealed Importance Sampling \cite{neal2001annealed}
or a sequential Monte Carlo sampler \cite{delmoral2006sequential}. This is illustrated in Appendix \ref{sec:smcsamplers}.
\newpage
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
Online social media play major role in dissemination of information. However, recent years have witnessed evidence of spreading huge amount of harmful disinformation on social media and manipulating public opinion on the Web, attributed to accounts dedicated to spreading malicious information. These accounts are referred to ``Pathogenic Social Media'' (PSM) accounts and can pose threats to social media firms and general public. PSMs are usually controlled by terrorist supporters, water armies or fake news writers and they are owned by either real users or bots who seek to promote or degrade certain ideas by utilizing large online communities of supporters to reach their goals. Identifying PSM accounts could have immediate applications, including countering terrorism~\cite{khader2016combating,KlausenMZ16}, fake news detection~\cite{Gupta2014,6805772} and water armies detection~\cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1111-4297,DBLP:conf/asunam/ChenWSB13}.
To better understand the behavior and impact of PSM accounts on the Web and normal users, and be able to counter their malicious activity, social media authorities need to deploy certain capabilities which could ultimately lead to reducing their threats. To make this happen, social media platforms are required to design sophisticated techniques that could automatically detect and suspend these accounts as quickly as possible, before they can reach their vast audience and spread malicious content. However, for the most part, the social media firms usually rely on reports they receive from their normal users or even their assigned teams to manually shut down these accounts. First of all, this mechanism is not always feasible due to the limited manpower and since not many real users are willing to put aside time and report the malicious activities. Also, it cannot be done in a timely manner since it takes time for these firms to review the reports and decide whether they are legit or not. On the other hand, the fact that these accounts simply return to social media using different accounts or even migrate to other social media, makes all these efforts almost useless. Therefore, the burden falls to automatic approaches that can identify these malicious actors on social media.
\textbf{Present work.} In this work, to address the above mentioned challenges, we aim to understand PSM accounts by (1) analyzing their behavior in terms of their posted URLs, and (2) estimate their influence by conducting experiments on a real-world dataset from Twitter. We deploy a mathematical technique known as ``Hawkes process"~\cite{hawkes71} to quantify the impact of PSMs on normal users and the greater Web, by looking at their posted URLs on Twitter. Hawkes processes are special forms of point processes and have shown promising results in many problems that require modeling complicated event sequences where historical events have impact on future ones, including financial analysis~\cite{bacry2016estimation}, seismic analysis~\cite{daley2007introduction} and social network modeling~\cite{zhou2013learning} to name a few. This study uses an ISIS-related dataset from Twitter~\cite{alvari2018early}. The dataset contains an \textit{action log} of users in the form of cascades of retweets. In this work, we consider URLs posted by two groups of users: (1) PSM accounts and (2) normal users. The URLs can belong to any platform including the major social media (e.g., facebook.com), mainstream news (e.g., nytimes.com) and alternative news outlets (e.g., rt.com). For each group of users, we fit a multi-dimensional Hawkes processes model wherein each process correspond to a platform referenced in at least one tweet. Furthermore, every process can influence all the others including itself, which allows estimating the strength of connections between each of the social media platforms and news sources, in terms of how likely an event (i.e., the posted URL) can cause subsequent events in each of the groups. In other words, in this study we are interested to investigate if a given URL $u_1$ has influence on another URL $u_2$ (i.e., $u_1\rightarrow u_2$) and thus can trigger subsequent events.
\textbf{Main Findings.} This paper makes the following main observations:
\begin{itemize}
\item Among all platforms studied here, URLs shared from facebook.com and alternative news media contributed the most to the dissemination of malicious information from PSM accounts. Simply put, they had the largest impact on making a message viral and causing the subsequent events.
\item Posts that were tweeted by the PSM accounts and contained URLs from facebook.com, demonstrated more influence on the subsequent retweets containing URLs from youtube.com, in contrary to the other way around. This means that ultimately tweets with URLs from Facebook will high likely end up inducing more external impulse on YouTube than YouTube might have on Facebook.
\item URLs posted by the normal users have nearly the same impact on the subsequent events regardless of the social media or news outlet used. This basically means that normal users do not often prefer specific social media or news sources over the others.
\end{itemize}
\section{Data Analysis}
In this section, we first explain the dataset and provide the list of the main social media platforms and news sites used in this study. Finally, we present our data analysis to demonstrate the differences between PSM accounts and normal users.
\subsection{Dataset}
We collect a dataset of 2.8M ISIS related tweets/retweets in Arabic
between February 22, 2016 and May 27, 2016. The dataset contains different fields including user ID, retweet ID, hashtags, content, posting time. The dataset also contains user profile information including name, number of followers/followees, description, location, etc.
The tweets were collected using different ISIS-related hashtags such as \textsf{\#stateoftheislamiccaliphate}. In this dataset, about 600K tweets have at least one URL (i.e., event) referencing one of the social media platforms or news outlets. There are about 1.4M of paired URLs which we denote by $u_1\rightarrow u_2$ and indicates a retweet (with the URL $u_2$) of the original tweet (with the URL $u_1$).
In this study, we are interested in investigating the impact of the URL $u_1$ on $u_2$. Accordingly, the dataset contains 35K cascades (i.e., sequences of events) of different sizes and durations, some of which contain paired URLs in the aforementioned form. After pre-processing and removing duplicate users from cascades (those who retweet themselves multiple times), cascades sizes (i.e. number of associated postings) vary between 20 to 9,571 and take from 10 seconds to 95 days to finish. The log-log distribution of cascades vs. cascade size and the cumulative distribution of duration of cascades are depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:casc_dist}.
\begin{figure}[t]\center
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{cascade_dist.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{cum_cascd.pdf}
\caption{(Top) Log-log distribution of cascades vs. cascade size. (Bottom) Cumulative distribution of duration of cascades}
\label{fig:casc_dist}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]\center
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{inactive_dist.pdf}
\caption{Total number of inactive users in each cascade.}
\label{fig:inactive_time}
\end{figure}
The statistics of the dataset are presented in Table~\ref{tb:st}. For labeling, we check through Twitter API to examine whether the users have been suspended (labeled as PSM) or they are still active (labeled as normal)~\cite{thomas2011suspended}. According to Table~\ref{tb:st}, 11\% of the users in our dataset are PSMs and others are normal. We also depict the total number of PSM accounts that have been suspended by Twitter in each cascade, in Figure~\ref{fig:inactive_time}. Finally, to reiterate, we note that these accounts mostly get suspended manually by Twitter based on reports the platform receives from its own users\footnote{https://blog.twitter.com/official/en\_us/a/2016/an-update-on-our-efforts-to-combat-violent-extremism.html}.
\begin{table}[b]
\centering
\caption{Description of the dataset.}
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c}
\cline{1-3}
\textbf{Name} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{Value}}\\
\cline{1-3}
\# of Cascades & \multicolumn{2}{c}{35K} \\ \cline{1-3}
\# of Tweets/Retweets & \multicolumn{2}{c}{2.8M} \\ \cline{1-3}
& \textbf{PSM} & \textbf{Normal} \\ \cline{2-3}
\# of Users & 64,484 & 536,609\\
\cline{1-3}
\# of Single URLs & 104,948 & 536,046 \\ \cline{1-3}
\# of Paired URLs & 200,892 & 1,123,434
\\ \cline{1-3}
\end{tabular}
\label{tb:st}
\end{table}
\subsection{Social Media Platforms and News Outlets}
Twitter deploys a URL shortener technique to leave more space for content and protect users from malicious sites\footnote{https://help.twitter.com/en/using-twitter/url-shortener}. To obtain the original URLs, we use a URL unshortening tool\footnote{https://github.com/skevas/unshorten} to obtain the original links contained in the tweets in our dataset.
We consider a number of major and well-known social media platforms including Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Google and Youtube.
About the dichotomy of mainstream and alternative media, it is notable to mention that most criteria for determining whether a news source counts as either of them, are based on a number of factors including but not limited to the content and whether or not it is corporate owned\footnote{https://smallbusiness.chron.com/mainstream-vs-alternative-media-21113.html}. However, a key difference between these two sources of media comes from the fact that all of mainstream media is profit-oriented, in contrast to the alternative media. We further note that for the most part, mainstream media is considered as a more credible source than alternative media, although the reputation has been recently tainted by the fake news.
In this work, following the commonsense, we consider popular news outlets such as The New York Times, and The Wall Street Journal as mainstream and less popular ones as alternatives. In Table~\ref{tb:urls_social}, we summarize the total number of paired URLs (i.e, $u_1\rightarrow u_2$) in which the original URL (i.e., $u_1$) corresponds to each social media platform with at least one event in our dataset. We also summarize in Table~\ref{tb:urls_news}, the total number of paired URLs whose original URL belongs to the mainstream and alternative news sources. In Table~\ref{tb:psm_normal_urls}, we see the break down of number of paired URLs for the PSM and normal users. We further demonstrate in Table~\ref{tb:percentage} some examples of the mainstream and alternative news URLs occurrence used in this work.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Social media platform's total number of paired URLs of the form $u_1\rightarrow u_2$ with at least one event in the dataset for the PSM and normal users.}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\cline{1-3}
\textbf{Platform} & \textbf{PSM} & \textbf{Normal}\\
\cline{1-3}
Twitter & 139,940 & 918,803\\ \hline
Facebook & 878 & 4,017 \\ \hline
Instagram & 0 & 2,857\\ \hline
Google & 163 & 132\\ \hline
Youtube & 24,724 & 72,890\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tb:urls_social}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{News sources' total paired URLs ($u_1\rightarrow u_2$) with at least one event in the dataset for the PSM and normal users.}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\cline{1-3}
\textbf{News Source} & \textbf{PSM} & \textbf{Normal}\\
\cline{1-3}
Mainstream & 0 & 286 \\ \hline
Alternatives & 35,187 & 124,449 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tb:urls_news}
\end{table}
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{Total number of paired URLs of the form $u_1\rightarrow u_2$ with at least one event for PSM/normal users and for all platforms.}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c}
\cline{1-8}
& $\rightarrow$ Twitter & $\rightarrow$ Facebook & $\rightarrow$ Instagram & $\rightarrow$ Google & $\rightarrow$ Youtube & $\rightarrow$ Mainstream & $\rightarrow$ Alternatives\\
\cline{1-8}
Twitter $\rightarrow$ & 109,354/766,617 & 598/3,843 & 229/2,461 & 120/382 & 11,992/59,889 & 90/688 & 17,557/84,923\\ \hline
Facebook $\rightarrow$& 655/3,108 & 4/41 & 3/9 & 2/1 & 87/281 & 0/1 & 127/576 \\ \hline
Instagram $\rightarrow$& 0/2,362 & 0/11 & 0/25 & 0/2 & 0/161 & 0/2 & 0/294\\ \hline
Google $\rightarrow$& 134/74 & 0/0 & 0/1 & 0/0 & 12/53 & 0/0 & 17/4\\ \hline
Youtube $\rightarrow$& 14,004/56,545 & 132/312 & 23/211 & 22/32 & 6,799/7,529 & 13/48 & 3,731/8,213\\ \hline
Mainstream $\rightarrow$& 0/189 & 0/1 & 0/1 & 0/0 & 0/13 & 0/1 & 0/81\\ \hline
Alternatives $\rightarrow$& 21,047/95,641 & 145/767 & 45/318 & 59/64 & 3,862/9,199 & 26/122 & 10,003/18,338\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tb:psm_normal_urls}
\end{table*}
\begin{table}[b]
\centering
\caption{Examples of mainstream and alternative news.
}
\begin{tabular}{c|c}
\cline{1-2}
\textbf{Mainstream} & \textbf{Alternatives} \\
\cline{1-2}
https://www.nytimes.com & https://www.rt.com \\
https://www.reuters.com & https://www.arabi21.com \\
https://www.wsj.com & https://www.7adramout.net \\
https://www.nbcnews.com & https://www.addiyar.com \\
https://www.ft.com & https://zamnpress.com \\
\cline{1-2}
\end{tabular}
\label{tb:percentage}
\end{table}
\subsection{Temporal Analysis}
Here, we present the differences between the PSM accounts in our dataset with their counterparts, normal users through temporal analysis of their posted URLs.
In Figure~\ref{fig:temporal}, we depict the daily occurrence of the paired URLs over the span of 43 days for both PSM and normal users. Recall from the previous section that our dataset has a larger number of normal users and higher number of the posted URLs compared to the PSM accounts. Therefore, it is reasonable to observe more activity from normal users than PSMs. For both groups of users, we observe a similar trend in occurrence of spikes and their durations.
As it is seen, distinguishing between PSMs and normal users merely based on the occurrence of URLs and their patterns is not reliable. Therefore, we set out to conduct experiments using a more sophisticated statistical technique known as ``Hawkes Process" in the next section.
\begin{figure}[t]\center
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{temporal.png}
\caption{Number of paired URLs posted by the PSM and normal users in our dataset. Note that number of normal users in our dataset is higher than the PSM accounts.}
\label{fig:temporal}
\end{figure}
\section{Framework}
In the previous section, we presented our data analysis to demonstrate differences between PSM accounts and normal users in terms of URLs they usually post on Twitter. We now set out to assess their impact via a well-known mathematical technique called ``Hawkes process".
\subsection{Hawkes Processes}
In many scenarios, one needs to deal with timestamped events such as the activity of users on a social network recorded in continuous time. An important task then is to estimate the influence of the nodes based on their timestamp patterns~\cite{gomez2013modeling}. Point process is a principled framework for modeling such event data, where the dynamic of the point process can be captured by its conditional intensity function as follows:
\begin{equation}
\lambda(t) = \lim\limits_{\Delta t \rightarrow 0} \frac{\mathbb{E}(N(t+\Delta t) - N(t)|\mathcal{H}_t)}{\Delta t} = \frac{\mathbb{E}(dN(t)|\mathcal{H}_t)}{dt}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\mathbb{E}(dN(t)|\mathcal{H}_t)$ is the expectation of the number of events happend in the interval $(t,t+dt]$ given the historical observations $\mathcal{H}_t$ and $N(t)$ records the number of events before time $t$. Point process can be equivalently represented as a counting process $N=\{N(t)|t \in [0,T]\}$ over the time interval $[0, T]$.
The Hawkes process framework~\cite{hawkes71} has been used in many problems that require modeling complicated event sequences where historical events have impact on future ones. Examples include but are not limited to financial analysis~\cite{bacry2016estimation}, seismic analysis~\cite{daley2007introduction} and social network modeling~\cite{zhou2013learning}. One-dimensional Hawkes process is a point process $N_t$ with the following particular form of intensity function:
\begin{equation}
\lambda(t) = \mu + a\int_{-\infty}^{t}g(t-s)dN_s = \mu + a\sum_{i:t_i<t}{g(t-t_i)}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\mu > 0$ is the exogenous base intensity (i.e., background rate of events), $t_i$ are the time of events in the point process before time $t$, and $g(t)$ is the decay kernel.
In this paper, we use exponential kernel of the form $g(t) = we^{-wt}$, but adapting to the other positive forms is straightforward. The second part of the above formulation captures the self-exciting nature of the point processes-- the occurrence of events in the past has a positive impact on the future ones. Given a sequence of events $\{t_i\}_{i=1}^n$ observed in $[0, T]$ and generated from the above intensity function, the log-likelihood function can be obtained as follows~\cite{zhou2013learning}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:log_like}
\mathcal{L} = \log\frac{\prod_{i=1}^n\lambda(t_i)}{\exp\int_{0}^{T}\lambda(t)dt} = \sum_{i=1}^n{\log\lambda(t_i)}-\int_{0}^{T}\lambda(t)dt
\end{equation}
In this paper, we focus on multi-dimensional Hawkes processes which is defined by a $U$-dimensional point process $N_t^u, u=1,\ldots,U$. In other words, we have $U$ Hawkes processes coupled with each other-- each Hawkes process correspond to one of the platforms and the influence between them is modeled using the mutually-exciting property of the multi-dimensional Hawkes processes. We formally define the following formulation to model the influence of different events on each other:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:multi_hawkes}
\lambda_u(t) = \mu_u + \sum_{i:t_i<t}{a_{uu_i}g(t-t_i)}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\mu_u \geq 0$ is the base intensity for the $u$-th Hawkes process. The coefficient $a_{uu_i}\geq 0$ captures the mutually-exciting property between the $u$-th and $u_i$-th processes. Larger value of $a_{uu_i}$ shows that events in the $u_i$-th dimension are more likely to trigger an event in $u$-th dimension in future. More intuitively, an event on one point process can cause an impulse response on other processes, which increases the probability of an event occurring above the processes' background rates. We reiterate that in this study each URL is attributed to an event, i.e., if the URL $u_1$ triggers the URL $u_2$ (i.e., $u_1\rightarrow u_2$), then $a_{u_2u_1}\geq 0$
In Figure~\ref{fig:hawkes}, we depict a multivariate example of three different streams of events, $e_0$, $e_1$ and $e_2$. As illustrated, $e_0$ is caused by the background rate $\lambda(t)_0$ and has an influence on itself and $e_1$. On the other hand, $e_1$ is caused by $\lambda(t)_1$ and has an influence on $e_2$. Simply put, a background event in $e_0$ induces impulse on responses on processes $e_1$ and $e_2$. Accordingly, the caused child event in $e_1$ leads to another child event in $e_2$.
\begin{figure}[t]\center
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{hawkes2.png}
\caption{Illustration of the Hawkes Process. Events induce impulse on other processes and cause child events. Background event in $e_0$ induces impulse on responses on processes $e_1$ and $e_2$.}
\label{fig:hawkes}
\end{figure}
We consider an infectivity matrix $\boldsymbol{A}=[a_{uu_i}] \in \mathbb{R}^{U\times U}$ which collects the self-triggering coefficients between Hawkes processes, and $U=7$ is the number of processes (i.e., platforms) in our work. Each entry in this matrix indicates the strength of influence each platform has on other platforms. Our ultimate goal in this paper is to estimate the infectivity matrix as it reflects the estimated influence of each platform on others. Next, we will provide the methodology that we follow to estimate the influence of the URLs on each other.
\subsection{Methodology}
We aim to assess the influence of the PSM accounts in our dataset via their posted URLs. We consider the URLs posted by two groups of users: (1) PSM accounts and (2) normal users. For both groups, we fit a Hawkes model with $K=7$ point processes each for the seven categories of social media and news outlets discussed earlier. In each of the Hawkes models, every process is able to influence all the others including itself, which allows us to estimate the strength of connections between each of the seven categories for both groups of users, in terms of how likely an event (i.e., the posted URL) can cause subsequent events in each of the groups.
We use the \textsc{Adm4} algorithm presented by~\cite{zhou2013learning} and follow the methodology presented by~\cite{zannettou2017web} for fitting the Haweks processes for both PSM and normal users. \textsc{Adm4}~\cite{zhou2013learning} is an efficient optimization that estimates the parameters $\boldsymbol{A}$ and $\boldsymbol{\mu}$ by maximizing the regularized log-likelihood $\mathcal{L}(\boldsymbol{A},\boldsymbol{\mu})$:
\begin{equation}
\min_{\boldsymbol{A}\geq 0,\boldsymbol{\mu}\geq 0} -\mathcal{L}(\boldsymbol{A},\boldsymbol{\mu}) + \lambda_1{||\boldsymbol{A}||_*} + \lambda_2||\boldsymbol{A}||_1
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\mathcal{L}(\boldsymbol{A},\boldsymbol{\mu})$ can be obtained by substituting $\lambda_u(t)$ from Equation~\ref{eq:multi_hawkes} into Equation~\ref{eq:log_like}. Also, $||\boldsymbol{A}||_*$ is the nuclear norm of matrix $\boldsymbol{A}$, and is defined as the sum of its singular value.
We consider two different sets of URLs posted by the PSM accounts and normal users by selecting URLs that have at least one event in Twitter (i.e., posted by a user). For each group, we construct a matrix $\boldsymbol{W}\in\mathbb{N}^{T\times U}$ with $U=7$, whose entries are sequences of events (i.e., posted URLs) observed during a time period $T$. We note that each sequence of events is of the form $\mathcal{S}=\{(t_i,u_i)\}_{i=1}^{n_i}$ where $n_i$ is the number of the events occurring at the $u_i$-th dimension (i.e., URLs posted containing one of the 7 platforms).
\section{Experimental Results}
Here, we conduct experiments to gauge the effectiveness of Hawkes process for moderling influence of PSMs.
\subsection{Settings}
In this work, we adopt the \textsc{Adm4} algorithm~\cite{zhou2013learning} which implements parametric inference for Hawkes processes with an exponential kernel and a mix of Lasso and nuclear regularization. We initialize infectivity matrix $\boldsymbol{A}$, base intensities $\boldsymbol{\mu}$ and decays $\boldsymbol{\beta}\in\mathbb{R}$ randomly.
We further set the number of nodes $U=7$ to reflect the $7$ platforms used in this study. Level of penalization is set to $C=1000$, and the ratio of Lasso-Nuclear regularization mixing parameter is set to $0.5$. Finally, maximum number of iterations for solving the optimization is set to $50$ and the tolerance of solving algorithm is set to $1e-5$.
\subsection{Results}
We estimate infectivity matrix for both PSM and normal users by fitting the Hawkes model described earlier. In our study, this matrix characterizes the strength of the connections between the platforms and news sources. More specifically, each weight value represents the connection strength from one platform to another. In other words, each entry in this matrix can be interpreted as the expected number of subsequent events that will occur on the second group after each event on the first~\cite{zannettou2017web}. In Figure~\ref{fig:hawkes_w}, we depict the estimated weights for all paired URLs for both PSM and normal users. Looking at the weights in both of the plots, we realize that greater weights belong to processes that have impact on Twitter, i.e. ``$\rightarrow Twitter$". This implies that both of the groups in our Twitter dataset often post URLs that ultimately have greater impact on Twitter.
Overall, we observe the followings:
\begin{itemize}
\item URLs referencing all platforms and posted by the PSMs and regular users, mostly trigger URLs that contain the Twitter domain.
\item Among all platforms studied here, URLs shared from facebook.com and alternative news media contributed the most to the dissemination of malicious information from PSM accounts. In other words, they had largest impact on making a message viral and causing the subsequent events.
\item Posts that were tweeted by the PSM accounts and contained URLs from facebook.com, demonstrated more influence on the subsequent retweets containing URLs from youtube.com, in contrary to the other way around. This means that ultimately tweets with URLs from facebook will likely end up inducing external impulse on youtube.com. In contrast, URLs posted by the normal users have nearly the same impact on the subsequent events regardless of the social media or news outlet used.
\end{itemize}
The above mentioned observations demonstrate the effectiveness of leveraging Hawkes process to quantify the impact of URLs posted by PSMs and regular users on the dissemination of content on Twitter. The observations we make here show that PSM accounts and regular users behave differently in terms of the URLs they post on Twitter, in that they have different tastes while disseminating URL links. Accordingly their impact on the subsequent events significantly differ from each other.
\begin{figure}[t]\center
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{psm_matrix_weights.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{normal_matrix_weights.png}
\caption{Estimated weights for all paired URLs for (top) PSMs, and (bottom) normal users. Among all URLs, those from facebook.com and alternative news media had the largest impact on dissemination of malicious messages.}
\label{fig:hawkes_w}
\end{figure}
\section{Related Work}
The explosive growth of the Web has raised numerous challenges and attracted several researchers with different background~\cite{ferrara2016rise,beigi2019protecting,alvari2016non,beigi2016exploiting,howard2016bots,beigi2014leveraging,alvari2018early,beigi2018privacy,benigni2017online,beigi2018securing,alvari2017semi,wang2014detection,beigi2018similar,alvari2016identifying,ferrara2016predicting,alvari2011detecting}. Below, we will review some of the closest research directions to our research
\noindent \textbf{Point Process.} When dealing with timestamped events in continuous time such as the activity of users on social media, point process could be leveraged for modeling such events. Point processes have been extensively used to model activities in networks~\cite{xiao2017wasserstein}. Hawkes process is a special form of point processes which models complicated event sequences with historical events influencing future ones. Hawkes processes have been applied to a variety of problems including financial analysis~\cite{bacry2016estimation}, seismic analysis~\cite{daley2007introduction} and social network modeling~\cite{zhou2013learning}, community detection~\cite{tran2015netcodec}, and causal inference~\cite{xu2016learning}.
\noindent \textbf{Social Spam/Bot Detection.} Social bot is a computer program that automatically generate content and interacts with real people on social media, trying to emulate and possibly alter their behavior~\cite{ferrara2016rise}. Recently, DARPA organized a Twitter bot challenge to detect ``influence bots''~\cite{7490315}, where supervised and semi-supervised approaches were proposed using different features. The work of~\cite{Cao:2014:ULG:2660267.2660269} for example, use similarity to cluster accounts and uncover groups of malicious users. The work of~\cite{varol2017online} presents a supervised framework for bot detection which uses more than thousands features. In a different attempt, the work of~\cite{ICWSM1715678} studied the problem of spam detection in Wikipedia using different spammers behavioral features.
For a comprehensive survey on the ongoing efforts to fight social bots, we direct the reader to~\cite{ferrara2016rise}.
\noindent \textbf{Fake News Identification.} Fake news detection has recently attracted a growing interest of general public and researchers, as the spread of misinformation on social media and the Web increases on a daily basis. A growing body of work has been devoted to addressing the impact of bots in manipulating political discussion and spreading fake news, including the 2016 U.S. presidential election~\cite{howard2016bots,bessi2016,shao2017spread} and the 2017 French election~\cite{ferrara2017}. For example,~\cite{shao2017spread} analyzes tweets following recent U.S. presidential election and found evidences that bots played key roles in spreading fake news.
\noindent \textbf{Identifying Instigators.} Given a snapshot of the diffusion process at a given time, these works aim to detect the source of the diffusion. For instance, ~\cite{Zhu:2016:ISD:2942477.2942508} designed an approach for information source detection and in particular initiator of a cascade. In contrast, we are focused on a set of users who \textit{might} or \textit{might not} be initiators. Other similar works on finding most influential spreaders of information such as ~\cite{journals/corr/PeiMAZM14,Fu2015} and outbreak prediction such as ~\cite{Cui:2013:COP:2487575.2487639} also exist in the literature. For example, the work of ~\cite{Konishi:2016:IKO:3061053.3061145} performed classification to detect users who adopt popular items.
\noindent \textbf{Extremism Detection.} Several studies have focused on understanding extremism in social networks~\cite{benigni2017online,benigni2016tweets,KlausenMZ16,ferrara2016predicting,scanlonautomatic,scanlonforecasting,hung2016detecting}. The work of~\cite{KlausenMZ16}, uses Twitter and proposes an approach to predict new extremists, determine if the newly created account belongs to a suspended extremist, and predict the ego-network of the suspended extremist upon creating her new account.
Authors in~\cite{benigni2016tweets,benigni2017online} performed iterative vertex clustering and classification to identify Islamic Jihadists on Twitter.
\noindent \textbf{Detection of Internet Water Armies.} The term ``Internet water armies" refers to a special group of online users who get paid for posting comments for some hidden purposes such as influencing other users towards social events or business markets. Therefore, they are also called ``hidden paid posters". The works of~\cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1111-4297,DBLP:conf/asunam/ChenWSB13,wang2014detection} use user behavioral and domain-specific attributes and designed approaches to detect Internet water armies.
\section{Conclusion and Future Work}
In this study, we presented an analysis on a real-world ISIS-related dataset from Twitter to demonstrate how Pathogenic Social Media (PSM) and normal users usually post on Twitter in terms of the URLs they post. More specifically, we leveraged a statistical technique known as Hawkes Process for modeling the influence of PSM accounts on dissemination of malicious content on the Web. In this work, we used URLs posted by two groups of users, PSMs and normal users, on major social media and mainstream and alternative news outlets. Overall, our findings indicate that the URLs posted by the PSM accounts have the largest impact if contained either facebook.com or alternative news media. In contrast, their counterparts, i.e., normal users, often post URLs that have nearly the same impact on the Web, no matter what social media or news outlet they use. There are potential avenues for future work. First, we would like to extend the study by proposing a prediction mechanism for distinguishing PSMs from normal users, based on their different impact on the greater Web. Another research direction would also be learning causal inference for Hawkes process and investigating the relation between the two concepts, while considering the problem of identification of PSM accounts.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
This work was supported through DoD Minerva program.
|
\section{Introduction}
Launched in 2009, the Kepler space observatory has discovered thousands of transiting extrasolar planets, and unveiled the huge diversity that characterizes the exoplanetary systems. Such large numbers of new worlds has enabled statistical studies to shed light on the different observed architectures, forming an important repository of data on the formation and evolutionary history of the planetary systems.
One striking feature that has emerged from observations is that the distribution of the radii of small ($R_{\rm p}$<4 $R_{\rm \oplus}$), close-in planets is bi-modal (\citealt{owenwu13}, and the following studies by \citealt{fulton17,zeng17a,zeng17b}). By refining the stellar and the planet radii using parallaxes from \textit{Gaia}, \cite{fulton18} have better characterized these two quite distinct populations, identified as super-Earths and sub-Neptunes. They have determined that the centres of the two groups lie at 1.2-1.3 $R_{\rm \oplus}$ and $\sim$ 2.4 $R_{\rm \oplus}$, respectively, and were able to locate the radius gap that separates the two families as lying between $\sim$ 1.8-2 $R_{\rm \oplus}$ (as also confirmed by \citealt{berger18}). The bi-modality in the size distribution is likely indicative of existing differences in the bulk compositions of the two classes of planets, which in turn could also be related to the formation history and the mass loss mechanisms in action during the system evolution, such as photo evaporation (e.g. \citealt{lopezfortney2013,owenwu17,vaneylen18}).
There is ambiguity in the compositions of the sub-Neptune family, since they may be either gas dwarfs, with a rocky core surrounded by an H$_{\rm 2}$/He gaseous envelope, or water-worlds mainly composed of H$_{\rm 2}$O-dominated ices or/and fluids, or a combination of an ice mantle and an H$_{\rm 2}$/He gaseous envelope. According to Zeng et al. (2018, submitted) many of the 2-4 $R_{\rm \oplus}$ planets could actually be water-worlds. Nonetheless, the key information that is still missing for the bulk of the small planets are their masses, which would allow for a determination of their average densities, necessary to constrain their compositions and internal structures. Therefore, the characterization of these small exoplanets through the measurement of their masses is fundamental to understanding the origins and diversity of planets in the Milky Way Galaxy.
Within this framework, we present a characterization study of the K2-36 planetary system \citep{sinukoff16} based on radial velocities (RVs) extracted from spectra collected with the HARPS-N spectrograph. This system is of special interest in that the star K2-36 hosts two small, close-in transiting planets discovered by K2 that are exemplar members of the two planet families identified in the Kepler sample ($R_{\rm b}$ = 1.43$\pm$0.08 $R_{\rm \oplus}$ and $R_{\rm c}$ = 3.2$\pm$0.3 $R_{\rm \oplus}$). K2-36 offers the exciting opportunity to measure the mass of planets below and above the radius gap that belong to the same system, testing the hypothesis that the gap represents the transition between rocky planets and lower density bodies with enough volatiles to measurably change their bulk composition.
K2-36 is a magnetically active star with an RV scatter of $\sim$17 \ms, which is much larger than the expected semi-amplitude of the planetary signals on the basis of the observed planet radii. Thus, it represents a very challenging case study concerning the characterization of small-size, low-mass planets, even with transit ephemeris known to high precision.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{sect:dataset} we describe the photometric and spectroscopic datasets used in this work. In Section \ref{sect:stellarparam} we provide a new determination of the fundamental stellar parameters for K2-36, making use of \textit{Gaia} data, and in Section \ref{sect:lcanalisi} we present refined planetary parameters from a reanalysis of the K2 light curve. We discuss in Section \ref{sect:actindex} the results of the stellar activity analysis, and present in Section \ref{sect:rvanalysis} the measurements from RV data of the mass and bulk density of the two K2-36 planets. In Section \ref{sect:discussion} we discuss the implications of our results concerning the composition and bulk structure of the K2-36 planets. The main conclusions are outlined in Section \ref{sect:conclusion}.
\section{Dataset}
\label{sect:dataset}
\subsection{K2 photometry}
K2-36 was observed by the K2 mission during Campaign 1 in 2014 (May 30-Aug 21).
In our work we used the 30 minute cadence K2SFF\footnote{https://archive.stsci.edu/prepds/k2sff/} light curve processed as described by \cite{vanderjohns14} and \cite{vander16}, and refined by simultaneously fitting for spacecraft systematics, stellar variability, and the planetary transits. The light curve is shown in the upper panel of Fig. \ref{Fig:curvaluce}. A gap is visible between epochs BJD 2\,456\,848 and 2\,456\,850.9, during which the observations were interrupted in order to downlink the data. During that time Kepler changed orientation, which also changed the heating due to the Sun and introduced an offset in the photometry. The middle panel in Fig. \ref{Fig:curvaluce} shows the flattened light curve corrected for the modulation due to the stellar rotation, and it is that we used to model the planetary transit signals.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\hsize]{pretty_transit_plot_ep201713348_young_age.pdf}
\caption{\textit{Upper panel}: K2-36 light curve observed by K2, showing the modulation induced by the stellar rotation. \textit{Middle plot}: K2-36 flattened light curve, with the rotation modulation filtered-out. The observed dimming events correspond to the transits of the two planets. \textit{Bottom panel}: transit light curves for K2-36\,b and K2-36\,c folded at their best-fit orbital periods (Table \ref{Table:planetfittransit}). The curves in red are our best-fit transit models, and the residuals are also shown.}
\label{Fig:curvaluce}
\end{figure}
\subsection{HARPS-N spectroscopy}
We observed K2-36 over three seasons, between the end of January 2015 and the end of May 2018, with the high-resolution and stabilised spectrograph HARPS-N \citep{cosentino14} at the Telescopio Nazionale Galileo (TNG) on the island of La Palma. A total of 83 echelle spectra have been secured on fiber A, all with an exposure time of 1800 seconds. Their average signal-to-noise ratio S/N per pixel is 34, as measured at wavelength $\lambda\sim$550 nm. Two of them have S/N<15 (taken at epochs BJD 2\,457\,810.586681 and 2\,457\,890.464286), and they have been discarded from further analysis due to their low quality. Fiber B was used to collect sky spectra. The spectra were reduced with version 3.7 of the HARPS-N Data Reduction Software (DRS).
We performed an analysis to identify the RV measurements potentially contaminated by moonlight. This check is particularly necessary for a target such as K2-36, which lies close to the ecliptic plane. The procedure adopted for this analysis is the same as the one described in Section 2.1 of \cite{malavolta17a}. We have found one potentially contaminated spectrum at epoch BJD 2\,457\,054.632798, but since our analysis is not conclusive we have decided to include it in the final dataset, which thus consists of 81 spectra.
\section{Stellar parameters}
\label{sect:stellarparam}
Adaptive optics imaging did not detect stellar companions near K2-36 \citep{sinukoff16}, and there is no evidence in the cross-correlation function (CCF) of the HARPS-N spectra for more than one component.
We derived new values for the fundamental stellar parameters from the analysis of HARPS-N spectra and using data from the \textit{Gaia} DR2 catalogue. The atmospheric parameters were first determined separately using three different algorithms.
\textit{Equivalent widths}. In the classical curve-of-growth approach, we derive temperature T$_{\rm eff}$ and microturbulent velocity ${\xi }_{{\rm{t}}}$ by minimizing the trend of iron abundances (obtained from the equivalent width of each line) with respect to excitation potential and reduced equivalent width, respectively. The surface gravity $\log g$ is obtained by imposing the same average abundance from neutral and ionized iron lines. We used \texttt{ARESv2}\footnote{Available at http://www.astro.up.pt/$\sim$sousasag/ares/} \citep{sousa15} to measure the equivalent widths, and used \texttt{MOOG}\footnote{Available at http://www.as.utexas.edu/$\sim$chris/moog.html} \citep{sneden73} jointly with the \texttt{ATLAS9} grid of stellar model atmospheres from \cite{castelli04} to perform line analysis and spectrum synthesis, under the assumption of local thermodynamic equilibrium (LTE). We followed the prescription of \cite{andreasen17} and applied the gravity correction from \cite{mortier14}. The analysis was performed on the resulting co-addition of individual spectra. We get $T_{\rm eff}=4800\pm59$ K, $\log g=4.73\pm$0.15 (cgs), and [Fe/H]=-0.15$\pm$0.03 dex.
\textit{Atmospheric Stellar Parameters from Cross-Correlation Functions (CCFpams)}. This technique is described in \cite{malavolta17b}, and the code is publicly available\footnote{https://github.com/LucaMalavolta/CCFpams}. We get $T_{\rm eff}=4841\pm37$ K, $\log g=4.60\pm$0.10 (cgs), and [Fe/H]=-0.19$\pm$0.04 dex. We report here the internal errors, which are likely underestimated.
\textit{Stellar Parameter Classification (SPC)}. The SPC technique \citep{buchhave12,buchave14} was applied to 55 spectra with high S/N, and the weighted average of the individual spectroscopic analyses yielded stellar parameters of $T_{\rm eff}=4862\pm50$ K, $\log g=4.57\pm$0.10 (cgs), and [m/H]=-0.05$\pm$0.08 dex. For the projected rotational velocity we can reliably impose only the upper limit $v\sin i_{\rm \star}$<2 \kms.
\subsection{The age of K2-36}
Inferring the age of this planetary system is relevant for investigating its origin and evolution, but it is a difficult issue for a K dwarf when using only stellar evolution isochrones. Based on the rotational modulation observed in the $K2$ light curve (Sect. \ref{lcstellarrotation}) and on a rotation-age relationship (Scott Engle, private communication), the age of K2-36 is found to be 1.5$\pm$0.4 Gyr, which agrees with our measured average level of chromospheric activity $\braket{\log R\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK}}$ = -4.50 dex.
Using the relation of \cite{mamajek08} based on gyrochronology (eqs. [12]-[14]), and adopting P$_{\rm rot}$=16.9$\pm$0.2 as the rotation period of K2-36 (Sect. 5.1), we derive an age of 1.09$\pm$0.13 Gyr, although the color index of K2-36 ($B-V$=0.96, corrected for the extinction $E(B-V)$=0.03 using the 3D Pan-STARRS 1 dust map of \citealt{green18}) is slightly out the range of validity for that calibration (0.5<$B-V$<0.9). This result is in agreement with the previous estimate.
We also carried out Galactic population assignment using the classification scheme by \cite{bensby03,bensby05}, the K2-36's systemic radial velocity from HARPS-N spectra, and \textit{Gaia} DR2 proper motion and parallax. We obtain a thick disk–to–thin disk probability ratio $thick/thin=0.1$, implying that K2-36 is significantly identified as a thin-disk object, presumably not very old.
Finally, we searched for evidence of the lithium absorption line at 6707.8 \AA\: (Fig. \ref{Fig:litium}). We compared the co-added spectrum with four models, each differing only in the assumed Li abundance. The lithium line is not detectable within the noise of the continuum, and we set an upper limit of $A$(Li)<0.0. The lithium depletion in K2-36 is comparable to, or lower than, that observed for stars of the same temperature and spectral type in 600-800 Myr-old open clusters with similar metallicity (e.g., \citealt{soderblom95,sestito05,somers14,brandt15}). We thus set an approximate lower limit for the age of K2-36 at $t=0.6$ Gyr.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\hsize]{full_spectrum.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=\hsize]{zoom_spectrum.pdf}
\caption{\textit{Top panel}: portion of the HARPS-N co-added spectrum of K2-36 containing
the LiI line at 6707.8 \AA , compared to four different syntheses (lines of various colors and styles), each differing only for the assumed lithium abundance. \textit{Bottom panel}: zoom-in view of the region around 6707.8 \AA to enable easier comparison between the observed data and model spectra for low Li abundances.”}
\label{Fig:litium}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Age-constrained final set of stellar parameters}
We used our estimated age of K2-36 to derive a final set of fundamental stellar parameters, including the stellar mass and radius. To this purpose we have constrained the stellar age to be in the range of 600 Myr to 2 Gyr. The parameters were obtained with the package \texttt{isochrone} \citep{morton15}, following the prescriptions of \cite{malavolta18}.
The photospheric parameters of the star obtained with the three different techniques outlined earlier in this Section were used as priors together with the photometric magnitudes V, K, WISE1 and WISE2, and the parallax from \textit{Gaia}, within a Bayesian framework. The stellar evolution models Dartmouth \citep{Dotter2008} and MIST \citep{Dotter2016,Choi2016,Paxton2011} were used, thus a total of six different sets of posteriors for the fitted parameters have been derived. The final results are listed in Table \ref{Tab:starparam2} and represent the 50$^{\rm th}$, 15.86$^{\rm th}$ and 84.14$^{\rm th}$ percentiles (the last two used for defining the error bars) after combining all the posteriors together (32310 samples) to take into account the differences existing between the different stellar evolution models. Our model provides an estimate of the extinction $A_{\rm V}$ at the distance of the star, $A_{\rm V}$=0.09$^{+0.09}_{-0.07}$ mag. This value is consistent with zero and is in agreement with the results of the 3D dust mapping with Pan-STARRS 1.
\begin{table}
\caption{Summary of the fundamental stellar parameters of K2-36.}
\label{Tab:starparam2}
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l l l}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
Parameter & Value & Ref. \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
RA [ICRS J2015] & 11:17:47.78 & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
DEC [ICRS J2015] & +03:51:59.00 & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$\mu_{\rm \alpha^{*}}$ [mas/year] &-20.521$\pm$0.076 & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$\mu_{\rm \delta}$ [mas/year] & 26.194$\pm$0.058 & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
Parallax [mas] & 9.0832$\pm$0.0504 & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$V$ [mag] & 11.803$\pm$0.030 & (2) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$B-V$ & 0.992$\pm$0.064 & (2) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$K_{\rm s}$ [mag] & 9.454$\pm$0.025 & (3) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
WISE/W1 [mag] & 9.379$\pm$0.023 & (4) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
WISE/W12 [mag] & 9.442$\pm$0.020 & (4) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
Radius [$R_{\rm \odot}$] & 0.718$^{+0.008}_{-0.006}$ & (5a) \\
& 0.74$\pm$0.04 & (6) \\
& 0.75$\pm$0.02 & (7) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
Mass [$M_\odot$] & 0.79$\pm$0.01 & (5a) \\
& 0.80$\pm$0.04 & (6) \\
& 0.80$^{+0.02}_{-0.03}$ & (7) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
Density [$\rho_\odot$] & 2.12$\pm$0.04 & (5a) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$T_{\rm eff}$ [K] & 4916$^{+35}_{-37}$ & (5) \\
& 4924$\pm$60 & (6) \\
& 4944$\pm$50 & (7) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$\log g$ [cgs] & 4.621$^{+0.005}_{-0.004}$ & (5b) \\
& 4.65$\pm$0.10 & (6) \\
& 4.70$\pm$0.10 & (7) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$[\rm Fe/H]$ [dex] & -0.09$^{+0.06}_{-0.04}$ & (5) \\
& -0.03$\pm$0.04 & (6) \\
& -0.03$\pm$0.08 & (7) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
Age [Gyr] & 1.4$^{+0.4}_{-0.5}$ & (5a) \\
& 1.5$\pm$0.4 & (5c) \\
& 1.1$\pm$0.2 & (5d) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$\log(L/L_\odot$) & -0.57$\pm$0.01 & (5a) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$v\sini_{\rm \star}$ [\kms] & < 2 & (5) \\
& 2$\pm$1 & (6) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$\braket{\log R\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK}}$ [dex] & -4.50 & (5) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
P$_{\rm rot}$ [days] & 16.9$\pm$0.2 & (5) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\end{tabular}
\tablefoot{(1) \textit{Gaia} DR2 \citep{gaiacoll16,brown18}; (2) APASS DR9 \citep{apass15}; (3) 2MASS Catalog \citep{2mass06}; (4) WISE Catalog; (5) this work; (5a) this work, derived from isochrones by imposing an age in the range 600 Myr-2 Gyr; (5b) derived from isochrones, and not from spectral analysis; (5c) based on a rotation-age relationship, and consistent with the measured $\braket{\log R\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK}}$; (5d) based on the activity-age calibration of \cite{mamajek08}; (6) \cite{sinukoff16}; (7) \cite{mayo18}.}
\end{table}
\section{Photometric transit analysis}
\label{sect:lcanalisi}
The transit analysis was done in the same manner as described in \cite{mayo18}. The two planets in the system were fit simultaneously using the \texttt{BATMAN} transit fitting package. The model consists of four global parameters (baseline flux level, a noise parameter, and a quadratic limb darkening law) as well as five parameters per planet (time of transit, period, $R_{\rm p}/R_{\rm \star}$, semi-major axis, and inclination). Our model also assumes zero eccentricity and non-interacting planets. The parameters were estimated using \texttt{emcee} \citep{foreman13}, a python package to perform Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) analysis. Convergence was determined by requiring the Gelman-Rubin statistic \citep{gelman92} to be less than 1.1 for all parameters. The only difference between our analysis and that of \cite{mayo18} is that we included a prior on the stellar density $\rho_\odot$ in the light curve model fit. Specifically, at each step in the MCMC simulation we took the stellar density estimated from the transit fit at that step and applied a Gaussian prior to penalize values discrepant from our spectroscopic estimate of $\rho_\odot$. Table \ref{Table:planetfittransit} summarizes the fit results. We see that, while our results are consistent with those in \cite{mayo18}, the prior on the stellar density reduced the uncertainties in planetary radii, inclinations and transit durations. Planet radii are consistent within 1$\sigma$ with those derived by \cite{sinukoff16}, and have a similar precision.
Based on their radii, K2-36\,b and K2-36\,c are each representative of one of the two planet populations in the radius distribution, below $\sim$1.8 $R_{\rm \oplus}$ and above $\sim$2 $R_{\rm \oplus}$, as characterized by \cite{fulton18}.
We note that the mutual inclination between the orbital planes of the planets ($\Delta I\leq 3 \degree$) is in agreement with the results of \cite{dai18} based on the analysis of Kepler/K2 multi-planet systems (not including K2-36). They found that when the innermost planet is closer to the host star than $a/R_{\rm \star}$=5, $\Delta I$ can be likely greater than $\sim5\degree$, and this effect could also depend on the orbital period ratio, with pairs with $P_{\rm c}/P_{\rm b}\geq$5-6 showing larger $\Delta I$. K2-36\,b has $a/R_{\rm \star}$=6.6, the period ratio is $P_{\rm c}/P_{\rm b}\sim$3.8, and the measured $\Delta I$ is very close to the dispersion of 2.0$\pm$0.1 degrees they found for multi-planet systems where the innermost planet has 5 < $a/R_{\rm \star}$ < 12. This suggests that K2-36 likely belongs to a group of systems that evolved through a mechanism which did not excite the inclination of the innermost planet, therefore without resulting in different orbital architectures.
\section{Stellar activity analysis}
\subsection{Stellar rotation from K2 light curve}
\label{lcstellarrotation}
Looking at the light curve of K2-36 (Fig. \ref{Fig:curvaluce}, upper panel), the modulation induced by the stellar rotation can be clearly seen. The data before the gap show a two-maxima pattern that repeats every $\sim$17 days, suggesting that this could be the actual stellar rotation period $P_{\rm rot}$.
The scatter of the data before the gap is $\sigma_{\rm phot}$=2.4$\%$, which increases to $\sigma_{\rm phot}$=3.9$\%$ for data collected after the gap. A positive trend is seen in the second batch of data, that suggests that the active regions on the stellar photosphere are evolving with a timescale comparable with the stellar rotation period. However, we note that the light curve extracted with the alternative pipeline \texttt{EVEREST} \citep{luger16} shows a weaker trend (light curve not shown here), implying that it could be not entirely astrophysical in origin. The highest increase in the relative flux of the light curve maxima is limited to $\sim$0.2$\%$, and it is observed between the last two rotation cycles.
To determine $P_{\rm rot}$ we computed the autocorrelation function (ACF) of the light curve using the DCF method by \cite{edelson88} (Fig. \ref{Fig:acf}). The ACF has been explored up to the 80-day time span. The highest ACF peak occurs at $\sim$16.7 days. We modelled this peak with a Gaussian profile\footnote{using \texttt{LMFIT}, a Non-Linear Least-Squares Minimization and Curve-Fitting for Python.} in order to determine the error on $P_{\rm rot}$, that we assume to be equal to the Gaussian RMS width. We get $P_{\rm rot}$=16.7$\pm$1.9 days.
Since the light curve shows evidence for quasi-periodic variations on a timescale of the order of $P_{\rm rot}$, this makes it interesting to analyse the data using a Gaussian process (GP) regression as done, e.g., by \cite{haywood14}, \cite{cloutier17}, or \cite{angus14} to model space-based photometry, adopting a quasi-periodic kernel defined by the covariance matrix
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:1}
K(t, t^{\prime}) = h^2\cdot\exp\bigg[-\frac{(t-t^{\prime})^2}{2\lambda^2} - \frac{sin^{2}\left(\dfrac{\pi(t-t^{\prime})}{\theta}\right)}{2w^2}\bigg] + \nonumber \\
+\, \sigma^{2}_{\rm phot, K2}(t)\cdot\delta_{t,t^{\prime}}
\end{eqnarray} \\
where $t$ and $t^{\prime}$ represent two different epochs. The four hyperparameters are $h$, which represents the amplitude of the correlations; $\theta$, which parametrizes the rotation period of the star; $w$, which describes the level of high-frequency variation within a complete stellar rotation; and $\lambda$, which represents the decay timescale of the correlations and can be physically related to the active region lifetimes. The flux error at time \textit{t} is indicated by $\sigma_{\rm phot, K2}(t)$, and $\delta_{t,t^{\prime}}$ is the Kronecker delta. We introduced a free parameter to model the offset due to the gap in the K2 observations. Since the computing time for a GP regression scales as N$^{\rm 3}$, where N is the number of data points, we analysed the 6-hr binned light curve instead of the full dataset.
All the GP analyses presented in this work (see also Sect. \ref{sect:actindex} and \ref{sect:rvanalysis}) were carried out using the publicly available Monte Carlo sampler and Bayesian inference tool \texttt{MultiNestv3.10} (e.g. \citealt{feroz13}), through the \texttt{pyMultiNest} wrapper \citep{buchner14}, by adopting 800 live points and a sampling efficiency of 0.5. All the logarithms of the Bayesian evidence ($\ln\mathcal{Z}$) mentioned in our work were calculated by MultiNest. The GP component of our code is the publicly available \texttt{GEORGEv0.2.1} python module \citep{ambika14}.
The results of the analysis are summarized in Table \ref{Tab:actindgp}. The rotation period, that we left free to vary between 0 and 20 days, is consistent with, but more precise than, the ACF estimate ($P_{\rm rot}$=16.9$\pm$0.2 days). The best-fit value for the evolution timescale of the active regions is well constrained ($\lambda=106_{\rm -11}^{\rm +14}$ days) and of the order of a few rotation periods. The best-fit value for the offset is 0.0036$\pm$0.0004, and Fig. \ref{Fig:lccorrected} shows the light curve corrected for the offset. Within the framework of a quasi-periodic model, the corrected light curve shows that the active regions on one hemisphere are evolving faster than those on the opposite side of the stellar disk, because the relative height of one maximum has increased by $\sim1.2\%$ over the observation time span.
Using our measure for the stellar radius and the upper limit for $v\sini_{\rm \star}$ (which coincides with the best-fit value of \citealt{sinukoff16}), the expected maximum rotation period is $P_{\rm rot}=17.7$ days.
This result implies that the projected inclination of the spin axis is $i_{\rm \star}$$\sim$90$\degree$.
Since the star is active, we searched for flares in the K2 light curve, without finding any clear evidence of large events.
\subsection{Stellar activity spectroscopic diagnostics}
\label{sect:actindex}
We characterized the activity of K2-36 during the time span of the HARPS-N observations by analysing a set of standard spectroscopic indicators.
We considered the full width at half maximum (FWHM) of the CCF, the bisector inverse slope (BIS) and V$_{\rm asy}$ indicators, that quantify the CCF line asymmetry (V$_{\rm asy}$ is defined by \citealt{figueira13}), the chromospheric activity index log R$\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK}$, and the activity indicator based on the H$_{\rm \alpha}$ line (derived following the method described in \citealt{gomesdasilva11}).
The time series of all the indicators are listed in Table \ref{Table:actind} and shown in Fig. \ref{Fig:actindserieperiod}. Extending to HARPS-N the results by \cite{santerne15} valid for the HARPS spectrograph, the uncertainties of the FWHM and BIS are fixed to 2$\sigma_{\rm RV}$, where $\sigma_{\rm RV}$ are the RV internal errors.
Positive trends are clearly visible for the FWHM, log R$\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK}$, and H$_{\rm \alpha}$ index, pointing out that the level of activity of K2-36 increased during the time span of our observations. These trends could be part of a long-term activity cycle, but our time span of $\sim$3.5 years is not extended enough to confirm this. We note that the dispersion in the FWHM, BIS, V$_{\rm asy}$ and H$_{\rm \alpha}$ data increased with time, as a consequence of the increasing levels of activity.
We calculated the frequency spectrum of these datasets using the Generalised Lomb-Scargle (GLS) algorithm \citep{zech09}, after correcting the trends in the FWHM, log $R\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK}$, and H$_{\rm \alpha}$ data by subtracting from each seasonal data chunk the corresponding average value. The periodograms are shown in Fig. \ref{Fig:actindserieperiod}. For the FWHM, BIS, and V$_{\rm asy}$ we find the highest peak at 8.6 days; for log $R\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK}$ the peak with the highest power occurs at 16.7 days, and for the H$_{\rm \alpha}$ index the main peak is at 12.9 days, even though peaks of slightly lower power occur at $P_{\rm rot}$ and its first harmonic. In conclusion, these indicators appear modulated over $P_{\rm rot}$ or $P_{\rm rot}$/2. We note that a strong correlation exists between log $R\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK}$ and H$_{\rm \alpha}$ ($\rho_{\rm Spear}$=0.8).
We fitted all the indicators with a quasi-periodic GP model, as explained in Sect. \ref{sect:lcanalisi}. Since they have been extracted from the same spectra used to measure the RVs, the outcomes of such analysis are important to eventually set up the analysis of the RVs, in order to properly remove the stellar activity contribution. Results of the GP regression are listed in Table \ref{Tab:actindgp}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\hsize]{acfK236.pdf}
\caption{Autocorrelation function of the K2-36 light curve shown in Fig. \ref{Fig:curvaluce}.}
\label{Fig:acf}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\hsize]{k2_lc_offset_corrected.pdf}
\caption{K2-36 light curve corrected for the offset introduced by the gap in the K2 observations (see Fig. \ref{Fig:curvaluce} for comparison). An offset of $\sim0.36\%$ has been determined through a Gaussian process regression, as described in Section \ref{sect:lcanalisi}. }
\label{Fig:lccorrected}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\caption[]{Best-fit values obtained from modelling the transit light curve of the K2-36 planets. Data from literature are shown for comparison. }
\label{Table:planetfittransit}
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
Parameter & Best-fit value & Reference \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
$P_{\rm p, b}$ [days] & 1.422614$\pm$0.000038 & (1) \\
& 1.42266$\pm$0.00005 & (2)\\
\noalign{\smallskip}
& 1.422619$\pm$0.000039 & (3)\\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$T_{\rm 0, b}$ [BJD-2\,454\,833] & 1977.8916$\pm$0.0013 & (1)\\
& 1977.8914$\pm$0.0013 & (3)\\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$T_{\rm dur, b}$ [days] & 0.05157$^{+0.0046}_{-0.0034}$ & (1)\\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$P_{\rm p, c}$ [days] & 5.340888$\pm$0.000086 & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
& 5.34059$\pm$0.00010 & (2)\\
\noalign{\smallskip}
& 5.340883$^{+0.000088}_{-0.000089}$ & (3)\\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$T_{\rm 0, c}$ [BJD-2\,454\,833] & 1979.84001$\pm$0.00071 & (1)\\
\noalign{\smallskip}
& 1979.84015$^{+0.00072}_{-0.00073}$ & (3)\\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$T_{\rm dur, c}$ [days] & 0.0564$^{+0.0035}_{-0.0027}$ & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$R_{\rm b}$/R$_{\rm *}$ & 0.01828$^{+0.00072}_{-0.00099}$ & (1)\\
\noalign{\smallskip}
& 0.0180$^{+0.0026}_{-0.0013}$ & (3) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$R_{\rm c}$/R$_{\rm *}$ & 0.04119$^{+0.0043}_{-0.0029}$ & (1)\\
\noalign{\smallskip}
& 0.04$^{+0.17}_{-0.01}$ & (3) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$R_{\rm b}$ (R$_{\rm \oplus}$) & 1.43$\pm$0.08 & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
& 1.32$\pm$0.09 & (2) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
& 1.47$^{+0.22}_{-0.11}$ & (3) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$R_{\rm c}$ (R$_{\rm \oplus}$) & 3.2$\pm$0.3 & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
& 2.80$^{+0.43}_{-0.31}$ & (2) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
& 4.0$^{+14.0}_{-1.0}$ & (3) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$i_{\rm b}$ [deg] & 84.45$^{+0.78}_{-0.48}$ & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
& 86.3$^{+2.7}_{-6.2}$ & (3) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$i_{\rm c}$ [deg] & 86.917$^{+0.066}_{-0.056}$ & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
& 85.5$^{+3.9}_{-3.3}$ & (3) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$b_{\rm b}$ & 0.66$^{+0.06}_{-0.09}$ & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$b_{\rm c}$ & 0.89$^{+0.01}_{-0.02}$ & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$a_{\rm b}$ [R$_{\rm \star}$] & 6.63$\pm$0.11 & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$a_{\rm b}$ [AU] & 0.0223$\pm$0.0004 & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$a_{\rm c}$ [R$_{\rm \star}$] & 16.01$^{+0.26}_{-0.27}$ & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$a_{\rm c}$ [AU] & 0.054$\pm$0.001 & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$T_{\rm eq, b}$ [K] & 1224$\pm$13 & (1a) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$T_{\rm eq, c}$ [K] & 788$\pm$9 & (1a)\\
\noalign{\smallskip}
Insolation $S_{\rm b} [S_{\rm \oplus}$] & 529$\pm23$ & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
Insolation $S_{\rm c} [S_{\rm \oplus}$] & 90$\pm4$ & (1) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\end{tabular}
\tablefoot{
(1) This work. (1a) This work, assuming the Bond albedo $A_{\rm b}$=0.3 (2) \cite{sinukoff16}. (3) \cite{mayo18}
}
\end{table}
\begin{table*}
\caption{GP hyper-parameters of a quasi-periodic model applied to the K2 light curve (6-hr bins), and to the asymmetry and activity index time series derived from HARPS-N spectra. Uncertainties are given as the $16^{\rm th}$ and $84^{\rm th}$ percentiles of the posterior distributions.}
\label{Tab:actindgp}
\small
\begin{tabular}{llcccccc}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
Jump parameter & Prior & K2 light curve & BIS span & FWHM\tablefootmark{a} & V$_{\rm asy}$\tablefootmark{a} & log $R\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK}$\tablefootmark{a} & H$_{\rm \alpha}$\tablefootmark{a} \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
$h$ & light curve: $\mathcal{U}$(0,0.5) & 0.31$_{\rm -0.04}^{\rm +0.06}$ & 15$_{\rm -3}^{\rm +4}$ & 40$_{\rm -6}^{\rm +8}$ & 0.7$\pm$0.1 & 0.025$_{\rm -0.006}^{\rm +0.009}$ & 0.11$\pm$0.02 \\
& BIS-$\braket{BIS}$: $\mathcal{U}$(0,100) [\ms] \\
& FWHM-$\braket{FWHM}$: $\mathcal{U}$(0,200) [\ms] & & & & \\
& V$_{\rm asy}$: $\mathcal{U}$(0,2) [\ms] & & & & \\
& $\log R\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK}$ - $\braket{\log R\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK}}$ : $\mathcal{U}$(0,1) [dex] & & & & \\
& H$_{\rm \alpha}: \mathcal{U}$(0,0.5) & & & & \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$\lambda$ & $\mathcal{U}$(0,1500) [days]& 106$_{\rm -11}^{\rm +14}$ & 144$_{\rm -55}^{\rm +100}$ & 79$_{\rm -24}^{\rm +34}$ & 161$_{\rm -54}^{\rm +80}$ & 270$_{\rm -111}^{\rm +175}$ & 1308$_{\rm -251}^{\rm +142}$ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$w$ & $\mathcal{U}$(0,1) & 0.987$_{\rm -0.02}^{\rm +0.009}$ & 0.6$\pm$0.2 & 0.41$_{\rm -0.06}^{\rm +0.08}$ & 0.87$\pm$0.1 & 0.8$_{\rm -0.2}^{\rm +0.1}$ & 0.96$_{\rm -0.06}^{\rm +0.03}$ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$\theta$ & $\mathcal{U}$(0,20) [days] & 16.9$\pm$0.2 & 8.56$_{\rm -0.04}^{\rm +0.07}$ & 17.2$\pm$0.1 & 17.24$_{\rm -0.53}^{\rm +0.07}$ & 16.7$_{\rm -3.2}^{\rm +0.3}$ & 16.90$\pm$0.01 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\end{tabular}
\tablefoottext{a}{Time series not corrected for the long-term trend.}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=17cm]{act_ind_series_period_con_vasy_v3.pdf}
\caption{Time series of the FWHM, BIS and V$_{\rm asy}$ CCF line diagnostics, and the log(R$\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK}$) and H$_{\rm \alpha}$ activity indexes, shown next to their corresponding GLS periodograms (after removing the trends in the FWHM, log(R$\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK}$) and H$_{\rm \alpha}$ data as described in the text). The dashed horizontal lines mark the mean values, to highlight the increasing trend visible in the FWHM, log(R$\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK}$), and H$_{\rm \alpha}$ data. Vertical dotted lines in the periodograms mark the locations of the stellar rotation period, as derived from K2 photometry, and its first harmonic. The panel in the bottom right corner shows the window function of the data. A zoomed view of the low-frequency part of the spectrum is shown in the inset plot, and a vertical dotted line marks the 1-year orbital frequency of the Earth.}
\label{Fig:actindserieperiod}
\end{figure*}
\onllongtab{
\begin{longtable}{ccccccccc}
\caption{Spectroscopic activity/CCF asymmetry indicators for K2-36. Data are extracted from the 81 spectra used in this work (the full dataset is available on-line via CDS).}
\label{Table:actind}\\
\hline \hline
\textbf{Time }& \textbf{FWHM} & \textbf{BIS} & \textbf{log(R$\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK}$)} & \textbf{$\sigma_{\rm log(R\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK})}$} & \textbf{H$_{\rm \alpha}$} & \textbf{$\sigma_{\rm H_{\rm \alpha}}$} & \textbf{V$_{\rm asy}$} \tablefootmark{a} & \textbf{$\sigma_{\rm V_{\rm asy}}$} \\
(BJD$_{\rm TDB}$-2\,400\.000) & ($\ms$) & ($\ms$) & & & & \\
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\endfirsthead
\caption{Continued.} \\
\hline\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\textbf{Time }& \textbf{FWHM} & \textbf{BIS} & \textbf{log(R$\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK}$)} & \textbf{$\sigma_{\rm log(R\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK})}$} & \textbf{H$_{\rm \alpha}$} & \textbf{$\sigma_{\rm H_{\rm \alpha}}$} & \textbf{V$_{\rm asy}$}\footnotemark{a} & \textbf{$\sigma_{\rm V_{\rm asy}}$} \\
(BJD$_{\rm TDB}$-2\,400\.000) & ($\ms$) & ($\ms$) & & & & \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\endhead
\hline
\endfoot
\hline
\endlastfoot
\noalign{\smallskip}
57047.651272 & 6635.69 & 45.79 & -4.5267 & 0.0270 & 0.27365 & 0.00221 & 1.28786 & 0.01556 \\
57048.697294 & 6624.72 & 31.80 & -4.4866 & 0.0270 & 0.27298 & 0.00229 & 1.27135 & 0.01631 \\
57051.659658 & 6555.43 & 37.65 & -4.5348 & 0.0229 & 0.26454 & 0.00209 & 1.35659 & 0.01546 \\
... & ... & ... & ... & ... & ... & ... & ... & ...\\
\end{longtable}
}
\section{RV analysis}
\label{sect:rvanalysis}
Predicting the amplitude of the RV variations due to the stellar contribution based on the photometric variability is a complex task, especially when photometric and spectroscopic data are not collected during the same seasons. Following \cite{mann18}, a guess for the RV variability could be estimated as $\sim$ $\sigma_{\rm phot}\cdot v \sin i_{\rm \star}$, where $\sigma_{\rm phot}$ is the scatter observed in the K2 light curve. The expected RV variability for K2-36 due to stellar activity is therefore $\sim$2-5 \ms.
According to the calibration for K-dwarfs derived by \cite{santos2000}, the expected radial velocity scatter for K2-36 is $\sim$9 \ms.
We anticipate here that the signal due to the stellar activity largely dominates the observed RVs variations, and it is 5-8 times larger than the semi-amplitudes of the planetary signals, which are of the order of the average RV internal errors ($\sim$2-3 \ms).
When dealing with such an active star it is interesting to compare the results obtained from RV extracted with two different procedures, that in principle could be sensitive to stellar activity in different ways for this specific case.
Therefore, we have calculated the systemic RVs through the CCF-based recipe of the on-line DRS, using a mask suitable for stars with spectral type K5V, and relative RVs with the TERRA pipeline \citep{anglada12}, measured against a high S/N template spectrum. We corrected the TERRA RVs for the perspective acceleration using parallax and proper motion from \textit{Gaia} DR2.
The complete list of RVs is presented in Table \ref{Table:radvel}.
We summarize general properties of the two RV datasets in Table \ref{Tab:rvproperties}, and show the time series in Fig. \ref{Fig:rvtimeperiod}. One common feature is the increase of the scatter observed in the last two seasons with respect to the first. This is a consequence of the increasing stellar activity discussed in Sect. \ref{sect:actindex}. The scatter over the time span is similar for all the methods, and the internal errors calculated with TERRA are on average lower than those of the DRS.
After a preliminary analysis of the RVs, in this Section we present, and compare, the results of different global models (combined fit of planet orbital equations and stellar signals). We used the results from the light curve analysis to fix the priors of the orbital periods and time of inferior conjunction for K2-36\,b and K2-36\,c. We assume independent Keplerian motions (i.e. ignoring mutual planetary perturbations, which would be significantly below 1 mm s$^{\rm -1}$) in all the cases and, especially considering the short orbital period of K2-36\,b, we did not bin the data on a nightly basis to make use of all the available information in each single data point.
\subsection{Frequency content and correlation with activity indicators}
We scrutinized the frequency content in the RV datasets with the GLS algorithm by fitting a single sinusoid to the data. Periodograms are shown in Fig. \ref{Fig:rvtimeperiod}. All look very similar, with the main peak clearly located at $\sim$8.5 days, that is the first harmonic of $P_{\rm rot}$, and semi-amplitudes of $\sim$16 \ms, which are equal to the measured RMS.
This analysis shows that signals due to stellar activity dominate the RVs. The orbital frequency $f\sim$0.7 d$^{\rm -1}$ associated with K2-36\,b appears with much less power, while the Doppler signal of K2-36\,c is missing. We analysed the residuals of the RVs with a GLS periodogram (using DRS data only because of the similarities with the periodogram of the TERRA RVs), after subtracting the best-fit sinusoid, and the periodogram shows the main peak at $P_{\rm rot}$. An additional pre-whitening results in a peak at frequency $f\sim0.17$ d$^{\rm -1}$, which likely corresponds to the second harmonic of $P_{\rm rot}$. This analysis points out that the stellar activity component could be mitigated by a sum of at least three sinusoids with periods $P_{\rm rot}$, $P_{\rm rot}$/2 and $P_{\rm rot}$/3. This simple pre-whitening procedure does not allow for the identification of significant power at the orbital planetary frequencies, pointing out that the detection of the two planets using only RVs, without the help from transits and an effective treatment of the stellar activity contribution, is very complicated.
We have folded the RVs of each season taken separately at the period P=8.5 days, and we observe a change in the phase of the signal. This suggests that the stellar activity signal has been evolving on a timescale less than one year, and that a quasi-periodic fit of the stellar component could be more appropriate than a simple combination of sinusoids.
We checked the correlation between the RVs and the CCF line asymmetry and activity indicators discussed in Sect. \ref{sect:actindex} by calculating the Spearman's rank correlation coefficients. Results are shown in Fig. \ref{Fig:rvactindcorr}, where we used the RVs from DRS. Significant anti-correlation exists just between the DRS RVs and BIS\footnote{Since the BIS span indicator is extracted with the DRS pipeline, we limit this analysis to the DRS RVs only.} ($\rho_{\rm Spear}$ = -0.65), which is not surprising since they have similar GLS periodograms. This anti-correlation is expected when the observed RV variations are due mainly to the presence of dark spots on the stellar photosphere, as shown by the light curve modulation \citep{boisse11}.
\subsection{Joint modelling of planetary and stellar signals (1): sum of sinusoids}
\label{subsec:model1}
Based on the results of the GLS analysis, first we tested a model (hereafter model 1) with the activity component described by a sum of three sinusoids, each with periods sampled around $P_{\rm rot}$, $P_{\rm rot}$/2 and $P_{\rm rot}$/3, using the priors indicated in Table 7.
We modelled the planetary signals as circular orbits. In total, 17 free parameters were used, including the uncorrelated jitter and offset, that for the DRS RVs corresponds to the systemic velocity.
Table \ref{Tab:mcmcfitrvsinusoid} shows the results from the analysis of the DRS and TERRA datasets. The semi-amplitude $K_{\rm b}$ is fitted with a relative error of $\sim50\%$, while that of the signal induced by K2-36\,c is nearly twice $K_{\rm b}$. We note that the required uncorrelated jitter $\sigma_{\rm jit}$ is more than twice the typical internal error $\sigma_{\rm RV}\sim$2-3 \ms.
\onllongtab{
\begin{longtable}{c|cc|cc}
\caption{Radial velocities of K2-36 extracted from the 81 HARPS-N spectra analyzed in this work (the full dataset is available on-line via CDS).}
\label{Table:radvel}\\
\hline \hline
& \multicolumn{2}{c|}{DRS} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{TERRA} \\
\hline
\textbf{Time }& \textbf{Radial velocity} & \textbf{$\sigma_{\rm RV}$} & \textbf{Radial velocity} & \textbf{$\sigma_{\rm RV}$} \\
(BJD$_{\rm TDB}$-2\,400\.000) & ($\ms$) & ($\ms$) & ($\ms$) & ($\ms$) \\
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\endfirsthead
\caption{Continued.} \\
\hline\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
& \multicolumn{2}{c|}{DRS} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{TERRA} \\
\hline
\textbf{Time }& \textbf{Radial velocity} & \textbf{$\sigma_{\rm RV}$} & \textbf{Radial velocity} & \textbf{$\sigma_{\rm RV}$} \\
(BJD$_{\rm TDB}$-2\,400\.000) & ($\ms$) & ($\ms$) & ($\ms$) & ($\ms$) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\endhead
\hline
\endfoot
\hline
\endlastfoot
\noalign{\smallskip}
57047.651272 & 13630.93 & 4.44 & -9.07 & 3.55 \\
57048.697294 & 13620.53 & 4.76 & -21.54 & 3.20 \\
... & ... & ... & .. & .. \\
\end{longtable}
}
\begin{table*}
\caption{Properties of the two RV datasets analysed in this work.}
\label{Tab:rvproperties}
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
Pipeline & RMS (all data) & RMS (1$^{\rm st}$ seas.) & RMS (2$^{\rm nd}$ seas.) & RMS (3$^{\rm rd}$ seas.) & Median internal error $\sigma_{\rm RV}$ \\
& [\ms] & [\ms] & [\ms] & [\ms] & [\ms] \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
DRS & 14.9 & 9.8 & 15.6 & 15.5 & 3.1 \\
TERRA & 14.7 & 9.4 & 14.8 & 16.2 & 2.3 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\caption{Results of the MC analysis performed on the RVs extracted with the DRS and TERRA recipes using a sum of three sinusoids to model the stellar activity component. Uncertainties are given as the $16^{\rm th}$ and $84^{\rm th}$ percentiles of the posterior distributions.}
\label{Tab:mcmcfitrvsinusoid}
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l c c c}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
Jump parameter & Prior & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Best-fit value} \\
& & DRS & TERRA \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
$\gamma$ [\ms] & $\mathcal{U}$(13550,13750) [DRS] & 13643.6$^{+0.8}_{-0.9}$ & -0.09$^{+0.84}_{-0.86}$ \\
& $\mathcal{U}$(-100,100) [TERRA] & & \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$\sigma_{\rm jit}$ [\ms] & $\mathcal{U}$(0,20) & 6.4$^{\rm +0.8}_{\rm -0.7}$ & 6.8$^{\rm +0.7}_{\rm -0.6}$ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\textbf{Stellar activity signal} & & \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$P_{\rm rot}$ [days] & $\mathcal{U}$(15,18) & 16.65$\pm$0.02 & 16.68$\pm$0.02 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$P_{\rm rot}$/2 [days] & $\mathcal{U}$(7,9.5) & 8.499$^{\rm +0.006}_{\rm -0.005}$ & 8.507$\pm$0.005 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$P_{\rm rot}$/3 [days] & $\mathcal{U}$(4.5,6.5) & 5.754$\pm$0.003 & 5.755$^{\rm +0.004}_{\rm -0.138}$ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$K_{\rm act,P=P_{\rm rot}}$ [\ms] & $\mathcal{U}$(0,30) & 7.8$\pm$1.2 & 7.9$\pm$1.2 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$T_{\rm 0,act,P=P_{\rm rot}}$ [BJD-2\,450\,000] & $\mathcal{U}$(7800,7820) & 7811.5$\pm$0,4 & 7811.9$^{+0.5}_{-0.4}$ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$K_{\rm act,P=P_{\rm rot}/2}$ [\ms] & $\mathcal{U}$(0,30) & 14.6$\pm$1.1 & 14.5$\pm$1.1\\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$T_{\rm 0,act,P=P_{\rm rot}/2}$ [BJD-2\,450\,000] & $\mathcal{U}$(7800,7810) & 7809.4$\pm$0.2 & 7809.1$\pm$0.2 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$K_{\rm act,P=P_{\rm rot}/3}$ [\ms] & $\mathcal{U}$(0,20) & 7.4$\pm$1.4 & 6.7$\pm$1.3\\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$T_{\rm 0,act,P=P_{\rm rot}/3}$ [BJD-2\,450\,000] & $\mathcal{U}$(7800,7808) & 7802.9$\pm$0.2 & 7802.8$^{\rm +0.3}_{\rm -0.2}$ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\textbf{Planetary signals} & & \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$K_{\rm b}$ [\ms] & $\mathcal{U}$(0,10) & 2.8$\pm$1.3 & 2.4$\pm$1.2 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$K_{\rm c}$ [\ms] & $\mathcal{U}$(0,10) & 5.0$\pm$1.4 & 4.9$\pm$1.4 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$m_{\rm b}$ [$M_\oplus$] & derived & 4.2$\pm$1.8 & 3.7$^{\rm +1.8}_{\rm -1.7}$ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$m_{\rm c}$ [$M_\oplus$] & derived & 11.7$^{\rm +3.0}_{\rm -3.4}$ & 11.5$\pm$3.2 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\textbf{Bayesian evidence ln($\mathcal{Z})_{\rm model\:1}$} & & -310.5$\pm$0.06 & -310.14$\pm$0.04\\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Joint modelling of planetary and stellar signals (2): de-trending using the BIS line asymmetry indicator}
Since a significant anti-correlation is observed between the DRS RVs and the BIS asymmetry indicator, we modelled the stellar signal contribution by including a linear term $c_{\rm BIS}\cdot$BIS in the model (hereafter model 2). The planetary orbits were fixed to the circular case. For the semi-amplitudes of the planetary signals we get estimates that are nearly twice and nearly half those derived for model 1, for planet b and c respectively: $K_{\rm b}$ = 4.8$^{+1.8}_{-1.7}$ \ms and $K_{\rm c}$ = 2.8$^{+1.7}_{-1.5}$ \ms. Since $\ln\left( \frac{\mathcal{Z}_{\rm model\:1}} {\mathcal{Z_{\rm model\:2}}} \right)\simeq$+10, which corresponds to a posterior odds ratio $\simeq2\times10^{\rm 4}$:1, this model is very significantly disfavoured, according to the conventional scale adopted for model selection (see, e.g., \citealt{feroz11}).
\subsection{Joint modelling of planetary and stellar signals (3): Gaussian process regression analysis}
We analysed the RV datasets with a GP regression using the quasi-periodic kernel (Eq. \ref{eq:1}) to model the correlated signal introduced by the stellar activity contribution. Since both signals modulated on $P_{\rm rot}$ and $P_{\rm rot}$/2 are present in the RV timeseries, we left the hyper-parameter $\theta$ free to explore uniformly the range between 0 and 20 days. In general, for the hyper-parameters $\theta$, $w$, and $\lambda$ we used the same priors as those in Table \ref{Tab:actindgp}. We included the parameter $\sigma_{\rm jit}$, which is summed in quadrature with $\sigma_{\rm RV}$ in Eq. \ref{eq:1}, to take into account other sources of uncorrelated noise not included in $\sigma_{\rm RV}(t)$.
We first considered the case of circular orbits, then we included the eccentricities $e_{\rm b}$ and $e_{\rm c}$ as free parameters.
The results of the analyses are shown in Table \ref{Table:percentilesgprv}. Concerning the circular model, looking at the best-fit values of the hyper-parameters, $\theta$ is determined with high precision and its value corresponds to $P_{\rm rot}$, and the evolutionary timescale of the active regions $\lambda$ is $\sim$5-8 times $P_{\rm rot}$, depending on the RV extraction algorithm. This is in very good agreement with the results of the analysis of the light curve and the FWHM activity diagnostic, while there is evidence for a slightly longer evolutionary timescale from the $\log$ $R\ensuremath{'}_{\rm HK}$ activity index. The Doppler semi-amplitude $K_{\rm b}$ is in agreement within the errors with that obtained from model 1, both for DRS ($K_{\rm b}$=2.1$\pm$0.9 \ms) and TERRA ($K_{\rm b}$=2.6$\pm$0.7 \ms), but more precise.
The mass of K2-36\,b is measured with a significance of $\sim2.5\sigma$ (DRS, $m_{\rm b}=3.2^{\rm +1.4}_{\rm -1.3}$ $M_\oplus$) and $\sim$3.6$\sigma$ (TERRA, $m_{\rm b}=3.9\pm1.1$ $M_\oplus$), and there is agreement within 1$\sigma$ between the two RV extraction pipelines. As for K2-36\,c, the mass is measured at best with a significance of $\sim$3.5$\sigma$ (TERRA, $m_{\rm c}=7.8\pm2.3$ $M_\oplus$), and all the values are in agreement within 1$\sigma$. When compared to model 1, the semi-amplitude of the K2-36\,c signal is lower for both DRS and TERRA, and more precise.
Our analysis does not constrain the eccentricities of the two planets. In fact, for K2-36\,b we get $e_{\rm b,\:DRS}=0.41^{+0.33}_{-0.30}$ (68.3$^{\rm th}$ percentile=0.57) and $e_{\rm b,\:TERRA}=0.51^{+0.26}_{-0.37}$ (68.3$^{\rm th}$ percentile=0.65), while for K2-36\,c we get $e_{\rm c,\: DRS}=0.18^{+0.23}_{-0.12}$ (68.3$^{\rm th}$ percentile=0.27) and $e_{\rm c,\:TERRA}=0.14^{+0.17}_{-0.10}$ (68.3$^{\rm th}$ percentile=0.21). For both planets, the eccentricity differs from zero with a significance less than 1.5$\sigma$, and the peak of the posterior distribution of $e_{\rm c}$ occurs at zero. Therefore we conclude that our data do not allow us to constrain the eccentricities. Moreover, the eccentric model is statistically disfavoured with respect to the circular model for both the DRS ($\ln\mathcal{Z}_{\rm circular}-\ln\mathcal{Z}_{\rm ecc}$=+2) and TERRA ($\ln\mathcal{Z}_{\rm circular}-\ln\mathcal{Z}_{\rm ecc}$=+2.5) datasets.
Fig. \ref{Fig:rvplanetfold} shows the RV signals due to the K2-36 planets, and the distribution of the HARPS-N measurements along the planetary orbits. In both cases, the orbit has been covered uniformly. We show in Fig. \ref{Fig:rvstellarsignal} the stellar component present in the RVs as fit by the GP quasi-periodic model (TERRA dataset).
We note that the GLS periodogram of the stellar signal only is very similar to that obtained for the original RV dataset (Fig. \ref{Fig:rvtimeperiod}), demonstrating that the quasi-periodic model gives a good representation of the activity component. Moreover, we folded the stellar component in the TERRA dataset, as fitted by the GP regression, at the stellar rotation period, and compared to the folded K2 light curve (Fig. \ref{Fig:rvlcfold}). Interestingly the RV data, collected in 2017 and 2018 and with a good phase coverage at $P_{\rm rot}$, have a similar phase pattern of the photometric data and appear only slightly shifted, despite more than 3 years separating the K2 observations from the HARPS-N observations.
\subsection{Adopted results}
We tested three different models to derive the main planetary parameters. According to their Bayesian evidences the GP quasi-periodic and circular model is strongly favoured over all the other models (in particular $\ln\left( \frac{\mathcal{Z}_{\rm model\:3}} {\mathcal{Z_{\rm model\:1}}} \right)\simeq$+14.5 for the TERRA dataset, and $\ln\left( \frac{\mathcal{Z}_{\rm model\:3}} {\mathcal{Z_{\rm model\:1}}} \right)\simeq$+9 for the DRS dataset), therefore we adopt this as the best representation for the K2-36 system based on our data.
Since the relative errors on the semi-amplitudes $K_{\rm b}$ and $K_{\rm c}$ are lower for the TERRA than for the DRS dataset, we adopt as our final solution the best-fit values obtained with the TERRA RVs. Based on that, K2-36\,c has a mass $\sim$2 times higher than that of K2-36\,b ($m_{\rm b}$=3.9$\pm$1.1 $M_\oplus$, $m_{\rm c}$=7.8$\pm$2.3 $M_\oplus$), but its bulk density is $\sim$19$\%$ that of the innermost planet ($\rho_{\rm b}$=7.2$^{+2.5}_{-2.1}$ g\,cm$^{-3}$, $\rho_{\rm c}$=1.3$^{+0.7}_{-0.5}$ g\,cm$^{-3}$).
By using the relation $S/S_{\rm \oplus}$ = ($L/L_{\rm \odot})\times$(AU/$a)^{\rm 2}$, we derived the insolation fluxes $S_{\rm b}$=529$\pm$23 \,S$_{\rm \oplus}$ and $S_{\rm c}$=90$\pm$4 \,S$_{\rm \oplus}$: planet b is $\sim$6 times more irradiated than K2-36\,c. The derived planet equilibrium temperatures are $T_{\rm eq, b}$=1224$\pm$13 K and $T_{\rm eq, c}$=788$\pm$9 K.
\subsection{Robustness of the derived planet masses}
We devised a test to assess how robust our results are. We simulated $N_{\rm sim}$=100 RV time series using the epochs of the HARPS-N spectra as time stamps, and assuming the TERRA dataset and the results of the GP global model to build the mock datasets. We added two planetary signals (circular orbits) to the quasi-periodic stellar activity signal, with semi-amplitudes $K_{\rm b}$=2.6 and $K_{\rm c}$=3.4 \ms. The orbital periods and epochs of inferior conjunction are those derived from K2 light curve. Each mock dataset has been obtained by randomly shifting each point of the exact solution within the error bar, assuming normal distributions centred to zero and with $\sigma=\sigma_{\rm RV}(t)$. We use this set of simulated data to test our ability to retrieve the injected signals. We analysed the mock RV time series within the same MC framework used to model the original dataset, and for each free parameter we saved the 16$^{\rm th}$, 50$^{\rm th}$ and 84$^{\rm th}$ percentiles. Then, we analysed the posterior distributions of the $N_{\rm sim}$ median values, and for the planetary Doppler semi-amplitudes we get $K_{\rm b}$=2.7$^{\rm +0.4}_{\rm -0.5}$ and $K_{\rm c}$=3.4$^{\rm +0.8}_{\rm -0.6}$ \ms (16$^{\rm th}$, 50$^{\rm th}$ and 84$^{\rm th}$ percentiles). Since these values are in very good agreement with those injected, that are equal to those we get form the GP analysis, this suggests that the best-fit values obtained for the original dataset are accurate.
\subsection{Sensitivity of the planetary masses to an extended dataset}
Through a different set of simulations we have investigated how much the precision of the planet masses would have improved with an additional season of RV data. We simulated $N_{\rm sim}$=50 RV datasets by randomly drawing 40 additional epochs (different for each mock dataset) within a 180-day timespan, six months after the end of the third observing season with HARPS-N (for a total of 121 RV measurements per dataset, including the original data). We assumed a sampling characterized by one RV measurement per night, and adopted the GP quasi-periodic best-fit solution to represent the stellar activity term. We used the \texttt{sample$\_$conditional} module in the \texttt{GEORGE} package to draw samples from the predictive conditional distribution (different for each mock dataset) at the randomly selected epochs. Then, we have injected two planetary signals with semi-amplitudes $K_{\rm b}$=2.6 and $K_{\rm c}$=3.4 \ms and circular orbits, using the ephemeris derived from the K2 light curve. The internal errors $\sigma_{\rm RV}$ of the additional RVs have been randomly drawn from a normal distribution centred on the mean of the internal errors of the original RV dataset and with $\sigma$ equal to the RMS of the real array $\sigma_{\rm RV}$. In order to avoid the selection of $\sigma_{\rm RV}$ values that are too optimistic and never obtained for the original dataset, we have simulated only internal errors greater than 1 \ms.
This analysis suggests that, on average, the significance of the retrieved semi-amplitudes of the planetary signals are expected to increase to 4.4$\sigma$ for K2-36\,b and to 5.6$\sigma$ for K2-36\,c, and the same result is obtained for the planet masses. Concerning the densities, their significance increases to 4$\sigma$ ($\rho_{\rm b}$) and to 2.6$\sigma$ ($\rho_{\rm c}$), thus only of a slight amount with respect to the original dataset. Our conclusion is that, under the hypothesis that the structure of the stellar activity signal is preserved several months after the last epoch of the actual observations, a set of 40 additional RVs (which is an affordable amount of measurements to be collected over one season) does not help in improving the precision of the derived planetary parameters enough to significantly improve the theoretical estimates of the planets' bulk composition based on theoretical models.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\hsize]{rv_timeseries_period_3.pdf}
\caption{\textit{Left column}. Radial velocity time series extracted from HARPS-N spectra using the DRS (upper plot) and TERRA (lower plot) pipelines. \textit{Right column}. GLS periodograms of the RV time series (blue line). Vertical dashed lines mark the location of the highest peak at $\sim$8.5 days and the stellar rotation frequency, for all the datasets. Vertical dotted lines in red mark the orbital frequencies of the K2-36 planets. For the DRS dataset only, we show the periodogram of the residuals, after subtracting the signal with period of 8.5 days (gray line), with the main peak located at $P\sim$16.5 days, which corresponds to the stellar rotation period. The window function of the data (not shown) is the same as in Fig. \ref{Fig:actindserieperiod}.}
\label{Fig:rvtimeperiod}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\hsize]{rv_act_correlation_con_vasy_2.pdf}
\caption{Correlations between radial velocities (from DRS), the CCF line profile indicators, and activity diagnostics.}
\label{Fig:rvactindcorr}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\hsize]{phase_histo_plot_QP_terra.pdf}
\caption{Doppler signals due to the K2-36 planets (TERRA radial velocity dataset, after removing the GP quasi-periodic stellar activity term), folded according to their transit ephemeris (phase=0 corresponds to the time of inferior conjunction). The histograms show the distribution of the RV measurements along the planetary orbits.}
\label{Fig:rvplanetfold}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\hsize]{rv_noise_twoplanet_circ_QP_terra_bis.pdf}
\caption{Stellar activity component in the radial velocities (TERRA dataset) as fitted using a GP quasi-periodic model (circular case). Each panel shows one of the three observing seasons. The blue line represents the best-fit solution, and the grey area the 1$\sigma$ confidence interval.}
\label{Fig:rvstellarsignal}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\hsize]{rvTerra_k2lc_fold.pdf}
\caption{K2 light curve (upper plot) and stellar activity component in the radial velocities (lower plot; TERRA data for the last two seasons. DRS data show a similar behaviour), folded at the stellar rotation period. The reference epoch corresponding to phase=0 is the same for both datasets. Light curve goes from May, 30$^{\rm th}$ to Aug, 21$^{\rm th}$ 2014 (K2 campaign C1). Spectroscopic data are distinguished according the observing season: black dots are used for data collected in 2017, red dots for those of 2018.}
\label{Fig:rvlcfold}
\end{figure}
\begin{table*}
\caption[]{Best-fit solutions for the model tested in this work (quasi-periodic GP model) applied to the HARPS-N RV time series extracted with the DRS and TERRA pipelines. Our global model includes two orbital equations (circular and eccentric case). Uncertainties are given as the $16^{\rm th}$ and $84^{\rm th}$ percentiles of the posterior distributions.}
\label{Table:percentilesgprv}
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
Jump parameter & Prior & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Best-fit value} \\% & Comment \\
& & DRS & TERRA \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\textbf{Stellar activity GP model} & & & \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$h$ [m$\,s^{-1}$] & $\mathcal{U}$(0,30) & 16.3$^{+3.8}_{-2.7}$ & 17.11$^{+3.9}_{-2.8}$ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$\lambda$ [days] & $\mathcal{U}$(0,1500) & 131$^{+55}_{-35}$ & 93$^{+22}_{-20}$ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$w$ & $\mathcal{U}$(0,1) & 0.33$^{+0.06}_{-0.05}$ & 0.33$\pm$0.05 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$\theta$ [days] & $\mathcal{U}$(0,20) & 16.99$^{+0.09}_{-0.07}$ & 17.06$\pm$0.08 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
$\sigma_{\rm jit}$ [m$\,s^{-1}$] & $\mathcal{U}$(0,20) & 2.5$\pm$1.0 & 1.6$^{+0.8}_{-0.9}$ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
$\gamma$ [m$\,s^{-1}$] & $\mathcal{U}$(13550,13750) & 13640.7$^{+4.9}_{-5.2}$ & -1.7$^{+5.1}_{-5.2}$ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
$K_{\rm b}$ [m$\,s^{-1}$] & $\mathcal{U}$(0,10) & 2.1$\pm$0.9 & 2.6$\pm$0.7 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$K_{\rm c}$ [m$\,s^{-1}$] & $\mathcal{U}$(0,10) & 2.9$\pm$1.1 & 3.4$\pm$1.0 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\textbf{Derived quantities} \tablefoottext{a} \\
$m_{\rm b}$ ($M_\oplus$) & & 3.2$^{+1.4}_{-1.3}$ & 3.9$\pm$1.1 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$m_{\rm c}$ ($M_\oplus$) & & 6.7$^{+2.7}_{-2.6}$ & 7.8$\pm$2.3 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$\rho_{\rm b}$ [g$\,cm^{-3}$] & & 5.9$^{+2.9}_{-2.5}$ & 7.2$^{+2.5}_{-2.1}$ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
$\rho_{\rm c}$ [g$\,cm^{-3}$] & & 1.1$^{+0.6}_{-0.5}$ & 1.3$^{+0.7}_{-0.5}$ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\textbf{Bayesian Evidence $\ln\mathcal{Z_{\rm model\: 3}}$} & & -301.45$\pm$0.02 & -295.5$\pm$0.08 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\end{tabular}
\tablefoot{
\tablefoottext{a}{Derived quantities from the posterior distributions. We used the following equations (assuming $M_{\rm s}+m_{\rm p} \cong M_{\rm s}$): $m_{\rm p}\sini \cong$ ($K_{\rm p} \cdot M_{\rm s}^{\frac{2}{3}} \cdot \sqrt{1-e^{2}} \cdot P_{\rm p}^{\frac{1}{3}}) / (2\pi G)^{\frac{1}{3}}$; $a \cong [(M_{\rm s}\cdot G)^{\frac{1}{3}}\cdot P_{\rm p}^{\frac{2}{3}}]/(2\pi)^{\frac{2}{3}} $, where $G$ is the gravitational constant. We set $e$=0 for circular orbits.}
}
\end{table*}
\section{Discussion}
\label{sect:discussion}
In this Section we first use our measurements of the planet parameters to investigate the bulk structure of K2-36\,b and K2-36\,c in the context of the photo-evaporation as the main driver of the evolution of these close-in, low-mass planets.
\subsection{Planets in the mass-radius diagram}
The exoplanet mass-radius diagram is shown in Fig. \ref{Fig:massradiusdiag}, and it includes the masses of the K2-36 planets derived from the GP analysis of the TERRA dataset.
K2-36\,b is nicely located on the theoretical curve for planets with Earth-like rocky composition, while the Neptune/sub-Neptune size K2-36\,c has a bulk structure compatible with having a H$_{\rm 2}$-dominated gas envelope of $\sim$1$-$2$\%$ planet mass, or a higher mean-molecular-weight envelope with higher mass fraction. Both planets have escape velocity compatible with 20 \kms within 1$\sigma$, as marked in Fig. \ref{Fig:massradiusdiag} by the dashed grey contour corresponding to $m_{\rm p}$/$R_{\rm p}$=3 (in Earth units). Within such a gravitational potential well and considering the young age ($\sim$1 Gyr) of the system, K2-36\,c is consistent with having 1-2$\%$ primordial H2/He-dominated envelope at its corresponding equilibrium temperature (Fig. \ref{fig:atmescape}), or an even less massive H2/He envelope if it has not cooled off from formation yet. Note the mass of K2-36 c is also less than 10 $M_\oplus$, the critical core mass required for run-away gas accretion \citep{rafikov06}. This may explain why it did not acquire more gas and evolve into a gas giant.
Both methane CH$_{\rm 4}$ and ammonia NH$_{\rm 3}$ \citep{levi13,levi14,levi17}, and even H$_{\rm 2}$ itself \citep{soubiran15}, can be incorporated into the H$_{\rm 2}$O-reservoir during the initial formation stage, then out-gassed gradually to replenish a primary envelope, or form a secondary envelope, making K2-36\,c a possible example of water-world (Zeng et al. subm.). It is possible that K2-36\,b formed inside the snowline of the system (located at $\sim$1.2 AU, see e.g. \citealt{mulders15}), and K2-36\,c formed farther away beyond the snowline, building up a water-rich core and acquiring almost twice the mass of planet b. In fact, it is expected from cosmic element abundance that just beyond the snowline there is about equal mass available in solids from icy material (including methane clathrates and ammonia hydrates, which both contain H$_{\rm 2}$O) and from rocky material (including primarily Mg-silicates and (Fe,Ni)-metal-alloy), for planet to accrete from, while only rocky material would remain available in solids inside the snowline \citep{lewis72,lewis04}.
\subsection{Comparing K2-36 to Kepler-36}
An interesting comparison can be made between the K2-36 and Kepler-36 planetary systems. The two-planet system Kepler-36 was discussed by \cite{carter12}, and then studied by \cite{lopezfortney2013}, \cite{quillen13}, \cite{owen16}, \cite{boden18}. Kepler-36 is a 6.8 Gyr moderately-evolved Sun-like star, thus older than K2-36 and with very similar metallicity ([Fe/H]=-0.20$\pm$0.6). Both Kepler-36 planets have very similar masses and radii compared to the corresponding K2-36 planets (see Fig. \ref{Fig:massradiusdiag}. The innermost planets b are consistent with Earth-like rocky composition (see Fig. \ref{Fig:massradiusdiag}). Kepler-36\,c has a larger radius than that of K2-36\,c, by adopting the more recent estimate of \cite{fulton18}\footnote{also \cite{berger18} provided a revised estimate for the radius of Kepler-36\,c, $R=3.689^{+0.165}_{-0.153}$, which is actually very similar to that of \cite{carter12}. By adopting this value instead of that from \cite{fulton18}, Kepler-36\,c and K2-36\,c have their radii compatible within one sigma.}, and lower density.
Kepler-36 planets have different densities and close orbits with periods near the 7:6 mean motion resonance. They both receive nearly half the insolation of K2-36\,b, and have insolation difference much lower than that for K2-36 planets ($[S_{\rm b}-S_{\rm c}]_{\rm Kep-36}\sim 45\, S_{\rm \oplus}$, and $[S_{\rm b}-S_{\rm c}]_{\rm K2-36}\sim 440\, S_{\rm \oplus}$). They are both susceptible to H$_{\rm 2}$-He atmospheric escape considering their escape velocities and current equilibrium temperatures $T_{\rm eq}\geq$900 K. According to their measured densities, Kepler-36\,b has lost any H$_{\rm 2}$-He gaseous envelope, while planet c still appears inflated and consistent with retaining an envelope of H$_{\rm 2}$/He with some percent in mass at the corresponding insolation. The near 7:6 mean motion resonance indicates that they have reached a stable orbital configuration. If photo evaporation has been driving atmospheric loss, its effects could have been steeply accelerated when the host star moved to the MS turn-off point, and it is still eroding the atmosphere of planet c. K2-36 and Kepler-36 planets could have formed in a similar environment, as suggested by the similar host star metallicity, and experienced a similar migration pathway.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\hsize]{K2_36_Damasso_20181221.pdf}
\caption{Mass-radius diagram for exoplanets with densities derived with precision better than 35$\%$ (data updated up to 2018 09 14). The planets with masses determined by the radial-velocity method are labelled as circles, and the ones with masses determined by the transit-timing-variation method are labelled as triangles. The color of the data points denotes stellar insolation (see legend in the upper left corner) in the Earth units (expressed as either the amount of stellar bolometric radiation reaching a given area at their orbital distances, assuming negligible orbital eccentricities, normalized to the Earth’s value or surface equilibrium temperatures assuming Earth-like albedo). The plotted masses of the K2-36 planets are those derived from the GP analysis of the TERRA RV dataset. K2-36 planets are represented by filled circles in bold and explicitly labelled. Overplotted are the planets of the Kepler-36 system (filled triangles in bold labelled as K-36), showing an analogy with the K2-36 system as discussed in the text. Two sets of H$_{\rm 2}$O mass-radius theoretical curves (blue - 100 mass$\%$ H$_{\rm 2}$O, cyan - 50 mass$\%$ H$_{\rm 2}$O; cores consist of rock and H$_{\rm 2}$O ice in 1:1 proportion by mass) are calculated for an isothermal fluid/steam envelope at temperatures 700 K and 1000 K, sitting on top of ice VII-layer at the appropriate melting pressure. A set of mass-radius curves (upper portion of the diagram) is calculated for the same temperatures assuming the addition of an isothermal H$_{\rm 2}$-envelope (2$\%$ mass) to the top of the 50 $\%$ mass H$_{\rm 2}$O-rich cores. The dashed curve labelled \textit{maximum collisional stripping} corresponds to the lower bound in radius or upper bound in density that a giant impact can yield for a given planet mass \citep{marcus09}. The dashed curve labelled \textit{M/R=3} corresponds to the contour on the mass-radius diagram where planet mass dividing by planet radius equals 3 in Earth units. It marks the equi-gravitational-potential for the surfaces of planets. Planets residing to the left of this curve are susceptible to atmospheric escape of H$_{\rm 2}$ and Helium over a billion years at their current equilibrium temperatures.}
\label{Fig:massradiusdiag}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\hsize]{esc_vel_vs_density_20190125_3.pdf}
\caption{Empirical relations that describe the dependence of the atmospheric composition in exoplanets from their escape velocities and equilibrium temperatures. The plot show the location of the K2-36 planets in the context of some notable small-size exoplanets ($R<4 R_{\rm \oplus}$) with measured masses (\textit{K-}: Kepler planets; \textit{T-1}: Trappist-1 planets). A color code is used to distinguish the planets on the basis of their bulk density.}
\label{fig:atmescape}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Comparing K2-36 to WASP-107}
Another interesting comparison is with WASP-107, a one-planet system characterized by a 0.9 $R_\mathrm{jup}$ planet with a sub-Saturn mass, and with an orbital period very similar to that of K2-36\,c (5.7 days), transiting a magnetic active K6V star with rotation period very similar to that of K2-36 \citep{anderson17,molcnik17}. Transmission spectroscopy has recently enabled the detection of helium in a likely extended atmosphere of the planet, for which an erosion rate of 0.1-4$\%$ of the total mass per billion years has been calculated \citep{spake18}. WASP-107\,b has an escape velocity ($\geq$20 \kms, or $m_{\rm p}/R_{\rm p}\sim$ 3.6) and a surface equilibrium temperature ($T_{\rm eq}\sim$740 K) not very dissimilar to those of K2-36\,c. If the sub-Neptune K2-36\,c has H$_{\rm 2}$/He as components in its atmosphere, they could currently be escaping at a strong rate, despite intermediate-sized planets (2-4 $R_{\rm \oplus}$) presumably having much less H$_{\rm 2}$/He volatiles than WASP-107\,b, which would then be depleted faster. Based on this planet-to-planet comparison, K2-36\,c may be considered suitable for future observations to search for evaporating helium. In fact, by assuming an atmosphere composed of 50$\%$ H$_{2}$ and 50 $\%$He, and the mass and radius estimated above for K2-36c, the atmospheric transmission spectrum signal of the planet can reach values up to about 160 ppm at five scale heights if it has a clear atmosphere. If the planet has a pure He atmosphere that extend 10 scale heights, it might present He absorption with an amplitude of 500 ppm.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sect:conclusion}
We presented a characterization study of the K2-36 planetary system based on data collected with the HARPS-N spectrograph. According to their size, the planets K2-36\,b and K2-36\,c are located above and below the photo-evaporation valley, and their derived bulk densities ($\rho_{\rm b}$=7.2$^{+2.5}_{-2.1}$ g\,cm$^{-3}$, $\rho_{\rm c}$=1.3$^{+0.7}_{-0.5}$ g\,cm$^{-3}$) indicate that K2-36\,b has an Earth-like rocky composition, while the Neptune/sub-Neptune size K2-36\,c is likely surrounded by a significant gas envelope, not yet evaporated. K2-36 is an ideal laboratory to study the role of the photo-evaporation on the evolution of low-mass, close-in planets, especially for a relatively young ($\sim$1 Gyr) system, as we determined in this work, with the host star having high levels of magnetic activity.
\begin{acknowledgements}
We acknowledge the two anonymous referees for useful comments.
MD acknowledges financial support from Progetto Premiale INAF WOW (\textit{Way to Other Worlds}) and Progetto Premiale 2015 FRONTIERA funding scheme of the Italian Ministry of Education, University, and Research. LM acknowledges financial support from Progetto Premiale 2015 FRONTIERA. ACC acknowledges support from the Science \&\ Technology Facilities Council (STFC) consolidated grant number ST/R000824/1. CAW acknowledges support from the STFC grant ST/P000312/1.
We thank Dr. B.J.~Fulton and Dr. E.~Petigura for providing us with a preview of the data used in their work. We thank Dr. S.~Engle and J. Kirk for useful discussions.
The HARPS-N project has been funded by the Prodex Program of the Swiss Space Office (SSO), the Harvard University Origins of Life Initiative (HUOLI), the Scottish Universities Physics Alliance (SUPA), the University of Geneva, the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO), and the Italian National Astrophysical Institute (INAF), the University of St Andrews, Queen's University Belfast, and the University of Edinburgh. The research leading to these results received funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007- 2013) under grant agreement number 313014 (ETAEARTH).
Some of this work has been carried out within the framework of the NCCR PlanetS, supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation.
This study is based upon work supported by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration under grants No. NNX15AC90G and NNX17AB59G issued through the Exoplanets Research Program. This research has made use of the SIMBAD database, operated at CDS, Strasbourg, France, NASA’s Astrophysics Data System and the NASA Exoplanet Archive, which is operated by the California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration under the Exoplanet Exploration Program. Based on observations made with the Italian Telescopio Nazionale Galileo (TNG) operated on the island of La Palma by the Fundacion Galileo Galilei of the INAF (Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica) at the Spanish Observatorio del Roque de los Muchachos of the Instituto de Astrofisica de Canarias. This paper includes data collected by the K2 mission. Funding for the K2 mission is provided by the NASA Science Mission directorate. Some of the data presented in this paper were obtained from the Mikulski Archive for Space Telescopes (MAST). STScI is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under NASA contract NAS5-26555. Support for MAST for non-HST data is provided by the NASA Office of Space Science via grant NNX13AC07G and by other grants and contracts.
This research has also made use of data products from the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer, which is a joint project of the University of California, Los Angeles, and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory/California Institute of Technology, funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration; of data from the European Space Agency (ESA) mission \textit{Gaia} (https://www.cosmos.esa.int/gaia), processed by the \textit{Gaia} Data Processing and Analysis Consortium (DPAC, https://www.cosmos.esa.int/web/gaia/dpac/consortium). Funding for the DPAC has been provided by national institutions, in particular the institutions participating in the Gaia Multilateral Agreement.
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{aa}
|
\section{Introduction}
Melt-blowing is a widely used production method for polymer micro- and nanofibers economically attractive due to low production costs. Fabrics of meltblown fibers are nonwovens, e.g., filters, hygiene products, battery separators. Details on the technology can be found in \cite{dutton:p:2009, pinchuk:b:2002}. A typical setup of a melt-blowing device is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{sec:intro_fig:apparatus}. In the process, molten polymer is fed through a nozzle into a forwarding high-speed and highly turbulent air stream to be stretched and cooled down. The resulting fibers are laid down onto some collector, e.g., conveyor belt. In contrast to melt-spinning processes, where the stretching is caused by a mechanical take-up, in melt-blowing the fiber jet thinning is due to the driving high-velocity air stream with its turbulent nature.
To deepen the understanding on the mechanism of jet thinning in melt-blowing extensive diverse studies have been performed in the last years, covering experimental investigations, e.g., \cite{bansal:p:1998, bresee:p:2003, ellison:p:2007, wu:p:1992, xie:p:2012}, combined experimental numerical works, e.g., \cite{yarin:p:2010, uyttendaele:p:1990, yarin:p:2010b}, as well as numerical computations, e.g., \cite{chen:p:2003, shambaugh:p:2011, sun:p:2011, zeng:p:2011}.
However, so far, there is an obvious gap between the experimental and numerical results for the achieved fiber thickness in literature. The existing numerical simulations underestimate the fiber elongation by several orders of magnitude, cf.\ \cite{xie:p:2012, uyttendaele:p:1990, shambaugh:p:2011, zeng:p:2011}. While experimental studies show fiber elongations $e \sim \mathcal{O}(10^6)$, $e = A_{in}/A = d_{in}^2/d^2$, meaning a reduction of $10^3$ in diameter $d$ and of $10^6$ in cross-sectional area $A$ compared to the values at the nozzle (indicated by the index $_{in}$), simulated elongations are of order $e\sim\mathcal{O}(10^4)$. This is likely due to steady considerations and the neglect of turbulent aerodynamic effects \cite{chen:p:2003, chen:p:2005, shambaugh:p:2011}. Assuming an incompressible steady fiber jet the relation $uA = u_{in}A_{in}$ with scalar jet speed $u$ holds true. Hence, the computed elongation is restricted by the velocity $\mathbf{v}_\star$ of the surrounding air stream, i.e., $e = u/u_{in} < \lVert \mathbf{v}_\star \rVert_\infty/u_{in}$. This estimate turns out to be valid also in (instationary) melt-blowing simulations where the surrounding airflow is computed (even) on basis of a turbulence model when only mean airflow informations are taken into account in the aerodynamic driving of the fiber jet \cite{sun:p:2011, zeng:p:2011}. Experiments in \cite{yarin:p:2010, xie:p:2012} indicate the relevance of the turbulent effects for the jet thinning. In \cite{yarin:p:2010b} a viscoelastic fiber model based on an upper convected Maxwell description (UCM) has been employed for melt-blowing, which is opposed to random pulsations. This is done by applying perturbation frequencies on a rectilinear fiber jet leading to bending instabilities and causing significant stretching and thinning of the jet. The examination has been extended to multiple fibers, focusing on the prediction of fiber deposition patterns and fiber-size distributions in the resulting nonwovens in \cite{yarin:p:2011}. Latest works deal with the numerical investigation of the angular fiber distribution, the effect of uptake velocity as well as the lay-down on a rotating drum \cite{sinharay:p:2013, ghosal:p:2016, ghosal:p:2016b}. In \cite{huebsch:p:2013} the significance of turbulence for melt-blowing has been approached by studying the effect of turbulent aerodynamic velocity fluctuations on a simplified fiber model of ordinary differential equations. There, a $k$-$\epsilon$ turbulence description of the high-speed airflow serves as basis for the reconstruction of the velocity fluctuations, yielding a stochastic aerodynamic force acting on the fiber jet.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=5cm]{device_2-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{Sketch of a typical melt-blowing setup.
}\label{sec:intro_fig:apparatus}
\end{figure}
The aim of this paper is to establish a numerical framework for fibers in turbulent air that makes the simulation of industrial melt-blowing processes feasible. For this purpose we bring together the two described approaches: we extend the random field sampling of \cite{huebsch:p:2013} to the instationary viscoelastic UCM fiber model of \cite{yarin:p:2010b}. Since the aerodynamic forces are the key player for the fiber behavior, we employ a one-way coupling of the outer air stream with the fibers by the help of the force model given in \cite{marheineke:p:2009b}. Of importance is the efficient and robust realization that enables us presenting numerical results of an industrial setup with an appropriate viscoelastic description of the fiber, the inclusion of temperature effects and the direct incorporation of the turbulence structure of the outer air stream for the first time in literature.
Regarding the viscoelastic UCM fiber model of \cite{yarin:p:2010b}, that is asymptotically derived by slender body theory in \cite{marheineke:p:2016}, in Lagrange description it can uniquely be written as quasilinear hyperbolic first order system of partial differential equations on a growing space-time domain. Its classification with respect to the growing fiber domain gives requirements on boundary conditions with regard to well-posedness of the mathematical problem formulation and suggests a parameterization of the fiber tangent by the help of spherical coordinates. The effects of turbulent fluctuations are calculated by the turbulence reconstruction procedure described in \cite{huebsch:p:2013} and coupled into the fiber model by an air force function. The resulting instationary problem is solved using finite volumes in space with numerical fluxes of Lax-Friedrichs type as well as employing the implicit Euler method in time. For an industrial melt-blowing setup we show the applicability of our model and numerical solution framework and demonstrate the relevance of the turbulent fluctuations causing fiber elongations of the expected higher order of magnitude compared to stationary simulations. From the repeated random sampling of fibers in the sense of the Monte Carlo method a distribution of the final fiber diameters is obtained that yields fiber diameters of realistic order of magnitude.
The paper is structured as follows. In Sec.~\ref{sec:model} we start with the instationary viscoelastic UCM fiber model, regarding its classification and correct closing with boundary conditions. Furthermore, we give a short survey in reconstructing the turbulent fluctuations of an underlying air stream. After that we discuss our numerical solution framework and the handling of the growing fiber domain in Sec.~\ref{sec:numerics}. In Sec.~\ref{sec:example} we consider an industrial melt-blowing setup, for which we present simulation results covering the turbulent effects due to the high-speed air stream.
\setcounter{equation}{0} \setcounter{figure}{0} \setcounter{table}{0}
\section{Viscoelastic fiber melt-blowing model}\label{sec:model}
For the melt-blowing of a fiber in a turbulent air stream we present an asymptotic instationary viscoelastic UCM fiber model in Lagrangian (material) description. We classify the resulting quasilinear system of partial differential equations of first order and discuss the appropriate closing by boundary conditions. The choice of the boundary conditions suggests a description with respect to a fiber tangent associated basis. The fiber tangent $\boldsymbol{\tau}$ with norm $e = \lVert \boldsymbol{\tau} \rVert$ and direction $\mathbf{t} = \boldsymbol{\tau}/\lVert \boldsymbol{\tau} \rVert$ is in particular parameterized by the help of spherical coordinates. Moreover, we present the models for the aerodynamic force and the heat exchange used in the one-way coupling with the surrounding airflow and introduce the stochastic modeling concept by which the effects of the turbulent aerodynamic velocity fluctuations are incorporated in the fiber system.
\subsection{Asymptotic fiber jet model}\label{sec:model_general}
The extrusion of a fiber jet from a nozzle into an air stream can be seen as an inflow problem with a domain enlarging over time. Let $\Omega= \{(\zeta,t)\in\mathbb{R}^2 \, \lvert \, \zeta\in\mathcal{Q}(t),\, t\in(0,t_{end}]\}$ be the space-time domain with time-dependent growing space $\mathcal{Q}(t) = (-\zeta_L(t),0)$, where $\mathrm{d}/\mathrm{d}t\, \zeta_L(t) = v_{in}(t)$, $\zeta_L(0) = 0$, with $v_{in}$ [m/s] being the (scalar) inflow velocity at the nozzle. In the following we assume a constant inflow velocity, i.e., $v_{in} = const$, yielding $\zeta_L(t) = v_{in}\, t$. The fiber jet is represented by a time-dependent curve $\mathbf{r}:\Omega\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^3$, where the fiber end corresponds to the material parameter $\zeta = 0$ and the material points entering the fiber (flow) domain at the nozzle are $\zeta = -\zeta_L(t)$. We assume incompressibility of the fiber jet such that besides the mass also the volume is conserved, i.e., $\partial_t\varrho_M = 0$ and $\partial_t\varrho_V = 0$ with mass and volume line densities, $\varrho_M$ [kg/m] and $\varrho_V$ [m$^2$], respectively. The mass and volume line densities are considered to be constant at the nozzle yielding $\varrho_M = \rho d_{in}^2\pi/4$ and $\varrho_V = \lVert \boldsymbol{\tau}_{in} \rVert d_{in}^2\pi/4$ with constant fiber density $\rho$ [kg/m$^3$], nozzle diameter $d_{in}$ [m] and fiber tangent at the nozzle $\boldsymbol{\tau}_{in}$. According to \cite{marheineke:p:2016}, where the viscoelastic UCM string model has been systematically derived by slender body asymptotics, our model for the extruding fiber jet is given in Lagrangian description by
\begin{align*}
\partial_t \mathbf{r} &= \mathbf{v},\\
\partial_\zeta \mathbf{r} &= \boldsymbol{\tau},\\
\partial_t(\varrho_M\mathbf{v}) &= \partial_\zeta\left(\varrho_V\sigma\frac{\boldsymbol{\tau}}{\lVert\boldsymbol{\tau}\rVert^2}\right) + \mathbf{f}_g + \mathbf{f}_{air},\\
c_p\partial_t(\varrho_M T) &= - \pi d \alpha (T-T_\star) \lVert \boldsymbol{\tau} \rVert,\\
\partial_t \sigma &= \left(3p+2\sigma+3\frac{\mu}{\theta}\right)\frac{\partial_t\lVert\boldsymbol{\tau}\rVert}{\lVert\boldsymbol{\tau}\rVert} - \frac{\sigma}{\theta},\\
\partial_t p &= \left(-p-\frac{\mu}{\theta}\right)\frac{\partial_t\lVert\boldsymbol{\tau}\rVert}{\lVert\boldsymbol{\tau}\rVert} - \frac{p}{\theta},
\end{align*}
supplemented with appropriate initial and boundary conditions to be specified. The diameter function $d:\mathcal{Q}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^+$ is introduced via
\begin{align*}
d = 2\sqrt{\frac{\varrho_V}{\pi\lVert \boldsymbol{\tau} \rVert}}.
\end{align*}
The two kinematic equations relate the fiber velocity $\mathbf{v}$ [m/s] and the fiber tangent $\boldsymbol{\tau}$ to the derivatives of the fiber curve $\mathbf{r}$ [m] with respect to time $t$ [s] and material parameter $\zeta$ [m]. The two dynamic equations prescribing the conservation of linear momentum and energy yield equations for fiber velocity $\mathbf{v}$ and fiber temperature $T$ [K]. The acting outer line force densities arise from gravity $\mathbf{f}_g = \varrho_M g \mathbf{e}_g$ [N/m] with direction $\mathbf{e}_g$, $\|\mathbf{e}_g\|=1$, and gravitational constant $g$ [m/s$^2$] as well as from the surrounding airflow $\mathbf{f}_{air}$ [N/m]. Moreover, $\alpha$ [W/(m$^2$K)] is the heat transfer coefficient, $T_\star$ [K] the aerodynamic temperature field, $c_p$ [J/(kgK)] the constant specific heat capacity of the fiber and $d$ [m] the fiber diameter. The models for the aerodynamic line force density $\mathbf{f}_{air}$ and for the heat transfer coefficient $\alpha$ are presented in Sec.~\ref{subsec:drag_turb_nusselt}. Concerning the viscoelastic material laws, they are based on a UCM model for the fiber stress $\sigma$ [Pa] and pressure $p$ [Pa]. Here, $\mu$ [Pa s] describes the dynamic viscosity and $\theta$ [s] the relaxation time of the fiber jet. Under the assumption of incompressibility the relation $\mu/\theta = E/3$ with elastic modulus $E$ [Pa] holds. We model the dynamic viscosity and relaxation time dependent on the temperature $T$, i.e., $\mu = \mu(T)$, $\theta = \theta(T)$. The corresponding rheological laws for an industrial example are specified in Sec.~\ref{sec:ex_subsec:setup}.
For the numerical treatment of the problem it is convenient to deal with dimensionless model equations. We introduce the dimensionless quantities as $\tilde{y}(\tilde{\zeta},\tilde{t}) = y(\zeta_0\tilde{\zeta},t_0\tilde{t})/y_0$ and use the reference values $y_0$ as given in Tab.~\ref{sec:model_table:entdim}. Here, $y_{in}$ indicates the value of a quantity $y$ at the nozzle and $H$ denotes the height of the considered melt-blowing device. The constant mass and volume line densities $\varrho_M$, $\varrho_V$ become $\tilde{\varrho}_M = \tilde{\varrho}_V = 1$ in dimensionless form. To keep the notation simple we suppress the label $\tilde{~}$ in the following. Then, the dimensionless model equations read
\begin{equation}\label{sec:model_eq:dimlessSystem}
\begin{aligned}
\partial_t \mathbf{r} &= \mathbf{v},\\
\partial_\zeta \mathbf{r} &= \boldsymbol{\tau},\\
\partial_t \mathbf{v} &= \partial_\zeta\left(\sigma\frac{\boldsymbol{\tau}}{\lVert\boldsymbol{\tau}\rVert^2}\right) + \frac{1}{\mathrm{Fr}^2}\mathbf{e}_g + \mathbf{f}_{air},\\
\partial_t T &= -\frac{\mathrm{St}}{\varepsilon}\pi d\alpha(T-T_\star)\lVert\boldsymbol{\tau} \rVert,\\
\mathrm{De}\left(\partial_t \sigma - (2\sigma+3p) \frac{\partial_t\lVert\boldsymbol{\tau}\rVert}{\lVert\boldsymbol{\tau}\rVert}\right) +\frac{\sigma}{\theta} &= \frac{3}{\mathrm{Re}}\frac{\mu}{\theta}\frac{\partial_t\lVert\boldsymbol{\tau}\rVert}{\lVert\boldsymbol{\tau}\rVert},\\
\mathrm{De}\left(\partial_t p + p\frac{\partial_t\lVert\boldsymbol{\tau}\rVert}{\lVert\boldsymbol{\tau}\rVert}\right) +\frac{p}{\theta} &= - \frac{1}{\mathrm{Re}}\frac{\mu}{\theta}\frac{\partial_t\lVert\boldsymbol{\tau}\rVert}{\lVert\boldsymbol{\tau}\rVert}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The fiber behavior is characterized by the dimensionless parameters given in Tab.~\ref{sec:model_table:entdim}, that are the Reynolds number $\mathrm{Re}$ as ratio of inertial to viscous forces, the Deborah number $\mathrm{De}$ as ratio of relaxation time to characteristic time-scale, the Froude number $\mathrm{Fr}$ as ratio of inertial to gravitational forces, the Stanton number $\mathrm{St}$ as ratio of heat transfer to thermal capacity as well as the slenderness ratio $\varepsilon$. The time-dependent space domain simplifies to $\mathcal{Q}(t) = (-t,0)$.
\begin{remark}\label{sec:model_remark:viscousLimit}
The viscoelastic UCM fiber model~\eqref{sec:model_eq:dimlessSystem} covers the limit cases describing pure viscous as well as elastic material behavior. The limit $\mathrm{De}\rightarrow 0$ yields a viscous fiber model, whereas the limit $\mathrm{Re}\rightarrow 0$, $\mathrm{De}\rightarrow\infty$ with $\mathrm{Re}\mathrm{De} = \mathrm{Ma}^2$ describes an elastic behavior. Here, the dimensionless Mach number $\mathrm{Ma}$ is the ratio of inertial to compressive forces.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{sec:model_remark:p}
As pointed out in \cite{marheineke:p:2016}, the pressure $p$ is at least one order of magnitude smaller than the stress $\sigma$ for fibers with high strain rates $\upsilon = \partial_t\lVert\boldsymbol{\tau}\rVert / \lVert\boldsymbol{\tau}\rVert \geq 0$ and large Deborah numbers $\mathrm{De}$, in particular $\lvert p \rvert \leq 0.1 \sigma$ if $\upsilon\mathrm{De}\,\theta \geq 0.35$. This means the pressure equation can be neglected in such cases. In \cite{yarin:p:2010b} this simplification is employed instantaneously to the UCM model for melt-blowing.
\end{remark}
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{minipage}[c]{\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\begin{small}
\begin{tabular}{| l r@{ = } l l |}
\hline
\multicolumn{4}{|l|}{\textbf{Reference values}}\\
Description & \multicolumn{2}{l}{Formula} & Unit\\
\hline
fiber curve & $r_0$ & $H$ & m \rule{0pt}{2.6ex}\\
fiber diameter & $d_0$ & $d_{in}\sqrt{\pi}/2$ & m\\
fiber velocity & $v_0$ & $v_{in}$ & m/s \\
fiber temperature & $T_0$ & $T_{in}$ & K\\
fiber mass line density & $\varrho_{M0}$ & $\rho d_0^2$ & kg/m\\
fiber volume line density & $\varrho_{V0}$ & $d_0^2$ & m$^2$\\
fiber stress & $\sigma_0$ & $\varrho_{M0}v_0^2/d_0^2$ & Pa\\
fiber pressure & $p_0$ & $\sigma_0$ & Pa\\
fiber kinematic viscosity & $\mu_0$ & $\mu(T_0)$ & Pas\\
fiber relaxation time & $\theta_0$ & $\theta(T_0)$ & s\\
outer forces & $f_0$ & $\varrho_{M0}v_0^2/r_0$ & N/m\\
heat transfer coefficient & $\alpha_0$ & $\alpha_{in}$ & W/(m$^2$K)\\
length scale & $\zeta_0$ & $r_0$ & m\\
time scale & $t_0$ & $r_0/v_0$ & s\\
air velocity & $v_{\star,0}$ & $v_0$ & m/s\\
air density & $\rho_{\star,0}$ & $\rho_{\star,in}$ & kg/m$^3$\\
air kinematic viscosity & $\nu_{\star,0}$ & $\nu_{\star,in}$ & m$^2$/s\\
air specific heat capacity & $c_{p,\star,0}$ & $c_{p,\star,in}$ & J/(kgK)\\
air thermal conductivity & $\lambda_{\star,0}$ & $\lambda_{\star,in}$ & W/(mK)\\
air turbulent kinetic energy & $k_{\star,0}$ & $k_{\star,in}$ & m$^2$/s$^2$\\
air viscous dissipation rate & $\epsilon_{\star,0}$ & $\epsilon_{\star,in}$ & m$^2$/s$^3$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{small}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}\vfill
\vspace*{0.5cm}
\begin{minipage}[c]{\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\begin{small}
\begin{tabular}{| l r@{ = } l |}
\hline
\multicolumn{3}{|l|}{\textbf{Dimensionless numbers}}\\
Description & \multicolumn{2}{l|}{Formula}\\
\hline
slenderness & $\varepsilon$ & $d_0/r_0$ \rule{0pt}{2.6ex}\\
Reynolds & $\mathrm{Re}$ & $\varrho_{M0}v_0r_0/(d_0^2\mu_0)$ \\
Deborah & $\mathrm{De}$ & $\theta_0/t_0$\\
Froude & $\mathrm{Fr}$ & $v_0/\sqrt{gr_0}$ \\
Stanton & $\mathrm{St}$ & $d_0^2\alpha_0/(c_p\varrho_{M0}v_0)$\\
Mach & $\mathrm{Ma}$ & $v_0/d_0\sqrt{\varrho_{M0}\theta_0/\mu_0}$\\
air drag associated & $\mathrm{A}_\star$ & $\rho_{\star,0}d_0v_0^2/f_0$\\
mixed (air-fiber) Reynolds & $\mathrm{Re}_\star$ & $d_0v_0/\nu_{\star,0}$\\
Nusselt & $\mathrm{Nu}_\star$ & $\alpha_0d_0/\lambda_{\star,0}$\\
Prandtl & $\mathrm{Pr}_\star$ & $c_{p,\star,0}\rho_{\star,0}\nu_{\star,0}/\lambda_{\star,0}$\\
turbulence degree & $\mathrm{Tu}_\star$ & $k_{\star,0}^{1/2}/v_0$\\
turbulent time & $\mathrm{Tt}_\star$ & $\epsilon_{\star,0}r_0/(k_{\star,0}v_0)$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{small}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}\\~\\~\\
\caption{Overview over reference values used for non-dimensionalization and the resulting dimensionless numbers.}\label{sec:model_table:entdim}
\end{table}
\subsection{Classification and boundary conditions}
The dimensionless fiber model (\ref{sec:model_eq:dimlessSystem}) can uniquely be written as a quasilinear system of partial differential equations of first order \cite{marheineke:p:2016}
\begin{align}\label{sec:model_eq:quasilinearForm}
\partial_t\boldsymbol{\varphi} + \mathbf{M}(\boldsymbol{\varphi})\cdot\partial_\zeta\boldsymbol{\varphi} + \mathbf{m}(\boldsymbol{\varphi}) = \mathbf{0}
\end{align}
with the vector of unknowns $\boldsymbol{\varphi} = (\mathbf{r},\boldsymbol{\tau},\mathbf{v},T,\sigma,p)\in\mathbb{R}^{12}$. The system is classified mathematically by the spectrum of the system matrix $\mathbf{M}$ that consists of the eigenvalues
\begin{itemize}
\item $\lambda_1 = 0$ (multiplicity $6$),
\item $\lambda_{2,3} = \pm\sqrt{\sigma}/\lVert \boldsymbol{\tau} \rVert$ (multiplicity $2$ each),
\item $\lambda_{4,5} = \pm\sqrt{w}/\lVert \boldsymbol{\tau} \rVert$ (multiplicity $1$ each), $\qquad w = \left(3\mu/\theta+\mathrm{Ma}^2\left(\sigma + 3p\right)\right)/\mathrm{Ma}^2$
\end{itemize}
The system is of hyperbolic type if $\sigma > 0$ and $w > 0$. Otherwise, it is mixed elliptic-hyperbolic, or even shows a parabolic deficiency if $\sigma=0$ and/or $w=0$.
Since the hyperbolic case is relevant for the application, we focus on it and discuss the closing of the system by appropriate boundary and initial conditions. At the fiber jet end, which corresponds to a fixed material point in Lagrangian description ($\zeta = 0$), the characteristic related to the eigenvalue $\lambda_i$ runs from the nozzle to the jet end if $\lambda_i > 0$ and from the jet end towards the nozzle if $\lambda_i < 0$. At the nozzle ($\zeta = -\zeta_L(t)$) the orientations of the characteristics depend on the scalar inflow velocity of the fiber jet, which reads $v_{in}/v_0 = 1$ in non-dimensional form. If $\lambda_i > -v_{in}/v_0=-1$ for $i\in\{1,...,5\}$, the corresponding characteristic propagates from the nozzle to the jet end, otherwise the other way round. The orientations of the characteristics yield requirements on the boundary conditions with regard to the well-posedness of the problem. Since $\lambda_3 < 0$ (multiplicity 2) and $\lambda_5 < 0$ (multiplicity 1), we have to pose three boundary conditions at the fiber jet end. Because of the spinning setup we model the fiber end ($\zeta = 0$) as stress-free, i.e.,
\begin{align*}
\sigma(0,t) = 0, \qquad p(0,t) = 0.
\end{align*}
Employing the viscoelastic material law for $\sigma$ yields a constant fiber elongation $e = \lVert \boldsymbol{\tau} \rVert$ at the fiber end over time, i.e., $\partial_t e(0,t) = 0$. To preserve this compatibility condition we pose
\begin{align*}
e(0,t) = 1,
\end{align*}
assuming the fiber jet to leave the nozzle unstretched. The eigenvalues $\lambda_1$, $\lambda_2$, $\lambda_4$ are non-negative and thus imply nine boundary conditions at the nozzle ($\zeta = -\zeta_L(t)$, $t\geq0$),
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{r}(-\zeta_L(t),t) &= \mathbf{r}_{in}/r_0, \qquad \left(\boldsymbol{\tau}/e\right)(-\zeta_L(t),t) = \mathbf{e}_g, \qquad
\mathbf{v}(-\zeta_L(t),t) = \mathbf{e}_g, \qquad T(-\zeta_L(t),t) = 1.
\end{align*}
Here, $\mathbf{r}_{in}$ is assumed to be constant. Furthermore, we set the following initial conditions for $t=0$,
\begin{align*}
\sigma(-\zeta_L(0),0) = \sigma_{in}/\sigma_0,\qquad
p(-\zeta_L(0),0) = p_{in}/p_0, \qquad e(-\zeta_L(0),0) = 1.
\end{align*}
Depending on the propagation-speed of the characteristics at the nozzle we pose further boundary conditions: we additionally prescribe for $t>0$
\begin{align*}
\sigma(-\zeta_L(t),t) &= \sigma_{in}/\sigma_0, \qquad p(-\zeta_L(t),t) = p_{in}/p_0,&& \text{ if } \lambda_3 > -1 \text{ (multiplicity 2)}, \\
e(-\zeta_L(t),t) &= 1 &&
\text{ if } \lambda_5 > -1 \text{ (multiplicity 1)}.
\end{align*}
The total time-derivative of the fiber curve $\mathbf{r}$ at the nozzle yields the compatibility condition $\mathbf{v}(-\zeta_L(t),t) = \boldsymbol{\tau}(-\zeta_L(t),t)$ for all times $t$. Through the above choice of the boundary conditions for $\mathbf{v}$, $\boldsymbol{\tau}/e$, and $e$ at the nozzle this condition is inherently fulfilled.
The choice of the boundary conditions and in particular the decomposition of the fiber tangent $\boldsymbol{\tau}=e\mathbf{t}$ into elongation $e = \lVert \boldsymbol{\tau}\rVert$ and direction $\mathbf{t}$, $\|\mathbf{t}\|=1$, suggests a reformulation of the corresponding dynamic equation $\partial_\zeta \mathbf{r}= \boldsymbol{\tau}$. Making use of the compatibility condition $\partial_t\boldsymbol{\tau} = \partial_t\partial_\zeta\mathbf{r} = \partial_\zeta\partial_t\mathbf{r} = \partial_\zeta \mathbf{v}$ yields an equation for the elongation $e$
\begin{align*}
\partial_t e - \mathbf{t}\cdot\partial_\zeta\mathbf{v} = 0.
\end{align*}
The normalized tangent $\mathbf{t}$ can be parameterized by means of spherical coordinates
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{t}(\vartheta,\varphi) = (\sin\vartheta\cos\varphi, \sin\vartheta\sin\varphi,\cos\vartheta), \qquad \vartheta \in [0,\pi], \quad \varphi \in [0,2\pi).
\end{align*}
Then, its time-derivative reads
$ \partial_t\mathbf{t} = \mathbf{n}\partial_t\vartheta + \mathbf{b}\partial_t\varphi $
with normal $\mathbf{n} = (\cos\vartheta\cos\varphi, \cos\vartheta\sin\varphi, -\sin\vartheta)$ and binormal $\mathbf{b} = (-\sin\vartheta\sin\varphi, \sin\vartheta\cos\varphi, 0)$. The set $\{\mathbf{t},\mathbf{n},\mathbf{b}\} \subset \mathbb{R}^3$ forms an orthogonal basis where $\|\mathbf{t}\|=\|\mathbf{n}\|=1$. Employing
\begin{align*}
\partial_t\mathbf{t} = \partial_t\left(\frac{\boldsymbol{\tau}}{e}\right) = \frac{1}{e}\left(\mathbf{I} - \mathbf{t}\otimes\mathbf{t}\right)\cdot\partial_\zeta\mathbf{v}
\end{align*}
gives relations for the polar $\vartheta$ and azimuth angles $\varphi$
\begin{align*}
\partial_t\vartheta = \frac{1}{e}\mathbf{n}\cdot\partial_\zeta\mathbf{v},\qquad
\sin^2\vartheta\,\partial_t\varphi = \frac{1}{e}\mathbf{b}\cdot\partial_\zeta\mathbf{v}.
\end{align*}
Summing up, our viscoelastic instationary fiber model on a growing domain in Lagrangian description is given by System~\ref{system:Final}.
\begin{system}[Instationary viscoelastic fiber model]\label{system:Final}
Kinematic and dynamic equations as well as material laws in $\Omega$:
\begin{align*}
\partial_t \mathbf{r} - \mathbf{v}&=0,\\
\partial_t e - \mathbf{t}\cdot\partial_\zeta\mathbf{v} &= 0,\\
\partial_t\vartheta - \frac{1}{e}\mathbf{n}\cdot\partial_\zeta\mathbf{v} &= 0,\\
\sin^2\vartheta\,\partial_t\varphi - \frac{1}{e}\mathbf{b}\cdot\partial_\zeta\mathbf{v} &=0,\\
\partial_t\mathbf{v} - \partial_\zeta\left(\sigma\frac{\mathbf{t}}{e}\right) - \frac{1}{\mathrm{Fr}^2}\mathbf{e}_g - \mathbf{f}_{air} &= 0,\\
\partial_t T + \frac{\mathrm{St}}{\varepsilon}\pi d\alpha(T-T_\star)e &= 0,\\
\mathrm{De}\,\partial_t \sigma + \left(-\mathrm{De}\,(2\sigma+3p)-\frac{\mu}{\theta}\frac{3}{\mathrm{Re}}\right) \,\frac{\mathbf{t}}{e}\cdot\partial_\zeta\mathbf{v}+ \frac{\sigma}{\theta} &= 0,\\
\mathrm{De}\,\partial_t p + \left(\mathrm{De}\,p+\frac{\mu}{\theta}\frac{1}{\mathrm{Re}}\right)\,\frac{\mathbf{t}}{e}\cdot\partial_\zeta\mathbf{v} + \frac{p}{\theta} &= 0,
\end{align*}
Initial-boundary conditions at the nozzle ($\zeta = -\zeta_L(t)$, $t \geq 0$):
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{r}(-\zeta_L(t),t) &= \mathbf{r}_{in}/r_0, \qquad &\vartheta(-\zeta_L(t),t) &= \vartheta_{in} \qquad &\varphi(-\zeta_L(t),t) &= \varphi_{in},\\
\mathbf{v}(-\zeta_L(t),t) &= \mathbf{e}_g, \qquad & T(-\zeta_L(t),t) &= 1,
\end{align*}
Initial conditions ($t=0$):
\begin{align*}
e(-\zeta_L(0),0) = 1,\qquad \sigma(-\zeta_L(0),0) = \sigma_{in}/\sigma_0,\qquad
p(-\zeta_L(0),0) = p_{in}/p_0,
\end{align*}
Boundary conditions at the nozzle ($\zeta = -\zeta_L(t)$, $t > 0$):
\begin{align*}
&\text{if } \lambda_3>-1 \text{: }& \sigma(-\zeta_L(t),t) &= \sigma_{in}/\sigma_0, \qquad p(-\zeta_L(t),t) = p_{in}/p_0,\\
&\text{if } \lambda_5>-1 \text{: }& e(-\zeta_L(t),t) &= 1,
\end{align*}
Boundary conditions at the fiber end ($\zeta = 0$, $t>0$):
\begin{align*}
e(0,t) = 1, \qquad \sigma(0,t) = 0, \qquad p(0,t) = 0.
\end{align*}
\end{system}
\subsection{Exchange models for one-way coupling with turbulent airflow}\label{subsec:drag_turb_nusselt}
In this work we consider a one-sided coupling of the airflow with the fiber, neglecting feedback effects of the fiber on the airflow. The respective exchange models used for the aerodynamic line force density $\mathbf{f}_{air}$ and the heat transfer coefficient $\alpha$ are briefly summarized in this subsection. Moreover, we describe the concept how the turbulent aerodynamic velocity fluctuations are realized with respect to an underlying (stochastic) airflow simulation and incorporated in our fiber model (System~\ref{system:Final}).
Note that to distinguish the fiber quantities from the airflow quantities, all airflow associated fields are labeled with the index $_\star$ as before. In particular, $\mathbf{v}_\star$ denotes the velocity, $\rho_\star$ the density, $\nu_\star$ the kinematic viscosity, $c_{p,\star}$ the specific heat capacity, $\lambda_\star$ the thermal conductivity, $k_\star$ the turbulent kinetic energy and $\epsilon_\star$ the viscous dissipation of the turbulent motions per unit mass of the air. All these quantities are space- and time-dependent fields assumed to be dimensionless and known -- for example provided by an external computation. The corresponding reference values used for non-dimensionalization are denoted with the index $_0$ and given in Tab.~\ref{sec:model_table:entdim}.
\subsubsection{Aerodynamic force and heat transfer coefficient}\label{subsubsec:drag}
The models for the aerodynamic force and the heat transfer coefficient are determined by material and geometrical properties as well as the incident flow situation which can be prescribed by the fiber orientation (normalized tangent) $\mathbf{t}$ and the relative velocity between airflow and fiber $\mathbf{v}_\star -\mathbf{v}$.
The aerodynamic line force density $\mathbf{f}_{air}$ is modeled by means of a dimensionless drag function $\mathbf{F}:\mathrm{SO}(3)\times \mathbb{R}^3\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^3$ which depends on fiber tangent and relative velocity,
\begin{align}\label{sec:model_eq:airdrag}
\mathbf{f}_{air} = e\frac{\mathrm{A}_\star}{\mathrm{Re}_\star^2}\frac{\rho_\star\nu^2_\star}{d} \mathbf{F}\bigg(\mathbf{t},\mathrm{Re}_\star\frac{d}{\nu_\star}(\mathbf{v}_\star - \mathbf{v})\bigg),\qquad
\mathbf{F}(\mathbf{t},\mathbf{w}) = r_n(w_n)\mathbf{w_n} + r_t(w_n)\mathbf{w_t}.
\end{align}
The drag function can be particularly expressed in terms of the tangential $\mathbf{w_t} = (\mathbf{w}\cdot\mathbf{t})\mathbf{t}$ and normal relative velocity components $\mathbf{w_n}=\mathbf{w}-\mathbf{w_t}$, $w_n = \lVert \mathbf{w_n} \rVert$. The models used for the tangential and normal air resistance coefficients $r_t$, $r_n$ are taken from \cite{marheineke:p:2009b}, see Appendix \ref{appendix_AirDrag} for details. The occurring dimensionless numbers are the air drag associated number $\mathrm{A}_\star$ and the mixed (air-fiber) Reynolds number $\mathrm{Re}_\star$ (cf. Tab.~\ref{sec:model_table:entdim}). Concerning lift forces see Remark~\ref{rem:lift}.
The heat transfer coefficient $\alpha$ is modeled by a Nusselt number associated dimensionless function $\mathcal{N}:\mathbb{R}^3\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$ which depends on the tangential and absolute relative velocity and the Prandtl number,
\begin{align}
\alpha = \frac{1}{\mathrm{Nu}_\star}\frac{\lambda_\star}{d}\mathcal{N}\left(\mathrm{Re}_\star\frac{d}{\nu_\star}(\mathbf{v_\star} - \mathbf{v})\cdot\mathbf{t}, \mathrm{Re}_\star\frac{d}{\nu_\star}\lVert \mathbf{v_\star} - \mathbf{v}\rVert, \mathrm{Pr}_\star\frac{c_{p,\star}\rho_\star\nu_\star}{\lambda_\star}\right).
\end{align}
For details on the used heuristic model for $\mathcal{N}$ we refer to Appendix~\ref{appendix_Nusselt}. The occurring dimensionless numbers are the Nusselt number $\mathrm{Nu}_\star$, the Prandtl number $\mathrm{Pr}_\star$ as well as the mixed (air-fiber) Reynolds number $\mathrm{Re}_\star$ (cf. Tab.~\ref{sec:model_table:entdim}).
\subsubsection{Turbulence reconstruction}\label{subsubsec:turbRecon}
A direct numerical simulation of the turbulent airflow in the application is not possible due to the required high resolution. Hence, a statistical turbulence description is used where the airflow velocity $\mathbf{v}_\star$ is assumed to consist of a mean (deterministic) part $\bar{\mathbf{v}}_\star$ and a fluctuating (stochastic) part $\mathbf{v}'_\star$, i.e.,
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{v}_\star = \bar{\mathbf{v}}_\star + \mathbf{v}'_\star.
\end{align*}
The mean velocity is given by the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes equations, while the fluctuations are only characterized by certain quantities that the respective turbulence model provides. To obtain $\mathbf{v}'_\star$ explicitly as random field we apply a turbulence reconstruction that has been developed in \cite{huebsch:p:2013} on basis of a $k_\star$-$\epsilon_\star$ turbulence model. Assuming given dimensionless space-time-dependent fields for the turbulent kinetic energy $k_\star$ and the viscous dissipation of the turbulent motions per unit mass $\epsilon_\star$, the general concept of the turbulence reconstruction is to model the local turbulent fluctuations as homogeneous, isotropic, incompressible Gaussian random fields in space and time, $\mathbf{v}_{\star,loc}' = \mathbf{v}_{\star,loc}'(\mathbf{x}, t; \nu_\star, \bar{\mathbf{v}}_\star)$, that depend parametrically on the kinematic viscosity and mean velocity of the airflow, as done in \cite{marheineke:p:2006, marheineke:p:2009b}. To form the large-scale structure of the global turbulence the local fluctuations fields are superposed based on a Global-from-Local assumption. The globalization strategy according to \cite{huebsch:p:2013} yields
\begin{align}\label{sec:model_eq:turbReconstr}
\mathbf{v}_\star' = \mathrm{Tu}_\star k_\star^{1/2}\mathbf{v}_{\star,loc}'\left(\frac{\mathrm{Tt}_\star}{\mathrm{Tu}_\star}\frac{\epsilon_\star}{k_\star^{3/2}}\mathbf{r}, \mathrm{Tt}_\star\frac{\epsilon_\star}{k_\star}t; \frac{\varepsilon}{\mathrm{Re}_\star}\frac{\mathrm{Tt_\star}}{\mathrm{Tu}_\star^2}\frac{\epsilon_\star}{k_\star^2} \nu_\star,\frac{1}{\mathrm{Tu}_\star} \frac{1}{k_\star^{1/2}} \bar{\mathbf{v}}_\star\right).
\end{align}
Besides the slenderness ratio $\varepsilon$ and the mixed Reynolds number $\mathrm{Re}_\star$, the occurring dimensionless numbers are the degree of turbulence $\mathrm{Tu}_\star$ and the turbulent time scale ratio $\mathrm{Tt}_\star$ as given in Tab.~\ref{sec:model_table:entdim}.
Note that the occurring turbulent length and time scales give requirements on the spatial and temporal resolution in our numerical solution algorithm (cf.\ Rem.~\ref{sec:numerics_remark:resolution} in Sec.~\ref{sec:numerics}). In particular, $l'_\star = \mathrm{Tu}_\star/\mathrm{Tt}_\star k_\star^{3/2}/\epsilon_\star$ is the dimensionless turbulent length scale indicating the expected length of the large-scale vortices, and $t_\star' = 1/\mathrm{Tt}_\star k_\star/\epsilon_\star$ is the dimensionless turbulent time scale describing the expected creation and break-up time of the vortices. For details on the general sampling procedure providing a fast and accurate sampling of the random fields we refer to \cite{huebsch:p:2013}. To even increase the efficiency of the procedure we use here a simplified underlying energy spectrum, see Appendix~\ref{appendix_turbRecon} for details on the modeling of $\mathbf{v}_{\star,loc}'$.
\begin{remark}[Lift forces]\label{rem:lift}
In industrial melt-blowing processes lift forces on a fiber are created through airflow vortices approaching the fiber and by vortex shedding at the back of the fiber. While the latter can be neglected since the fiber is meanly following the turbulent air stream, the first mechanism is included by the help of the following ansatz: the local turbulent instationary velocity fluctuations $\mathbf{v}_\star'$ are plugged into the air drag model (\ref{sec:model_eq:airdrag}), meaning local observations are mapped into a stationary far field consideration. This leads to aerodynamic forces on the fiber acting perpendicular to the $(\bar{\mathbf{v}}_\star-\mathbf{v})$-$\boldsymbol{\tau}$-plane.
\end{remark}
\setcounter{equation}{0} \setcounter{figure}{0} \setcounter{table}{0}
\section{Numerical Scheme}\label{sec:numerics}
System~\ref{system:Final} is a boundary value problem of a quasilinear system of partial differential equations of first order on a growing domain. It is discretized with finite volumes in space based on a central flux approximation with a Lax-Friedrich type stabilization and with the implicit Euler method in time. The growing fiber domain is realized by dynamic and static spatial cells according to the discretization concept in \cite{arne:p:2015}.
We reformulate System~\ref{system:Final} as
\begin{equation}\label{sec:numerics_eq:instationary}
\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{K}(\mathbf{y})\cdot\partial_t\mathbf{y} + \mathbf{L}(\mathbf{y})\cdot\partial_\zeta\mathbf{y} + \mathbf{l}(\mathbf{y}) = \mathbf{0}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
with the vector of unknowns $\mathbf{y} = (\mathbf{r},e,\vartheta,\varphi,\mathbf{v},T,\sigma,p)\in\mathbb{R}^{12}$ and consider it on the spatial domain $\mathcal{Q}(t) = (-t,0)$ for times $0 \leq t \leq t_{end}$. The introduction of the matrix $\mathbf{K}$ avoids a singularity for $\sin\vartheta = 0$. For $\sin\vartheta \neq 0$, $\mathbf{K}$ is invertible revealing the unique quasilinear form \eqref{sec:model_eq:quasilinearForm}.
For the spatial discretization we employ a finite volume scheme. We introduce a constant cell size $\Delta \zeta$ and define the number of dynamic cells $N(t)$ depending on the fiber length $\zeta_L(t) = t$ at time $t$ as
\begin{align*}
N(t) = \bigg\lfloor\frac{\zeta_L(t)}{\Delta \zeta}\bigg\rfloor,
\end{align*}
where $\lfloor\cdot\rfloor$ denotes the floor function. Furthermore, we introduce the discretization points
\begin{align*}
\zeta_{(j+1)/2} = -\left( N(t) - \frac{j}{2}\right)\Delta \zeta, \qquad j=0,...,2N(t).
\end{align*}
The points $\zeta_i$, $i=1,...,N(t)$, represent the cell centers. The dynamic cell closest to the nozzle ($\zeta = -t$) is given by $[\zeta_{1/2}, \zeta_{3/2}]$, whereas $\zeta_{N+1/2} = 0$ is the fiber end, cf. Fig.~\ref{sec:numerics_fig:mesh}. The jet growth is realized by adding static cells at the nozzle. This means we add new cells, which are initialized by the boundary conditions at the nozzle (i.e., at the left side of the computational domain). The cells remain static until they have completely left the nozzle. When they have completely entered the flow domain they are called dynamic cells and are then taken into consideration for the computation. The introduction of static cells at the nozzle allows the suitable initialization of a jet with length $\zeta_L(t) < \Delta\zeta$ and a stable numerical treatment of the temporal evolution.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=5.5cm]{mesh-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{Illustration of the spatial discretization of the growing jet domain $\mathcal{Q}(t)$ (marked by the blue dashed line) with $N(t)$ dynamic cells. Cells are treated as static cells until they have completly entered the flow domain.}\label{sec:numerics_fig:mesh}
\end{figure}
We define the cell averages $\mathbf{y}_i$, $i=1,...,N(t)$, of the unknown quantities as
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{y}_i(t) = \frac{1}{\Delta \zeta}\int\limits_{\zeta_{i-1/2}}^{\zeta_{i+1/2}} \mathbf{y}(\zeta,t)d\zeta,
\end{align*}
integrate the quasilinear system (\ref{sec:numerics_eq:instationary}) over the control cells $[\zeta_{i-1/2},\zeta_{i+1/2}]$, $i=1,...,N(t)$, in which we assume $\mathbf{X}(\mathbf{y})|_{[\zeta_{i-1/2},\zeta_{i+1/2}]} = \mathbf{X}(\mathbf{y}_i)$ for $\mathbf{X} = \mathbf{K}, \mathbf{L}, \mathbf{l}$ and adopt the idea of the Lax-Friedrichs scheme for the approximation of the numerical fluxes as done in \cite{fjordholm:p:2012}. The resulting system of ordinary differential equations for the cell averages $\mathbf{y}_i$ with respect to time has the form
\begin{equation}\label{sec:numerics_eq:spaceSemidis}
\mathbf{K}(\mathbf{y}_i)\cdot\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t}\mathbf{y}_i - \mathbf{K}(\mathbf{y}_i)\cdot\frac{1}{2\Delta t}(\mathbf{y}_{i+1} - 2\mathbf{y}_i + \mathbf{y}_{i-1})+ \mathbf{L}(\mathbf{y}_i)\cdot \frac{1}{2\Delta \zeta}\left(\mathbf{y}_{i+1} - \mathbf{y}_{i-1}\right) + \mathbf{l}(\mathbf{y}_i) = 0,
\end{equation}
where $\Delta t$ denotes the constant time-step size, that we will use in the temporal discretization. The incorporation of initial-boundary and boundary conditions in our numerical scheme is realized by ghostlayers. Following \cite{leveque:b:2002} quantities not being prescribed at a boundary are extrapolated on the corresponding ghostlayer, in particular we choose first order extrapolation.
For the solution of the system of ordinary differential equations (\ref{sec:numerics_eq:spaceSemidis}) we employ the stiffly accurate implicit Euler scheme with constant time-step size $\Delta t$
\begin{equation}\label{sec:num_eq:fullDiscr}
\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{K}(\mathbf{y}_i^{n+1})\cdot\left(2\mathbf{y}_i^{n+1} - \frac{1}{2}\mathbf{y}_{i+1}^{n+1} - \frac{1}{2}\mathbf{y}_{i-1}^{n+1} - \mathbf{y}_i^n\right) + \mathbf{L}(\mathbf{y}_i^{n+1})\cdot \frac{\Delta t}{2\Delta \zeta}\left(\mathbf{y}_{i+1}^{n+1} - \mathbf{y}_{i-1}^{n+1}\right) + \Delta t\mathbf{l}(\mathbf{y}_i^{n+1}) = 0,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
with $\mathbf{y}_i^n = \mathbf{y}_i(t^n)$ and $t^n = n\Delta t$ for $n = 0,...,M$, $t^M = t_{end}$.
The resulting nonlinear system of equations is solved by a Newton-method with Armijo step size control, where the Jacobian of the system matrix is prescribed analytically. The break-up criterion of the Newton algorithm is set to an absolute error tolerance $tol = 10^{-8}$ with respect to the maximum norm.
\begin{remark}[Artificial diffusion]
The semi-discrete system (\ref{sec:numerics_eq:spaceSemidis}) can be seen as a spatial discretization of
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{K}(\mathbf{y})\cdot\partial_t\mathbf{y} + \mathbf{L}(\mathbf{y})\cdot\partial_\zeta\mathbf{y} + \mathbf{l}(\mathbf{y}) = \mathbf{K}(\mathbf{y})\cdot\eta\partial_{\zeta\zeta}\mathbf{y}
\end{align*}
with $\eta = (\Delta \zeta)^2/(2\Delta t)$ by means of a central approximation of the flux terms. This means we add artificial diffusion of magnitude $\eta$ to our system as it is common for classical Lax-Friedrich schemes.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}[Convergence of numerical scheme]
As it is well-known from hyperbolic literature (e.g. \cite{leveque:b:2002}), the numerical scheme (\ref{sec:num_eq:fullDiscr}) provides accuracy of order one with respect to the time and accuracy of order two with respect to the space discretization yielding a combined convergence of order one. In \cite{devuyst:p:2004, fjordholm:p:2012, munkejord:p:2009} a similar scheme has been investigated with respect to a stability concept for non-conservative hyperbolic partial differential equations.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}[Spatial and temporal resolution]\label{sec:numerics_remark:resolution}
The temporal and spatial grid sizes have to be chosen in such a way that the turbulent scales of the underlying airflow are resolved properly. In particular, the turbulent length scale $l'_\star = \mathrm{Tu}_\star/\mathrm{Tt}_\star k_\star^{3/2}/\epsilon_\star$ and the turbulent time scale $t_\star' = 1/\mathrm{Tt}_\star k_\star/\epsilon_\star$ used in the turbulence reconstruction (\ref{sec:model_eq:turbReconstr}) have to be considered. Furthermore, the time that a vortex needs to pass a fixed material point of the fiber due to their relative velocity has to be taken into account for the temporal resolution. In total, the requirements for a successful simulation in terms of $\Delta\zeta$ and $\Delta t$ read
\begin{equation}\label{sec:numerics_eq:resolution}
\Delta\zeta \leq \frac{l'_\star}{e}, \qquad \Delta t \leq \min\left(t'_\star,\frac{l'_\star}{\lVert\mathbf{v_\star - \mathbf{v}}\rVert}\right).
\end{equation}
Appropriate grid sizes are estimated by computing the bounds for all given airflow data with assumptions on the maximal fiber velocity and elongation.
\end{remark}
\setcounter{equation}{0} \setcounter{figure}{0} \setcounter{table}{0}
\section{Industrial melt-blowing simulation}\label{sec:example}
In this section we investigate an industrial melt-blowing scenario that has been studied in \cite{huebsch:p:2013} by the help of a simplified ODE model for the fiber jet position, velocity and elongation. We employ our more sophisticated PDE fiber jet model (System~\ref{system:Final}), which additionally contains a viscoelastic material behavior and thermal effects describing the jet cooling and solidification. Before we present our simulation results, we specify the industrial setup and state the closing models for the dynamic viscosity as well as relaxation time and elastic modulus. In the scenario we face step size restrictions (cf.\ Remark~\ref{sec:numerics_remark:resolution}) that prevent the computability of the whole fiber from nozzle to conveyor belt. To handle this numerical problem we suggest and discuss an appropriate simulation strategy.
\subsection{Setup and model closing}\label{sec:ex_subsec:setup}
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{minipage}[c]{\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\begin{small}
\begin{tabular}{| l l l l |}
\hline
\multicolumn{4}{|l|}{\textbf{Parameters}}\\
Description & Symbol & Value & Unit\\
\hline
device height & $H$ & $1.214\cdot10^{-1}$ & m \rule{0pt}{2.6ex}\\
nozzle diameter & $d_{in}$ & $4\cdot 10^{-4}$ & m\\
fiber speed at nozzle & $v_{in}$ &$1\cdot 10^{-2}$ & m/s\\
fiber temperature at nozzle & $T_{in}$ & $5.532\cdot10^2$ & K\\
heat transfer at nozzle & $\alpha_{in}$ & $ 1.595\cdot10^3$ & W/(m$^2$K)\\
polar angle at nozzle & $\vartheta_{in}$ & $\pi/2$ & --\\
azimuth angle at nozzle & $\varphi_{in}$ & $\pi$ & --\\
fiber density & $\rho$ & $7\cdot10^2$ & kg/m$^3$\\
fiber specific heat capacity & $c_p$ & $2.1\cdot10^3$ & J/(kgK)\\
end time & $t_{end}$ & $2.20\cdot10^{-2}$ & s\\
air density at nozzle & $\rho_{\star,in}$ & $1.187$ & kg/m$^3$\\
air kinematic viscosity at nozzle & $\nu_{\star,in}$ & $1.8\cdot10^{-5}$ & m$^2$/s\\
air specific heat capacity at nozzle & $c_{p,\star,in}$ & $1.006\cdot10^3$ & J/(kgK)\\
air thermal conductivity at nozzle & $\lambda_{\star,in}$ & $2.42\cdot10^{-2}$ & W/(mK)\\
air turbulent kinetic energy at nozzle & $k_{\star,in}$ & $2.181\cdot10^2$ & m$^2$/s$^2$\\
air viscous dissipation rate at nozzle & $\epsilon_{\star,in}$ & $1.808\cdot10^7$ & m$^2$/s$^3$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{small}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\vfill
\vspace{0.5cm}
\begin{minipage}[c]{\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\begin{small}
\begin{tabular}{| l l l |}
\hline
\multicolumn{3}{|l|}{\textbf{Dimensionless numbers}}\\
Description & Symbol & Value\\
\hline
slenderness & $\varepsilon$ & $2.92\cdot 10^{-3}$ \rule{0pt}{2.6ex}\\
Reynolds & $\mathrm{Re}$ & $2.99\cdot 10^{-1}$\\
Deborah & $\mathrm{De}$ & $4.94\cdot 10^{-2}$\\
Froude & $\mathrm{Fr}$ & $9.16\cdot 10^{-3}$ \\
Stanton & $\mathrm{St}$ & $1.08\cdot 10^{-1}$\\
Mach & $\mathrm{Ma} $ & $1.22\cdot 10^{-1}$\\
air drag associated & $\mathrm{A}_\star$ & $5.81\cdot 10^{-1}$\\
mixed (air-fiber) Reynolds & $\mathrm{Re}_\star$ & $1.97\cdot 10^{-1}$\\
Nusselt & $\mathrm{Nu}_\star$ & $2.34\cdot 10^1$\\
Prandtl & $\mathrm{Pr}_\star$ & $8.89\cdot 10^{-1}$\\
turbulence degree & $\mathrm{Tu}_\star$ & $1.48\cdot 10^3$\\
turbulent time & $\mathrm{Tt}_\star$ & $1.01\cdot 10^6$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{small}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}\\~\\~\\
\caption{Overview over process and physical parameters in the industrial melt-blowing setup according to \cite{huebsch:p:2013} and the resulting dimensionless numbers.}\label{sec:ex_table:param}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=5cm]{industrial_setup-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{Illustration of the considered industrial melt-blowing process. The two-dimensional cut ($\mathbf{e}_x$-$\mathbf{e}_z$-plane, marked by dashed line) represents the whole flow domain due to homogenity in $\mathbf{e}_y$-direction.}\label{sec:ex_fig:setup}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\newlength\figureheight
\newlength\figurewidth
\centering
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics{main-figure0.pdf}
\end{minipage}\hfill
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics{main-figure1.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics{main-figure2.pdf}
\end{minipage}\hfill
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics{main-figure3.pdf}
\end{minipage}\vfill
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics{main-figure4.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Airflow simulation of the representative two-dimensional flow domain (cf. Fig.~\ref{sec:ex_fig:setup}). \textit{Top:} components of mean airflow velocity $\bar{\mathbf{v}}_\star$ in $\mathbf{e}_x$- and $\mathbf{e}_z$-direction (denoted by $\bar{v}_{\star,1}$ and $\bar{v}_{\star,3}$ respectively). \textit{Middle:} turbulent kinetic energy $k_\star$ and dissipation rate $\epsilon_\star$ in logarithmic scale. \textit{Bottom:} temperature $T_\star$.}\label{sec:ex_fig:k-eps-sim}
\end{figure}
In the melt-blowing setup a high-speed air stream is directed vertically downwards in direction of gravity and enters the domain of interest via thin slot dies. The spinning nozzles are located in between and extrude the polymeric fiber jets in the same direction, see Fig.~\ref{sec:ex_fig:setup}. We choose an outer orthonormal basis $\{\mathbf{e}_x,\mathbf{e}_y,\mathbf{e}_z\}$, where $\mathbf{e}_x$ points against the direction of gravity (i.e., $\mathbf{e}_x = -\mathbf{e}_g$) and $\mathbf{e}_y$ is aligned with the slot inlet. The mean quantities of the turbulent airflow are time-independent and homogeneous in $\mathbf{e}_y$-direction, such that a stationary $k_\star$-$\epsilon_\star$ simulation for a representative two-dimensional cut showing the $\mathbf{e}_x$-$\mathbf{e}_z$-plane is reasonable. The origin of the outer basis is aligned with the external given airflow data, such that the considered nozzle is at the position $\mathbf{r}_{in} = (-2.85\cdot 10^{-2},0,0)\,$m in the airflow field. We use the same $k_\star$-$\epsilon_\star$ simulation results as in \cite{huebsch:p:2013}, supplemented with an additional temperature profile as depicted in Fig.~\ref{sec:ex_fig:k-eps-sim}. The melt-blown fiber polymer is of polypropylene (PP) type with material parameters taken from \cite{huebsch:p:2013}. The process and physical parameters as well as the resulting dimensionless numbers are listed in Table~\ref{sec:ex_table:param}.
For the temperature-dependent dynamic viscosity of the PP-type fiber material we employ the Arrhenius law. The corresponding relation for the dimensionless viscosity $\mu$ depending on the temperature $T$ is given by
\begin{align*}
\mu(T) = \frac{1}{\mu_0}\mathcal{M}(TT_0),\qquad \mathcal{M}(T) = a_\mu\exp\left(\frac{b_\mu}{T-c_\mu}\right).
\end{align*}
The polymer-specific constants coming from measurements are $a_\mu = 0.1352$ Pas, $b_\mu = 852.323$ K, $c_\mu = 273.15$ K.
We choose the following heuristic model for the relaxation time
\begin{align*}
\theta(T) = \frac{1}{\theta_0} \mathcal{T}(TT_0),\qquad \mathcal{T}(T) = 3\frac{\mathcal{M}(T) + b_\theta}{a_\theta}
\end{align*}
with $a_\theta=10^9$ Pa and $b_\theta= 2\cdot 10^8$ Pas showing a meaningful limit behavior: for $T\rightarrow\infty$ the dimensional relaxation time is of order $\mathcal{T}\sim\mathcal{O}(10^{-1}$ s), which is typical for melt-blown polymers, see, e.g., \cite{yarin:p:2010b}. Furthermore, employing the relation $\mu/\theta = E/3$ the resulting dimensionless elastic modulus $E$ reads
\begin{align*}
E(T) = \frac{\theta_0}{\mu_0}\mathcal{E}(T_0T),\qquad \mathcal{E}(T) = 3\frac{\mathcal{M}(T)}{\mathcal{T}(T)}.
\end{align*}
For $T\rightarrow c_\mu = 273.15$ K the dimensional elastic modulus $\mathcal{E}$ approaches $\mathcal{E} = a_\theta = 10^9$ Pa -- a typical value for hardened polymer, see, e.g., \cite{barnes:b:2000}.
\subsection{Simulation strategy}\label{sec:ex_subsec:practicalTreatment}
Expecting a maximal fiber elongation $e = 10^{6}$ and a maximal dimensionless relative velocity between fiber and airflow $\lVert \mathbf{v}_\star-\mathbf{v} \rVert \leq \lVert \mathbf{v}_\star \rVert = 4.78\cdot 10^4$ (in dimensionless form) in the industrial melt-blowing, the step size restriction for the spatial and temporal fiber discretization (\ref{sec:numerics_eq:resolution}) gives
\begin{align}\label{sec:ex_eq:resolution}
\Delta \zeta \leq 5.77\cdot 10^{-10},\qquad \Delta t \leq 1.21\cdot 10^{-6}
\end{align}
(cf. Fig.~\ref{sec:ex_fig:k-eps-sim}). Such a resolution implies computationally impractical runtimes. However, to make a simulation for the setup feasible, we suggest the following strategy that is motivated from observations of the process.
In the region close to the nozzle the high-speed air stream pulls the slowly extruded fiber jet rapidly down without any lateral bending. The hot temperatures prevent fiber cool-down and solidification. Thus, the magnitude of the Deborah number $\mathrm{De}$ at the nozzle (cf. Tab.~\ref{sec:ex_table:param}) allows the consideration of the viscous limit case $\mathrm{De}\rightarrow 0$ (see Remark~\ref{sec:model_remark:viscousLimit}). Moreover, the fiber jet behavior is mainly determined by the mean airflow, turbulent effects play a negligible role. Hence, we assume that in the nozzle region (i.e., deterministic region) the polymer jet can be described by a steady uni-axial viscous fiber model with deterministic aerodynamic force and heat transfer. This model follows from System~\ref{system:Final} by a re-parameterization into Euler (spatial) description, transition to steady-state, and the limit $\mathrm{De}\rightarrow 0$. The resulting boundary value problem of ordinary differential equations is solved by a continuation-collocation method, which we successfully employed in studies on glass wool manufacturing \cite{arne:p:2011}, electrospinning \cite{arne:p:2018} and dry spinning \cite{wieland:p:2018b}. Further details on the model and its numerical treatment are given in Appendix~\ref{appendix_statModel}. Note that the use of the viscous fiber model is not only physically reasonable, but it also simplifies crucially the numerical treatment. Concerning the viscoelastic fiber model, the rapid changes of the fiber quantities in the nozzle region caused by the immediate pull down of the fiber yields multiple changes in the structure of the quasilinear system matrix in view of its eigenvalues and its resulting classification. This means that the runs of the characteristics change their direction several times. In the steady uni-axial model this leads to singular system matrices and closing problems with appropriate boundary conditions making the numerical treatment extremely complicated. This issue has been addressed by \cite{lorenz:p:2014} in the context of existence regimes for solutions of an uni-axial UCM fiber model under gravitational forces. We circumvent these problems when using the viscous fiber model where no mathematical regime changes take place.
In the region away from the nozzle the turbulent aerodynamic fluctuations crucially affect the fiber behavior (i.e., stochastic region). By means of the uni-axial steady fiber solution (from the nozzle region) we identify a coupling point, from where on the further fiber behavior downwards to the bottom is described by the instationary viscoelastic fiber model (System~\ref{system:Final}) accounting for turbulent effects. The simulation with the numerical scheme from Sec.~\ref{sec:numerics} becomes here feasible since the expected elongation and relative velocities in this domain are much smaller and hence the spatial and temporal step size restrictions weaken compared to (\ref{sec:ex_eq:resolution}).
The coupling between the stationary and instationary fiber simulations is done in the following way: Let the fiber domain in the Eulerian parametrization $\Omega(t) = \Omega_d\cup\Omega_s(t)$ be divided into the time-independent deterministic part $\Omega_d$, where the fiber is uni-axially stretched, and the time-dependent stochastic part $\Omega_s(t)$, where the fiber is strongly affected by the turbulent fluctuations. Consider $C = \Omega_d\cap\Omega_s(t)$ to be the time-independent coupling point between the deterministic and the stochastic domain.
First, we perform the simulation of the steady viscous fiber model (System~\ref{system:Final_viscous} in Appendix~\ref{appendix_statModel}) for the whole fiber domain, i.e., $\Omega_d = \Omega$, yielding solutions for the scalar fiber speed $u$, temperature $T$, stress $\sigma$ and pressure $p$. Second, we determine the coupling point $C$ by the ratio of the relative velocity between fiber and airflow $v_{rel} = \lVert \mathbf{v}_\star - u\boldsymbol{\tau} \rVert$ and the turbulent velocity scale $k_\star^{1/2}$, in particular
\begin{align*}
C=\min\bigg\{s\in\Omega~\bigg\lvert\left(\frac{v_{rel}v_0}{(k_{\star}k_{\star,0})^{1/2}}\right)(s) \leq 10\bigg\}.
\end{align*}
So the coupling point is the nearest point to the nozzle, where the ratio of the relative velocity and the turbulent velocity scale is below one order of magnitude. At $C$ the quantities of the stationary solution are denoted by $u_C$, $T_C$, $\sigma_C$, $p_C$. Third, for the subsequent solving of the instationary viscoelastic fiber model (System~\ref{system:Final}) on $\Omega_s(t)$ (reformulated in Lagrangian coordinates) we adjust the typical values and adapt the initial conditions. We particularly set the reference values used for the non-dimensionalization (see Sec.~\ref{sec:model_general}) to be
\begin{align*}
r_0 = (1-C)H,\qquad d_0 =\frac{\sqrt{\pi}}{2} \sqrt{\frac{v_{in}}{v_C}} d_{in},\qquad
v_0 = u_C, \qquad T_0 = T_C, \end{align*}
then the dimensionless numbers change accordingly. The altered initial conditions read
\begin{align*}
\sigma_{in} = \sigma_C, \qquad p_{in} = p_C.
\end{align*}
These modifications can be interpreted as putting a fictive nozzle with adjusted extrusion conditions at the spatial position of the coupling point $C$. The diameter of the fictive nozzle reflects the pre-elongations of the extruded fiber by the factor $v_C/v_{in}$ compared to $d_{in}$ of the original nozzle.
In the setup the crucial stretching of the fiber takes place in the upper part of the device and ends when the fiber is nearly solidificated. Since we are interested in the maximal achieved fiber elongations as well as in the corresponding fiber diameter distribution, but not in the lay-down process, it is sufficient to cutoff the fiber before it reaches the bottom of the device. We choose to cutoff the fiber, when it reaches the height corresponding to $x = -9.45\cdot10^{-2}$ m. Below this point the airflow temperature satisfies $T_\star < 353.15$ K (see Fig.\ \ref{sec:ex_fig:k-eps-sim}). We expect the fiber dynamic viscosities to be of magnitude $\mu\sim\mathcal{O}(10^3$ Pas$)$, implying that no noticeable further fiber elongations take place.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[c]{\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics{main-figure5.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Scalar speed $u$, elongation $e$, stress $\sigma$, pressure $p$ and temperature $T$ of the steady viscous uni-axial fiber model in Eulerian coordinates \textit{(top left to bottom right)}. The stochastic region, where the instationary viscoelastic fiber model (System~\ref{system:Final}) is employed, is shaded in gray.}\label{sec:ex_fig:statSol}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Results}
In the following we present the numerical results for the industrial spinning setup described in Sec.~\ref{sec:ex_subsec:setup}. While all computations for a single fiber realization have been done on an Intel Core i7-6700 CPU (4 cores, 8 threads) and 16 GBytes of RAM, the Monte Carlo simulation has been performed on a MPI cluster (dual Intel Xeon E5-2670, 16 CPU cores per node, 64 GB RAM) with one CPU core for each fiber realization. For all computations the MATLAB version R2016b has been used.
Figure~\ref{sec:ex_fig:statSol} shows the results for scalar speed $u$, stress $\sigma$, pressure $p$ and temperature $T$ as well as the induced elongation $e$ of the steady viscous uni-axial fiber model in an Eulerian parameterization that spans the whole domain $\Omega$. The maximal fiber speed is $u=1.74\cdot10^2$ m/s and the corresponding maximal fiber elongation is $e=1.74\cdot10^4$. This indicates that a stationary fiber simulation is not physically reasonable for the whole domain $\Omega$, since much higher fiber elongations for the melt-blowing setup are expected. Nevertheless, the steady viscous solution serves as adequate approximation of the fiber behavior in the nozzle region as described in Sec.~\ref{sec:ex_subsec:practicalTreatment}. For the further instationary viscoelastic simulation we determine the spatial position of the coupling point $C$ and put a fictive nozzle at $\mathbf{r}_{in} = (-3.83\cdot10^{-2},0,0)\,$m. The corresponding fiber quantities at this fictive nozzle are
\begin{align*}
u_C = 50.62\text{ m/s}, \qquad \sigma_C = 69.98\text{ Pa},\qquad p_C = -23.33\text{ Pa},\qquad T_C = 446.6\text{ K},
\end{align*}
and the dimensionless numbers change accordingly, see Tab.~\ref{sec:ex_table:dimNumbers_adjustedNozzle}.
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{minipage}[c]{\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\begin{small}
\begin{tabular}{| l l l |}
\hline
\multicolumn{3}{|l|}{\textbf{Dimensionless numbers}}\\
Description & Symbol & Value\\
\hline
slenderness & $\varepsilon$ & $4.47\cdot10^{-5}$ \rule{0pt}{2.6ex}\\\
Reynolds & $\mathrm{Re}$ & $2.15\cdot10^2$ \\
Deborah & $\mathrm{De}$ & $2.72\cdot10^2$\\
Froude & $\mathrm{Fr}$ & $4.84\cdot10^1$ \\
Stanton & $\mathrm{St}$ & $1.75\cdot10^{-4}$\\
Mach & $\mathrm{Ma}$ & $2.42\cdot10^{2}$\\
air drag associated & $\mathrm{A}_\star$ & $2.66\cdot10^1$\\
mixed (air-fiber) Reynolds & $\mathrm{Re}_\star$ & $1.40\cdot 10^1$\\
Nusselt & $\mathrm{Nu}_\star$ & $2.68$\\
Prandtl & $\mathrm{Pr}_\star$ & $6.23\cdot 10^{-1}$\\
turbulence degree & $\mathrm{Tu}_\star$ & $7.34\cdot10^{-1}$\\
turbulent time & $\mathrm{Tt}_\star$ & $1.14\cdot10^2$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{small}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}\\~\\~\\
\caption{Dimensionless numbers characterizing the fiber behavior in the stochastic region.}\label{sec:ex_table:dimNumbers_adjustedNozzle}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.33\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics{main-figure6.pdf}
\end{minipage}\hfill
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.33\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics{main-figure7.pdf}
\end{minipage}\hfill
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.33\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics{main-figure8.pdf}
\end{minipage}\hfill
\caption{Snapshots of one representative fiber curve $\mathbf{r}$ before reaching the cutoff height ($x = -9.45\cdot10^{-2}$ m) at times $t \in\{ 1.30\cdot10^{-4}$ s, $2.60\cdot10^{-4}$ s, $3.90\cdot10^{-4}$ s$\}$. We track the material point $\zeta_{N-3269}$ (marked with a red star) and present the temporal evolution of all fiber quantities at that point in Fig.~\ref{sec:ex_fig:sol_instat}.}\label{sec:ex_fig:curves}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{minipage}[c]{\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics{main-figure9.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Solution plots for the material point $\zeta_{N-3269}$ (cf. Fig.~\ref{sec:ex_fig:curves}) that enters the flow domain at time step $3270$ ($t = 7.20\cdot10^{-5}$ s). \textit{Top} and \textit{middle left:} fiber velocities $v_i$ (\textit{blue}) as well as airflow velocities $v_{\star,i}$, $\bar{v}_{\star,i}$ with (\textit{red}) and without (\textit{green}) turbulent fluctuations respectively, $i \in\{ 1,2,3\}$. \textit{Middle right:} elongation $e$ as rate of fiber stretching compared to the original nozzle and $e_{max}$ indicating the maximal achievable elongation in stationary simulations. \textit{Bottom:} pressure $p$, stress $\sigma$ as well as fiber temperature $T$ and air temperature $T_\star$.}\label{sec:ex_fig:sol_instat}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics{main-figure10.pdf}
\end{minipage}\hfill
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics{main-figure11.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{\textit{Left:} Fiber elongation distribution at the cutoff point for a Monte Carlo simulation based on $67$ realizations.
\textit{Right:} Resulting fiber diameter distribution at the cutoff point in the sense of an Eulerian fiber parameterization
}\label{sec:ex_fig:diameter}
\end{figure}
Considering the stochastic region, the numerical step size restriction (\ref{sec:numerics_eq:resolution}) for the fiber discretization weakens compared to (\ref{sec:ex_eq:resolution})
\begin{align*}
\Delta\zeta \leq 3.31\cdot 10^{-5}, \qquad \Delta t \leq 7.99\cdot 10^{-4},
\end{align*}
we choose $\Delta\zeta = \Delta t = 10^{-5}$ for our computation. As expected the turbulent fluctuations of the airflow cause a swirling of the fiber jet such that the fiber curve leaves the $\mathbf{e}_x$-axis shortly away from the fictive nozzle. Figure~\ref{sec:ex_fig:curves} shows temporal snapshots of the curve for one representative fiber before its cutoff (at $x = -9.45\cdot10^{-2}$ m). The fluctuations move the fiber jet not only downwards but also upwards such that the fiber curve creates loops. In these loops high aerodynamic forces act on the fiber due to high relative velocity gradients causing the fiber to elongate. Figure~\ref{sec:ex_fig:sol_instat} shows exemplary the temporal evolution of the fiber quantities for one material point. Obviously the material point experiences high elongations: directly after entering the flow domain high relative velocities in $\mathbf{e}_x$-direction between the fiber velocity $v_1$ and the deterministic airflow velocity $\bar{v}_{\star,1}$ cause a fiber stretching. After the fiber velocity $v_1$ reaches the corresponding deterministic airflow velocity $\bar{v}_{\star,1}$ the fiber experiences a further stretching due to the velocity fluctuations, in which the mean stretching takes place in regions where high lateral air velocities $v_{\star,2}$, $v_{\star,3}$ create swirls. The final elongation at this material point is of magnitude $e\sim\mathcal{O}(10^5)$ and therewith clearly exceeds the theoretically possible deterministic expectations. In particular, the computed elongation in a stationary simulation is obviously restricted by the velocity of the air stream, i.e., $e_{max} = u/v_{in} < \lVert \mathbf{v}_\star \rVert_\infty/v_{in} = 4.78\cdot10^4$. Furthermore, the stationary uni-axial viscous simulation only achieves $e = 1.74\cdot 10^4$ (cf. Fig.~\ref{sec:ex_fig:statSol}). In the region of high fiber stretching the material point experiences high stresses $\sigma$ that partly dissipate due to the elastic material behavior before the fiber completely solidificates. The pressure $p$ is orders of magnitude smaller compared to the stress $\sigma$ and could therefore be neglected in the simulation as already pointed out in Remark~\ref{sec:model_remark:p}. The fiber temperature $T$ approaches the air temperature $T_\star$ leading to a cool-down and induced solidification of the jet.
When the fiber reach the cutoff height $x = -9.45\cdot10^{-2}$~m at time $t = 3.92\cdot10^{-4}$~s, we cutoff the fiber end, track the fiber elongations $e$ as well as the corresponding fiber diameters $d$ and document the occurring relative frequencies until the end time $t_{end} = 2.20\cdot10^{-2}$~s is reached, see Fig.~\ref{sec:ex_fig:diameter}. To achieve comparability with experiments, we weight the relative frequencies of the fiber diameters with the associated fiber elongations $e$ leading to a diameter distribution in the sense of an Eulerian (spatial) parameterization of the fibers. The resulting elongation and fiber diameter distributions are computed by the help of a Monte Carlo simulation with $67$ samples. We observe a mean elongation $e = 9.47\cdot10^4$ again exceeding the deterministic expectations. The mean fiber diameter is $d = 1.28\cdot10^{-6}$~m. This is a typical value for fibers produced in industrial melt-blowing setups, see for example \cite{ellison:p:2007}. So our instationary viscoelastic fiber model using an adjusted nozzle as well as employing fluctuation reconstruction of the underlying turbulence effects from an airflow simulation predicts quantitatively well the fiber jet thinning observed in experiments, which would not be possible with a pure steady deterministic simulation neglecting the turbulent aerodynamics velocity fluctuations.
Summing up, our proposed procedure makes the simulation of industrial melt-blowing processes with inclusion of turbulent and viscoelastic effects as well as temperature dependencies feasible. Including turbulent effects acting on the fiber by the help of reconstructing the turbulent structure of the outer air stream yields a jet thinning exceeding the deterministic expectations and produces final fiber diameters of realistic order of magnitude. So our presented modeling and solution framework provides the basis for further parameter studies and the optimization of melt-blowing processes. The computation time for the presented setup is around $96.4$ hours. A combined experimental and numerical study is left to future research.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper we presented a model and simulation framework that allowed the numerical investigation of the physical mechanism being responsible for the strong fiber thinning in industrial melt-blowing processes. Considering an asymptotic instationary viscoelastic UCM fiber jet model driven by turbulent aerodynamic forces, the random field sampling strategy of \cite{huebsch:p:2013} provides an efficient numerical procedure for the realization of the turbulent air flow fluctuctuations. The computed fiber diameters are much lower than those obtained from previous stationary simulations regarding a pure deterministic aerodynamic force on the fiber. Our simulation results clearly stress the significance of the turbulent effects as key player for the production of fibers of micro- and nanoscale. Further parameter studies and an optimization of the industrial process setup will provide the opportunity of simulating fibers with elongations of order $e\sim\mathcal{O}(10^6)$ compared to the nozzle diameter. In view of more quantitative predictions of the resulting nonwovens a combined experimental and numerical study with experimentally measured temperature-dependencies of polymer properties (e.g., relaxation time) is aimed at in future.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work has been supported by German DFG, project 251706852, MA 4526/2-1, WE 2003/4-1.
|
\section{Introduction} \label{introduction}
Due to the rapid technological advances in observational cosmology,
the accumulation of observational data obtained with increasing
precision makes it possible to test some fundamental relations in
cosmology, one of which is the well known Etherington's distance
duality relation (DDR) \citep{etherington1933on}. In the framework
of DDR, two cosmological distances, i.e., the luminosity distance
$D_L$ and angular diameter distance $D_A$ at the same redshift $z$
are connected as
\begin{equation}
\frac{D_L(z)}{D_A(z)}\left(1+z\right)^{-2} = 1.
\end{equation}
Theoretically, distances based on standard candles (e.g. supernovae)
and standard rulers (e.g. baryon oscillations) agree as long as
three conditions are met: the spacetime is characterized by a metric
theory, the light propagates along null geodesics, and the number of
photons is conserved. Despite of its application in all analyses of
cosmological observations, it is necessary to test the valid of this
relation because of the possible violation of the DD relation. It
has been argued in the literature that the violation of the former
two conditions is related to a signal of exotic physics acting as
the background gravity theory \citep{bassett2004cosmic}, while
cosmic opacity might contribute to the possibility that the number
of photons is not conserved in propagation
\citep{li2013cosmic,liao2015universe}. Therefore, a validity check
of the DDR not only tests the existing theories of gravity, but also
helps us understand some fundamental properties of the Universe.
Up to now, there are many works devoted to validate the DDR with
various observational data, in which the conclusions were drawn from
recent type-Ia supernovae data as luminous sources of known (or
standardizable) intrinsic luminosity in the Universe, while the
angular diameter distance was derived from different astrophysical
probes, such as Baryon Acoustic Oscillations (BAO)
\citep{wu2015cosmic,lv2016constraints,cardone2012testing,percival2010baryon,blake2011wigglez,beutler20116df},
Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect together with X-ray emission of galaxy
clusters
\citep{cao2011testing,bonamente2006determination,holanda2012test},
and strong gravitational lensing systems
\citep{biesiada2011dark,cao2012SL,cao2015SL,li2016comparison}, etc.
The first two tests are always con sidered as individual standard
rulers while the other two probes are treated as statistical
standard rulers in cosmology. However, it should be noted that the
information of angular diameter distance obtained from the above
standard rulers, is strongly model dependent, which will generate
systematic uncertainties hard to quantify \citep{liao2016distance}.
For instance, the angular diameter distance determined from X-ray
and SZ-studies of clusters is sensitive to the underlying geometry
of the galaxy clusters (spherical or elliptical)
\citep{holanda2012test} and the assumptions of the hot gas density
profile (simple $\beta$ or double $-\beta$ profile)
\citep{cao2016testing}. In addition, it was found that other
attempts using angular diameter distance data from Baryon Acoustic
Oscillations suffer from the limited sample size covering the
redshift range $0.35\leq z \leq 0.74$ \citep{yu2016new}. More
importantly, one note that with SN Ia and other standard rulers we
are only able to probe the relatively lower redshift range $z\leq
1.40$, which still remains challenging with respect to the
exploration of the DDR. In order to draw firm and robust conclusions
about the validity of DDR, one will need to minimize statistical
uncertainties by increasing the depth and quality of observational
data sets. In this paper, we will make a cosmological
model-independent test for the DD relation with two new methods by
using the simulated data of gravitational waves from the
third-generation gravitational wave detector (which can be
considered as standard siren to provide the information of
luminosity distance) and the newly-compiled sample of compact radio
quasars observed by very-long-baseline interferometry (which
represents a type of new cosmological standard ruler).
It is well known that the first direct detection of gravitational
waves (GWs) by the LIGO/Virgo collaboration
\citep{abbott2016observation} has opened the era of GW astronomy.
The original idea of using the waveform signal to directly measure
the luminosity distance $D_L$ to the GW sources (inspiralling and
merging double compact binaries) can be traced back to the paper of
\citet{schutz1986determining}, which indicates that the GW sources,
especially the inspiraling and merging compact binaries consisting
of neutron stars (NSs) and black holes (BHs), can also be used to
probe the information of the absolute luminosity distances. This
constraint from the so-called standard sirens originates from the
dependence of the $D_L$ measurements on the so-called chirp mass and
the luminosity distance \citep{schutz1986determining}. The
gravitational waves (GWs) provide an alternative tool to testing the
cosmology and there have been a number of attempts to do so
\citep{holz2005using,dalal2006short,zhao2011determination,taylor2012cosmology,cai2017estimating}.
The constraints derived in these works are compatible with
cosmological parameter constraints determined by other techniques
\citep{cao2011constraints,cao2012SL,cao2015SL}, if hundreds of GW
events are seen. More importantly, as a promising complementary tool
to supernovae, the greatest advantage of GWs lies in the fact that
the distance calibration of such standard siren is independent of
any other distance ladders. In this paper, we present a significant
extension of previous works and investigate the possibility of using
GW data to test the validity of DDR. Unfortunately, due to the
limited size of observed GW events up to date (which makes it
impossible to do statistical analysis), we will focus on a large
number of simulated GW events based on the third-generation GW
ground-based detector, Einstein Telescope (ET) \footnote{The
Einstein Telescope Project, https://www.et-gw.eu/et/}.
In the EM window, with the aim of acquiring angular diameter
distances, the angular size of the compact structure in radio
quasars provides an effective source of standard rulers in the
Universe. However, due to their uncertain intrinsic linear sizes, it
is controversial whether the compact radio sources can be calibrated
as standard cosmological probes
\citep{jackson1997deceleration,vishwakarma2001consequences,
lima2002dark,zhu2002cardassian,chen2003cosmological}. In general,
the precise value of the linear size $l_m$ might depend both on
redshifts and the intrinsic properties of the source, i.e., the
intrinsic luminosity $L$ \citep{gurvits1999measuring}. On the other hand, the
morphology and kinematics of compact structure in radio quasars
could be strongly dependent on the nature of the central engine,
including the mass of central black hole and the accretion rate
\citep{gurvits1999measuring}. Therefore, the central region may be standard if
these parameters are confined within restricted ranges for specific
quasars. Considering the possible correlation between black hole
mass $M_{BH}$ and radio luminosity $L_R$
\citep{laor2000on,jarvis2002on}, \citet{cao2016measuring} proposed
that intermediate-luminosity quasars ($10^{27}$ W/Hz $<L<10^{28}$
W/Hz) might be used as a new type of cosmological standard ruler
with fixed comoving length, based on a 2.29 GHz VLBI all-sky survey
of 613 milliarcsecond ultra-compact radio sources
\cite{kellermann1993cosmological,gurvits1994apparent}. More
recently, the value of $l_m$ was calibrated at $\sim 11$ pc though a
cosmological model-independent method \citep{cao2017ultra}, based on
which the cosmological application of the intermediate-luminosity
quasar sample (in the redshift range $0.46<z<2.76$) was also
extensively discussed in the framework of different dark energy
models \citep{li2017testing,zheng2017ultra} and modified gravity
theories \citep{qi2017new,xu2017new}. Compared with our previous
works focusing on SNe Ia as background sources
\citep{cao2011testing,holanda2012test}, the advantage of this work
is that, we achieve a reasonable and compelling test of DDR at much
higher redshifts ($z\sim 3.0$), which will help us to verify the
fundamental relations in the early Universe.
This paper is organized as follows. We briefly introduce how to
handle the gravitational wave data and the quasar data in Section
\ref{obs}. Then we show the analysis methods and results of our work
in Section \ref{result}. Finally, the conclusions and discussions
are presented in Section \ref{conclusion}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=9cm,height=7cm]{fig1.eps}
\caption{The angular size measurements from 500 simulated radio
quasars.}\label{QSO_theta}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=9cm,height=7cm]{fig2.eps}
\caption{The luminosity distance measurements from 1000 observed GW
events. }\label{DL}
\end{figure}
\section{Observations and simulations} \label{obs}
\subsection{Angular diameter distance from radio quasars}\label{qso}
Following the suggestions by Refs. \citep{gurvits1994apparent,vishwakarma2001consequences}, the linear
size of the compact structure in radio quasars depends on the
redshift $z$ and the intrinsic luminosity $L$ of the source
\begin{equation}
l_m=lL^{\beta}(1+z)^n
\end{equation}
where $\beta$ and $n$ are two parameters represent the "angular
size-redshift" and "angular size-luminosity" relations,
respectively. The parameter $l$ denotes the linear size scaling
factor describing the apparent distribution of radio brightness
within the core. In one of the more significant studies involving
the compact structure of radio quasars, \citet{gurvits1994apparent}
showed that the dispersion in linear size is greatly mitigated by
retaining only those sources with flat spectrum
($-0.38<\alpha<0.18$). These works have formed the basis of many
subsequent investigations
\citep{jackson1997deceleration,vishwakarma2001consequences,
lima2002dark,zhu2002cardassian,chen2003cosmological}. More recently,
based on a sample of 2.29 GHz VLBI survey with 613 milliarcsecond
ultra-compact radio sources covering the redshift range
$0.0035<z<3.787$, \citet{cao2016measuring} demonstrated that
intermediate-luminosity quasars (ILQSO), which show negligible
redshift and luminosity dependence $\left(|n|\simeq
10^{-3},~\beta\simeq 10^{-4} \right)$, may be used to establish some
general constraints on cosmological parameters. In the subsequent
analysis, the intrinsic linear size of this cosmological standard
ruler at 2.29 GHz was determined at \textbf{$l_m=11.03\pm0.25
\rm{pc}$,} which was obtained through a cosmological
model-independent method \citep{cao2017ultra}. This sub-sample
contains 120 intermediate-luminosity quasars covering the redshift
range $0.46<z<2.80$, whose cosmological application in $\Lambda$CDM
resulted with stringent constraints on both the matter density
$\Omega_m$ and the Hubble constant $H_0$, in a good agreement with
recent Planck 2015 results. It is now understood that these works
lead to a second significant advancement with the use of these
sources in the study of cosmic acceleration
\citep{li2017testing,zheng2017ultra,qi2017new,xu2017new}.
Let us remind that the angular sizes $\theta$ of these standard
rulers were estimated from the ratio of the correlated and total
flux densities measured with radio interferometers
($\Gamma=S_c/S_t$), i.e., the visibility modulus $\Gamma$ defines a
characteristic angular size
\begin{equation}
\theta={2\sqrt{-\ln\Gamma \ln 2} \over \pi B} \label{thetaG}
\end{equation}
where $B$ is the interferometer baseline measured in wavelengths
\citep{Thompson86}. It is reasonable to ask if the derived angular
sizes are dependent on the intrinsic luminosities of radio quasars.
At first sight this is the case, since they were obtained by
combining the measurements of total flux density $S_t$ and the
correlated flux density $S_c$ (fringe amplitude). However, one
should observe that in Eq.~(3) that the flux densities enters into
the angular size $\theta$ not through an $S$ measure directly, but
rather through a ratio of correlated and total flux densities
$\Gamma=S_c/S_t$. Therefore, the intrinsic luminosities of radio
quasars do not influence the derived angular sizes $\theta$, which
implies that the so-called "circularity problem" will not affect our
statistical analysis of the distance duality relation. Meanwhile, we
also remark here that the "$\theta$" value represents a
single-parameter Gaussian, which can be assumed to be a rough
representation of the complicated source structure (the actual
brightness distribution). The previous works convinced us
\citep{jackson2004tight,jackson2012ultra-compact} that we could
reliably define the size of an unresolved source though such
technique, while $\theta$ is accurate enough to represent source
sizes when averaged over a group of sources in a statistical
application. More importantly, besides the direct averaging over the
set of sources, it also mimics averaging over the different position
angles of the interferometer baselines, although the apparent
angular size of milliarcsecond structure in radio quasars is less
dependent on the orientation relative to the line of sight.
Following Ref. \citep{kellermann1993cosmological}, another useful
method to define the characteristic angular size of each source is
to measure the size between the peak in the map (i.e. the core) and
the most distant component exceeding a given relative brightness
level (i.e., 2\% of the peak brightness of the core), which was
extensively used in the investigation of compact structure in radio
sources \citep{Gurvits99,cao2015exploring}.
The observable of ILQSO is the angular size of the compact structure
$\theta$, which may then be written as
\begin{equation}
\theta(z)=\frac{l_m}{D_A(z)}.
\end{equation}
where $D_A(z)$ is the model-dependent angular diameter distance at
redshift $z$. Furthermore, we will consider the future observation
of radio quasars from VLBI surveys based on better uv-coverage which
will significantly reduce the uncertainty of the angular size of
compact structure observed. Consequently, one can expect to have a
better angular diameter distance information in the future, which
will allow us to test DDR more accurately. Here, in the simulation
below, we adopt the flat $\Lambda$CDM with $H_0=67.8
\rm{km~s^{-1}Mpc^{-1}}$ and $\Omega_m=0.308$ based on the recent
Planck results \citep{ade2016planck}. Taking the linear size of
ILQSO as $l_m=11.03$ pc and following the redshift distribution of
QSOs \citep{palanque2016extended}, we have simulated 500 $\theta-z$
data in the redshift $0.50<z<6.00$, for which the error of the
angular size $\theta$ was taken at a level of $3\%$. This reasonable
assumption of the "$\theta$" measurements will be realized from both
current and future VLBI surveys based on better uv-coverage
\citep{pushkarev2015milky}. There are two general reasons for
ignoring sources with $z<0.5$. Firstly, as $z$ falls below 0.5, the
epoch of quasar formation comes to an end and the nature of the
population changes dramatically, which indicates the possible
existence of a correlation between linear size and radio luminosity.
Therefore, following the suggestion of Refs.
\citep{gurvits1994apparent,Gurvits99}, only the high-redshift part
of radio quasars could be used as a standard rod to fit different
cosmological models with experimental data. Secondly, as $z$
increases a larger Doppler boosting factor $\mathcal{D}$ is
required, i.e., the ratio $\mathcal{D}/(1+z)$ is approximately
fixed, so that the rest-frame emitted frequency
$(1+z)\nu_r/\mathcal{D}$ is also fixed. See Ref.
\citep{jackson2004tight} for mathematical and astrophysical details
\footnote{We remark here that, such approximation could possibly
constitute a source of systematic errors, i.e., it applies near the
redshift at which the angular diameter distance $D_A$ reaches its
maximum ($z\sim 1.5$ in the framework of $\Lambda$CDM cosmology),
and thus not at the high redshift regime investigated in this
work.}. Moreover, in order to make the simulated data more
representative of the experimental expectation, we assume the
angular size measurements obey the Gaussian distribution
$\theta_{mean}=\mathcal{N}(\theta_{fid},\sigma_{\theta})$ as shown
in Fig.~\ref{QSO_theta}. The more details of the specific procedure
of QSO simulation can be found in Ref. \citep{qi2018revised}.
\subsection{Luminosity distance from gravitation wave sources}\label{gw}
In this section we simulate GW events based on the Einstein
Telescope,the third generation of the ground-based GW detector.
Compared with the current advanced ground-based detectors (i.e., the
advanced LIGO and Virgo detectors), the ET is designed to be ten
times more sensitive covering the frequency range of $1-10^4$ Hz.
Here we briefly introduce the GW as standard sirens in the ET
observations.
GW detectors based on the ET could measure the strain $h(t)$, which
quantifies the change of difference of two optical paths caused by
the passing of GWs. It can be expressed as the linear combination of
the two polarization states
\begin{equation}
h(t)=F_+(\theta, \phi, \psi)h_+(t)+F_\times(\theta, \phi,
\psi)h_\times(t),
\end{equation}
where $F_{+,\times}$ are the beam pattern functions, $\psi$ denotes
the polarization angle, and ($\theta, \phi$) are angles describing
the location of the source relative to the detector. Following the
analysis of \citet{zhao2011determination}, the explicit expressions
of the beam patterns of the ET are given by
\begin{align}
F_+^{(1)}(\theta, \phi, \psi)=&~~\frac{{\sqrt 3 }}{2}[\frac{1}{2}(1 + {\cos ^2}(\theta ))\cos (2\phi )\cos (2\psi ) \nonumber\\
&~~- \cos (\theta )\sin (2\phi )\sin (2\psi )],\nonumber\\
F_\times^{(1)}(\theta, \phi, \psi)=&~~\frac{{\sqrt 3 }}{2}[\frac{1}{2}(1 + {\cos ^2}(\theta ))\cos (2\phi )\sin (2\psi ) \nonumber\\
&~~+ \cos (\theta )\sin (2\phi )\cos (2\psi )].
\label{equa:F}
\end{align}
Considering the fact that the three interferometers of the ET are
arranged in an equilateral triangle, the other two interferometer's
antenna pattern functions can also be derived from
Eq.~(\ref{equa:F}) \citep{cai2017estimating}
\begin{equation}
F_{+,\times}^{(2)}(\theta, \phi, \psi)=F_{+,\times}^{(1)}(\theta,
\phi+2\pi/3, \psi)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
F_{+,\times}^{(3)}(\theta, \phi, \psi)=F_{+,\times}^{(1)}(\theta,
\phi+4\pi/3, \psi).
\end{equation}
In this paper, we focus on the GW signals from the merger of binary
systems with component masses $m_1$ and $m_2$. Then the chirp mass
can defined as $\mathcal{M}_c=M \eta^{3/5}$, while the observed
counterpart can be written as $\mathcal{M}_{c,\rm
obs}=(1+z)\mathcal{M}_{c,\rm phys}$, where $M=m_1+m_2$ is the total
mass and $\eta=m_1 m_2/M^2$ represents the symmetric mass ratio.
Following
Refs.~\citep{sathyaprakash2009physics,zhao2011determination}, the
Fourier transform $\mathcal{H}(f)$ of the time domain waveform
$h(t)$ could be derived by applying the stationary phase
approximation,
\begin{align}
\mathcal{H}(f)=\mathcal{A}f^{-7/6}\exp[i(2\pi
ft_0-\pi/4+2\psi(f/2)-\varphi_{(2.0)})], \label{equa:hf}
\end{align}
where $t_0$ is the epoch of the merger, and the definitions of the
functions $\psi$ and $\varphi_{(2.0)}$ can be found in
\citep{zhao2011determination}. The Fourier amplitude $\mathcal{A}$
is given by
\begin{align}
\mathcal{A}=&~~\frac{1}{D_L}\sqrt{F_+^2(1+\cos^2(\iota))^2+4F_\times^2\cos^2(\iota)}\nonumber\\
&~~\times \sqrt{5\pi/96}\pi^{-7/6}\mathcal{M}_c^{5/6},
\label{equa:A}
\end{align}
where $\iota$ represents the angle of inclination of the binary's
orbital angular momentum with the line of sight, and $D_L$ is the
theoretical luminosity distance in the fiducial cosmological model
we choose. It should be noted that the GW sources used in this work
are caused by binary merger of a neutron star with either a neutron
star or black hole, which can generate an intense burst of
$\gamma$-rays (SGRB) with measurable source redshift. More
specifically, since the SGRB is emitted in a narrow cone, a
criterion on the total beaming angle (e.g., $\iota<20^\circ$) should
be applied to detect one specific gravitational wave event
\citep{nakar2007short}. Moreover, as was pointed out in
\citet{li2015extracting,cai2017estimating}, averaging the Fisher
matrix over the inclination $\iota$ and the polarization $\psi$ with
the constraint $\iota<20^\circ$ is approximately equivalent to
taking $\iota=0$. Therefore, we can take the simplified case of
$\iota=0$ and then the Fourier amplitude $\mathcal{A}$ will be
independent of the polarization angle $\psi$. Given the waveform of
GWs, the combined signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) for the network of
three independent ET interferometers is
\begin{equation}
\rho=\sqrt{\sum\limits_{i=1}^{3}\left\langle
\mathcal{H}^{(i)},\mathcal{H}^{(i)}\right\rangle}. \label{euqa:rho}
\end{equation}
Here the inner product is defined as
\begin{equation}
\left\langle{a,b}\right\rangle=4\int_{f_{\rm lower}}^{f_{\rm
upper}}\frac{\tilde a(f)\tilde b^\ast(f)+\tilde a^\ast(f)\tilde
b(f)}{2}\frac{df}{S_h(f)}, \label{euqa:product}
\end{equation}
where $\tilde a(f)$ and $\tilde b(f)$ are the Fourier transforms of
the functions $a(t)$ and $b(t)$. $S_h(f)$ is the one-side noise
power spectral density (PSD) characterizing the performance of a GW
detector \citep{zhao2011determination}. The lower cutoff frequency
$f_{\rm lower}$ is fixed at 1 Hz. The upper cutoff frequency,
$f_{\rm upper}$, is decided by the last stable orbit (LSO), $f_{\rm
upper}=2f_{\rm LSO}$, where $f_{\rm LSO}=1/(6^{3/2}2\pi M_{\rm
obs})$ is the orbit frequency at the LSO, and $M_{\rm
obs}=(1+z)M_{\rm phys}$ is the observed total mass. Here, we
simulate many catalogues of NS-NS and NS-BH systems, with the masses
of NS and BH sampled by uniform distribution in the intervals of
[1,2] $M_{\odot}$ and [3,10] $M_{\odot}$. Meanwhile, the signal is
identified as a GW event only if the ET interferometers have a
network SNR of $\rho>8.0$, the SNR threshold currently used by
LIGO/Virgo network \citep{cai2017estimating}.
Moreover, using the Fisher information matrix, the instrumental
uncertainty on the measurement of the luminosity distance can be
estimated as
\begin{align}
\sigma_{D_L}^{\rm inst}\simeq \sqrt{\left\langle\frac{\partial
\mathcal H}{\partial D_L},\frac{\partial \mathcal H}{\partial
D_L}\right\rangle^{-1}},
\end{align}
if the uncertainty of $D_L$ is independent with the uncertainties of
the other GW parameters. Concerning the uncertainty budget,
following the strategy described by \citet{cai2017estimating}, the
distance precision per GW is taken as
$\sigma_{D_L}^2=(\sigma_{D_L}^{\rm inst})^2+(\sigma_{D_L}^{\rm
lens})^2$. In the simplified case of $\iota\simeq0$, the estimate of
the uncertainty of $D_L$ expresses as $\sigma_{D_L}^{\rm inst}\simeq
\frac{2D_L}{\rho}$ \citep{li2015extracting}, while the lensing
uncertainty caused by the weak lensing is modeled as
$\sigma_{D_L}^{lens}/D_L=0.05z$
\citep{sathyaprakash2010cosmography,li2015extracting,cai2017estimating}.
Thus, the total uncertainty of $D_L$ is taken to be
\begin{align}
\sigma_{D_L}&~~=\sqrt{(\sigma_{D_L}^{\rm inst})^2+(\sigma_{D_L}^{\rm lens})^2} \nonumber\\
&~~=\sqrt{\left(\frac{2D_L}{\rho}\right)^2+(0.05z D_L)^2}.
\label{sigmadl}
\end{align}
Finally, we adopt the redshift distribution of the GW sources
observed on Earth, which can be written as
\citep{sathyaprakash2010cosmography}
\begin{equation}
P(z)\propto \frac{4\pi D_c^2(z)R(z)}{H(z)(1+z)}, \label{equa:pz}
\end{equation}
where $H(z)$ is the Hubble parameter of the fiducial cosmological
model, $D_c=\int_0^z1/H(z)dz$ is the corresponding comoving distance
at redshift $z$, and $R(z)$ represents the time evolution of the
burst rate taken as \citep{schneider2001low,cutler2009ultrahigh}
\begin{equation}
R(z)=\begin{cases}
1+2z, & z\leq 1 \\
\frac{3}{4}(5-z), & 1<z<5 \\
0, & z\geq 5.
\end{cases}
\label{equa:rz}
\end{equation}
The final key question required to be answered is: \emph{how many GW
events can be detected per year for the ET?} Focusing on the GW
sources caused by binary merger of neutron stars with either neutron
stars or black holes, recent analysis \citep{cai2017estimating}
revealed that the third generation ground-based GW detector can
detect up to 1000 GW events in a 10 year observation (with
detectable EM counterpart measurable source redshift). Therefore,
assuming the luminosity distance measurements obey the Gaussian
distribution $D_L^{mean}=\mathcal{N}(d_L^{\rm fid},\sigma_{d_L})$,
we simulate 1000 GW events used for statistical analysis in the next
section, the redshift distribution of which is shown in
Fig.~\ref{DL}.
\begin{table*}
\centering \setlength{\tabcolsep}{7mm}{
\begin{tabular}{l|ccc}
\hline \hline
Data & $\eta_0$ (Model I) &$\eta_1$ (Model II ) & $\eta_2$ (Model III) \\
QSO (Cur) + GW (Sim) [this work] & $-0.007\pm0.012$ &$-0.0086\pm0.0093$ & $-0.018\pm0.023$ \\
QSO (Sim) + GW (Sim) [this work] & $0.0002\pm0.0029$ &$-0.0004\pm0.0018$ & $-0.0007\pm0.0051$ \\
\hline
Union2 + galaxy cluster \citep{cao2011b} & $-0.03^{+0.05}_{-0.06}$ & $-0.01^{+0.15}_{-0.16}$ & $-0.01^{+0.21}_{-0.24}$ \\
Union2.1 + BAOs \citep{wu2015cosmic}& $-0.009\pm0.033$ & $0.027\pm0.064$ & $0.039\pm0.099$ \\
Union2.1 + $f_gas$ \citep{gonccalves2015constraints} & $\Box$ & $-0.08^{+0.11}_{-0.10}$ & $\Box$ \\
JLA + strong lensing \citep{liao2016distance}& $\Box$ & $-0.005^{+0.351}_{-0.215}$ & $\Box$ \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Summary of the best-fit values for the DDR parameter
obtained from different observations. } \label{table1}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=6cm]{fig3.eps}
\caption{The likelihood distributions of $\eta_0$, $\eta_1$ and
$\eta_2$ from the current QSO data and simulated GW data.
}\label{qso_gw}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=6cm]{fig4.eps}
\caption{The likelihood distributions of $\eta_0$, $\eta_1$ and
$\eta_2$ from the simulated QSO and GW data.}\label{future}
\end{figure}
\section{Constraints and results}\label{result}
From the theoretical point of view, in order to directly test the
DDR from GW+EM observations, our analysis will be based on one
constant parametrization and two parametric representations for
possible redshift dependence of the distance duality expression
\citep{li2011cosmological,holanda2012test}, namely
\begin{equation}
\eta(z)=\frac{D_L}{D_A}\left(1+z\right)^{-2},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{eqnarray}\label{equa:para}
\eta(z,\eta_0)&=&1+\eta_0, \\ \nonumber \eta(z,\eta_1)&=&1+\eta_1z,
\\ \nonumber \eta(z,\eta_2)&=&1+\eta_2\frac{z}{1+z}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\eta_0$, $\eta_1$ and $\eta_2$ are constant parameters, the
likelihood of which is expected to peak at zero in order to satisfy
the DD relation. Such parameterizations are clearly inspired on
similar expressions for the equation of state ($w$) in different
dark energy models \citep{cao2014cosmic}, i.e., the XCDM model
(where the equation of state parameter for dark energy is a
constant) and time-varying dark energy models (where the $w$
parameterizations stem from the first order Taylor expansions in
redshift $z$). Note that the first two expressions are continuous
and smooth linear expansion, while the last one may effectively
avoid the possible divergence at high redshifts. More importantly,
it should be noted that the deviations from DDR may point to a
non-metric spacetime structure (since the DDR depends only on
Lorentzian spacetime geometry apart from geometrical photon
conservation), which could possibly generate drastic effects on
light propagation \citep{Schuller:2017dfj}. The $\eta$
parameterizations in Eq. (\ref{equa:para}) are sufficient to account
for such non-metric behavior at leading orders, which is supported
by the recent discussion of the DDR on non-metric backgrounds
\citep{Schuller:2017dfj}.
From the observational point of view, for a given $D^{QSO}_A$ data
point, in order to check the validity of the DDR, the luminosity
distance from an associated GW data point $D^{GW}_L$ should be
observed at the same redshift. Following the recent analysis of
\citet{cao2011b}, the testing results of the DDR may be influenced
by the particular choice of the selection criteria for a given pair
of data set, i.e., the choice of $\delta z$ may play an important
role in this model-independent test. The redshifts of GW sample are
carefully chosen to coincide with the ones of the associated quasar
sample, which may hopefully ease the systematic errors brought by
redshift inconsistence between GW and EM observations. More
specifically, in our analysis, a selection criterion that bins $D_L$
measurements from GW within the redshift range
$|z_{QSO}-z_{GW}|<0.005$ is adopted to get $D_L$ at the redshift of
QSO. If $D_{\rm{L}i}$ represents the $i$th appropriate GW luminosity
distance with $\sigma_{D_{\rm{L}i}}$ denoting its reported
observational uncertainty, the weighted mean luminosity distance
$\bar{D}_L$ at the QSO redshift and its corresponding uncertainty
$\sigma_{\bar{D}_L}$ can obtained by the standard data reduction
framework \citep{bevington1993data}:
$\bar{D}_L=\frac{\sum\left(D_{\rm{L}i}/\sigma^2_{D_{\rm{L}i}}\right)}{\sum1/\sigma^2_{D_{\rm{L}i}}}$,
and $\sigma^2_{\bar{D}_L}=\frac{1}{\sum1/\sigma^2_{D_{\rm{L}i}}}$.
Subsequently, the observed $\eta_{\rm{obs}}(z)$ can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
\eta_{\rm{obs}}(z)=\frac{\bar{D}_L}{D_A}\left(1+z\right)^{-2},
\end{equation}
and the corresponding statistical error is given by
\begin{equation}
\sigma^2_{\eta_{\rm{obs}}}=\frac{\sigma^2_{\bar{D}_L}}{D_A^2}\left(1+z\right)^{-4}+\frac{\bar{D}_L^2}{D_A^4}\sigma^2_{D_A}\left(1+z\right)^{-4}.
\end{equation}
The likelihood estimator is determined by $\chi^2$ statistics
\begin{equation} \label{chi2}
\chi^2(\eta_j)=
\sum_i\frac{\left[\eta(z,\eta_j)-\eta_{i,\rm{obs}}(z)\right]^2}{\eta^2_{\eta_{i,\rm{obs}}}}
\end{equation}
for the three different parameterizations $j=0,1,2$.
To get reasonable $D_A$, we firstly turn to the recent catalog by
\citet{cao2017ultra} that contains 120 intermediate-luminosity
quasars, with redshifts ranging from 0.46 to 2.80, all observed with
Very Large Baseline Interferometry (VLBI). Considering the
uncertainties in $D_A$ encountered previously
\citep{cao2016measuring}, we include the statistical error of
observations in $\theta(z)$ and an additional 10\% systematical
uncertainty accounting for the intrinsic spread in the linear size.
The GW data are carefully selected whose redshift is closest to the
quasar's redshift, demanding that the difference in redshift is
smaller than 0.005. Combining these quasar data together with the GW
estimate of the luminosity distances, for Model I we obtain the
best-fit value $\eta_0=-0.007\pm0.012$ at 68.3\% confidence level
and plot the likelihood distribution function in Fig.~3. Working on
the other two parameterization forms of the DD relation:
$\eta(z)=1+\eta_1z$ and \textbf{$\eta(z)=1+\eta_2z/(1+z)$}, the
best-fit values are $\eta_1=-0.0086\pm0.0093$ and
$\eta_2=-0.018\pm0.023$ at 68.3\% confidence level. The results are
summarized on Table I and are depicted on Fig.~3, which indicate
that $\eta<1$ tends to be slightly favored by all three
parametrizations of $\eta(z)$. Such tendency has been previously
noted and extensively discussed in the literature
\citep{cao2011b,gonccalves2015constraints,liao2016distance}. We
remark here that, compared with the previous works based on
observations of $D_A$ on large angular scales (galaxy clusters
\citep{cao2011b,li2011cosmological,gonccalves2015constraints}, BAO
\citep{wu2015cosmic}, galaxy strong lensing systems
\citep{liao2016distance}), using such different technique (compact
structure in radio quasars) to estimate $D_A$ opens the interesting
possibility to test the fundamental relations in the early universe
($z\sim 3$). Moreover, it is necessary to compare our results with
those of earlier studies using alternative probes at high redshifts
(GRBs and SGL systems). More recently, \citet{Yang2017} tested the
DD relation with current strong lensing observations
\citep{cao2015SL} and future luminosity distances from gravitational
waves sources, with the final conclusion that the DD relation can be
accommodated at 1$\sigma$ (C.L.). In our analysis, in the framework
of model-independent methods testing the DDR, the current compiled
quasar sample may achieves constraints with much higher precision of
$\Delta \eta=10^{-2}$.
On the other hand, we also pin our hope on the VLBI observations of
more compact radio quasars with higher angular resolution based on
better uv-coverage. In order to compare with previous results from
the current quasar sample, we also derive the testing results from
simulated QSO and GW data in Table I, with the best-fit values of
the $\eta$ parameter in the three DDR models:
$\eta_0=0.0002\pm0.0029$ for Model I, $\eta_1=-0.0004\pm0.0018$ for
Model II, and $\eta_2=-0.0007\pm0.0051$ for Model III. The
corresponding likelihood distribution function from three
one-parameter forms of DDR parameterizations are also shown in
Fig.~\ref{future}. Furthermore, the future VLBI observations of
ILQSO combined with the simulated data of GWs using the Einstein
Telescope (ET) could extend the test of DDR to much higher redshifts
(i.e., $z\sim 5$). More importantly, one can clearly see that the
future compiled quasar data improves the constraints on model
parameters significantly. With the confrontation between the angular
diameter distance (ADD) from quasars and luminosity distance (LD)
from GWs, one can expect the validity of the distance duality
relation to be confirmed at the precision of $\Delta \eta=10^{-3}$.
Now it is worthwhile to make some comments on the results obtained
above. As was commented earlier, the cosmic opacity caused by the
absorption or scattering effects of dust in the Universe might
contribute to the possible violation of DDR. In particular, the
latest observations of SN Ia, which strongly support the accelerated
expansion of the Universe may be affected by the dust in their host
galaxies and Milky Way
\citep{li2013cosmic,liao2015universe,qi2018what}. However, it should
be emphasized that the luminosity distance derived from waveform and
amplitude of the gravitational waves observations is insensitive to
non-conservation of the number of photons \citep{Yang2017}.
Therefore, the method proposed in our analysis opens an interesting
possibility to probe exotic physics in the theory of gravity
\citep{bassett2004cosmic}, as can be seen from possible deviation
from the standard distance duality relation.
\section{Conclusions} \label{conclusion}
In this paper, we have discussed a new model-independent
cosmological test for the distance duality relation. For $D_L$ we
consider the simulated data of gravitational waves from the
third-generation gravitational wave detector (ET), which can be
considered as standard siren, while the angular diameter distances
$D_A$ are derived from the newly-compiled sample of compact radio
quasars observed by VLBI, which represents a type of new
cosmological standard ruler. This creates a valuable opportunity to
directly test DDR at much higher precision with the combination of
gravitational wave (GW) and electromagnetic (EM) signals. In order
to obtain a more reliable result of testing the DDR from GW+EM
observations, we use one constant parametrization
($\eta(z)=1+\eta_0$) and two parametric representations for possible
redshift dependence of the distance duality expression
($\eta(z)=1+\eta_1z$, \textbf{$\eta(z)=1+\eta_2z/(1+z)$)}. The
redshifts of GW sample are carefully chosen to coincide with the
ones of the associated quasar sample, which may hopefully ease the
systematic errors brought by redshift inconsistence between GW and
EM observations. More specifically, in our analysis, a selection
criterion that bins $D_L$ measurements from GW within the redshift
range $|z_{QSO}-z_{GW}|<0.005$ is adopted to get $D_L$ at the
redshift of QSO.
Firstly of all, we turn to the recent catalog by
\citet{cao2017ultra} that contains 120 intermediate-luminosity
quasars with redshifts ranging from 0.46 to 2.80, all observed with
Very Large Baseline Interferometry (VLBI). Combining these quasar
data together with the GW estimate of the luminosity distances, we
obtain the best-fit value $\eta_0=-0.007\pm0.012$,
$\eta_1=-0.0086\pm0.0093$ and $\eta_2=-0.018\pm0.023$ at 68.3\%
confidence level, which indicate that $\eta<1$ tends to be slightly
favored by all three parametrizations of $\eta(z)$. In the framework
of model-independent methods testing the DDR, the current compiled
quasar sample may achieve constraints with much higher precision of
$\Delta \eta=10^{-2}$. Moreover, compared with the previous works
based on observations of $D_A$ on large angular scales (galaxy
clusters, BAO, galaxy strong lensing systems), using such different
technique (compact structure in radio quasars) to estimate $D_A$
opens the interesting possibility to test the fundamental relations
in the early universe ($z\sim 3$). Therefore, the spacetime
characterized by a metric theory and that the light propagates along
null geodesics is strongly supported by the available observations.
This is the most unambiguous result of the current data sets.
Working on more simulated compact radio quasars with higher angular
resolution based on better uv-coverage, our results show that the
future VLBI observations of ILQSO combined with the simulated data
of GWs using the Einstein Telescope (ET) could extend the test of
DDR to much higher redshifts (i.e., $z\sim 5$). More importantly,
one can expect the validity of the DDR to be confirmed at the
precision of $\Delta \eta=10^{-3}$. Since the luminosity distances
obtained from GW observations are insensitive to the
non-conservation of photon number, any deviation from the standard
distance duality relation can be explained as possible existence of
exotic physics in the gravity theory. This encourages us to expect
the possibility of testing DDR at much higher precision in the
future, which reinforces the interest in the observational search
for more quasar samples and GW events with smaller statistical and
systematic uncertainties.
\acknowledgments{ This work was supported by National Key R\&D
Program of China No. 2017YFA0402600; the Ministry of Science and
Technology National Basic Science Program (Project 973) under Grants
No. 2014CB845806; the National Natural Science Foundation of China
under Grants Nos. 11503001, 11690023, 11633001, and 11873001;
Beijing Talents Fund of Organization Department of Beijing Municipal
Committee of the CPC; the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central
Universities and Scientific Research Foundation of Beijing Normal
University; and the Opening Project of Key Laboratory of
Computational Astrophysics, National Astronomical Observatories,
Chinese Academy of Sciences. J.-Z. Qi was supported by the China
Postdoctoral Science Foundation (Grant No. 2017M620661). J. Li was
supported by the national natural science fund of china Grant No. 11873001.
Y. Pan was supported by CQ CSTC under grant Nos. cstc2015jcyjA00044 and
cstc2018jcyjAX0192, and CQ MEC under grant No. KJ1500414.}
|
\subsection{Problem Setting}
Many machine learning tasks involve fitting a model over a training data set by minimizing a loss function. For a given labeled data set $\mathcal{D} = \{ \mathbf{x}_j \in \mathbb{R}^{p+1} : j=1,\cdots, d \}$, the goal is to solve the following optimization problem:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:minb}
\theta^* = \operatornamewithlimits{arg\,min}_{\theta \in \mathbb{R}^{p}} \sum_{\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{D}} \ell \left( \theta; \mathbf{x} \right) + \lambda R(\theta),
\end{equation}
where $\ell(\cdot)$ and $R(\cdot)$ respectively denote the loss and regularization functions, and the optimization problem is parameterized by $\lambda$. One of the most popular ways of solving \eqref{eq:minb} in distributed learning is to use the Gradient Descent (GD) algorithm. More specifically, under standard convexity assumptions, the following sequence of model updates $\{ \theta^{(t)} \}_{t=0}^{\infty}$ converges to the optimal solution $\theta^{*}$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:gd}
\theta^{(t+1)} = h_R \left( \theta^{(t)}, \mathbf{g} \right),
\end{equation}
where $h_R(\cdot)$ is a gradient-based optimizer depending on the regularizer $R(\cdot)$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:g}
\mathbf{g} = \sum_{\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{D}} \nabla \ell \left(\theta^{(t)}; \mathbf{x} \right),
\end{equation}
denotes the gradient of the loss function evaluated at the model at iteration $t$ over the data set ${\mathcal{D}}$. Under certain assumptions, the iterations in (\ref{eq:gd}) converge to a local optimum in the non-convex case, as well. The core component of the iterations defined in (\ref{eq:gd}) is the computation of the gradient vector $\mathbf{g}$ at each iteration. At scale, due to limited storage and computation capacity of the computing nodes, gradient aggregation task (\ref{eq:g}) has to be carried out over distributed nodes. This parallelization, as we discussed earlier, introduces two major bottlenecks: stragglers and bandwidth contention.
The goal of the distributed gradient aggregation scheme is to provide straggler resiliency as well as communication parallelization. At a high level, straggler resiliency, $\alpha$, refers to the fraction of the straggling workers that the distributed aggregation scheme is robust to, and communication parallelization gain, $\beta$, quantifies the number of simultaneous communications in the network by distributed nodes compared to only one simultaneous communication in a single-node (master-worker) aggregation scheme
Next, we discuss the data allocation and communication strategy of two synchronous gradient aggregation schemes in distributed learning and their corresponding straggler resiliency and communication parallelization gain.
\subsection{Ring-AllReduce}
In AllReduce-type aggregation schemes, the data set is uniformly distributed over $N$ worker nodes $\{W_1,\cdots,W_N\}$ which coordinate among themselves in a master-less setting to aggregate their partial gradients and compute the aggregate gradient $\mathbf{g}$ at each worker.
Particularly in \textsf{RAR}, each worker $W_i$ partitions its local partial gradient into $N$ segments $\mathbf{v}_{1,i},\cdots, \mathbf{v}_{N,i}$. In the first round, $W_i$ transmits $\mathbf{v}_{i,i}$ to $W_{i+1}$. Each worker then adds up the received segment to the corresponding segment of its local gradient, i.e., $W_i$ obtains $\mathbf{v}_{i-1,i-1}+ \mathbf{v}_{i-1,i}$. In the second round, the reduced segment is forwarded to the neighbor and added up to the corresponding segment. Proceeding similarly, at the end of $N-1$ rounds, each worker has a unique segment of the full gradient, i.e., $W_i$ has $\mathbf{v}_{i+1,1}+\ldots+ \mathbf{v}_{i+1,N}$. After the reduce-scatter phase, the workers execute the collective operation of AllGather where the full gradient $\mathbf{g}$ becomes available at each node. The \textsf{RAR} operation for a cluster of three workers is illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:Ring-AllReduce}.
It is clear that \textsf{RAR} cannot tolerate \emph{any} straggling nodes since the communications are carried out over a ring and each node requires its neighbor's result to proceed in the ring, i.e., the straggler resiliency for \textsf{RAR} is $\alpha_{\textsf{RAR}}=0$. However, the ring communication design in \textsf{RAR} alleviates the communication congestion at busy nodes, and achieves communication parallelization gain $\beta_{\textsf{RAR}}= \Theta (N)$ which is optimal \cite{patarasuk2009bandwidth}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figures/RAR-v2-combined-all}
\caption{Illustration of communication strategy in \textsf{RAR} for $N=3$ workers.} \label{fig:Ring-AllReduce1}
\label{fig:Ring-AllReduce}
\end{figure}
\iffalse
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{subfigure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth]{figures/RAR1-5-v2}
\caption{Ring-AllReduce} \label{fig:Ring-AllReduce1}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{figures/RAR-v2-combined}
\caption{Step 1: First round of reduce-scatter} \label{fig:Ring-AllReduce2}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Illustrative example of Ring-AllReduce for a cluster of three workers
}
\label{fig:Ring-AllReduce}
\end{figure}
\fi
\iffalse
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{subfigure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figures/RAR1-5-v2}
\caption{Ring-AllReduce} \label{fig:Ring-AllReduce1}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{figures/RAR2-v2}
\caption{Step 1: First round of reduce-scatter} \label{fig:Ring-AllReduce2}
\end{subfigure}%
~
\begin{subfigure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{figures/RAR3-v2}
\caption{Step 2: Second round of reduce-scatter} \label{fig:Ring-AllReduce3}
\end{subfigure}%
~
\begin{subfigure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{figures/RAR4-v2}
\caption{Aggregated segments communicated along the ring for allgather.} \label{fig:Ring-AllReduce4}
\end{subfigure}%
\caption{Illustrative example of Ring-AllReduce for a cluster of three workers: At the end of the collective operation, each of the three workers has all of the reduced segments. }
\label{fig:Ring-AllReduce}
\end{figure}
\fi
\subsection{Gradient Coding}
\label{subsec:GC}
Gradient Coding (\textsf{GC}) \cite{tandon2017gradient} was recently proposed to provide straggler resiliency in a master-worker topology with one master node and $N$ distributed worker nodes $\{W_1,\cdots,W_N\}$ as depicted in Figure \ref{fig:mainfig}. We start the description of
\textsf{GC} with an illustrative example.
\begin{example}[Gradient Coding]
To make gradient aggregation over $N=3$ workers robust to any $S=1$ straggler, \textsf{GC} partitions the data set to $\{ \mathcal{D}_1, \mathcal{D}_2, \mathcal{D}_3 \}$ and assigns $2$ partitions to each worker as depicted in Figure \ref{fig:GC-example}. Full gradient $\mathbf{g}=\mathbf{g}_1+\mathbf{g}_2+\mathbf{g}_3$ can be recovered from any $N-S=2$ workers, e.g., the master recovers $\mathbf{g}$ from $W_1$ and $W_2$ by combining their results as $\mathbf{g} = 2 \left( \frac{1}{2}\mathbf{g}_1+\mathbf{g}_2 \right) - \left( \mathbf{g}_2 - \mathbf{g}_3 \right) $.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width= 0.24\textwidth]{figures/GC-example-v2}
\caption{Illustration of data allocation and communication strategy in \textsf{GC} for $N=3$ workers.} \label{fig:GC-example}
\end{figure}
\end{example}
In general, to be robust to \emph{any} $S \in [N] = \{1,\cdots,N\}$ stragglers, \textsf{GC} uniformly partitions the data set $\mathcal{D}$ to $\{ \mathcal{D}_1,\cdots,\mathcal{D}_k \}$ (e.g. $k=N$) with corresponding partial gradients $\mathbf{g}_1, \cdots, \mathbf{g}_k$ and distributes them redundantly among the workers such that each partition is placed in $S+1$ workers, thus achieving a computation load of $r_{\textsf{GC}}=\frac{S+1}{N}$.
Let matrix $\mathbf{G} = [\mathbf{g}_1,\cdots,\mathbf{g}_k]^{\top} \in \mathbb{R}^{k \times p}$ denote the collection of partial gradients. Each worker $W_i$ then computes its local partial gradients
and sends $\mathbf{b}_i \mathbf{G}$ to the master, where $\mathbf{B} = [\mathbf{b}_1;\cdots;\mathbf{b}_N] \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times k}$ denotes the encoding matrix, i.e. non-zero elements in $\mathbf{b}_i$ specifies the partitions stored in worker $W_i$. Upon receiving the results of any $N-S$ workers, the master recovers the total gradient $\mathbf{g}$ by linearly combining the received results, that is $\mathbf{g} = \mathbf{a}_f \mathbf{B} \mathbf{G}$
where the row vector $\mathbf{a}_f \in \mathbb{R}^{1 \times N}$ corresponds to a particular set of $S$ stragglers and $\mathbf{A} = [\mathbf{a}_1;\cdots;\mathbf{a}_F]$ denotes the decoding matrix with $F={N \choose S}$ distinct straggling scenarios. The \textsf{GC} algorithm designs encoding and decoding matrices $(\mathbf{B},\mathbf{A})$ such that, in the worst case, the full gradient $\mathbf{g}$ is recoverable from the results of \emph{any} $N-S$ out of $N$ workers, i.e. straggler resiliency $\alpha_{\textsf{GC}}=S/N$ is attained. Although \textsf{GC} prevents the master to wait for \emph{all} the workers to finish their computations, it requires simultaneous communications from the workers that will cause congestion at the master node, and lead to parallelization gain $\beta_{\textsf{GC}}= \Theta (1)$ for a constant resiliency
\iffalse
\begin{center}
\begin{TAB}(r,0.7cm,0.7cm)[2pt]{|c|c|c|}{|c|c|c|c|
& straggler toleration ($\alpha$) & bandwidth efficiency ($\beta$)\\
\textsf{RAR} & $0$ & $\Theta(\log N)$\\
\textsf{GC} & $S/N$ & $\Theta(N)$\\
\textsf{CR} & $s/n$ & $\Theta(N^{1/L})$\\
\end{TAB}
\end{center}
\fi
Having reviewed \textsf{RAR} and \textsf{GC} strategies and their resiliency and parallelization properties, we now informally provide the guarantees of our proposed \textsf{CR} scheme in the following remark.
\begin{remark}
\textsf{CR} arranges the available $N$ workers via a tree configuration with $L$ layers of nodes and each parent having $n$ children, i.e. $N=n+\cdots+n^L$. The proposed data allocation and communication strategy in \textsf{CR} results in communication parallelization gain $\beta_{\textsf{CR}} = \Theta(N^{1-1/L})$ which approaches $\beta_{\textsf{RAR}} = \Theta(N)$ for large $L$. Moreover, given a computation load $0\leq r \leq 1$, \textsf{CR} is robust to straggling of $\alpha_{\textsf{CR}} \approx r^{1/L}$ fraction of the children per any parent in the tree, while \textsf{GC} is robust to only $\alpha_{\textsf{GC}} \approx r$ fraction of nodes and \textsf{RAR} has no straggler resiliency.
Therefore, \textsf{CR} achieves the best of \textsf{RAR} and \textsf{GC}, simultaneously. Table \ref{tab:schemes} summarizes these results and Theorems \ref{thm:CRoptimality} and \ref{thm:CRtime} formally characterize such guarantees.
\end{remark}
\iffalse
We also show that
\textsf{CR} assigns each worker with $r_{\textsf{CR}} = \left( \left( \frac{n}{s+1} \right) + \cdots + \left( \frac{n}{s+1} \right)^L \right)^{-1} $ fraction of the data set which we prove to be optimal to attain the resiliency of $s/n$. We also consider random shifted exponential run-times for workers and asymptotically characterize the expected run-time of \textsf{CR} as $\mathbb{E} \left[T_{\textsf{CR}} \right] = \Theta(1) + \Theta(n)$, where we assume each node is restricted to hear from only one node at the time.
\fi
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{Communication parallelization gain and straggler resiliency of three designs \textsf{RAR}, \textsf{GC}, and \textsf{CR} in a system with $N$ nodes with computation load $r$, where \textsf{CR} has a tree communication topology of $L$ layers.}
\label{tab:schemes}
\begin{center}
\begin{small}
\begin{sc}
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
\toprule
Scheme & \begin{tabular}{@{}c@{}@{}}Straggler \\ Resiliency \\ ($\alpha$)\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{@{}c@{}@{}}Communication \\ Parallelization Gain \\ ($\beta$)\end{tabular} \\
\midrule
\textsf{RAR} & $0$ & $\Theta(N)$ \\
\textsf{GC} & $r$ & $\Theta(1)$\\
\textsf{CR} & $r^{1/L}$ & $\Theta \left( N^{1-1/L} \right)$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{sc}
\end{small}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.1in
\end{table}
\iffalse
\setlength\arrayrulewidth{0.7pt}
\begin{table}[!ht]
\normalsize
\centering
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.1}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\cline{2-3}
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{} &
\begin{tabular}{@{}c@{}}Straggler Resiliency \\ ($\alpha$)\end{tabular}
& \begin{tabular}{@{}c@{}}Comm. Parallelization \\ Gain ($\beta$)\end{tabular} \\ \hline
\textsf{RAR} & $0$ & $\Theta(N)$ \\ \hline
\textsf{GC} & $S/N$ & $\Theta(1)$ \\ \hline
\textsf{CR} & $s/n$ & $\Theta(N^{1-1/L})$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Efficiency and resiliency of three designs \textsf{RAR}, \textsf{GC}, and \textsf{CR}.}
\label{tab:schemes}
\end{table}
\fi
\subsection{Description of \textsf{CR} Scheme } \label{subsec:CRdescr}
Let us start with the proposed network configuration. \textsf{CR} arranges the communication pattern among the nodes via a \emph{regular} tree structure as defined below.
An $(n,L)$--regular tree graph $T$ consists of a master node and $L$ layers of worker nodes. At any layer (except for the lowest), each \emph{parent} node is connected to $n$ \emph{children} nodes in the lower layer, i.e. there is a total of $N=n+\cdots+n^L$ nodes (See Figure \ref{fig:n-tree}). Each node of the tree is identified with a pair $(l,i)$, where $l \in [L]$ and $i \in [n^l]$ denote the corresponding layer and the node's index in that layer, respectively. Furthermore, $T(l,i)$ denotes the sub-tree with the root node $(l,i)$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.35\textwidth]{figures/n-tree-master-2}
\caption{$(n,L)$--regular tree topology.} \label{fig:n-tree}
\end{figure}
We next introduce a notation that eases the algorithm description.
We associate a real scalar $b$ to all the data points in a generic data set $\mathcal{D}$, denoting it by $b \mathcal{D}$, and define the gradient over $b \mathcal{D}$ as $\mathbf{g}_{b \mathcal{D}} = b \mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}} = b \sum_{\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{D}} \nabla \ell (\theta^{(t)}; \mathbf{x} ) $. As a building block of \textsf{CR}, we define the sub-routine \textsc{CompAlloc} in which given a generic data set $\mathcal{D}$, $n$ workers are carefully assigned with data partitions and combining coefficients such that the full gradient over $\mathcal{D}$ is retrievable from the computation results of any $n-s$ workers (Pseudo-code in Appendix \ref{appA}).
\noindent
\textbf{\textsc{CompAlloc}}: For specified $n$ and $s$, \textsf{GC} (Algorithm 2 in \cite{tandon2017gradient}) constructs the encoding matrix $\mathbf{B} = [\mathbf{b}_1;\cdots;\mathbf{b}_n] = [b_{i\kappa}]$. In \textsc{CompAlloc}, the input data set $\mathcal{D}$ is partitioned to $\mathcal{D} = \cup_{\kappa = 1}^{k} \mathcal{D}_\kappa$ and distributed among the $n$ workers along with the corresponding coefficients. That is, each worker $i \in [n]$ is assigned with $\mathcal{D}{(i)} = \cup_{\kappa = 1}^{k} b_{i\kappa} \mathcal{D}_\kappa$ which specifies its local data set and corresponding combining coefficients. The parent of the $n$ workers is then able to recover the gradient over $\mathcal{D}$, i.e. $\mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}}$ upon receiving the partial coded gradients of any $n-s$ workers and using the decoding matrix $\mathbf{A}$ designed by \textsf{GC} (Algorithm 1 in \cite{tandon2017gradient}).
\noindent
\textbf{CodedReduce:} \textsf{CR} is implemented in two phases. It first allocates each worker with its local computation task via \textsc{CR.Allocate} procedure. This specifies each worker with its local data set and combining coefficients. Then, the communication strategy is determined by \textsc{CR.Execute}.
\begin{itemize}
\item[] \textbf{\textsc{CR.Allocate}:}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Starting from the master, data set $ \mathcal{D}^{T(1,i)}$ is assigned to sub-tree $T(1,i)$ for $i \in [n]$ via the allocation module \textsc{CompAlloc} (Figure \ref{fig:tree-data}).
\item In layer $l=1$, each worker $(1,i)$, $i \in [n]$, picks $r_{\textsf{CR}} d$ data points from the corresponding sub-tree's data set $\mathcal{D}^{T(1,i)}$ as its local data set $\mathcal{D}{(1,i)}$ and passes the rest $ \mathcal{D}_{T(1,i)} = \mathcal{D}^{T(1,i)} \setminus \mathcal{D}(1,i)$ to its children and their sub-trees (Figure \ref{fig:tree-data}).
\item Step (1) is repeated by using the module \textsc{CompAlloc} and treating $\mathcal{D}_{T(1,i)}$ as the input data set to distribute it among the children of node $(1,i)$.
\item Same procedure is applied till reaching the bottom layer (Figure \ref{fig:tree-data}). By doing so, the data set $\mathcal{D}$ is redundantly distributed across the tree while all the workers are equally loaded with $r_{\textsf{CR}} d$ data points, where in Theorem \ref{thm:CRoptimality} we will show that $r_{\textsf{CR}} $ is a self-derived pick for \textsf{CR} given in (\ref{eq:rCR_lemma}).
\end{enumerate}
\item[] \textbf{\textsc{CR.Execute}:}
\begin{enumerate}
\item All the $N$ nodes start their local partial \emph{coded} gradient computations on the current model $\theta^{(t)}$, i.e. $\mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}(l,i)}$ for all nodes $(l,i)$. Note that $\mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}(l,i)}$ is a coded gradient (i.e. a linear combination of partial gradients) since ${\mathcal{D}(l,i)}$ carries combining coefficients along with its data points.
\item Starting from the leaf nodes, they send their partial coded gradient computation results (messages) $\mathbf{m}_{(L,i)} = \mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}(L,i)}$ up to their parents.
\item Upon receiving enough results from their children (any $n-s$ of them), workers in layer $L-1$ recover a linear combination of their children's messages via proper row in the decoding matrix $\mathbf{A}$, e.g., parent node $(L-1,1)$ recovers from its children's messages $[ \mathbf{m}_{(L,1)};\cdots; \mathbf{m}_{(L,n)}]$ via the proper decoding row $\mathbf{a}_{f(L-1,1)}$.
\item Recovered partial gradient is added to the local partial coded gradient and is uploaded to the parent, e.g. node $(L-1,1)$ uploads $\mathbf{m}_{(L-1,1)}$ to its parent, where
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{m}_{(L-1,1)} = \mathbf{a}_{f(L-1,1)} [ \mathbf{m}_{(L,1)};\cdots; \mathbf{m}_{(L,n)}] + \mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}(L-1,1)}. \nonumber
\end{equation}
\item The same procedure is repeated till reaching the master node which is able to aggregate the total gradient $\mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{figures/tree-data-v2}
\caption{Illustration of task allocation in \textsf{CR}.} \label{fig:tree-data}
\end{figure}
The pseudo-code for \textsf{CR} is available in Appendix \ref{appB}.
\subsection{An Example for \textsf{CR}}
In this section, we provide a simple example to better illustrate the proposed \textsf{CR} scheme.
\begin{example}[CodedReduce]
Consider a $(3,2)$--regular tree with $N=12$ nodes and $s=1$ straggler per parent. From \textsf{GC}, we have the decoding and encoding matrices
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gc3nodes}
\mathbf{A} = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & 2 \\
1 & 0 & 1 \\
2 & -1 & 0
\end{pmatrix},
\quad
\mathbf{B} = \begin{pmatrix}
1/2 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & -1 \\
1/2 & 0 & 1
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{figures/CRexample}
\caption{Illustration of data allocation and communication strategy in \textsf{CR} for a $(3,2)$--regular tree.} \label{fig:CR-ex}
\end{figure}
Following \textsf{CR}'s description, we partition the data set of size $d$ as $\mathcal{D}=\{\mathcal{D}_1,\mathcal{D}_2,\mathcal{D}_3\}$ and assign $\mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}=\frac{1}{2}\mathcal{D}_1 \cup \mathcal{D}_2$ to sub-tree $T(1,1)$. Node $(1,1)$ then picks $r_{\textsf{CR}} d= \frac{4}{15}d$ data points from $\mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}$ as $\mathcal{D}{(1,1)}$. To do so, $\mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}$ is partitioned to $5$ sub-sets as $\mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)} = \mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}_1 \cup \cdots \cup \mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}_5$ and node $(1,1)$ picks the first two sub-sets, i.e. $\mathcal{D}{(1,1)} = \mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}_1 \cup \mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}_2$ and the rest $\mathcal{D}_{T(1,1)} = \mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}_3 \cup \mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}_4 \cup \mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}_5$ is passed to layer $2$. Note that data points in $\mathcal{D}{(1,1)}$ carry on the linear combination coefficients associated with $\mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}=\frac{1}{2}\mathcal{D}_1 \cup \mathcal{D}_2$. Figure \ref{fig:CR-ex} demonstrates each node in sub-tree $T(1,1)$ with its allocated data set along with the encoding coefficients. Moving to layer $2$, $\mathcal{D}_{T(1,1)}$ is partitioned to $3$ subsets and according to $\mathbf{B}$ in (\ref{eq:gc3nodes}), the allocations to nodes $(2,1)$, $(2,2)$ and $(2,3)$ are as follows:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{D}{(2,1)} &= \frac{1}{2}\mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}_3 \cup \mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}_4, \nonumber\\
\mathcal{D}{(2,2)} &= \mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}_4 \cup (-1)\mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}_5, \nonumber\\
\mathcal{D}{(2,3)} &= \frac{1}{2}\mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}_3 \cup \mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}_5. \nonumber
\end{align}
Similarly for other sub-trees, each node now is allocated with a data set for which each data point is associated with a scalar. For instance, node $(2,1)$ uploads $\mathbf{m}_{(2,1)} = \mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}(2,1)}=\frac{1}{2} \mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}_3} + \mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}^{T(1,1)}_4}$
to its parent $(1,1)$. Node $(1,1)$ can recover from any $2$ surviving children, e.g. from $(2,1)$ and $(2,1)$ and using the first row in $\mathbf{A}$, it uploads
\begin{align}
\mathbf{m}_{(1,1)}
&= [2,-1,0] [\mathbf{m}_{(2,1)} ; \mathbf{m}_{(2,2)} ; \mathbf{m}_{(2,3)}] + \mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}(1,1)} \nonumber \\
& = 2\mathbf{m}_{(2,1)} - \mathbf{m}_{(2,2)} + \mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}(1,1)} \nonumber \\
& = \frac{1}{2} \mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}_1} + \mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}_2} \nonumber
\end{align}
to the master. Similarly for other nodes, the master can recover the full gradient from any two children, e.g. using the second row of decoding matrix $\mathbf{A}$ and surviving children $(1,1)$ and $(1,3)$:
\begin{align}
[1,0,1] [\mathbf{m}_{(1,1)} ; \mathbf{m}_{(1,2)} ; \mathbf{m}_{(1,3)}] &= \mathbf{m}_{(1,1)} + \mathbf{m}_{(1,3)} \nonumber \\
& = \left(\frac{1}{2} \mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}_1} + \mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}_2} \right) + \left(\frac{1}{2} \mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}_1} + \mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}_3} \right) \nonumber \\
& = \mathbf{g}_{\mathcal{D}}. \nonumber
\end{align}
\end{example}
\subsection{Theoretical Guarantees of \textsf{CR}}
In this section, we formally present the theoretical guarantees of \textsf{CR}. We first characterize the computation load induced by \textsf{CR} and demonstrate its significant improvement over \textsf{GC}. Then, we consider the commonly-used shifted exponential run-time computation distribution and a single-port communication model for workers and asymptotically characterize the expected run-time of \textsf{CR} and conclude with a discussion on its communication parallelization gain.
\textbf{Computation Load Optimality:}
We show that for a fixed tree topology, the proposed \textsf{CR} is optimal in the sense that it achieves the minimum per-node computation load for a target resiliency. This optimality is established in two steps per Theorem \ref{thm:CRoptimality}: (i) we first show the achievability by characterizing the computation load of \textsf{CR}; and (ii) we establish a converse showing that \textsf{CR}'s computation load is as small as possible. Proof is available in Appendix \ref{appC}.
\iffalse
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:CRload}
For an $(n,L)$--regular tree and resiliency $\alpha=s/n$, the proposed \textsf{CR} scheme loads each node with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:rCR_lemma}
r_{\textsf{CR}} \coloneqq \frac{1}{ \left( \frac{n}{s+1} \right) + \cdots + \left( \frac{n}{s+1} \right)^L }.
\end{equation}
fraction of the total data set.
\end{lemma}
\fi
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:CRoptimality}
For a fixed $(n,L)$--regular tree, any gradient aggregation scheme robust to any $s$ stragglers per any parent requires computation load $r$ where
\begin{equation}\label{eq:rCR_lemma}
r \geq r_{\textsf{CR}} = \frac{1}{ \left( \frac{n}{s+1} \right) + \cdots + \left( \frac{n}{s+1} \right)^L }.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
While \textsf{CR} is $\alpha$-resilient, i.e. robust to \emph{any} $s=\alpha n$ stragglers per \emph{any} parent node, it significantly improves the per-node computation (and storage) load compared to an equivalent \textsf{GC} scheme with the same resiliency. In particular, \textsf{GC} loads each worker with $r_{\textsf{GC}} = \frac{S+1}{N} = \frac{\alpha N + 1}{N} \approx \alpha$ fraction of the data set, while \textsf{CR} considerably reduces it to
$r_{\textsf{CR}} = 1 / \sum_{l=1}^L \left( \frac{n}{ \alpha n +1} \right)^l \approx \alpha^L$. For $\alpha=0.5$ as an instance, \textsf{CR} reduces the computation load $7 \times$ by rearranging the nodes from $1$ layer to $3$ layers.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
\textsf{CR} makes the distributed GD strategy $\alpha$-resilient, that is any $s=\alpha n$ stragglers per any parent node which sums up to a total of $S= \alpha N$ stragglers -- the same as the worst case number of stragglers in \textsf{GC}. It is clear than if the stragglers are picked adversarially, for instance all the nodes in layer $1$, then \textsf{CR} fails to recover the total gradient at the master. However, our experiments over Amazon EC2 confirm that stragglers are randomly distributed over the tree and not adversarially picked, which is aligned with the random stragglers pattern considered in this paper.
\end{remark}
\textbf{Latency Performance:}
While we have derived the straggler resiliency of \textsf{CR}, the ultimate goal of a distributed gradient aggregation scheme is to have small latency which is partly attained by establishing higher communication parallelization.
\textit{Computation Time Model}: We consider random computation time model for workers with shifted exponential distribution which is used in several prior works \cite{liang2014tofec,reisizadeh2017coded,li2018near}. More precisely, for a worker $W_i$ with assigned data set of size $d_i$, we model the computation time as a random variable with a shifted exponential distribution as follows:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:comp_model}
\mathbb{P}[T_i\leq t]=1-e^{-\frac{\mu}{d_i}(t-a d_i)}, \text{ for }\,\,t\geq a d_i,
\end{equation}
where system parameters $a = \Theta(1)$ and $\mu = \Theta(1)$ respectively denote the shift and the exponential rate. We assume that $T_i$'s are independent.
\textit{Communication Time Model}: To model the communication time and bandwidth bottleneck, we assume that each node is able to receive messages from only one other node at a time, and the total available bandwidth is dedicated to the communicating node. We also assume that communicating a partial gradient vector (of size $p$) from a child to its parent takes a constant time $t_c$.
The following theorem asymptotically characterizes the expected run-time of \textsf{CR} which we denote by $T_{\textsf{CR}}$ (Proof is available in Appendix \ref{appD}). More precisely, we consider the regime of interest where the data set size $d$ and the number of layers $L$ in the tree are fixed, while the number of children per parent, i.e. $n$ is approaching infinity with a constant straggler ratio $\alpha = s/n = \Theta(1)$.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:CRtime}
Considering the computation time model in (\ref{eq:comp_model}) for workers, the expected run-time of \textsf{CR} on an $(n,L)$--regular tree with resiliency $\alpha = \Theta(1)$ satisfies the followings:
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E} \left[T_{\textsf{CR}} \right] &\geq \frac{r_{\textsf{CR}} d}{\mu} \log \left( \frac{1}{\alpha} \right) + a r_{\textsf{CR}} d + \left( n(1-\alpha)-o(n)+L-1 \right) \left( (1-o(1) \right) t_c + o(1), \label{eq:lowerb} \\
\mathbb{E} \left[T_{\textsf{CR}} \right]
&\leq
\frac{r_{\textsf{CR}} d}{\mu} \log \left( \frac{1}{\alpha} \right) + a r_{\textsf{CR}} d + n \left( 1-o(1) \right) L t_c + o(1) \label{eq:upperb}.
\end{align}
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
Theorem \ref{thm:CRtime} implies that the expected run-time of the proposed \textsf{CR} algorithm breaks down into two terms: $\mathbb{E} \left[T_{\textsf{CR}} \right] = \Theta(1) + \Theta(n)$, where the two terms $\Theta(1)$ and $\Theta(n)$ correspond to computation and communication times, respectively. As a special case, it also implies that the average run-time for \textsf{GC} is $\mathbb{E} \left[T_{\textsf{GC}} \right] = \Theta(1) + \Theta(N)$. This clearly demonstrates that \textsf{CR} is indeed alleviating the bandwidth bottleneck and it improves the communication parallelization gain from $\beta_{\textsf{GC}} = \Theta(1)$ to $\beta_{\textsf{CR}} = \Theta(N/n) = \Theta(N^{1-1/L})$ by parallelizing the communications over an $L$-layer tree structure.
\end{remark}
\iffalse
\begin{remark}
{\color{red} Amir: do we need this remark?} As described before, \textsf{RAR} addresses the bandwidth bottleneck at the nodes by arranging the communications over a logical ring and hence each node communicates only to its neighbors. Considering customary communication time models, e.g. \cite{thakur2005optimization}, Segmented Ring-AllReduce takes $\Theta(\frac{\log N}{N}) + \Theta(N)$ to aggregate the gradient on all the workers. Theorem \ref{thm:CRtime} demonstrates the speedup of \textsf{CR} over Segmented \textsf{RAR} as well, despite the fact that \textsf{RAR} fails to handle stragglers on a ring.
\end{remark}
\fi
\iffalse
\subsection{Storage Optimality of \textsf{CR}}
To make gradient aggregation schemes robust to stragglers, computing nodes are required to execute redundant computation to compensate for the straggling nodes. Therefore, a larger storage capacity is necessary at the nodes compared to uncoded and naive schemes. Here, we show that among the fixed tree topologies, the proposed \textsf{CR} is optimal in the sense that it achieves the minimum per-node computation load for a target resiliency. Next theorem formalizes this optimality (Proof is available in the Supplementary Material.).
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:CRoptimality}
For a fixed $(n,L)$--regular tree, any gradient aggregation scheme robust to $s$ stragglers per parent, stores $r$ fraction of the total data set on each node where
\begin{equation}\label{eq:optimalr}
r \geq r_{\textsf{CR}} = \frac{1}{ \left( \frac{n}{s+1} \right) + \cdots + \left( \frac{n}{s+1} \right)^L } .
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\fi
\subsection{Real Data Set}
We consider the machine learning problem of logistic regression via gradient descent (GD) over the real data set GISETTE \cite{guyon2007competitive}. The problem is to separate the often confused digits `9' and `4'. We use $d=6552$ training samples, with model size $p=5001$. The following relative error rate is considered for model estimation:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:RER}
\text{Relative Error Rate } = \frac{\norm{ \theta^{(t)}-\theta^{(t-1)}}^2}{\norm{\theta^{(t-1)}}^2},
\end{equation}
where $\theta^{(t)}$ denotes the estimated model at iteration $t$. The following schemes are considered for data allocation and gradient aggregation:
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering \includegraphics[width= 0.47 \textwidth]{figures/log84_1by4}
\caption{Convergence curves for relative error rate vs wall-clock time for logistic regression over $N=84$ workers. The straggler resiliency is $\alpha=1/4$. \textsf{CR} achieves a speedup of up to $32.8\times$, $5.3\times$, $3.8\times$ and $3.2\times$ respectively over \textsf{UMW}, \textsf{GC}, \textsf{RAR} and \textsf{SGD}.}
\label{fig:log84}
\end{figure}
\begin{enumerate}
\item {Uncoded Master-worker (\textsf{UMW})}: This is the naive scheme in which the data set is uniformly partitioned among the workers, and the master waits for results from all the workers to aggregate the gradient.
\item {Gradient Coding (\textsf{GC})}: We implement \textsf{GC} as described in Section \ref{subsec:GC}, with the straggler parameter $S=\alpha N$.
\item {Ring-AllReduce (\textsf{RAR})}: The data set is uniformly partitioned over the workers and the MPI function \texttt{MPI\_Allreduce()} is used for gradient aggregation.
\item {Stochastic Gradient Descent (\textsf{SGD})}: The data allocation is the same as \textsf{UMW}. However, the master updates the model using the partial gradient obtained via aggregating the results from results of \textit{only} the first $N-S$ children. Furthermore, as is typical in SGD experiments, we used a learning rate of $c_1/(t + c_2)$ where $c_1$ and $c_2$ were numerically optimized.
\item {CodedReduce (\textsf{CR})}: We implement our proposed scheme as presented in Section \ref{sec:codedreduce} on a tree with $(n,L)=(12,2)$, while the straggler parameter $s=\alpha n$.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[h]{0.47\textwidth}
\centering \includegraphics[width= 1.0 \textwidth]{figures/log156_1by12}
\caption{Convergence curves for $\alpha=1/12$. \textsf{CR} achieves a speed up of up to $32.3\times$, $27.2\times$, $7.0\times$ and $25.4\times$ respectively over \textsf{UMW}, \textsf{GC}, \textsf{RAR} and \textsf{SGD}.}
\label{fig:log156_1by12}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[h]{0.47\textwidth}
\centering \includegraphics[width= 1.0 \textwidth]{figures/log156_2by12}
\caption{Convergence curves for $\alpha=2/12$. \textsf{CR} achieves a speed up of up to $29.3\times$, $23.3\times$, $6.4\times$ and $21.9\times$ respectively over \textsf{UMW}, \textsf{GC}, \textsf{RAR} and \textsf{SGD}.}
\label{fig:log156_2by12}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[h]{0.47\textwidth}
\centering \includegraphics[width= 1.0 \textwidth]{figures/log156_3by12}
\caption{Convergence curves for $\alpha=3/12$. \textsf{CR} achieves a speed up of up to $25.0\times$, $16.8\times$, $5.4\times$ and $15.4\times$ respectively over \textsf{UMW}, \textsf{GC}, \textsf{RAR} and \textsf{SGD}.}
\label{fig:log156_3by12}
\end{subfigure}
~
\caption{Convergence results for relative error rate vs wall-clock time for logistic regression over $N=156$ workers with different straggler resiliency $\alpha$.}
\label{fig:log156}
\end{figure}
Next, we plot the relative error rate defined in (\ref{eq:RER}) as a function of wall-clock time for our logistic regression experiments with $N=84$ workers and $N=156$ workers respectively in Fig. \ref{fig:log84} and Fig. \ref{fig:log156}. For $N=84$, we consider a straggler-resiliency of $\alpha = 1/4$, while for $N=156$, we consider three different values of $\alpha: 1/12, 2/12 \text{ and } 3/12$.
We make the following observations from the plots:
\begin{itemize}
\item As demonstrated by Fig. \ref{fig:log84} and \ref{fig:log156}, \textsf{CR} achieves significant speedups over the baseline approaches. Specifically, for $(N,\alpha) = (84,1/4)$, \textsf{CR} is faster than \textsf{UMW}, \textsf{GC}, \textsf{RAR} and \textsf{SGD} by $32.8\times$, $5.3\times$, $3.8\times$ and $3.2\times$ respectively. For $(N,\alpha) = (156,1/12)$,
\textsf{CR} achieves speedups of
$32.3\times$, $27.2\times$, $7.0\times$ and $25.4\times$ respectively over \textsf{UMW}, \textsf{GC}, \textsf{RAR} and \textsf{SGD}. Similar speedups are obtained with $(N,\alpha) = (156,2/12)$ and $(N,\alpha) = (156,3/12)$, as demonstrated by Fig. \ref{fig:log156_2by12} and Fig. \ref{fig:log156_3by12} respectively.
\item Although \textsf{GC} gains over \textsf{UMW} by avoiding stragglers, its performance is still bottlenecked by bandwidth congestion, and the increase in computation load at each worker by a factor of $(S+1)$ in comparison to \textsf{UMW}. The bottlenecks are reflected in comparison with \textsf{SGD}, which has similar or better performance in comparison to \textsf{GC} due to much less computation load per worker.
\item \textsf{RAR} significantly outperforms \textsf{UMW} as well as \textsf{GC} for $N=84$ as well as $N=156$ worker settings. Although \textsf{RAR} achieves similar performance in comparison to \textsf{SGD} for $N=84$ workers scenario, it ultimately beats all the schemes with the generic master-worker topology when the cluster size is increased to $N=156$. Our proposed \textsf{CR} algorithm combines the best of \textsf{GC} and \textsf{RAR} by providing straggler robustness via coding and alleviating bandwidth bottleneck via a tree topology.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Artificial Data Set}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering \includegraphics[width= 0.47 \textwidth]{figures/lin84_1by4}
\caption{Convergence curves for normalized error rate vs wall-clock time for linear regression over $N=84$ workers. The straggler resiliency is $\alpha=1/4$. \textsf{CR} achieves a speedup of up to $24.1\times$, $4.6\times$, $3.0\times$ and $2.8\times$ respectively over \textsf{UMW}, \textsf{GC}, \textsf{RAR} and \textsf{SGD}.}
\label{fig:lin84}
\end{figure}
Next we solve a linear regression problem via GD over a synthetic data set with parameters $(d,p)=(7644,6500)$. We generate the data set using the following model:
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{x}_{j}(p+1) = \mathbf{x}_{j}(1:p)^{\top} \theta_* + z_j, \quad \text{ for } j \in [d],
\end{equation}
where the true model $\theta_*$ and features $\mathbf{x}_{j}(1:p) = [\mathbf{x}_{j}(1);\cdots;\mathbf{x}_{j}(p)]$ are drawn randomly from $\mathcal{N}(0,I_p)$ distribution and $z_j$ is a standard Gaussian noise. We consider the following normalized error rate
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:NER}
\text{Normalized Error Rate} = \frac{\norm{ \theta^{(t)}-\theta_*}^2}{\norm{\theta_*}^2}.
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[h]{0.47\textwidth}
\centering \includegraphics[width= 1.0 \textwidth]{figures/lin156_1by12}
\caption{Convergence curves for $\alpha=1/12$. \textsf{CR} achieves a speed up of up to $31.7\times$, $22.0\times$, $5.2\times$ and $20.7\times$ respectively over \textsf{UMW}, \textsf{GC}, \textsf{RAR} and \textsf{SGD}.}
\label{fig:lin156_1by12}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[h]{0.47\textwidth}
\centering \includegraphics[width= 1.0 \textwidth]{figures/lin156_2by12}
\caption{Convergence curves for $\alpha=2/12$. \textsf{CR} achieves a speed up of up to $27.1\times$, $18.1\times$, $4.4\times$ and $16.8\times$ respectively over \textsf{UMW}, \textsf{GC}, \textsf{RAR} and \textsf{SGD}.}
\label{fig:lin156_2by12}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[h]{0.47\textwidth}
\centering \includegraphics[width= 1.0 \textwidth]{figures/lin156_3by12}
\caption{Convergence curves for $\alpha=3/12$. \textsf{CR} achieves a speed up of up to $22.2\times$, $13.7\times$, $3.6\times$ and $13.0\times$ respectively over \textsf{UMW}, \textsf{GC}, \textsf{RAR} and \textsf{SGD}.}
\label{fig:lin156_3by12}
\end{subfigure}
~
\caption{Convergence results for normalized error rate vs wall-clock time for linear regression over $N=156$ workers with different straggler resiliency $\alpha$.}
\label{fig:lin156}
\end{figure}
In Fig. \ref{fig:lin84} and \ref{fig:lin156}, we plot the normalized error rate defined in (\ref{eq:NER}) as a function of wall-clock time for $N=84$ and $N=156$ respectively. We consider similar configuration and schemes as for the experiments with real data set. The following observations are made with regard to the experiments:
\begin{itemize}
\item As in the previous case of logistic regression with real data set, \textsf{CR} achieves significant speedups over baseline approaches for linear regression as well. Particularly, for $(N,\alpha)=(84,1/4)$, \textsf{CR} achieves speedups of $24.1\times$, $4.6\times$, $3.0\times$ and $2.8\times$ over \textsf{UMW}, \textsf{GC}, \textsf{RAR} and \textsf{SGD} respectively. When $(N,\alpha) = (156,1/12)$, \textsf{CR} achieves speedups of $31.7\times$, $22.0\times$, $5.2\times$ and $20.7\times$ in comparison to \textsf{UMW}, \textsf{GC}, \textsf{RAR} and \textsf{SGD} respectively. Similar speedups are obtained for $(N,\alpha) = (156,2/12)$ and $(N,\alpha)=(156,3/12)$.
\item \textsf{GC} performs better than \textsf{UMW} by avoiding stragglers. However, its performance is still bottlenecked by bandwidth congestion and the increase in computation load at each worker by a factor of $(S+1)$ in comparison to \textsf{UMW}.
\item \textsf{SGD} achieves a gain in per iteration time over \textsf{UMW} and \textsf{GC}. However, it has higher normalized error with respect to the true model.
\item Combined with the results of logistic regression, our experiments complement the theoretical gains of \textsf{CR} that have been established earlier. As demonstrated by the results, a tree-based topology is well-suited for bandwidth bottleneck alleviation in large-scale commodity clusters. Furthermore, the data allocation and coding strategy provide resiliency to stragglers.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering \includegraphics[width= 0.47 \textwidth]{figures/large_exp}
\caption{Convergence curves for normalized error rate vs wall-clock time for linear regression over $N=156$ workers and $(d,p)=(32760,5000)$. The straggler resiliency is $\alpha=1/4$ and the number of rounds is $50$. \textsf{CR} achieves a speedup of up to $11.3\times$, $9.7\times$, $1.69\times$ and $6.1\times$ respectively over \textsf{UMW}, \textsf{GC}, \textsf{RAR} and \textsf{SGD}.}
\label{fig:large_exp}
\end{figure}
\begin{remark}
Till now, we have considered small-scale datasets in our experiments, which is motivated by the fact that in edge based devices with non-dedicated resources, the amount of memory available for computation shall be low. Nevertheless, our proposed scheme \textsf{CR} can speedup general machine learning in cloud environments. To illustrate this point, we have carried out another experiment with a larger dataset $(d,p) = (32760,500)$, with $(N,\alpha)=(156,1/4)$. As illustrated by Fig. \ref{fig:large_exp}, \textsf{CR} outperforms the baseline approaches by considerable margins. Specifically, \textsf{CR} achieves a speedup of $11.3\times, 9.7\times, 1.69\times$ and $6.1\times$ over \textsf{UMW}, \textsf{GC}, \textsf{RAR} and \textsf{SGD} respectively.
\end{remark}
\iffalse
\saurav{
We summarize our observations and conclusions from the experiments in the following remarks:
$\bullet$ \textsf{CR} achieves significant speed ups over the benchmark schemes. As demonstrated in Figure \ref{fig:logreg156}, \textsf{CR} achieves a speedup of up to $31.4\times$, $18.9\times$ and $7.9\times$ respectively over \textsf{UMW}, \textsf{GC}, and \textsf{RAR} for logistics regression. In the linear regression problem, the corresponding speedups are $28.9\times$, $17.0\times$ and $6.8\times$, respectively as demonstrated in Figure \ref{fig:linreg156}.
$\bullet$ These experiments complement the theoretical gains of \textsf{CR} that have been established earlier. As demonstrated in the figures, although \textsf{GC} improves the overall time in comparison to \textsf{UMW}, it still suffers from bandwidth bottleneck at the master. On the other hand, \textsf{RAR} is bottlenecked by straggling nodes which reduce its performance. \textsf{CR} however, jointly improves bandwidth utilization and straggler toleration, leading to significant speedups in distributed machine learning problems while maintaining the same generalization error.
Lastly, we provide similar experimental results for a smaller cluster with $N=84$ workers in Appendix \ref{appE}.
}
\fi
\section{Introduction}
\input{1-intro.tex}
\section{Problem Setup and Background}\label{sec:background}
\input{2-background.tex}
\section{Proposed CodedReduce Scheme}\label{sec:codedreduce}
\input{3-CR.tex}
\section{Empirical Evaluation of \textsf{CR}}\label{sec:experiments}
\input{6-experiments.tex}
\bibliographystyle{ieeetr}
|
\section{Introduction}
The family of layered transition metal dichalcogenides attracts much attention, because of the wide diversity of fascinating electronic properties. One of the present-day research interests is the possibility to realize novel quantum states as a result of the topological non-trivial nature of the electronic band structure~\cite{Soluyanov2015,Huang2016,Yan2017,Bahramy2018}. Especially, it has been proposed that these materials host a generic coexistence of type-I and type-II three dimensional Dirac fermion states~\cite{Bahramy2018}. An interesting example in this respect is PdTe$_2$ that has been classified as a type-II Dirac semimetal following a concerted examination of \textit{ab-initio} electronic structure calculations and angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy (ARPES) experiments~\cite{Liu2015a,Fei2017,Noh2017,Bahramy2018,Clark2017}. In a type-II Dirac semimetal the Hamiltonian breaks Lorentz invariance because the energy dispersion relations, \textit{i.e.} the Dirac cone, are tilted~\cite{Soluyanov2015}. The Dirac point is then the touching point between the electron and hole pockets and a nearly flat band may form near the Fermi level. Moreover, PdTe$_2$ is a superconductor below 1.6~K~\cite{Guggenheim1961,Leng2017}, which solicits the intriguing question whether superconductivity is promoted by the nearly flat band and consequently has a topological nature~\cite{Fei2017}. Topological non-trivial superconductors attract much interest since it is predicted these may host protected Majorana zero modes at the surface (for recent reviews see Refs.~\onlinecite{Sato&Fujimori2016,Sato&Ando2017}). This in turn offers a unique design route to make devices for topological quantum computation.
Superconductivity in PdTe$_2$ was discovered in 1961~(Ref.~\onlinecite{Guggenheim1961}), but was not investigated in detail until 2017, when Leng \textit{et al.}~\cite{Leng2017} carried out comprehensive magnetic and transport experiments on single-crystals. Unexpectedly, dc-magnetization measurements, $M(H)$, revealed that PdTe$_2$ is a bulk type-I superconductor, which was further embodied by the observation of the differential paramagnetic effect in the ac-susceptibility measured in applied magnetic dc-fields. The critical field $H_c(T)$ follows the standard quadratic temperature variation with $\mu_0 H_c(0) = 13.6$~mT. The possibility of type-I superconductivity in Dirac materials was recently investigated by Shapiro \textit{et al}.~\cite{Shapiro2018} employing a microscopic pairing theory for an arbitrary tilt parameter of the Dirac cone. For PdTe$_2$ these authors concluded type-I superconductivity is feasible for a tilt parameter $k=2$. Another interesting aspect of PdTe$_2$ is the observation of surface superconductivity, as evidenced by large screening currents in the ac-susceptibility for applied dc-fields $H_a > H_c$~\cite{Leng2017}. The critical field for surface superconductivity $H_c ^S$ does not follow the standard Saint-James - de Gennes expression $H_{c3} = 2.39 \times \kappa H_c$~\cite{Saint-James&deGennes1963}, where $\kappa$ is the Ginzburg-Landau parameter. This led to the proposal~\cite{Leng2017} that superconductivity of the surface sheath might have a topological nature and originates from topological surface states detected by ARPES~\cite{Liu2015a,Noh2017}. More recently, specific heat~\cite{Amit2018} and magnetic penetration depth~\cite{Salis2018,Teknowijoyo2018}, measurements have been conducted. These confirm conventional weak-coupling Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer (BCS) superconductivity, with a full gap in the bulk. At the same time zero-field scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) and spectroscopy (STS) experiments~\cite{Das2018,Clark2017} lend further support for the absence of in-gap states, which seems to rule out topological superconductivity at the surface. Dominant $s$-wave superconductivity was also concluded from tunneling spectroscopy experiments on side junctions~\cite{Voerman2019}. Nonetheless, the uncommon type-I behavior for a binary compound, and the unexplained superconductivity of the surface sheath, justify a further in-depth examination of the superconducting properties of PdTe$_2$.
We here report the results of a high-pressure investigation of the superconducting phase diagram of PdTe$_2$ single crystals ($p \leq 2.5$~GPa). Combined resistivity and ac-susceptibility measurements show $T_c$ increases at low pressures, then passes through a maximum of 1.91~K around 0.91~GPa, and subsequently decreases at higher pressure. The critical field for $T \rightarrow 0$, $H_c(0,p)$, follows a similar behavior and consequently the $H_c(T)$-curves at different pressures collapse on a single curve. Under pressure superconductivity maintains its type-I character. Surface superconductivity is robust under pressure as demonstrated by the large superconducting screening signal that persists for applied dc-fields $H_a > H_c$. Surprisingly, for $p \geq 1.41$~GPa the superconducting transition temperature of the surface, $T_c^S$, is larger than $T_c$ of the bulk. Therefore surface superconductivity may possibly have a non-trivial nature and is related to the topological surface states detected by ARPES\cite{Liu2015a,Noh2017,Clark2017}. The initial increase of $T_c$ with pressure is at variance with the smooth depression predicted by recent electronic structure calculations~\cite{Xiao2017}.
\section{Experiment}
The crystals used for our high pressure study were taken from the single-crystalline boule prepared by the modified Bridgman technique~\cite{Lyons1976} and characterized in Ref. \onlinecite{Leng2017}. Powder X-ray diffraction confirmed the trigonal CdI$_2$ structure (spacegroup $P\bar{3}m1$~\cite{Thomassen1929}. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) with energy dispersive x-ray (EDX) spectroscopy showed the proper 1:2 stoichiometry within the experimental resolution of 0.5\%. Laue backscattering was used to orient the crystals. Standard four-point resistance measurements were performed in a Physical Property Measurement System (PPMS, Quantum Design) at temperatures down to 2~K. The resistivity, $\rho (T)$, of our crystals shows metallic behavior. A typical trace in the temperature range 2-300~K is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:figure1}. The residual resistance ratio $R$(300K)/$R$(2K) = 30.
Electrical resistance, $R(T,H)$, and ac-susceptibility, $\chi_{ac}(T,H)$, measurements under high-pressure were performed utilizing a clamp-type piston-cylinder cell, which has a double-layer made of Cu-Be and NiCrAl alloys. The single crystal sizes for $R(T,H)$ and $\chi_{ac}(T,H)$ were $\sim 2.3 \times 1.0 \times 0.18$~mm$^3$ and $\sim 2.9 \times 1.0 \times 0.67$~mm$^3$, respectively. Both samples were mounted on a plug and loaded into a Teflon capsule together with coils and a pressure-transmitting medium, Daphne oil 7373, for hydrostatic compression. A schematic drawing of the plug with samples and coil is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:figure1}. The generated pressure in the capsule relating to each load was estimated from the calibration data for this cell, which was obtained from the pressure variations of superconducting transition temperatures of lead and tin in previous experiments~\cite{Slooten2009,Bay2012}. We carried out the compression experiments on the crystals twice, first up to a pressure of 1.24~GPa and in a second run up to 2.49~GPa.
Typical experimental conditions are as follows. The high-pressure cell was compressed at room temperature and then cooled down to about 0.3~K using a $^3$He refrigerator (Oxford Instruments Heliox VL). Electrical resistivity was measured by a resistance bridge (Linear Research LR-700) using a low-frequency ac method with an excitation current $I = 300 \mu$A. In order to investigate the field-suppression of $T_c$, a magnetic field was applied along the current, parallel to the $a$-axis. For ac-susceptibility measurements, a small cylinder, composed of an excitation coil and a pick-up coil in which the sample is situated, was prepared. The in-phase and out-of-phase signals were detected in the driving field $\mu_0 H_{ac} = 0.0047$~mT with a frequency of $f_{ac} = 313$~Hz using a lock-in amplifier (EG\&G Instruments Model 7260). Measurements were made in zero field and in applied dc-fields using a superconducting magnet. Special care was taken to reduce the remnant field of the superconducting magnet to close to zero, since our PdTe$_2$ crystals show type-I superconductivity.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{figure1}
\caption{Left: Resistivity of PdTe$_2$ measured with the current in the basal plane. Right: Pressure plug with samples and $\chi_{ac}$ coils mounted (schematic).}
\label{fig:figure1}
\end{figure}
Overall the resistivity, $\rho(T)$, measured in the temperature range 2-300~K showed little variation with pressure and remained metallic. However, the absolute $\rho$-value at 300~K decreases smoothly with respect to pressure to about 80\% of the ambient pressure value at the highest pressure 2.49~GPa.
\section{Results}
\subsection{Pressure-temperature phase diagram}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{figure2}
\caption{Resistance and ac-susceptibility (normalized to $-1$ in the superconducting state) of single-crystalline PdTe$_2$ as a function of temperature around $T_c$ at pressures up to 2.49 GPa as indicated. The data were taken in two pressure runs (see text): dashed-dotted lines for the first run ($p$-values listed above the curves) and solid lines for the second run ($p$-values listed adjacent to the curves). The yellow curve in both panels was taken at 1.08~GPa. The curves at 0 GPa were measured after releasing the pressure in the second run. $T_c^R$ is determined from the onset of superconductivity in $R(T)$ as indicated for $p=2.49~$GPa by the thin solid lines. For $p \geq 1.41$~GPa the onset of diamagnetic screening in $\chi_{ac}(T)$ is attributed to surface superconductivity at $T_c^S$, and the further drop signals bulk superconductivity at $T_c^{\chi}$, as indicated for $p=2.49$~GPa. See text.}
\label{fig:figure2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[b]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{figure3}
\caption{Pressure variation of the superconducting transition temperature of PdTe$_2$ as determined from resistance, $T_c^R$ (blue symbols), and from ac-susceptibility, $T_c^{\chi}$ (red symbols). $T_c^S$ denotes surface superconductivity (open and closed green symbols). Open symbols are determined by extrapolation. Note that for $p \geq 1.41$~GPa $T_c^S > T_c^{bulk} = T_c^{\chi}$ (see text).}
\label{fig:figure3}
\end{figure}
The overall results of the two pressure runs are reported in Fig.~\ref{fig:figure2}. In the first run data were taken at pressures of 0.25, 0.58, 0.91 and 1.24~GPa. Here the normal state resistance $R_N \simeq 70~\mu \Omega$. For the second run new voltage contacts were made on the crystal resulting in $R_N \simeq 60~\mu \Omega$. The applied pressures are 0.75, 1.08, 1.41, 1.74, 2.07 and 2.49~GPa. We remark the zero-pressure data were measured after releasing the pressure. Also, the value of the ac-susceptibility differed somewhat between different cool downs and between the two pressure runs. For clarity all the $\chi_{ac}$ data in the lower panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:figure2} are normalized to $-1$ in the superconducting state.
The resistance curves around $T_c$ at ambient pressure and $p=0.25$~GPa show a double structure which becomes more pronounced with increasing pressure. However, for $p \geq 1.08$~GPa the superconducting transition is sharp. We attribute the double structure in $R(T)$ at low pressures to parts of the crystal responding differently to pressure, because of an inhomogeneity, rather than to a pressure gradient. We remark that previous resistance experiments on crystals taken from the same single-crystalline boule revealed a single sharp superconducting transition at ambient pressure~\cite{Leng2017}. A similar behavior is observed in $\chi_{ac}(T)$ with relatively sharp, single transitions at pressures of 1.08 and 1.24~GPa. However, for $p \geq 1.41$~GPa the transition becomes structured again with an onset temperature of superconductivity larger than $T_c$ deduced from the resistivity curves (top panel). As we will demonstrate in the next Section, at these pressures the initial screening step is attributed to surface superconductivity~\cite{Leng2017}, while the ensuing second step with a full diamagnetic screening is attributed to bulk superconductivity.
The first important result is that superconductivity is enhanced under pressure with a maximum value $T_c =$~1.91~K around 0.91~GPa and a gradual depression of $T_c$ at higher pressures. This is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:figure3}, where we trace $T_c^R (p)$ extracted from the resistance data. Here we use the onset transition temperatures determined by extrapolation of the $R(T)$-curves just below $T_c$ to the normal state plateau values, as shown for the 2.49~GPa curve in Fig.~\ref{fig:figure2}. The same analysis for the $\chi_{ac}(T)$-data shows $T_c^{\chi} (p)$ tracks $T_c^R (p)$ closely up to 1.24~GPa, see Fig.~\ref{fig:figure3}. However, for $p \geq 1.41$~GPa it is the second, lower in temperature, transition in $\chi_{ac} (T)$ that is attributed to bulk superconductivity and tracks $T_c^R (p)$. The agreement between $T_c^{\chi} (p)$ and $T_c^R (p)$ obtained with different techniques on two different crystals is good. Lastly, the temperature of surface superconductivity, $T_c^S (p)$, is traced in Fig.~\ref{fig:figure3}. For $p \leq 1.41$~GPa $T_c^S (p)$ is obtained from the field-temperature phase diagrams by extrapolating $T_c^S (H)$ to zero field, as reported in Ref.~\onlinecite{Leng2017} and presented in the following Section. For $p \geq 1.41$~GPa we take $T_c^S (p)$ from the onset of the upper transition in $\chi_{ac}(T)$. This tells us the transition temperatures for the bulk and surface have a distinct pressure variation, and for $p \geq 1.41$~GPa $T_c^S > T_c^{bulk} $. This underpins surface superconductivity in PdTe$_2$ is a unique, robust feature.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{figure4}
\caption{Upper panel: Resistance of PdTe$_2$ as a function of temperature at a pressure $p = 0.25$~GPa measured in applied magnetic fields $\mu_0 H_a \parallel I \parallel a$. Curves from right to left are taken in fields of 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 13, 16, 24, 35, 50, 65, 80, 95, 110, 125, 140, 155 and 180~mT. Lower panel: Ac-susceptibility at $p = 0.25$~GPa measured in applied magnetic fields. Curves from right to left in 0~mT to 14~mT with 1~mT steps and in 16.5, 19, 21.5, 23, 27 and 30~mT. }
\label{fig:figure4}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Field-temperature phase diagram}
In order to investigate the pressure dependence of the superconducting phase diagram in the $H$-$T$ plane we have measured at each pressure the resistance and ac-susceptibility in applied dc-fields, $H_a$. A typical data set taken at $p=0.25$~GPa is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:figure4}. In the lower panel with $\chi_{ac}$-data the zero-field curve shows $T_c = 1.63$~K. In small applied fields a peak appears just below $T_c$ due to the differential paramagnetic effect (DPE). This peak signals the field induced intermediate state~\cite{Leng2017}. It shifts to lower temperatures with increasing field and for higher fields is progressively depressed because of an additional screening signal that precedes the DPE peak. The additional screening is attributed to superconductivity of the surface sheath~\cite{Leng2017}. Partial screening is still visible at 27~mT, but has nearly vanished at $\mu_0 H_a = 30$~mT down to 0.3~K. Consequently, in the limit $T \rightarrow 0$ $H_c^S(0) > H_c(0)$. In the upper panel, with $R(T)$ data, the transition is first rapidly depressed with field up to $\mu_0 H_a \approx 13$~mT, but then the depression rate decreases, the transition broadens and signals of superconductivity persist up to $\mu_0 H_a \approx 180$~mT. We remark this field is much larger than $H_c(0)$ or $H_c^S(0)$. The robustness of superconductivity in resistance measurements was also observed at ambient pressure, with a critical field, $H_c^R(0)$, equal to $\sim 0.3$~T~\cite{Leng2017}.
\begin{figure}[b]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{figure5}
\caption{Left panel: Critical field $H_c(T)$ for type-I superconductivity in PdTe$_2$ at pressures between 0 and 2.49~GPa as indicated. The solid lines represent $H_c(T) = H_c(0)[1-(T/T_c)^2]$ at different pressure, where $T_c = T_c^{\chi}$ is the bulk superconductivity transition temperature extracted from the $\chi_{ac}$-data in applied fields. Right panel: Reduced plot $h^* =(H_c(T)/T_c)/(-dH_c/dT)|_{T_c}$ \textit{versus} $T/T_c$. The solid line represents $h^* = 0.5 \times [1-t^2]$. See text.}
\label{fig:figure5}
\end{figure}
In the following paragraphs we present the $H$-$T$ phase diagrams determined from the $R(T)$- and $\chi_{ac}(T)$-data in applied fields, measured up to 2.49~GPa. The phase diagram at 0.25~GPa is extracted from Fig.~\ref{fig:figure4}. Additional data sets are presented in the Supplemental Material (SM)~\cite{SM}.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:figure5} we present the critical field for bulk superconductivity $H_c(T)$. The data are obtained by tracing the $T_c^{\chi}$-values as a function of the applied field. The solid lines in Fig.~\ref{fig:figure5} represent $H_c(T) = H_c(0)[1-(T/T_c)^2]$ at different pressures, where $T_c = T_c^{\chi}$. The quadratic temperature variation is consistent with type-I superconductivity. In fact all the data under pressure collapse on one single curve, $h^*(t)$, as shown in the right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:figure5}. Here the standard expression for plotting $H_c(T)$ in a reduced form is applied, with $h^* =(H_c(T)/T_c)/(-dH_c/dT)|_{T_c}$ where $t=T/T_c$~\cite{Bay2012b}. For a type-I superconductor $h^*(0) = 0.5$. The collapsed curve $h^*(t)$ shows type-I superconductivity persists over the whole pressure range.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{figure6}
\caption{Superconducting phase diagram of PdTe$_2$ deduced from ac-susceptibility at a pressure of 0.25~GPa (left), 1.08~GPa (middle) and 2.07~GPa (right), for $H_a$ in the basal plane. Bulk type-I superconductivity is found below the critical field $H_c (T)$. The data points (red solid symbols) follow the standard quadratic temperature variation $H_c(T) = H_c(0)[1-(T/T_c^{\chi})^2]$ (red lines). Surface superconductivity is found below $H_c^S (T)$ (green solid symbols). The transition temperature, $T_c^S$, is determined by extrapolating $H_c^S (T)$ to $H_a = 0$ (green lines). The values of the bulk $T_c^{\chi}$ and surface $T_c^S$ are indicated by arrows. Note that at the highest pressure $T_c^S > T_c^{\chi}$.}
\label{fig:figure6}
\end{figure}
Next we show how superconductivity of the surface sheath develops with pressure. Hereto we have traced $T_c^S(H)$ obtained from the $\chi_{ac}$-curves in applied fields in Fig.~\ref{fig:figure6}. Phase diagrams at 0.25, 1.08 and 2.07 GPa are presented. At 0.25~GPa we start to observe the (partial) diamagnetic screening due to the surface at a finite value $H_a \approx 5$~mT (Fig.~\ref{fig:figure4}, lower panel). The corresponding $T_c^S(H)$ points are traced in the left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:figure6}. By extrapolating $T_c^S(H)$ to zero field we obtain $T_c^S(0)$. In the same panel we have plotted $H_c(T)$ for bulk superconductivity as well. We find $T_c^S(0) < T_c^{\chi}(0)$, just like reported previously at ambient pressure~\cite{Leng2017}. However, upon further increasing the pressure the phase lines $H_c(T)$ and $H_c^S(T)$ move apart and do no longer intersect for $p \geq 1.41$~GPa, in which case $T_c^S(0) > T_c^{\chi}(0)$. This is illustrated for $p=2.07$~GPa in the right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:figure6}. The distinct pressure variation of $T_c^S$ and $T_c^{\chi}$ demonstrates once more that surface superconductivity is not of the standard Saint-James - de Gennes type~\cite{Saint-James&deGennes1963}. We discuss the robustness and nature of this phenomenon in the next Section.
\begin{figure}[b]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{figure7}
\caption{Superconducting phase diagram of PdTe$_2$ constructed from resistance measurements in the $H$-$T$ plane at different pressures, as indicated. For 1.3-1.9~K the data points $H_c^R (T)$ denote bulk superconductivity. Below 1.3~K (partial) superconductivity persists resulting in a critical field $H_c^R (0)$ of $\simeq 0.2$~T. The blue solid line compares the data to the Werthamer-Helfand-Hohenberg model (see text).}
\label{fig:figure7}
\end{figure}
Finally we show in Fig.~\ref{fig:figure7} the $H$-$T$ phase diagrams determined from the transport data at pressures up to 2.49~GPa. At each pressure we investigated the depression of superconductivity by measuring $R(T)$ in fixed applied fields. The $R(T)$-data for 0.25~GPa are shown in the upper panel in Fig.~\ref{fig:figure4}. Additional data sets are reported in the SM~\cite{SM}. In all cases superconductivity is first depressed rapidly in small fields, and $H_c^R (T)$ tracks $H_c(T)$ for bulk superconductivity as deduced from $\chi_{ac}$ (see Fig.~\ref{fig:figure5}). The $H_c^R (T)$-data in Fig.~\ref{fig:figure7} show this behavior is restricted to the temperature range 1.3-1.9~K. Below 1.3~K the transition in $R(T)$ broadens and traces of superconductivity are visible up to $\sim 0.2$~T. By tracing in Fig.~\ref{fig:figure7} the onset temperature for superconductivity from $R(T)$ in fixed magnetic fields below 1.3~K, we observe a steady increase of $H_c^R(T)$. A comparison with the Werthamer-Helfand-Hohenberg (WHH) model~\cite{Werthamer1966} indicates the data extrapolate to $H_c^R(0) \simeq 0.2$~T for $T \rightarrow 0$. We remark that for the crystal studied in Ref.~\onlinecite{Leng2017} this value is larger, $\simeq 0.3$~T. Interestingly, $H_c^R(T)$ below 1.3~K is almost pressure independent, which shows the superconducting transition in resistance for $H_a > H_c$ is not closely connected to surface superconductivity as was proposed in Ref.~\onlinecite{Leng2017}.
\section{Analysis and Discussion}
The mechanical and electronic properties of PdTe$_2$ under pressure have been investigated theoretically by several groups~\cite{Soulard2005,Xiao2017,Lei2017}. The only experimental high-pressure study carried out so far is by Soulard \textit{et al}.~\cite{Soulard2005} who conducted high-pressure X-ray diffraction experiments at room temperature and 300~$^\circ$C to investigate the possiblity of a structural phase transition. They found that an abrupt change in the interatomic distances occurs above $p=15.7$~GPa at room temperature, but the volume \textit{versus} pressure curve exhibits no discontinuity. Under pressure the unit cell volume decreases by 17.6\% at the maximum applied pressure of 27~GPa, and the $c/a$ ratio decreases from 1.27 to 1.24 at 27~GPa. A bulk modulus, $B_0$, of 102 GPa was derived from the experimental data. This value is to be compared with 71.2~GPa (74.2~GPa) derived from first principle calculations by Lei \textit{et al}.~\cite{Lei2017} at 300~K (0~K). Xiao \textit{et al}.~\cite{Xiao2017} computed the optimized lattice parameters as a function of pressure, which are slightly overestimated compared to the experimental data~\cite{Soulard2005}. Overall, these studies indicate there is no structural transition in the modest pressure range up to 2.5~GPa in our experiments. For a layered material the change in the $c/a$-ratio is normally an important control parameter for the electronic properties. However, for PdTe$_2$ this change is very tiny and 0.2\% at most up to 2.5~GPa~\cite{Soulard2005}. In the following we focus on the superconducting properties.
\subsection{Bulk superconductivity}
A major result is the non-monotonous variation of $T_c$ with pressure reported in Fig.~\ref{fig:figure3}. $T_c$ first increases to 1.91~K at 0.91~GPa and then is gradually depressed. We first compare the experimental results with theoretical calculations. The evolution of superconductivity with pressure was investigated theoretically by Xiao \textit{et al}.~\cite{Xiao2017}. The authors used the Allen-Dynes-modified McMillan equation to calculate $T_c$, with the characteristic phonon frequency $\omega_{log}$, the electron-phonon coupling constant $\lambda$ and the Coulomb pseudopotential $\mu^* \simeq 0.1$ as input parameters. Combined electronic structure and phonon-density of states calculations show a gradual decrease of $\lambda$ and an increase of $\omega_{log}$ (blue shift), but overall the calculated $T_c$ decreases from 2.0~K at ambient pressure to 0.6~K at 10~GPa. Note the calculated $T_c$ at $p=0$ is larger than our experimental value of 1.6~K. While a decrease to 0.6~K at 10~GPa is within bounds of the extrapolation of $T_c (p)$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:figure3}, the calculations by Xiao \textit{et al}.~\cite{Xiao2017} clearly do not capture the initial increase of $T_c$ and its maximum value at 0.91~GPa. The superconducting properties of PdTe$_2$ were also investigated by Kim \textit{et al}.~\cite{Kim2018} employing the same McMillan formalism. Their phonon band structure calculations show the electron-phonon interaction is dominated by the optical $O_{1,2}$ and $O_3$ phonon modes. Furthermore, they emphasize the importance of a saddle-point van Hove singularity (vHs) close to the Fermi energy. The computed $T_c$ is 1.79~K at ambient pressure. The importance of a vHs is further illustrated by the case of PtTe$_2$, which is isoelectronic with PdTe$_2$ but does not show superconductivity. Here the vHs-band has a broad dispersion along $k_z$ leading to a lower density of states at the Fermi level and absence of superconductivity~\cite{Kim2018}. Calculations for PdTe$_2$ with a 15\% volume contraction, which corresponds to a pressure of $\sim$20~GPa, indicate the vHs band moves close to the Fermi level~\cite{Kim2018}, which would produce a higher $T_c$. However, this is at variance with the experimental data presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:figure3}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{figure8}
\caption{Relative change of the superconducting transition temperature, $(T_c - T_c(0)) / T_c(0))$, as a function of the relative volume change $(V - V_0)/V_0$. Red symbols: PdTe$_2$ under pressure, this work; blue symbols: Au$_x$Pd$_{1-x}$Te$_2$, Ref.~\onlinecite{Kudo2016}; magenta symbol: Cu$_x$PdTe$_2$, Ref.~\onlinecite{Hooda&Yadav2018}; green symbols: calculated, Ref.~\onlinecite{Xiao2017}.}
\label{fig:figure8}
\end{figure}
Another way to tune $T_c$ besides pressure is via doping or substitution. Recently, it was demonstrated that Cu intercalation enhances $T_c$ to a maximum value of 2.6~K in Cu$_{x}$PdTe$_2$~\cite{Liu2015b,Ryu2015,Hooda&Yadav2018} for $x=0.06$. Upon intercalation the volume contracts, but changes are minute: $\Delta V/V = -$0.07\% for $x=0.04$~\cite{Hooda&Yadav2018}, which corresponds to an applied pressure of 0.07~GPa. This shows Cu intercalation cannot be equated to chemical pressure in tuning superconductivity. The same holds for the substitution series (Au$_{x}$Pd$_{1-x}$)Te$_2$~\cite{Kudo2016}. Upon alloying with Au, $T_c$ increases up to 4.65~K for $x=0.40$. Simultaneously, the volume \textit{increases} by 2.5\%, which corresponds to a \textit{negative} pressure of $\sim$2.5~GPa. The experimental and calculated variation of $T_c$ with pressure and doping are summarized in Fig.~\ref{fig:figure8}. Here we trace the relative change of $T_c$ as a function of the relative volume change, $(V-V_0)/V_0$, where a bulk modulus of 102~GPa is used~\cite{Soulard2005}. Although $T_c$ generally decreases with a smaller volume, the experimentally observed positive $dT_c /dp$ for PdTe$_2$ up to 0.91~GPa is at odds with this trend.
In an attempt to shed further light on the pressure variation of $T_c$, we have conducted Hall effect measurements on two PdTe$_2$ crystals under pressure up to 2.07~GPa~\cite{SM}. At the lowest pressure of 0.25~GPa the carrier concentration, $n$, amounts to 1.5-1.7$ \times 10^{22}$~cm$^{-3}$ at 2~K. It varies quasi-linearly with pressure resulting in an increase of $\sim$20\% at 2.07~GPa. No anomalous behavior is observed around 0.9~GPa. In the most simple model the increase of $n$ is expected to result in an increase of the density of states at the Fermi level and a monotonous enhancement of $T_c$.
The non-monotonous variation of $T_c$ indicates the density of states and the electron phonon-coupling constant are affected in an intricate manner by doping and/or pressure. Possibly this is a result from band structure subtleties that have not been probed in the coarse-grained calculations carried out so far~\cite{Soulard2005,Xiao2017,Lei2017}. In order to access the electronic band structure under pressure, a quantum oscillations study is highly desirable. The feasibility to observe the Shubnikov - de Haas effect and the de Haas - van Alphen effect at ambient pressure has been demonstrated in Refs.~\onlinecite{Dunsworth1975,Fei2017,Zheng2018}. In the same context, small structural modifications that might influence $T_c$, such as changes in the $z$-coordinate of Te atoms in the unit cell that would affect the $O_{1,2}$ and $O_3$ phonon modes, cannot be excluded based on the X-ray diffraction experiment with a first pressure point at 2.2~GPa~\cite{Soulard2005}. This calls for high-precision low-pressure ($p \leq 2.5$~GPa) single-crystal X-ray diffraction measurements.
\subsection{Surface superconductivity}
The distinct pressure variation of the superconducting transition temperature of the surface sheath, $T_c^S$, and of the bulk, $T_c^{\chi}$, reported in Figs.~\ref{fig:figure3} and ~\ref{fig:figure6}, is an extraordinary result. We recall this feature is derived from the ac-susceptibility curves measured in fixed magnetic fields at eleven different pressures. Selected data sets at 0.25~GPa are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:figure4} and at 1.08 and 2.07~GPa in the SM~\cite{SM}. The data show how type-I superconductivity in the bulk, probed by the DPE-peaks in small applied dc-fields, is progressively depressed with field, while surface superconductivity is observed for $H_a > H_c$ (see also Ref.~\onlinecite{Leng2017}). Upon increasing the pressure, the DPE peak is more rapidly depressed compared to surface screening. At 2.07~GPa the DPE effect is - already in the lowest applied fields - almost completely screened by the surface~\cite{SM}. Hence for $p \geq 1.41$~GPa $T_c^S > T_c^{\chi}$. This is further underpinned by the observation that $H_c(T)$, defined by $T_c^{\chi}(H)$, follows the quadratic temperature variation at all pressures, characteristic for bulk type-I superconductivity (Fig.~\ref{fig:figure5}). Note that $T_c^{S}$ is defined as the onset temperature for the diamagnetic signal due to surface superconductivity, while the transition itself may become very broad. $H_c^S(p)$ has a maximum near 0.9~GPa, similar to $H_c (p)$, as reported in the SM~\cite{SM}. When the $H_c^S(T,p)$ data is traced in the reduced form $h^*(t)$ the data do not collapse on a single curve as, see SM~\cite{SM}. Instead the trend is that the values $h^*(t)$ increase with respect to pressure, which indicates the superconducting pairing interaction changes in a non-trivial way. The distinct $H_c(T)$- and $H_c^S$-curves and their dissimilar pressure dependence strongly suggest surface and bulk superconductivity are independent phenomena and not tightly connected, in contrast to the familiar Saint James - de Gennes surface superconductivity~\cite{Saint-James&deGennes1963}. It remains tempting to relate surface superconductivity in PdTe$_2$ to topological surface states detected by ARPES\cite{Liu2015a,Noh2017,Clark2017}. These surface states could possibly be investigated by STM experiments in small applied fields ($H_a > H_c$). The STM experiments performed so far were predominantly directed to probe bulk superconductivity~\cite{Das2018,Clark2017}. Moreover, for the spectra taken in a magnetic field the intermediate state that occurs below $H_c$ for a finite demagnetization factor was not taken into account.
In the resistance measurements (partial) superconductivity is observed up to about 0.2~T for $T \rightarrow 0$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:figure7}), a value that largely exceeds $H_c(0)$ and $H_c^S(0)$. The enhanced $H_c^R(T)$-curves below 1.3~K are quasi pressure independent. By extrapolating the data in this field range to $H_a \rightarrow 0$ with the WHH function a pressure independent $T_c = 1.2$~K is found. Since $T_c^S$ has a pronounced pressure variation the resistive superconducting transitions measured in this field range are not connected to surface superconductivity. Note that for the crystal studied in Ref.~\onlinecite{Leng2017} it was concluded that the transport experiment does probe surface superconductivity, but these experiments were performed at ambient pressure only. The persistence of superconductivity in resistance measurements in field is puzzling. Normally such an effect is attributed to filamentary superconductivity. Its pressure independence indicates it might not be intrinsic to PdTe$_2$.
\section{Summary and conclusions}
We have carried out a high-pressure transport and ac-susceptibility study of superconductivity in the type-I superconductor PdTe$_2$ ($T_c = 1.64$~K). $T_c$ shows a pronounced variation with pressure: it increases at low pressure, then passes through a maximum of 1.91~K around 0.91~GPa, and subsequently decreases smoothly up to the highest pressure measured, $p_{max} = 2.5$~GPa. The critical field, $H_c$, follows a similar behavior, leading the $H_c(T)$-curves at different pressures to collapse on a single universal curve with the characteristic quadratic in temperature depression of $H_c$ for type-I superconductivity. Type-I superconductivity is robust under pressure. In view of the absence of structural modifications in our pressure range and the minute change of the $c/a$-ratio ~\cite{Soulard2005}, the non-monotonous variation of $T_c$ indicates an intricate role of the dominant phonon frequency, the electron-phonon-coupling parameter and Coulomb pseudopotential used to compute $T_c$ with help of the McMillan formula. This effect has not been captured by band structure calculations so far~\cite{Xiao2017,Kim2018}, notably the electron band structure calculations predict a smooth decrease of $T_c$ under pressure~\cite{Xiao2017}. This calls for more elaborate and detailed calculations for pressures up to $p_{max} = 2.5$~GPa.
The unusual surface superconductivity, first reported at ambient pressure~\cite{Leng2017}, persists under pressure. Surprisingly, for $p \geq 1.41$~GPa the superconducting transition temperature for the surface $T_c^S$ exceeds $T_c$ of the bulk. This tells us surface and bulk superconductivity are distinct phenomena. This is further confirmed by the observation that the phase lines $H_c(T)$ and $H_c^S(T)$ move apart under pressure and no longer intersect for $p \geq 1.41$~GPa. We propose surface superconductivity possibly has a non-trivial nature and originates from topological surface states detected by ARPES\cite{Liu2015a,Noh2017,Clark2017}. This calls for quantum-oscillation experiments under pressure, possibly enabling one to follow the pressure evolution of the bulk electronic structure and topological surface states.
In the same spirit it will be highly interesting to extend the experiments to higher pressures, especially because a pronounced change in the electronic properties of PdTe$_2$ is predicted to occur in the range 4.7-6.1~GPa: the type-II Dirac points disappear at 6.1~GPa, and a new pair of type-I Dirac points emerges at 4.7~GPa~\cite{Xiao2017}. Thus a topological phase transition may occur in the pressure range 4.7-6.1~GPa. This in turn might have a strong effect on (surface) superconductivity, because the tilt of the Dirac cone vanishes~\cite{Fei2017,Shapiro2018}. We conclude further high-pressure experiments on PdTe$_2$ provide a unique opportunity to investigate the connection between topological quantum states and superconductivy.
\vspace{6mm}
Acknowledgements: H.L. acknowledges the Chinese Scholarship Council for Grant No.~201604910855. This work was part of the research program on Topological Insulators funded by FOM (Dutch Foundation for Fundamental Research on Matter). It was further supported by the JSPS (Japan Society for the Promotion of Science) Program for Fostering Globally Talented Researchers, Grant Number R2903.
|
\section{Introduction and Preliminaries.}
Zadeh introduced the concept of fuzzy set to assign to each object encountered in the real physical world that do not have precisely defined criteria of membership a grade of membership ranging between zero and one in 1965 [15]. Kramosil and Mich$\acute{a}$lek defined the concept of fuzzy metric space using continuous t-norms in 1975 [9]. The fuzzy metric spaces have very important applications in quantum physics, particularly, in connections with both string and $\epsilon^{(\infty)}$ theory which were studied by EI Naschie [14]. Matloka considered bounded and convergent sequences of fuzzy numbers and studied their properties in 1986 [11]. Sequences of fuzzy numbers also were discussed by Nanda $[13]$, Kwon $[10]$, Esi $[5]$ and many others. Burgin introduced the theory of fuzzy limits of functions based on the theory of fuzzy limits of sequences in 2000. He studied and developed the construction of fuzzy limits of functions similar to the one of the fuzzy limits of sequences based on the concept of $r-$limit of function $f$ [3]. In 2010, Altai defined the fuzzy metric spaces in a new way, that every real number $r \in \mathbb{R}$ is replaced by a fuzzy number $\overline{r} \in \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}},\ \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} = \overline{\overline{\mathbb{Z}}} \cup \overline{\overline{\mathbb{Q}}} \cup \overline{\overline{\mathbb{Q^{\prime}}}}$, where if $r \in \mathbb{Q}^{\prime}$ or $r \in \mathbb{Q} \backslash \mathbb{Z}$ will be replaced by a triangular fuzzy number because of density of irrational and rational numbers in $\mathbb{R}$ and if $r \in \mathbb{Z}$ will be replaced by a singleton fuzzy set because of non density of integer numbers in $\mathbb{R}$ [1], and then using the representation theorem (resolution principle) to calculate the arithmetic operations act on $\alpha-$cuts of fuzzy numbers [4]. And in 2011, Altai defined the limit fuzzy number of the convergent fuzzy sequence in similar way [2]. Our goal is to establish the theory of fuzzy limits of fuzzy functions depending on Altai's principle, because it is very handy and convenient in the study of the fuzzy arithmetic.
\paragraph*{Representation theorem [4].}Let $A$ be a fuzzy set in $X$ with the membership function $\mu_{A}(x)$. Let $A_{\alpha}$ be the $\alpha-$cuts of $A$ and $\chi_{A_{\alpha}}$ be the characteristic function of the crisp set $A_{\alpha}, \alpha \in (0,1]$. Then
\begin{align*}
\mu_{A}(x) = \sup_{\alpha \in (0,1]} \left( \alpha \wedge \chi_{A_{\alpha}}(x) \right), \ x \in X.
\end{align*}
\paragraph*{Resolution principle [4].} Let $A$ be a fuzzy set in $X$ and $\alpha A_{\alpha}, \alpha \in (0,1]$ be a special fuzzy set, whose membership function
\begin{align*}
\mu_{\alpha A_{\alpha}}(x) = \left( \alpha \wedge \chi_{A_{\alpha}}(x) \right), \ x \in X.
\end{align*}
Also, let
\begin{align*}
\Lambda_{A} = \left\lbrace \alpha : \mu_{A}(x) = \alpha \ \mathrm{for \ some} \ x \in X \right\rbrace
\end{align*}
be the level set of $A$. Then $A$ can be expressed in the form
\begin{align*}
A = \bigcup_{\alpha \in \Lambda_{A}} \left( \alpha A_{\alpha} \right),
\end{align*}
where $\bigcup$ denotes the standard fuzzy union.
\paragraph*{Remark [4].} The essence of representation theorem of fuzzy sets is that a fuzzy set $A$ in $X$ can be retrieved as a union of its $\alpha A_{\alpha}$ sets, $\alpha \in (0,1]$ and the essence of resolution principle is that a fuzzy set $A$ can be decomposed into fuzzy sets $\alpha A_{\alpha}, \alpha \in (0,1]$ . Thus the representation theorem and the resolution principle are the same coin with two sides as both of them essentially tell that a fuzzy set $A$ in $X$ can always be expressed in terms of its $\alpha-$cuts without explicitly resorting to its membership function $\mu_{A}(x)$.
\paragraph*{Proposition [1]} Let $A$ be a fuzzy number, then $A_{\alpha}$ is a closed, convex and compact subset of $\mathbb{R}$, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$.
\section{Two-sided fuzzy limits.}
In this section, definition of the fuzzy limit of fuzzy functions will be introduced and its properties will be considered.
\paragraph{Theorem 2.1.} Let $\Big( \overline{\overline{X}}, \rho \Big) $ and $\left( \overline{\overline{Y}}, d \right)$ be fuzzy metric spaces. Suppose that $f:\overline{\overline{E}} \subset \overline{\overline{X}} \to \overline{\overline{Y}}$ and $\overline{p}$ is a fuzzy limit point of $\overline{\overline{E}}$. If for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $f (\overline{x})$ converge to the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $\overline{L}$, then $f (\overline{x})$ converges to $\overline{L} \in \overline{\overline{Y}}$ as $\overline{x} \to \overline{p}$.
\paragraph{Proof.} For all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, let $[f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha})], [L_{1,\alpha}, L_{2,\alpha}]$ be $\alpha-$cuts of $f (\overline{x})$ and $\overline{L}$ respectively, such that for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $\delta_{1}, \delta_{2} > 0$,
\begin{align*}
0 < \rho_{1}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) < \delta_{1} \Rightarrow d_{1} \left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) < \varepsilon, \\
0 < \rho_{2}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) < \delta_{2} \Rightarrow d_{2} \left( f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) < \varepsilon, \\
\end{align*}
where
\begin{align*}
d_{1} \left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) = \min \{ d \left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right): i = 1,2 \}, \\
d_{2} \left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) = \max \{ d \left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right): i = 1,2 \}, \\
\rho_{1}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) = \min \{ \rho((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})): i =1,2 \}, \\
\rho_{2}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) = \max \{ \rho((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})): i =1,2 \}.
\end{align*}
If $f_{*}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \in [f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha})]$, by the squeeze theorem for functions that
\begin{align*}
0 < \rho_{*}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) < \delta_{*} \Rightarrow d_{*} \left( f_{*}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{*,\alpha} \right) < \varepsilon,
\end{align*}
where $\delta_{*} = \min \{ \delta_{1}, \delta_{2} \}$ and $ L_{*,\alpha} \in [L_{1,\alpha}, L_{2,\alpha}]$. That is, the $\alpha-$cut $[f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha})]$ of $f (\overline{x})$ converges to the $\alpha-$cut $[L_{1,\alpha}, L_{2,\alpha}]$ of $\overline{L}$ as the $\alpha-$cut $[x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}]$ of $\overline{x}$ approaches the $\alpha-$cut $[p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha}]$ of $\overline{p}$ for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$. By the resolution principle, we complete the proof. $\square$
\paragraph{Theorem 2.2.} Let $\Big( \overline{\overline{X}}, \rho \Big) $ and $\left( \overline{\overline{Y}}, d \right)$ be fuzzy metric spaces. Suppose that $f:\overline{\overline{E}} \subset \overline{\overline{X}} \to \overline{\overline{Y}}$ and $\overline{p}$ is a fuzzy limit point of $\overline{\overline{E}}$. Then $f (\overline{x})$ converges to $\overline{L} \in \overline{\overline{Y}}$ as $\overline{x} \to \overline{p}$ if and only if for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $\delta > 0$,
\begin{align}
0 < \left\Vert \big( \rho_{1}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})), \rho_{2}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) \big) \right\Vert &< \delta \notag\\
\Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( d_{1} \left( f(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right), d_{2} \left( f(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) \right) \right\Vert &< \varepsilon,
\end{align}
\paragraph{Proof.} Let $f (\overline{x})$ converge to $\overline{L} \in \overline{\overline{Y}}$ as $\overline{x} \to \overline{p}$. By theorem 2.1, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $\delta_{1}, \delta_{2} > 0$,
\begin{align*}
0 < \rho_{1}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) < \delta_{1} \big/ \sqrt{2} \Rightarrow d_{1} \left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) < \varepsilon \big/ \sqrt{2}, \\
0 < \rho_{2}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) < \delta_{2} \big/ \sqrt{2} \Rightarrow d_{2} \left( f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) < \varepsilon \big/ \sqrt{2}.
\end{align*}
Then
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \big( \rho_{1}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})), \rho_{2}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) \big) \right\Vert &= \\
\left( \left( \rho_{1}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) \right)^{2} + \left( \rho_{2}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) \right)^{2} \right)^{1/2} &< \delta
\end{align*}
where $\delta = \min \{ \delta_{1}, \delta_{2} \}$, implies
\begin{align*}
\left\Vert \left( d_{1} \left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right), d_{2} \left( f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) \right) \right\Vert &= \\
\left( \left( d_{1} \left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) \right)^{2} + \left( d_{2} \left( f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) \right)^{2} \right)^{1/2} &< \varepsilon.
\end{align*}
Now suppose (2.1) is given. Since
\begin{align*}
\rho_{1}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) &\leq \left\Vert \big( \rho_{1}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})), \rho_{2}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) \big) \right\Vert; \\
\rho_{2}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) &\leq \left\Vert \big( \rho_{1}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})), \rho_{2}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) \big) \right\Vert
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
d_{1} \left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) \leq \left\Vert \left( d_{1} \left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right), d_{2} \left( f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) \right) \right\Vert; \\
d_{2} \left( f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) \leq \left\Vert \left( d_{1} \left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right), d_{2} \left( f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) \right) \right\Vert.
\end{align*}
Then
\begin{align*}
0 < \rho_{1}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) < \delta &\Rightarrow d_{1} \left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) < \varepsilon; \\
0 < \rho_{2}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) < \delta &\Rightarrow d_{2} \left( f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) < \varepsilon. \ \square
\end{align*}
\paragraph{Remark 2.1.}We will call $\overline{L}$ in theorem 2.2 by the fuzzy limit of $f$ at $\overline{p}$ and write it as
\begin{align}
f(\overline{p}) = \overline{L} = \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f(\overline{x}).
\end{align}
\paragraph{Examples 2.1.}
\begin{enumerate}
\item To find the limit of $\overline{f}(\overline{x})= \frac{\overline{x}^3 -\overline{4}}{\overline{x}^2+\overline{1}}$, as $\overline{x} \to (0,\frac{1}{2},1)$. We have, by the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, the $\alpha-$cut
\begin{align*}
\frac{ \left[ x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha} \right]^{3} - [4,4]}{ \left[ x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha} \right]^{2} + [1,1]} &= \left[ \min_{i,j,k = 1,2} \left\lbrace \frac{x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha}x_{k,\alpha} - 4}{x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha}+1} \right\rbrace, \max_{i,j,k = 1,2} \left\lbrace \frac{x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha}x_{k,\alpha} - 4}{x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha} + 1} \right\rbrace \right] \mathrm{of} \ \overline{f}(\overline{x})
\end{align*}
has the limit
\begin{align*}
\left[ \lim \limits_{ \substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to \frac{1}{2}\alpha \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to {1 - \frac{1}{2}\alpha}}} \min_{i,j,k = 1,2} \left\lbrace \frac{x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha}x_{k,\alpha} - 4}{x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha}+1} \right\rbrace, \lim \limits_{ \substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to \frac{1}{2}\alpha \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to {1 - \frac{1}{2}\alpha}}} \max_{i,j,k = 1,2} \left\lbrace \frac{x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha}x_{k,\alpha} - 4}{x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha}+1} \right\rbrace \right] .
\end{align*}
Taking the union of above $\alpha-$cut we get the limit of the function.
\item If $\overline{f}(\overline{x}) = \overline{x} + \overline{b}, \overline{x} \in \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}}$, then $ \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} \overline{f}(\overline{x}) = \overline{f}(\overline{p}) $
because, by the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists an $\delta > 0$,
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left| x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert &< \delta \\
\Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - f_{2}(p_{1,\alpha}, p_{2,\alpha}) \right|, \left| f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - f_{1}(p_{1,\alpha}, p_{2,\alpha}) \right| \right) \right\Vert &= \\
\left\Vert \left( \left| \left( x_{1,\alpha} + b_{1,\alpha} \right) - \left( p_{2,\alpha} + b_{2,\alpha} \right) \right|, \left| \left( x_{2,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right) - \left( p_{1,\alpha} + b_{1,\alpha} \right) \right|_{2} \right) \right\Vert &\leq \\
\left\Vert \left( \left| \left( x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right) \right|, \left| x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert + \left\Vert \left( \left| \left( b_{1,\alpha} - b_{2,\alpha} \right) \right|, \left| b_{2,\alpha} - b_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert &< \\
\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \delta & \mbox{,$\mathrm{if} \ \overline{b} \in \overline{\overline{\mathbb{Z}}},$} \\
\delta + \left\Vert \left( \left| \left( b_{1,\alpha} - b_{2,\alpha} \right) \right|, \left| b_{2,\alpha} - b_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert & \mbox{,$ \mathrm{if} \ \overline{b} \not\in \overline{\overline{\mathbb{Z}}} $}. \\
\end{array}
\right.
\end{align*}
\item If $\overline{f}(\overline{x})= \overline{x}^2+\overline{x}-\overline{3}, \overline{x} \in \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} $, then $ \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{1}} \overline{f}(\overline{x}) = - \overline{1}$ because, by the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $0 < \delta \leq 1$,
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left| x_{1,\alpha} - 1 \right|, \left| x_{2,\alpha} - 1 \right| \right) \right\Vert < \delta \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - f_{2}(1,1) \right|, \left| f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - f_{1}(1,1) \right| \right) \right\Vert &= \\
\left\Vert \left( \left| y_{1,\alpha} + x_{1,\alpha} - 2 \right|, \left| y_{2,\alpha} + x_{2,\alpha} - 2 \right| \right) \right\Vert &< \sqrt{32} \delta = \varepsilon
\end{align*}
where $y_{1,\alpha} = \min \{ x^{2}_{1,\alpha},x_{1,\alpha}x_{2,\alpha},x^{2}_{2,\alpha} \}; y_{2,\alpha} = \max \{ x^{2}_{1,\alpha},x_{1,\alpha}x_{2,\alpha},x^{2}_{2,\alpha} \}$
and
\begin{align*}
\left| y_{1,\alpha} + x_{1,\alpha} - 2 \right| &\leq \left| x_{1,\alpha} - 1 \right| \left| x_{1,\alpha} + 2 \right| < \left( \left| x_{1,\alpha} \right| + 2 \right) \delta < 4\delta, \mathrm{if} y_{1,\alpha} = x^{2}_{1,\alpha} ;
\\
\left| y_{1,\alpha} + x_{1,\alpha} - 2 \right| &\leq \left| x_{1,\alpha} - 1 \right| \left| x_{2,\alpha} + 1 \right| + \left| x_{2,\alpha} - 1 \right| < \left( \left| x_{2,\alpha} \right| + 1 \right) \delta + \delta < 4 \delta, \mathrm{if} y_{1,\alpha} = x_{1,\alpha} x_{2,\alpha};
\\
\left|y_{1,\alpha} + x_{1,\alpha} - 2 \right| &\leq \left| x^{2}_{2,\alpha} - 1 \right| + \left| x_{1,\alpha} - 1 \right| < \left( \left| x_{2,\alpha} \right| + 1 \right) \delta + \delta < 4\delta, \mathrm{if} y_{1,\alpha} = x^{2}_{2,\alpha};
\\
\left| y_{2,\alpha} + x_{2,\alpha} - 2 \right| &\leq \left| x^{2}_{1,\alpha} - 1 \right| + \left| x_{2,\alpha} - 1 \right| < \left( \left| x_{1,\alpha} \right| + 1 \right) \delta + \delta < 4\delta, \mathrm{if} y_{2,\alpha} = x^{2}_{1,\alpha};
\\
\left| y_{2,\alpha} + x_{2,\alpha} - 2 \right| &\leq \left| x_{2,\alpha} - 1 \right| \left| x_{1,\alpha} + 1 \right| + \left| x_{1,\alpha} - 1 \right| < \left( \left| x_{1,\alpha} \right| + 1 \right) \delta + \delta < 4 \delta, \mathrm{if} y_{2,\alpha} = x_{1,\alpha} x_{2,\alpha};
\\
\left|y_{2,\alpha} + x_{2,\alpha} - 2 \right| &\leq \left| x_{2,\alpha} - 1 \right| \left| x_{2,\alpha} + 2 \right| < \left( \left| x_{2,\alpha} \right| + 2 \right) \delta < 4\delta, \mathrm{if} y_{2,\alpha} = x^{2}_{2,\alpha}.
\end{align*}
Set $\delta = \min \left\lbrace 1,\varepsilon / \sqrt{32} \right\rbrace $, we complete the proof.
\end{enumerate}
Now, we can consider basic properties of fuzzy limits of fuzzy functions and prove them depending on the above theorems.
\paragraph{Theorem 2.3.} The fuzzy limit of a fuzzy function is unique if it exists.
\paragraph{Proof.} Suppose $f:\overline{\overline{E}} \subset \overline{\overline{X}} \to \overline{\overline{Y}} $ and $\overline{p} \in \overline{\overline{X}}$ is a fuzzy limit point of $\overline{\overline{E}}$. Assume that $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f(\overline{x}) = \overline{L}; \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f(\overline{x}) = \overline{M}.$
So, by the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exit $\delta_{1}, \delta_{2} > 0$, such that
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \rho_{1}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})), \rho_{2}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) \right) \right\Vert &< \delta_{1} \\
\Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( d_{1} \left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right), d_{2} \left( f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) \right) \right\Vert &< \frac{\varepsilon}{2};
\\
0 < \left\Vert \left( \rho_{1}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})), \rho_{2}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) \right) \right\Vert &< \delta_{2} \\
\Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( d_{1} \left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), M_{i,\alpha} \right), d_{2} \left( f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), M_{i,\alpha} \right) \right) \right\Vert &< \frac{\varepsilon}{2} .
\end{align*}
Let $\delta = \min \{ \delta_{1}, \delta_{2} \}$. Then, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, the $\alpha-$cut $\left[ p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha} \right]$ of $\overline{p}$ satisfies
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \rho_{1}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})), \rho_{2}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) \right) \right\Vert &< \delta \\
\Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( d_{1} \left( L_{i,\alpha}, M_{i,\alpha} \right), d_{2} \left( L_{i,\alpha}, M_{i,\alpha} \right) \right) \right\Vert \leq \left\Vert \left( d_{1} \left( L_{i,\alpha}, f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \right), d_{2} \left( L_{i,\alpha}, f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \right) \right) \right\Vert &+ \\
\left\Vert \left( d_{1} \left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), M_{i,\alpha} \right), d_{2} \left( f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), M_{i,\alpha} \right) \right) \right\Vert &< \varepsilon,
\end{align*}
where
\begin{align*}
d_{1} \left( L_{i,\alpha}, M_{i,\alpha} \right) = \min \{ d \left( L_{i,\alpha}, M_{i,\alpha} \right): i =1,2 \}, d_{2} \left( L_{i,\alpha}, M_{i,\alpha} \right) = \max \{ d \left( L_{i,\alpha}, M_{i,\alpha} \right): i =1,2 \}. \ \square
\end{align*}
\paragraph{Theorem 2.4.} Let $f:\overline{ \overline{E}} \subset \overline{\overline{X}} \to \overline{\overline{Y}}$ and $\overline{p}$ be a fuzzy limit point of $\overline{\overline{E}}$. Then $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f(\overline{x}) = \overline{L}$ if and only if $\lim \limits_{n \to \infty} f(\overline{p}_{n}) = \overline{L}$ for every fuzzy sequence $\overline{p}_{n}$ in $\overline{ \overline{E}}$ such that $ \overline{p}_{n} \neq \overline{p}, \ \lim \limits_{n \to \infty} \overline{p}_{n} = \overline{p}$.
\paragraph{Proof.} Suppose that $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f(\overline{x}) = \overline{L}$ holds. By the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $\delta > 0$,
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \rho_{1}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})), \rho_{2}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) \right) \right\Vert &< \delta \\
\Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( d_{1} \left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right), d_{2} \left( f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) \right) \right\Vert &< \varepsilon.
\end{align*}
Since $ \overline{p}_{n} \to \overline{p}$, then for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, there exits $N \in \mathbb{N}$ such that for $n > N$,
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \rho_{1}((p_{n,1,\alpha}, p_{n,2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})), \rho_{2}((p_{n,1,\alpha}, p_{n,2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) \right) \right\Vert &< \delta \\
\Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( d_{1} \left( f_{1}(p_{n,1,\alpha}, p_{n,2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right), d_{2} \left( f_{2}(p_{n,1,\alpha}, p_{n,2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) \right) \right\Vert &< \varepsilon.
\end{align*}
Conversely, assume $\lim \limits_{n \to \infty} f(\overline{p}_{n}) = \overline{L}$ but $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f(\overline{x}) \neq \overline{L}$. That is, there exists $\varepsilon_{o} > 0$, such that for every $\delta > 0$, that
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \rho_{1}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})), \rho_{2}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) \right) \right\Vert &< \delta \\
\mathrm{but} \ \left\Vert \left( d_{1} \left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right), d_{2} \left( f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) \right) \right\Vert &> \varepsilon_{o}
\end{align*}
Taking $\delta = \frac{1}{n}, n \in \mathbb{N}$, there is a $\overline{p}_{n}$ in $\overline{ \overline{E}}$ such that
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \rho_{1}((p_{n,1,\alpha}, p_{n,2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})), \rho_{2}((p_{n,1,\alpha}, p_{n,2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) \right) \right\Vert &< \frac{1}{n} \\
\mathrm{but} \ \left\Vert \left( d_{1} \left( f_{1}(p_{n,1,\alpha}, p_{n,2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right), d_{2} \left( f_{2}(p_{n,1,\alpha}, p_{n,2,\alpha}), L_{i,\alpha} \right) \right) \right\Vert &> \varepsilon_{o}
\end{align*}
which contradicts the assumption $\lim \limits_{n \to \infty} f(\overline{p}_{n}) = \overline{L}$. $\square$
\paragraph{Theorem 2.5.}
If $f$ and $g$ are fuzzy functions such that $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} g(\overline{x}) = \overline{L}$ and $\lim \limits_{\overline{u} \to \overline{L}} f(\overline{u}) = f \left( \overline{L} \right) $, then $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f (\overline{g}(\overline{x})) = f \left( \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} g(\overline{x}) \right) = f \left( \overline{L} \right).$
\paragraph{Proof.} Since $ f(\overline{u}) \to f \left( \overline{L} \right) $ as $\overline{u} \to \overline{L}$, then by the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exits $\delta > 0$, such that
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \rho_{1}((u_{1,\alpha},u_{2,\alpha}),(L_{1,\alpha},L_{2,\alpha})), \rho_{2}((u_{1,\alpha},u_{2,\alpha}),(L_{1,\alpha},L_{2,\alpha})) \right) \right\Vert &< \delta \\
\Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( d_{1} \left( f_{1}(u_{1,\alpha},u_{2,\alpha}), f_{i}(L_{1,\alpha}, L_{2,\alpha}) \right), d_{2} \left( f_{2}(u_{1,\alpha},u_{2,\alpha}), f_{i}(L_{1,\alpha}, L_{2,\alpha}) \right) \right) \right\Vert &< \varepsilon.
\end{align*}
Since $ g(\overline{x}) \to \overline{L}$ as $\overline{x} \to \overline{p}$, then by the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, there exists $\delta^{\prime} > 0$ such that
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \sigma_{1}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})), \sigma_{2}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) \right) \right\Vert &< \delta^{\prime} \\
\Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \rho_{1} \left( g_{1} (x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), g_{i}(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha}) \right) , \rho_{2} \left( g_{2} (x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), g_{i} (p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha}) \right) \right) \right\Vert &< \delta.
\end{align*}
Letting $u_{1,\alpha} = g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), u_{2,\alpha} = g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha})$, we obtain
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \sigma_{1}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})), \sigma_{2}((x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),(p_{1,\alpha},p_{2,\alpha})) \right) \right\Vert &< \delta^{\prime} \Rightarrow \\
\Big \Vert \big( d_{1} \big( f_{1}(g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),g_{2} (x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha})), f_{i}(L_{1,\alpha}, L_{2,\alpha}) \big), d_{2} \big( f_{2}(g_{1} (x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),g_{2} (x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha})), f_{i}(L_{1,\alpha}, L_{2,\alpha}) \big) \big) \big \Vert &< \varepsilon. \ \square
\end{align*}
\paragraph{Theorem 2.6.} If $\overline{\overline{E}} \subset \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}}$ is a fuzzy metric space, $\overline{p}$ is a fuzzy limit point of $\overline{\overline{E}}$, $f$ and $g$ are fuzzy functions on $\overline{\overline{E}}$, and $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f(\overline{x})$ and $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} g(\overline{x})$ are exist, then
\begin{enumerate}
\item $ \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} (f(\overline{x}) + g(\overline{x}))= \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f(\overline{x}) + \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} g(\overline{x})$
\\
\item $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} \left( \overline{A} f \right)(\overline{x}) = \overline{A} \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f(\overline{x}), \overline{A} \in \overline{\overline{R}}$
\\
\item $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} (f g)(\overline{x})= \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f(\overline{x}) \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} g(\overline{x})$
\\
\item $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} \left( \frac{f(\overline{x})}{g(\overline{x})} \right) = \frac{\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f(\overline{x})}{\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} g(\overline{x})}$ .
\end{enumerate}
\paragraph{Proof.} For $(1)$ and $(2)$, by the resolution principle, we have
\begin{align*}
\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} (f(\overline{x}) + g(\overline{x})) &= \bigcup _{\alpha \in (0,1]} \Bigg( \alpha \Bigg[ \lim \limits_{\substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} (f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha}) + g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha})), \lim \limits_{\substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} (f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha}) + g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{1,\alpha})) \Bigg] \Bigg) \\
&= \bigcup _{\alpha \in (0,1]} \left( \alpha \left[ \lim \limits_{\substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),\lim \limits_{\substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \right] \right) \\
&+ \bigcup _{\alpha \in (0,1]} \left( \alpha \left[ \lim \limits_{\substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha}), \lim \limits_{\substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \right] \right) \\
&= \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} \overline{f}(\overline{x}) + \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} \overline{g}(\overline{x})
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} \left( \overline{A} f \right)(\overline{x}) &= \bigcup _{\alpha \in (0,1]} \left( \alpha \left[ \lim \limits_{\substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} F_{1}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha}), \lim \limits_{\substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} F_{2}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha}) \right] \right) \\
&= \bigcup _{\alpha \in (0,1]} \left( \alpha \left[ A_{1,\alpha}, A_{2,\alpha} \right] \right) \bigcup _{\alpha \in (0,1]} \left( \alpha \left[ \lim \limits_{\substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha}), \lim \limits_{\substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha})\right] \right) \\
&= \overline{A} \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f(\overline{x})
\end{align*}
where
\begin{align*}
F_{1}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha}) = \min \{ A_{1,\alpha} f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha}), A_{1,\alpha} f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha}), A_{2,\alpha} f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha}), A_{2,\alpha} f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha}) \},\\
F_{2}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha}) = \max \{ A_{1,\alpha} f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha}), A_{1,\alpha} f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha}), A_{2,\alpha} f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha}), A_{2,\alpha} f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha}) \}.
\end{align*}
\\
To prove $(3)$, let $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f (\overline{x}) = \overline{L} $ and $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} g (\overline{x}) = \overline{M} $, then $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} \left[ f (\overline{x}) - \overline{L} \right] = \overline{0} $ and $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} \left[ g (\overline{x}) - \overline{M} \right] = \overline{0} $. By the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $\delta > 0$, such that
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left|x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right|_{1}, \left|x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \delta \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert &< \varepsilon ;
\\
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left|x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right|_{1}, \left|x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \delta \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert &< \varepsilon .
\end{align*}
So,
\begin{align*}
\left\Vert \left( \left| (FG)_{1} \right|, \left| (FG)_{2} \right| \right) \right\Vert \leq \left\Vert \left( \left| F_{1} \right|, \left| F_{2} \right| \right) \right\Vert \left\Vert \left( \left| G_{1} \right|, \left| G_{2} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \varepsilon.
\end{align*}
where
\begin{align*}
F_{1} = f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha}, F_{2} = f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha}, \\
G_{1} = g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{2,\alpha}, G_{2} = g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{1,\alpha}, \\
(FG)_{1} = \min \{ F_{1} G_{1}, F_{1} G_{2}, F_{2} G_{1}, F_{2} G_{2} \}, \\
(FG)_{2} = \max \{ F_{1} G_{1}, F_{1} G_{2}, F_{2} G_{1}, F_{2} G_{2} \}.
\end{align*}
That is,
\begin{align*}
\lim \limits_{ \substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} (FG)_{1} = 0,
\lim \limits_{ \substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} (FG)_{2} = 0.
\end{align*}
From properties $(1)$ and $(2)$, if $f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) = \min \{ f_{i}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{i}(x_{1},x_{2,\alpha}): i = 1,2 \}$ or $f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) = \max \{ f_{i}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{i}(x_{1},x_{2,\alpha}): i = 1,2 \}$, then
\begin{align*}
\lim \limits_{ \substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) &= \lim \limits_{ \substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} \Big( \left[ f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \right] \left[ g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{2,\alpha} \right] \\
&+ L_{2,\alpha} g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) + M_{2,\alpha} f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} M_{2,\alpha} \Big) \\
&= 0 + L_{2,\alpha} M_{2,\alpha} + L_{2,\alpha} M_{2,\alpha} - L_{2,\alpha} M_{2,\alpha} = L_{2,\alpha} M_{2,\alpha}.
\end{align*}
If $f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) = \min \{ f_{i}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{i}(x_{1},x_{2,\alpha}): i = 1,2 \}$ or $f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) = \max \{ f_{i}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{i}(x_{1},x_{2,\alpha}): i = 1,2 \}$, then
\begin{align*}
\lim \limits_{ \substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) &= \lim \limits_{ \substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} \Big( \left[ f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \right] \left[ g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{1,\alpha} \right] \\
&+ L_{2,\alpha} g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) + M_{1,\alpha} f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} M_{1,\alpha} \Big) \\
&= 0 + L_{2,\alpha} M_{1,\alpha} + L_{2,\alpha} M_{1,\alpha} - L_{2,\alpha} M_{1,\alpha} = L_{2,\alpha} M_{1,\alpha}.
\end{align*}
If $f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) = \min \{ f_{i}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{i}(x_{1},x_{2,\alpha}): i = 1,2 \}$ or $f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) = \max \{ f_{i}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{i}(x_{1},x_{2,\alpha}): i = 1,2 \}$, then
\begin{align*}
\lim \limits_{ \substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) &= \lim \limits_{ \substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} \Big( \left[ f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \right] \left[ g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{2,\alpha} \right] \\
&+ L_{1,\alpha} g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) + M_{2,\alpha} f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} M_{2,\alpha} \Big) \\
&= 0 + L_{1,\alpha} M_{2,\alpha} + L_{1,\alpha} M_{2,\alpha} - L_{1,\alpha} M_{2,\alpha} = L_{1,\alpha} M_{2,\alpha}.
\end{align*}
If $f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) = \min \{ f_{i}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{i}(x_{1},x_{2,\alpha}): i = 1,2 \}$ or $f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) = \max \{ f_{i}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{i}(x_{1},x_{2,\alpha}): i = 1,2 \}$, then
\begin{align*}
\lim \limits_{ \substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) &= \lim \limits_{ \substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to p_{1,\alpha} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to p_{2,\alpha}}} \Big( \left[ f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \right] \left[ g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{1,\alpha} \right] \\
&+ L_{2,\alpha} g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) + M_{1,\alpha} f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} M_{1,\alpha} \Big) \\
&= 0 + L_{1,\alpha} M_{1,\alpha} + L_{1,\alpha} M_{1,\alpha} - L_{1,\alpha} M_{1,\alpha} = L_{1,\alpha} M_{1,\alpha}.
\end{align*}
Finally, since $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} g(\overline{x}) = \overline{M} $, then by the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$ there exists $\delta_{1} > 0$ such that
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left|x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left|x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \delta_{1} \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \varepsilon.
\end{align*}
So,
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left|x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left|x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \delta_{1} \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \frac{\left\Vert \left( \left| M_{1,\alpha} \right|, \left| M_{2,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert}{2}
\end{align*}
which implies that
\begin{align*}
\left\Vert \left( \left| M_{1,\alpha} \right|, \left| M_{2,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert &\leq \left\Vert \left( \left| g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \right|, \left| g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \right| \right) \right\Vert + \left\Vert \left( \left| g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert \\
&< \left\Vert \left( \left| g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert + \frac{\left\Vert \left( \left| M_{1,\alpha} \right|, \left| M_{2,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert}{2}
\end{align*}
Rearranging above, we get
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{\left\Vert \left( \left| g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \right|, \left| g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \right|\right) \right\Vert} < \frac{2}{ \left\Vert \left( \left| M_{1,\alpha} \right|, \left| M_{2,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert}.
\end{align*}
Also, there exists $\delta_{2} > 0$ such that
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left|x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left|x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \delta_{2} \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \frac{\left\Vert \left( \left| M_{1,\alpha} \right|, \left| M_{2,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert^{2} \varepsilon}{2}.
\end{align*}
Set $\delta = \min \{ \delta_{1},\delta_{2} \}$, then
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left|x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left|x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \delta \Rightarrow \left| \frac{1}{\left\Vert \left( \left| g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \right|, \left| g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \right| \right) \right\Vert} - \frac{1}{\left\Vert \left( \left| M_{1,\alpha} \right|, \left| M_{2,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert} \right| = \\
\frac{\left| \left\Vert \left( \left| M_{1,\alpha} \right|, \left| M_{2,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert - \left\Vert \left( \left| g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \right|, \left| g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \right| \right) \right\Vert \right|}{ \left\Vert \left( \left| g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \right|, \left| g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \right| \right) \right\Vert \left\Vert \left( \left| M_{1,\alpha} \right|, \left| M_{2,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert} \leq
\frac{\left\Vert \left(\left| g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{1,\alpha} \right|\right) \right\Vert} {\left\Vert \left( \left| g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \right|, \left| g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \right| \right) \right\Vert \left\Vert \left( \left| M_{1,\alpha} \right|, \left| M_{2,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert} < \\
\frac{2}{\left\Vert \left(\left| M_{1,\alpha} \right|, \left| M_{2,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert^{2}} \frac{\left\Vert \left( \left| M_{1,\alpha} \right|, \left| M_{2,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert^{2} \varepsilon}{2} = \varepsilon. \ \square
\end{align*}
\paragraph{Theorem 2.7.} Let $\overline{a} \in \overline{\overline{I}} \subset \overline{\overline{R}}$, where $\overline{\overline{I}}$ is an open fuzzy interval. If $f, g$ are fuzzy functions defined on $\overline{\overline{I}} \backslash \overline{a}$ such that $f(\overline{x}) = g(\overline{x}), \overline{x} \in \overline{\overline{I}} \setminus \overline{a} $ and $f(\overline{x}) \to \overline{L}$ as $\overline{x} \to \overline{a}$, then $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{a}} g(\overline{x}) = \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{a}} f(\overline{x})$
\paragraph{Proof.} Since $f(\overline{x}) \to \overline{L}$ as $\overline{x} \to \overline{a}$, then by the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $\delta > 0$ such that
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left| x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \delta \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \varepsilon;
\end{align*}
Since $f(\overline{x}) = g(\overline{x}), \overline{x} \in \overline{\overline{I}} \setminus \overline{a}$, then for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$ that $[ f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) ] = [g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha})]$.
Thus,
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left| x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \delta \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \varepsilon. \ \square
\end{align*}
\paragraph{Theorem 2.8.} \medskip \noindent\textbf{Comparison theorem for fuzzy functions.} Suppose $\overline{a} \in \overline{\overline{I}} \subset \overline{\overline{R}}$, where $\overline{\overline{I}}$ is an open fuzzy interval, and $f,g$ are fuzzy functions defined on $\overline{\overline{I}} \backslash \overline{a}$. If $f$ and $g$ have limits as $\overline{x} \to \overline{a}$ and $f(\overline{x}) \leq g(\overline{x})$ for all $\overline{x} \in \overline{\overline{I}} \backslash \overline{a}$, then $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f(\overline{x}) \leq \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} g(\overline{x}) $.
\paragraph{Proof.} Let $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f(\overline{x}) = \overline{L}$ and $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} g(\overline{x}) = \overline{M}$, and suppose that $ \overline{L} > \overline{M}$. By the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, that $\left[ L_{1,\alpha}, L_{2,\alpha} \right] > \left[ M_{1,\alpha}, M_{2,\alpha} \right] $. Let $\varepsilon_{1} > 0, \varepsilon_{2} > 0, \varepsilon_{1} + \varepsilon_{2} = \frac{1}{2}[L_{1,\alpha} - M_{2,\alpha}]$, there exist $\delta_{1} > 0, \delta_{2} > 0$ such that
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left| x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \delta_{1} \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert &< \varepsilon_{1};
\\
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left| x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \delta_{2} \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - M_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert &< \varepsilon_{2}.
\end{align*}
Letting $\delta = \min \{ \delta_{1}, \delta_{2} \}$, we get
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left| x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \delta \Rightarrow \left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \right) &= \\
\left( f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha}, f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \right) + \left( L_{2,\alpha} - M_{1,\alpha}, L_{1,\alpha} - M_{2,\alpha} \right) &+ \\
\left( M_{1,\alpha} - g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}), M_{2,\alpha} - g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \right) &> \\
\left( L_{2,\alpha} - M_{1,\alpha} - \varepsilon_{1} - \varepsilon_{2}, L_{1,\alpha} - M_{2,\alpha} - \varepsilon_{1} - \varepsilon_{2} \right) > (0,0)
\end{align*}
which contradicts the assumption that $\overline{f}(\overline{x}) \leq \overline{g}(\overline{x})$ for all $\overline{x} \in \overline{\overline{I}} \backslash \overline{p}$. $\square$
\paragraph{Theorem 2.9.} \medskip \noindent\textbf{Squeeze theorem for fuzzy functions.} {\sl Suppose $\overline{p} \in \overline{\overline{I}} \subset \overline{\overline{R}}$, where $\overline{\overline{I}}$ is an open fuzzy interval, and $f,g,h$ are fuzzy functions defined on $\overline{\overline{I}} \backslash \overline{p}$. If $f(\overline{x}) \leq h(\overline{x}) \leq g(\overline{x})$ for all $\overline{x} \in \overline{\overline{I}} \backslash \overline{p}$, and $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f(\overline{x}) = \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} g(\overline{x}) = \overline{L}$ then $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} h(\overline{x}) = \overline{L}$. }
\paragraph{Proof.} Since $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f(\overline{x}) = \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} g(\overline{x}) = \overline{L}$, by the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exist $\delta_{1} > 0; \delta_{2} > 0$ such that
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left| x_{1,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right|, \left| x_{2,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \delta_{1} \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert &< \varepsilon;
\\
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left| x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \delta_{2} \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert &< \varepsilon.
\end{align*}
Since $f(\overline{x}) \leq h(\overline{x}) \leq g(\overline{x})$ for all $\overline{x} \in \overline{\overline{I}} \backslash \overline{a}$, then by resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, there exists $\delta_{3} > 0$ such that
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left| x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \delta^{\prime\prime} \Rightarrow \Big( L_{1,\alpha} - \varepsilon \big/ \sqrt{2}, L_{2,\alpha} - \varepsilon \big/ \sqrt{2} \Big) < \Big(f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \Big) &\leq \\
\Big( h_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),h_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \Big) \leq \Big( g_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}),g_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \Big) < \Big( L_{1,\alpha} + \varepsilon \big/ \sqrt{2}, L_{2,\alpha} + \varepsilon \big/ \sqrt{2} \Big).
\end{align*}
Choosing $\delta = \min \{ \delta_{1},\delta_{2},\delta_{3} \}$ we have
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left| x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right|_{1}, \left| x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right|_{2} \right) \right\Vert &< \delta \Rightarrow \left( \left| h_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| h_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) &< \left( \frac{\varepsilon}{\sqrt{2}}, \frac{\varepsilon}{\sqrt{2}} \right)
\end{align*}
which completes the proof. $\square $
\section{One-sided fuzzy limit.}
We try in this section to establish the concept of the one-side fuzzy limit of fuzzy functions through the following theorem whose proofs are similar to proofs of theorems 2.1 and 2.2 respectively.
\paragraph{Theorem 3.1.} Let $f: \overline{\overline{I}} \subset \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} \to \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}}$ be a fuzzy function defined on some open fuzzy interval $\overline{\overline{I}}$ with left endpoint $\overline{p}$. Then $f (\overline{x})$ converges to $\overline{L}$ as $\overline{x}$ approaches $\overline{p}$ from the right if for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $f (\overline{x})$ converge to the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $\overline{L}$ as the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $\overline{x}$ approach from the right to the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $\overline{p}$.
\paragraph{Theorem 3.2.} Let $f: \overline{\overline{I}} \subset \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} \to \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}}$ be a fuzzy function defined on some open fuzzy interval $\overline{\overline{I}}$ with right endpoint $\overline{p}$. Then $f (\overline{x})$ converges to $\overline{L}$ as $\overline{x}$ approaches $\overline{p}$ from the left if for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $f (\overline{x})$ converge to the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $\overline{L}$ as the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $\overline{x}$ approach from the left to the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $\overline{p}$.
\paragraph{Theorem 3.3.} Let $f: \overline{\overline{I}} \subset \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} \to \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}}$ be a fuzzy function defined on some open fuzzy interval $\overline{\overline{I}}$ with left endpoint $\overline{p}$. Then $f (\overline{x})$ converges to $\overline{L}$ as $\overline{x}$ approaches $\overline{p}$ from the right if and only if for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $\delta_{1},\delta_{2} > 0$,
\begin{align}
(0,0) < (x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha}) < (\delta_{1}, \delta_{2}) \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert &< \varepsilon.
\end{align}
\paragraph{Theorem 3.4.} Let $f: \overline{\overline{I}} \subset \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} \to \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}}$ be a fuzzy function defined on some open fuzzy interval $\overline{\overline{I}}$ with right endpoint $\overline{p}$. Then $f (\overline{x})$ converges to $\overline{L}$ as $\overline{x}$ approaches $\overline{p}$ from the left if and only if for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $\delta_{1}, \delta_{2} > 0$,
\begin{align}
(- \delta_{1}, - \delta_{2}) < (x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha}) < (0,0) \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert &< \varepsilon.
\end{align}
\paragraph{Remark 3.1.}
\begin{enumerate}
\item We will call $\overline{L}$ in theorem 3.3 by the right-hand fuzzy limit of $f$ at $\overline{p}$ and write it as
\begin{align}
f(\overline{p}^{+}) = \overline{L} = \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}^{+}} f(\overline{x})
\end{align}
if by the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $\delta > 0$ such that
3.1 is satisfied.
\item We will call $\overline{L}$ in theorem 3.4 by the left-hand fuzzy limit of $f$ at $\overline{p}$ and write it as
\begin{align}
f(\overline{p}^{-}) = \overline{L} = \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}^{-}} f(\overline{x})
\end{align}
if by the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $\delta > 0$ such that
3.2 is satisfied.
\end{enumerate}
\paragraph{Examples 3.1.}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Both $ \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to (\frac{1}{4},\frac{1}{3},\frac{1}{2})^{+}} \frac{\overline{1}}{\overline{x} - (\frac{1}{4},\frac{1}{3},\frac{1}{2})}$ and $ \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to (\frac{1}{4},\frac{1}{3},\frac{1}{2})^{-}} \frac{\overline{1}}{\overline{x} - (\frac{1}{4},\frac{1}{3},\frac{1}{2})}$ do not exist, because by the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0; \varepsilon^{\prime} > 0$, there exist an $\delta_{1}, \delta_{2} > 0; \delta^{\prime}_{1}, \delta^{\prime}_{2} > 0$ such that
\begin{align*}
\left( 0, 0 \right) < \left(x_{1,\alpha} - \left( - \frac{1}{6} \alpha + \frac{1}{2} \right) ,x_{2,\alpha} - \left( \frac{1}{12} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right) \right) &< (\delta_{1}, \delta_{2}) \\
\Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| \frac{1}{x_{2,\alpha} - \left( \frac{1}{12} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right)} - \infty \right|, \left| \frac{1}{x_{1,\alpha} - \left( - \frac{1}{6} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right)} - \infty \right| \right) \right\Vert &> \left\Vert (1/ \delta_{2}, 1/\delta_{1}) \right\Vert > \varepsilon;
\\
\left( -\delta^{\prime}_{1}, -\delta^{\prime}_{2} \right) < \left(x_{1,\alpha} - \left( - \frac{1}{6} \alpha + \frac{1}{2} \right) ,x_{2,\alpha} - \left( \frac{1}{12} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right) \right) &< (0, 0) \\
\Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| \frac{1}{x_{2,\alpha} - \left( \frac{1}{12} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right)} - \infty \right|, \left| \frac{1}{x_{1,\alpha} - \left( - \frac{1}{6} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right)} - \infty \right| \right) \right\Vert &> \left\Vert (1/ \delta^{\prime}_{2}, 1/\delta^{\prime}_{1}) \right\Vert > \varepsilon^{\prime}.
\end{align*}
\item $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{0}^{+}} \exp{\left( \overline{1} / \overline{x} \right)}$ does not exist but $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{0}^{-}} \exp{\left( \overline{1} / \overline{x} \right)}$ exists, because by the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exist an $\delta_{1}, \delta_{2} > 0$ such that
\begin{align*}
&(0,0) < (x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) < ( \delta_{1}, \delta_{2} ) \Rightarrow \\
&\left\Vert \left( \left| \exp{\left( 1 / x_{2,\alpha} \right)} - \infty \right|, \left| \exp{\left( 1 / x_{1,\alpha} \right)} - \infty \right| \right) \right\Vert > \left\Vert \left( \left| \exp{\left( 1 / \delta_{2} \right)} - \infty \right|, \left| \exp{\left( 1 / \delta_{1} \right)} - \infty \right| \right) \right\Vert > \varepsilon,
\end{align*}
and for all $\varepsilon^{\prime} > 0$, there exists $\delta^{\prime}_{1}, \delta^{\prime}_{2} > 0$ such that
\begin{align*}
(-\delta^{\prime}_{1}, -\delta^{\prime}_{2}) < (x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) < (0, 0) \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| \exp{\left( 1 / x_{2,\alpha} \right)} \right|, \left| \exp{\left( 1 / x_{1,\alpha} \right)} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \left\Vert \left( \left| \exp{\left( -1/\delta^{\prime}_{2} \right)} \right|, \left| \exp{\left( -1 /\delta^{\prime}_{1} \right)} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \varepsilon^{\prime}.
\end{align*}
\item The function
$ f(\overline{x}) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
\overline{x}^{2} & \mbox{ ,$\overline{x} < (\frac{1}{6},\frac{1}{5},\frac{1}{4})$} \\
(\frac{1}{36},\frac{1}{25},\frac{1}{16}) & \mbox{ ,$(\frac{1}{6},\frac{1}{5},\frac{1}{4}) < \overline{x}$} \\
\end{array}
\right. $ has both $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to (\frac{1}{6},\frac{1}{5},\frac{1}{4})^{-}} f(\overline{x})$ and $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to (\frac{1}{6},\frac{1}{5},\frac{1}{4})^{+}} f(\overline{x})$ because
by the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $\delta_{1}, \delta_{2} > 0$ such that
\begin{align*}
&(0,0) < \left( x_{1,\alpha} - \left( \frac{-1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right), x_{2,\alpha} - \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right)\right) < (\delta_{1},\delta_{2}) \Rightarrow \\
&\left\Vert \left| \left( \frac{11}{900} \alpha + \frac{1}{36} \right) - \left( \frac{11}{900} \alpha + \frac{1}{36} \right) \right|, \left| \left( \frac{-9}{400} \alpha + \frac{1}{16} \right) - \left( \frac{-9}{400} \alpha + \frac{1}{16} \right) \right| \right\Vert < \varepsilon
\end{align*}
and since for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for $\delta^{\prime}_{1}, \delta^{\prime}_{2} > 0$ that
\begin{align*}
(-\delta^{\prime}_{1}, -\delta^{\prime}_{2}) < \left( x_{1,\alpha} - \left( -\frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right), x_{2,\alpha} - \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right)\right) < (0,0)
\end{align*}
leads to
\begin{align*}
\left| x^{2}_{1,\alpha} - \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right)^{2} \right| &\leq \left| x_{1,\alpha} - \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right) \right| \left| x_{1,\alpha} + \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right) \right| < \left( \left| x_{1,\alpha} \right| + 2 \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right) \right) \delta_{1} \\
&< 4 \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right) \delta_{1},
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
\left| x^{2}_{1,\alpha} - \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right)^{2} \right| &\leq \left| x_{1,\alpha} - \left(- \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right) \right| \left| x_{1,\alpha} + \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right) \right| + \left| \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right)^{2} - \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right)^{2} \right| \\
&< 4 \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right) \delta_{1} + \left| \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right)^{2} - \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right)^{2} \right| < 5 \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right) \delta_{1},
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
\left| x^{2}_{2,\alpha} - \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right)^{2} \right| &\leq \left| x_{2,\alpha} - \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right) \right| \left| x_{2,\alpha} + \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right) \right| < \left( \left| x_{2,\alpha} \right| + 2 \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right) \right) \delta_{2} \\
&< 4 \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right) \delta_{2},
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
\left| x^{2}_{2,\alpha} - \left( \frac{-1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right)^{2} \right| &\leq \left| x_{2,\alpha} - \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right) \right| \left| x_{2,\alpha} + \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right) \right| + \left| \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right)^{2} - \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right)^{2} \right| \\
&< 4 \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right) \delta_{2} + \left| \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right)^{2} - \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right)^{2} \right| < 5 \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right) \delta_{2},
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
\left| x_{1,\alpha}x_{2,\alpha} - \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right)^{2} \right| &\leq \left[ \left| x_{1,\alpha} - \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right) \right| + \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right) \right] \left[ \left| x_{2,\alpha} - \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right) \right| + \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right) \right] \\
&+ \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right)^{2} < \left[ \delta_{1} + \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right) \right] \left[ \delta_{2} + \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right) \right] + \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right)^{2},
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
\left| x_{1,\alpha}x_{2,\alpha} - \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right)^{2} \right| &\leq \left[ \left| x_{1,\alpha} - \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right) \right| + \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right) \right] \left[ \left| x_{2,\alpha} - \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right) \right| + \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right) \right] \\
&+ \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right)^{2} < \left[ \delta_{1} + \left( - \frac{1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right) \right] \left[ \delta_{2} + \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right) \right] + \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right)^{2}.
\end{align*}
then, by considering above various cases, for all $\varepsilon^{\prime}(\delta_{1},\delta_{2}) > 0$, we get
\begin{align*}
\left\Vert \left| y_{1,\alpha} - \left( \frac{-1}{20} \alpha + \frac{1}{4} \right)^{2} \right|, \left| y_{2,\alpha} - \left( \frac{1}{30} \alpha + \frac{1}{6} \right)^{2} \right| \right\Vert < \varepsilon^{\prime},
\end{align*}
where $y_{1,\alpha} = \min \{x^{2}_{1,\alpha}, x_{1,\alpha}x_{2,\alpha}, x^{2}_{2,\alpha} \}, y_{2,\alpha} = \max \{x^{2}_{1,\alpha}, x_{1,\alpha}x_{2,\alpha}, x^{2}_{2,\alpha} \} $ and
\end{enumerate}
\paragraph{Theorem 3.5.}
$f: \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} \to \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}}$ be a fuzzy function, then $
\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f(\overline{x}) = \overline{L}$ if and only if $
\overline{L} = \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}^{-}} f(\overline{x}) = \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}^{+}} f(\overline{x}). $
\paragraph{Proof.} Suppose that $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}} f(\overline{x}) = \overline{L}$. By the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon >0$, there exists $\delta > 0$ such that
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left| x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \delta \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| f_{2} (x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \varepsilon.
\end{align*}
Since for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, that
\begin{align*}
(0,0) < (x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha}) < ( \delta_{1} , \delta_{2}) \ \mathrm{and} \ (- \delta_{1}, - \delta_{2}) < (x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha}) < (0,0)
\end{align*}
lead to
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left| x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \delta,
\end{align*}
then
\begin{align*}
(0,0) < (x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha}) < (\delta_{1} / \sqrt{2}, \delta_{2} / \sqrt{2}) \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert &< \varepsilon; \\
(- \delta_{1} / \sqrt{2}, - \delta_{2} / \sqrt{2}) < (x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha}) < (0,0) \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert &< \varepsilon.
\end{align*}
\\
Conversely, suppose $\overline{L} = \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}-} f(\overline{x}) = \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{p}+} f(\overline{x})$ holds. By the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon >0$, there exists $\delta > 0$ and $\delta^{\prime} > 0$ such that
\begin{align*}
(0,0) < (x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha}) < (\delta_{1} / \sqrt{2}, \delta_{2} / \sqrt{2}) \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert &< \varepsilon, \\
(- \delta_{1} / \sqrt{2}, - \delta_{2} / \sqrt{2}) < (x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha}) < (0,0) \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert &< \varepsilon
\end{align*}
Set $\delta = \min \{ \delta_{1}, \delta_{2} \}$. Then
\begin{align*}
0 < \left\Vert \left( \left| x_{1,\alpha} - p_{2,\alpha} \right|_{1}, \left| x_{2,\alpha} - p_{1,\alpha} \right|_{2} \right) \right\Vert < \delta \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| f(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \right|, \left| f_{2} (x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \varepsilon. \ \square
\end{align*}
\paragraph{Examples 3.2.}
\begin{enumerate}
\item The function $f(\overline{x}) = \frac{\left| \sin(\overline{x}) \right|}{{\sin}(\overline{x})}$ has no fuzzy limit at $\overline{0}$ because by the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, we have the $\alpha-$cuts
$\lim \limits_{\substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to 0^{+} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to 0^{+}}} \min \left\lbrace \frac{\left| \sin(x_{i,\alpha}) \right|}{\sin(x_{i,\alpha})} : i=1,2 \right\rbrace $ and $\lim \limits_{\substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to 0^{+} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to 0^{+}}} \max \left\lbrace \frac{\left| \sin(x_{i,\alpha}) \right|}{\sin(x_{i,\alpha})} : i=1,2 \right\rbrace $ give positive values and $\lim \limits_{\substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to 0^{-} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to 0^{-}}} \min \left\lbrace \frac{\left| \sin(x_{i,\alpha}) \right|}{\sin(x_{i,\alpha})} : i = 1,2 \right\rbrace$ and $\lim \limits_{\substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to 0^{-} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to 0^{-}}} \max \left\lbrace \frac{\left| \sin(x_{i,\alpha}) \right|}{\sin(x_{i,\alpha})} : i = 1,2 \right\rbrace $ give negative values.
\item The function $f(\overline{x}) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
\overline{2}\overline{x} + \overline{1} & \mbox{ ,$\overline{x} > \overline{1}$} \\
\overline{5} & \mbox{ ,$\overline{x} = \overline{1}$} \\
\overline{7}\overline{x}^{2} - \overline{4} & \mbox{ ,$\overline{x} < \overline{1}$} \\
\end{array}
\right. $ has a fuzzy limit at $\overline{x} = \overline{1}$ because by the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, we have the $\alpha-$cuts
$$ \left[ \lim \limits_{\substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to 1^{+} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to 1^{+}}} \left( 2x_{1,\alpha} + 1 \right), \lim \limits_{\substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to 1^{+} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to 1^{+}}} \left( 2x_{2,\alpha} + 1 \right) \right] = \left[ 3,3 \right];$$
$$ \left[ \lim \limits_{\substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to 1^{-} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to 1^{-}}} \left( 7 y_{1,\alpha} - 4 \right), \lim \limits_{\substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to 1^{-} \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to 1^{-}}} \left( 7 y_{2,\alpha} - 4 \right) \right] = \left[ 3,3 \right].$$
where $y_{1,\alpha} = \min \{ x_{i,\alpha} x_{j,\alpha}: i,j = 1,2 \}; y_{2,\alpha} = \max \{ x_{i,\alpha} x_{j,\alpha}: i,j = 1,2 \}$. Thus, $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{1}^{+}} f(\overline{x}) = \overline{3}; \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{1}^{-}} f(\overline{x}) = \overline{3}$, and by theorem 3.5, $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{1}} f(\overline{x}) = \overline{3}$.
\end{enumerate}
\section{Fuzzy limit at infinity.}
\subsection{ Fuzzy limit as $\overline{x} \to \pm \infty$ } Concept of fuzzy limit of fuzzy function at infinity will be given here through the following theorems whose proofs are similar to proofs of theorems 2.1 and 2.2.
\paragraph{Theorem 4.1.1.} Let $f: \overline{\overline{E}} \subset \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} \to \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}}$ be a fuzzy function and $\left( \overline{a},\infty \right) \subseteq \overline{\overline{E}}$ for some $\overline{a} \in \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} $. Then $f (\overline{x})$ converges to $\overline{L} \in \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}}$ as $\overline{x}$ approaches $\infty$ if for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $f (\overline{x})$ converge to the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $\overline{L}$ as the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $\overline{x}$ approach $\infty$.
\paragraph{Theorem 4.1.2.}Let $f: \overline{\overline{E}} \subset \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} \to \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}}$ be a fuzzy function and $\left( - \infty, \overline{a} \right) \subseteq \overline{\overline{E}}$ for some $\overline{a} \in \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} $. Then $f (\overline{x})$ converges to $\overline{L} \in \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}}$ as $\overline{x}$ approaches $- \infty$ if for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $f (\overline{x})$ converge to the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $\overline{L}$ as the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $\overline{x}$ approach $- \infty$.
\paragraph{Theorem 4.1.3.} Let $f: \overline{\overline{E}} \subset \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} \to \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}}$ be a fuzzy function and $\left( \overline{a},\infty \right) \subseteq \overline{\overline{E}}$ for some $\overline{a} \in \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} $. Then $f (\overline{x})$ converges to $\overline{L}$ as $\overline{x}$ approaches $\infty$ if and only if for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $\overline{K}$ such that the $\alpha-$cuts $\left[ K_{1,\alpha},K_{2,\alpha} \right]$ of $\overline{K}$, $\left[ x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha} \right]$ of $\overline{x}$ and $ \big[ \big| f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \big|, \big| f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \big| \big]$ of $\big| \overline{f}(\overline{x}) - \overline{L} \big|$ satisfy that $K_{1,\alpha} = K_{1,\alpha}(\varepsilon) > a_{1,\alpha}, K_{2,\alpha} = K_{2,\alpha}(\varepsilon) > a_{2,\alpha}$ and
\begin{align}
\left( x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha} \right) > \left( K_{1,\alpha}, K_{2,\alpha} \right) \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \big| f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \big|, \big| f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \big| \right)
\right\Vert < \varepsilon.
\end{align}
\paragraph{Theorem 4.1.4.} Let $f: \overline{\overline{E}} \subset \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} \to \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}}$ be a fuzzy function and $\left( \overline{a},\infty \right) \subseteq \overline{\overline{E}}$ for some $\overline{a} \in \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} $. Then $f (\overline{x})$ converges to $\overline{L}$ as $\overline{x}$ approaches $\infty$ if and only if for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $\overline{K}$ such that the $\alpha-$cuts $\left[ K_{1,\alpha},K_{2,\alpha} \right]$ of $\overline{K}$, $\left[ x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha} \right]$ of $\overline{x}$ and $ \big[ \big| f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \big|, \big| f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \big| \big]$ of $\big| \overline{f}(\overline{x}) - \overline{L} \big|$ satisfy that $K_{1,\alpha} = K_{1,\alpha}(\varepsilon) < a_{1,\alpha}, K_{2,\alpha} = K_{2,\alpha}(\varepsilon) < a_{2,\alpha}$ and
\begin{align}
\left( x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha} \right) < \left( K_{1,\alpha}, K_{2,\alpha} \right) \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \big| f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{2,\alpha} \big|, \big| f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) - L_{1,\alpha} \big| \right)
\right\Vert < \varepsilon.
\end{align}
\paragraph{Remark 4.1.1.} The convergence in theorem 4.3 will be denoted as
\begin{align}
\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \infty} f(\overline{x}) = \overline{L},
\end{align}
and the convergence in theorem 4.4 will be denoted as
\begin{align}
\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to - \infty} f(\overline{x}) = \overline{L}.
\end{align}
\paragraph{Examples 4.1.1.}
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{\infty}} \frac{\overline{2} \overline{x}^{2} - \overline{1}}{\overline{1} - \overline{x}^{2}} = - \overline{2}$ because by resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, the $\alpha-$cut
\begin{align*}
\left[ \frac{[2,2][x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}]^{2}-[1,1]}{[1,1] - [x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}]^{2}} \right] = \left[ \min_{i,j = 1,2} \left\lbrace \frac{2x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha} -1}{ 1 - x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha}} \right\rbrace, \max_{i,j = 1,2} \left\lbrace \frac{2x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha} -1}{ 1 - x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha}} \right\rbrace \right] \mathrm{of} \ \frac{\overline{2} \overline{x}^{2} - \overline{1}}{\overline{1} - \overline{x}^{2}}
\end{align*}
has the limit
\begin{align*}
\left[ \lim \limits_{ \substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to \infty \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to \infty}} \min_{i,j = 1,2} \left\lbrace \frac{2x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha} -1}{ 1 - x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha}} \right\rbrace, \lim \limits_{ \substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to \infty \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to \infty}} \max_{i,j = 1,2} \left\lbrace \frac{2x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha} -1}{ 1 - x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha}} \right\rbrace \right] &= \\
\left[ \lim \limits_{ \substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to \infty \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to \infty}} \min_{i,j = 1,2} \left\lbrace \frac{2 - 1 / x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha}}{ -1 + 1/x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha}} \right\rbrace, \lim \limits_{ \substack{x_{1,\alpha} \to \infty \\ x_{2,\alpha} \to \infty}} \max_{i,j = 1,2} \left\lbrace \frac{2 - 1 / x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha}}{ -1 + 1 / x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha}} \right\rbrace \right] &= \left[ - 2, - 2 \right].
\end{align*}
\item $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{\infty}} \frac{\overline{1}}{\overline{x}} = \overline{0} = \lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to - \overline{\infty}} \frac{\overline{1}}{\overline{x}}$ because by resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exist $\alpha-$cuts $\left[ K_{1,\alpha},K_{2,\alpha} \right]$ of $\overline{K} > \overline{0}$ such that
\begin{align*}
\left( x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha} \right) > \left( K_{1,\alpha}, K_{2,\alpha} \right) \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| \frac{1}{x_{2,\alpha}} \right|, \left| \frac{1}{x_{1,\alpha}} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \left\Vert \left( \left| \frac{1}{K_{2,\alpha}} \right|, \left| \frac{1}{K_{1,\alpha}} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \varepsilon
\end{align*}
and for all $ \varepsilon^{\prime} > 0$, there exist $\alpha-$cuts $\left[ K^{\prime}_{1,\alpha},K^{\prime}_{2,\alpha} \right]$ of $\overline{K^{\prime}} > \overline{0}$ such that
\begin{align*}
\left( x_{1,\alpha}, x_{2,\alpha} \right) < \left( -K^{\prime}_{1,\alpha}, -K^{\prime}_{2,\alpha} \right) \Rightarrow \left\Vert \left( \left| \frac{1}{x_{2,\alpha}} \right|, \left| \frac{1}{x_{1,\alpha}} \right| \right) \right\Vert <\left\Vert \left( \left| \frac{1}{K^{\prime}_{2,\alpha}} \right|, \left| \frac{1}{K^{\prime}_{1,\alpha}} \right| \right) \right\Vert < \varepsilon^{\prime}.
\end{align*}
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{ Infinity Fuzzy limit } Concept of fuzzy limit of fuzzy function at infinity will be given here through the following theorems whose proofs are similar to proofs of theorems 2.1 and 2.2.
\paragraph{Theorem 4.2.1.} Let $f: \overline{\overline{E}} \subset \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} \to \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}}$ be a fuzzy function and $\left( \overline{a},\infty \right) \subseteq \overline{\overline{E}}$ for some $\overline{a} \in \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} $. Then $f(\overline{x})$ converges to $\infty$ as $\overline{x}$ approaches $\overline{a}$ if for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $f (\overline{x})$ converge to $\infty$ as the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $\overline{x}$ approach the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $\overline{a}$.
\paragraph{Theorem 4.2.2.}Let $f: \overline{\overline{E}} \subset \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} \to \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}}$ be a fuzzy function and $\left( - \infty, \overline{a} \right) \subseteq \overline{\overline{E}}$ for some $\overline{a} \in \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}} $. Then $f(\overline{x})$ converges to $-\infty$ as $\overline{x}$ approaches $\overline{a}$ if for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $f (\overline{x})$ converge to $-\infty$ as the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $\overline{x}$ approach the bounds of $\alpha-$cut of $\overline{a}$.
\paragraph{Remark 4.2.1.} The convergence in theorem 4.2.1 will be denoted as
\begin{align}
\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{a}} f(\overline{x}) = \infty,
\end{align}
and the convergence in theorem 4.2.2 will be denoted as
\begin{align}
\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{a}} f(\overline{x}) = - \infty.
\end{align}
\paragraph{Examples 4.2.1.}
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{0}} \frac{1}{\overline{x}^{2}} = \infty$ because by the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, there exists $\alpha-$cuts $\left[ M_{1,\alpha},M_{2,\alpha} \right]$ of $\overline{M} \in \overline{\overline{\mathbb{R}}}$ such that
\begin{align*}
0 < \Vert (x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \Vert < \delta_{1} \Rightarrow f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) > {1}/{\delta^2_{1}} \Rightarrow \delta_{1} = 1/ M_{2,\alpha}, \\
0 < \Vert (x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) \Vert < \delta_{2} \Rightarrow f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) > {1}/{\delta^2_{2}} \Rightarrow \delta_{2} = 1/ M_{1,\alpha} ,
\end{align*}
where
\begin{align*}
f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) = \min \left\lbrace {1}/{x^2_{1,\alpha}}, {1}/{x_{1,\alpha}x_{2,\alpha}}, {1}/{x^2_{2,\alpha}} \right\rbrace, f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) = \max \left\lbrace {1}/{x^2_{1,\alpha}}, {1}/{x_{1,\alpha}x_{2,\alpha}}, {1}/{x^2_{2,\alpha}} \right\rbrace.
\end{align*}
\item $\lim \limits_{\overline{x} \to \overline{1}-} \frac{\overline{x} + \overline{2}}{\overline{2} \overline{x}^{2} - \overline{3} \overline{x} + \overline{1}} = -\infty$ because by the resolution principle, for all $\alpha \in (0,1]$, there exists $\alpha-$cuts $\left[ M_{1,\alpha},M_{2,\alpha} \right]$ of $\overline{M} < \overline{0}$ such that
\begin{align*}
0 < \Vert ( \vert x_{1,\alpha} -1 \vert, \vert x_{2,\alpha} - 1 \vert ) \Vert < \delta_{1} \Rightarrow f_{1}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) = \min_{i,j = 1,2} \left\lbrace \frac{x_{i,\alpha} + 2}{2 x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha} -3x_{i,\alpha} + 1} \right\rbrace < M_{1, \alpha}, \\
0 < \Vert ( \vert x_{1,\alpha} -1 \vert, \vert x_{2,\alpha} - 1 \vert ) \Vert < \delta_{2} \Rightarrow f_{2}(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) = \max_{i,j = 1,2} \left\lbrace \frac{x_{i,\alpha} + 2}{2 x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha} -3x_{i,\alpha} + 1} \right\rbrace < M_{2, \alpha},
\end{align*}
where $2 x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha} -3x_{i,\alpha} + 1$ is negative and converges to $0$ as $(x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha})$ approaches to $(1,1)$ from the left. Therefore, choosing $\delta_{i} \in (0,1), i = 1,2$ such that $(1 - \delta_{1},1 - \delta_{1}) < (x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) < (1,1)$ and $(1 - \delta_{2},1 - \delta_{2}) < (x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) < (1,1)$ imply $2/M_{1} < 2 x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha} -3x_{i,\alpha} + 1$ and $2/M_{2} < 2 x_{i,\alpha}x_{j,\alpha} -3x_{i,\alpha} + 1$ respectively. Since $(0,0) < (x_{1,\alpha},x_{2,\alpha}) < (1,1)$ imply $(2,2) < (x_{1,\alpha} + 2, x_{2,\alpha} + 2) < (3,3)$, we get the result.
\end{enumerate}
\section{Conclusion}
Concept of Limit of function can be generalized to fuzzy limit of fuzzy functions. Basic properties that rule the classical concept of limit of function can be also generalized and proved in light of fuzzy logic and fuzzy sets. Future works like fuzzy continuity, fuzzy derivation and fuzzy integration of fuzzy functions and their properties will be considered depending on concept of fuzzy limit of fuzzy function and its basic properties.
|
\section{Introduction}
Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup\footnote{https://github.com/crawl/crawl} (DCSS) is a single-player, free and open-source rogue-like turn-based video game that consists of a procedurally generated 2-dimensional grid world. To win the game, the player must navigate their character through a series of levels to collect `The Orb of Zot' and then exit the dungeon. Along the way, players encounter a wide variety of monsters and items. Players equip and use items to make themselves stronger or consume them to aid in difficult situations. The world of DCSS is dynamic, stochastic, partially observable, open, and sufficiently complex: the number of states is orders of magnitude larger than games such as Starcraft and Go and the number of instantiated actions the player may take can reach into the hundreds.
DCSS is notoriously hard for humans. Comments such as ``\textit{Wow. I've finally gotten my first win since I started playing, almost exactly 3 years ago.}"\footnote{This comment was posted on October 24, 2018: https://www.reddit.com/r/dcss/comments/9qzfmy/vavp\_mibe\_my \_first\_win\_after\_3\_years/} frequently appear on message boards for DCSS. More experienced players are regularly answering questions and providing advice to newer players. A single game takes on the order of hours to complete; for example, the average playtime for games in a large-scale tournament of human players in 2016 was 8.5 hours.
Rogue-likes are famous for having permanent death: when the player dies, the game ends. Often making a single mistake, or a series of small mistakes will lead to failure. Worse, sometimes these mistakes are only realized hundreds or thousands of turns later. For example, a player may use a one-time-use life-saving item when they could have used a repeatable ability or the player may have trained skills in such a way that they have vulnerabilities against more powerful monsters found later in the game.
Development of an API for AI agents to play DCSS would offer several desirable aspects for evaluating new and existing AI techniques:
\begin{itemize}
\item DCSS is a simulated environment which is partially observable, open, dynamic, and stochastic, with an environment model that changes over time (i.e., the probabilities associated with the player's actions change over time)
\item An environment that requires rich knowledge to play effectively. This includes multiple types of knowledge such as factual knowledge (e.g., the player must obtain 3 runes before entering \textit{The Realm of Zot} level), strategic knowledge (e.g., fighting a hydra monster with a non-fire bladed weapon should be avoided), and descriptive knowledge (almost every aspect of the game comes with an English text description designed for a human user - this includes all objects, tiles, and monsters).
\item A game that requires long-term strategic planning where early decisions can have a significant impact on later game play. Poor decisions early can be irreversible and have significant consequences (e.g., permanent death).
\item An environment that does not penalize slow reaction times. DCSS is a turn based game with no time limit on deciding which action to take next. New players are often advised to pause when they realize they are in a dangerous situation in order to (1) carefully consider all of their options and (2) learn about the monsters and items in the current situation from online knowledge bases including a wiki, forum, and live IRC chat with other players.
\item There is existing data on human performance for thousands of previous games played. This opens the possibility for comparison between human and intelligent agents using DCSS.
\item A game interface that enables multiple spectators to watch the player and interact with them via natural language text dialog. This provides multiple opportunities for human-agent interaction, such as explanation, human-agent teaming, and intelligent tutoring.
\end{itemize}
In the following section, we describe the state space and environment properties that make DCSS an interesting research domain. Following that, we describe the skill level of human DCSS players from an annual tournament. Next we highlight current efforts to build an API for DCSS followed by a description of cognitive systems and AI approaches that could be evaluated using such an API. We then discuss related work and conclude with a summary and next steps.
\section{DCSS State Space and Environment Properties}
We now identify in more detail properties of DCSS that lead to its high complexity, followed by a lower bound theoretical analysis of the state space and action space.
\begin{itemize}
\item 650+ unique monster types which the player may encounter, many of which require specific actions, attributes, or special knowledge to be able to defeat. For example, if you attack a hydra monster with a weapon that has a blade (e.g., axe, sword) you will chop off it's head and it will grow more in its place, and as a result become much stronger. A good approach to defeating hydras is to have a bladed weapon enchanted with fire (which sears the wound) or use a blunt force object such as a mace. Magic also works.
\item 13,800 possible starting character configurations formed by choosing: one of 23 species (e.g., vampire, ogre), one of 24 backgrounds (e.g., fighter, wizard, berserker), and one of 25 deities for your character to worship that may provide additional benefits (e.g., worshiping \textit{Gozag Ym Sagoz} turns slain enemy corpses into gold). Some are considered easier than others; a minotaur berserker worshiping Trog is the recommended starting character for new players who have yet to win the game.
\item 31 skills (e.g., fighting, short blades, hexes, charms, shields) and 3 attributes (strength, intellect, dexterity) that are increased by spending experience points. The value of each skill ranges from 0 to a maximum of value of 27. Spending experience is permanent and cannot be undone. Poor decisions in allocating experience points for skills and attributes is a major cause for players not being able to win the game, since improperly raising your attributes leads to deficiencies against certain monster types later on. It is also specific to the items and spells a character will focus on, which often changes during the course of a game. Finding a rare item meant for melee may warrant an entire strategy change for a character that is currently magic-based. It is not always an easy decision because there may not be enough time to raise skill and attribute values before encountering monsters which require such skills to be defeated.
\item 100+ spell actions a player can learn. A player can only know a maximum of 21 spells at any given time. Spells have unique effects that sometimes require careful planning. Some spells buff the player with attributes that affect later actions. For example, when in a situation where time is of utmost importance, often casting a spell to temporarily increase the speed of the player should be done first.
\item 48 unique types of melee and ranged weapons that player may encounter and use. Each weapon may be branded to give it additional effects (e.g., fire, frost, venom) that may do additional damage and cause special effects (e.g., a monster hit with a venom brand will gain a temporary poison status that deals damage over time).
\item 15 runes to be collected. Runes are special items that do not take up inventory space and serve to enable the player to visit new branches (series of levels) of the dungeon. Collecting a minimum of three runes is necessary to access the \textit{Realm of Zot} level, which is required to win the game. While 3 runes are the minimum requirement, many players challenge themselves to see how many runes they can acquire. Runes are associated with special areas in the game (i.e. the serpentine rune requires fighting snake-themed monsters and a resistance to poison is highly recommended). Some runes are significantly more difficult to obtain than others.
\item Approximately 65,000 to 80,000 turns is typical for a 3-rune game. Turns can be considered an approximation of the number of actions taken. This can vary depending on the speed of the player, which may be faster or slower than the turn rate, in which case a fast player may take 2 actions in 1.5 turns or a slow player may take 1 action in 1.5 turns. Speed is an attribute of the player's character depending on their attributes an items (e.g. equipping heavier armor can slow attack speed; other items may increase or decrease the player's movement speed). Speed here does not refer to how long the player takes in deciding the next action to take.
\item 40+ consumable resource-based items including: 18 potions, 10 scrolls, 11 wands and a small number of specialty items. Potions and scrolls are single-use and offer some of the most important life saving capabilities, such as a scroll of blinking which instantly teleports the character to another tile within line of sight of the player.
\item Players may encounter more than 70,000 tiles before completing a game. A tile is a location on the grid that may hold a combination of monsters, items, and special terrain features (e.g., lava, water, steam).
\item 100+ levels. Levels are composed of tiles that are procedurally generated to form rooms, passageways, etc., using a variety of terrain elements such as walls, shallow water, deep water, lava, etc. Levels are connected via staircases that act as portals from one level to the next. A 3-rune game requires visiting at least 45 levels. Most levels have a static arrangement of tiles except for two special levels, Abyss and Labyrinth, where the number of tiles is infinite and the layout of tiles outside the player's line of sight constantly changes.
\item Partially observable: the player does not see a tile until it is within line of sight, which is normally within seven tiles of the player in any cardinal direction.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.33]{gfx/dcss_018_results.png}
\caption{Results from the v. 0.18 tournament}
\label{tournyresults}
\end{figure}
\begin{itemize}
\item Dynamic: monsters take their own actions independent of the player, and there are time-based events such as entrances to special areas that close after a time limit (e.g., volcano and sewer levels).
\item Stochastic: most actions (e.g., melee attacks, spells) are probabilistic and often fail.
\item Natural language text accompanies every item and action in the game. The player can ask for a description of any tile, object, monster, etc., within view or in the player's inventory.
\item Permanent death: if the player dies, the game ends and they must start again in a newly generated world. The only way to replay a game is to manually set the seed for the procedural generation.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure*}[h]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{gfx/dcss-game-image}
\caption{Screenshot of the full DCSS Game in Progress}
\label{full-game-screenshot}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{1cm}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.4\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=1in]{gfx/large_map_screenshot.png}
\caption{Open-room Custom Scenario}
\label{large-custom-scenario-screenshot}
\vspace{2ex}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=1in]{gfx/small_map_image.png}
\caption{Small Custom Scenario}
\label{small-custom-scenario-screenshot}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Screenshots of Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup}
\label{all-screenshots}
\end{figure*}
We now give a lower bound complexity analysis of the state space for a complete game using the following assumptions. These assumptions are lower bounds on the numbers of tiles, items, monsters, etc the player would encounter in a 3-rune game. Technically DCSS has an infinite state space.
\begin{itemize}
\item 70,000 tiles
\item 900 items (estimated 20 items per level, 45 levels)
\item 2000 monsters
\end{itemize}
For simplicity, let's assume that monsters and items will not be generated on the same tile. With these minimum assumptions, the state space is $$ |S| = 70000^{2900} \approx 10^{14000}$$ which is significantly more than Starcraft (estimated at lower bound of $10^{1685}$), Go (estimated at around $10^{170})$, and Chess (estimated at $10^{50}$) \cite{ontanon2013survey}. Starcraft however has a significantly higher action space estimated at $10^8$ \cite{vinyals2017starcraft} where as we estimate the number of grounded actions for DCSS to be no more than 1000 in any given state. A primary difference between Starcraft and DCSS is real-time decision making. Since DCSS does not penalize long reaction times, cognitive approaches for more deliberate reasoning (such as planning and inference mechanisms) can be effectively evaluated in DCSS, while still ensuring a highly complex environment.
\section{Annual DCSS Tournament}
With every major release of the game (e.g., v. 0.17, v. 0.18, v. 0.19) there is a tournament held with thousands of players that spans 16 days. During this time, players try to collect as many points as possible by playing a variety of different character configurations (i.e., species, background, and deity combinations). The results for the tournament using v. 0.18 of the game \cite{dcssV018TournResults} were posted on June 3rd, 2016 and some of these results are shown in Figure \ref{tournyresults}. Tournaments attract the best human players to show off their skill and serves as one possible benchmark with which to evaluate AI agents against humans. Especially for those unfamiliar with DCSS, here are some stats to give a better idea of what is required by human players:
\begin{itemize}
\item The average won game took around eight and half hours of human playtime.
\item The fastest run in the v. 0.18 tournament is 41:00 minutes.
\item 2500 human players competed in the tournament, with only about 500 players winning a game.
\item The overall win rate of games attempted is slightly more than 2\% by the end of the tournament.
\end{itemize}
There are many intermediate metrics that can be used to measure AI performance besides winning the game and the score the player has accumulated. These could include number of runes collected, number of levels reached, time, number of actions the agent has taken, number of monsters killed, etc. Our API will maintain a history of the players actions and other data to output metrics such as these.
\section{An API for AI Agents for DCSS}
Previous efforts to build a bot for DCSS (see Related Work) used hand coded expert knowledge. The focus of this API is to provide a game state data object to a computer program (the AI) and accept action commands which will then be executed. The API we are building has the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item Ability to send actions and receive game state from a webserver client. This allows observers (including humans) to watch and interact with the agent via chat messages.
\item Game state data objects in a structured representation format like PDDL \cite{mcdermott1998pddl}
\item A PDDL domain file containing models for non-combat actions
\item Support for treating multi-step actions as single commands. Often a user must issue multiple keypresses to take certain actions such as first choosing the throw command and then choosing a target. Our API allows an agent to issue a single command and takes care of the execution of all the steps involved to send to the game engine.
\item Ability to run agents in custom levels. Figures \ref{large-custom-scenario-screenshot} and \ref{small-custom-scenario-screenshot} show custom scenarios that are simply empty rooms with no monsters or objects except for a single orb. Items and monsters are easily added when designing the scenario.
\end{itemize}
\section{Promising Research Questions Facilitated by the DCSS Domain}
Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup is unique in that it is a highly complex game both in terms of state and action space while also being difficult for humans. Playing well requires large amounts of different types of knowledge (factual knowledge vs. strategic knowledge for example). Human performance data is available to compare against AI systems. Additionally, almost everything in the game is accompanied by natural language text. Because of these qualities, DCSS is an excellent research testbed to explore solutions to the following problems:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Achievement goals vs. learning goals:} An agent may find it is constantly dying in a situation and should consider querying the online wiki or ask a question on an online IRC chatroom to understand why it's failing. Once it has found knowledge relevant to the problem the agent must decide how to use such knowledge. The topic of achievement goals vs. learning goals is an open problem in goal reasoning.
\item \textbf{Planning and acting with learned models:} The probabilities of an agent's effects (e.g., combat, likelihood to land a hit, likelihood to block or dodge an attack) change as the agent gets stronger and with respect to different types of monsters. How can an agent plan and act with these changing models, and how can it update it's models?
\item \textbf{Intelligent assistants and tutors:} Could you develop an assistant that aids players in completing the game by offering advice and/or guidance? Perhaps an intelligent tutoring agent could observe a human player fail repeatedly in a situation (i.e. every time the human player faces a hydra monster, the character dies) and generate custom scenarios designed to teach the human player proper strategies to running from or defeating hydras. This could include lessons in allocating skill points, selecting among a variety of weapons, and using a variety of escape related items.
\item \textbf{Explainable planning and goal reasoning agents:} The interpretability of AI systems has been a popular topic of workshops and related events since 2016, and in 2017 DARPA launched the Explainable AI (XAI) Program. Most of these efforts have focused on providing transparency to the decision making of machine learning (ML) systems in general, and deep networks more specifically\footnote{Exceptions, for example, include the broader intent of the Workshops on XAI at IJCAI-17 and IJCAI-18}. While XAI research on data-driven ML is well-motivated, AI Planning is well placed to address the challenges of transparency and explainability in a broad range of interactive AI systems. For example, research on Explainable Planning has focused on helping humans to understand a plan produced by the planner (e.g., \cite{Sohrabi11,Bidot10}), on reconciling the models of agents and humans (e.g., \cite{chakraborti17}), and on explaining why a particular action was chosen by a planner rather than a different one (e.g., \cite{smith12,langley17,fox2017explainable}.
DCSS has a sufficiently rich environment containing different types of knowledge that make understanding decision making difficult. Novice players watching an expert player may not understand why decisions were made or actions were taken. Thus, DCSS could be a suitable environment for evaluating agents that explain their planning and other decision making components to humans.
\item \textbf{Knowledge Extraction from Games:} Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup is a knowledge rich game which takes humans many hours of playing and reading before acquiring enough knowledge to complete the game. While our API provides a starting point to use techniques such as automated planning, there are opportunities for new approaches to knowledge extraction that could be evaluated with DCSS.
\item \textbf{Single-Policy Reinforcement Learning (RL) vs. Hierarchical or Component-Based Approaches}: An open question is whether RL approaches can learn a single policy for large state action spaces or whether policies per individual goals or tasks scale better. Does having an explicit goal representation (for example, the agent may have the goal of a nearby hydra to be dead: \textbf{dead(hydra)}) and goal-specific plans or policies lead to more manageable decision making rather than relying only on knowing the best action to take in any given state to reach some reward?
\item \textbf{Curriculum-based RL:} In environments such as DCSS there is delayed reward. The most obvious reward function is winning a game but since this requires tens of thousands of actions to do so, intermediate reward functions will be needed. The player's cumulative game score could be used, but this may not be enough to determine such actions as spending experience points to increase skill levels. Could an agent identify for itself what rewards it should pursue? Will a curriculum-based RL approach lead to an agent that can complete the game?
\item \textbf{Execution monitoring, replanning and goal reasoning:}
Consider an example where an agent is executing a plan to achieve the goal of killing a monster and the agent observes a rare weapon item nearby. The agent may decide to replan in order to pick up the object and use it to kill the monster, but to do so would require kiting the monster around an obstacle to reach the item without being attacked first. Can we build agents capable of reasoning about goals and plans in an environment such as DCSS that could lead to such behavior?
\end{itemize}
\section{Related Work}
Surprisingly, little work in AI has made use of rogue-like video games. \citeauthor{steinkraus2004combining} (\citeyear{steinkraus2004combining}) used an extremely simplified version of NetHack\footnote{https://www.nethack.org/} to evaluate learning abstractions for large MDPs. More recently \citeauthor{winder2018keg} (\citeyear{winder2018keg}) identified NetHack as ``an immensely rich domain'' worth using to evaluate concept-aware task transfer as future work. Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup is a richer domain than NetHack in many aspects (e.g., number of spells, number of starting characters), although an API for NetHack would also be a contribution to the AI community.
Computer programs to play DCSS and NetHack have been handcoded. \textbf{qw}\footnote{https://github.com/elliptic/qw} is the best known bot for DCSS achieving the highest winrate of about 15\% for 3-rune games with the starting character of Deep Dwarf Fighter worshipping Makhleb, and also achieves a 1\% winrate for a 15-rune game with a Gargoyle Fighter worshipping Okawaru. The first bot to beat NetHack with no human intervention was created by Reddit user \textit{duke-nh}\footnote{https://www.reddit.com/r/nethack/comments/2tluxv/ ~~~~yaap\_fullauto\_bot\_ascension\_bothack/}. Both of these bots rely extensively on expert-coded knowledge and rules, and do not perform learning. They demonstrate that programs are capable of beating these games and being open source, provide baselines for AI agents playing these games.
Video games such as DCSS offer some of the complexities of real-world environments: dynamic, partially observable, open, etc... in a software simulation that is often cheaper and/or faster to evaluate new approaches. A number of simulated environments have released over the last few years: the MALMO API for Minecraft from Microsoft Research \cite{johnson2016malmo}, the Starcraft II API \cite{vinyals2017starcraft} from Deepmind and Blizzard, and the ELF platform for Game Research \cite{tian2017elf} from Facebook. Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup (DCSS) fills a needed gap in the available simulated environments because it offers high complexity, partial observability, and non-determinism, yet without the difficulty of decision-making in real-time. This makes DCSS more manageable for agents that may require deliberation in their decision making such as automated planning, inference, and online learning mechanisms.
\section{Conclusion}
DCSS is an excellent evaluation testbed for many problems in artificial intelligence and cognitive systems, and is supported by an active community of players and developers. We describe properties of DCSS that warrant it's consideration as an evaluation testbed, particularly because it is partially observable, dynamic, stochastic, open, is surrounded by an active community of players and developers, and requires a variety of decision making capabilities in order to win the game. We include a theoretical lower bound of the state and action space complexity analysis, showing it has more states than Starcraft, Go, and Chess. We also described an ongoing effort to build an API for AI agents to play and be evaluated in this game. Future work on the API will be to add support for combat actions, a feature vector representation of the state, and provide planning and reinforcement learning agent tutorials.
\printendnotes
\clearpage
\bibliographystyle{named}
|
\section{Introduction} \label{section:introduction}
The presence of noise and data corruption in real-world data can be inevitably caused by various reasons such as experimental errors, accidental outliers, or even adversarial data attacks.
In traditional robust regression problem, reliable regression coefficients are learned in the presence of adversarial data corruptions in its response vector. A commonly adopted model from existing methods assumes that the observed response is obtained from the generative model $\bm y = X^T \bm \beta^* + \bm u$, where $\bm \beta^*$ is the true regression coefficients we wish to recover and $\bm u$ is the corruption vector with adversarial values. In the problem setting, the data matrix $X$ is assumed to contain all the features that can be accessed at any time and by arbitrarily many times.
Existing robust learning methods typically focus on modeling the entire dataset with all the features at once; however, they may meet the bottleneck in terms of computation and memory as more and more data sets are becoming
However, the assumption is no longer suitable to the following scenarios in the applications that contain exponentially increasing user-generated contents:
1) \textit{features are too many to be loaded entirely}. Features grows dramatically fast and becomes extremely large in. For instance, over 4.7 million movies and televisions with 8.3 million reviews in IMDb\footnote{https://www.imdb.com/} online movie and television review website, which makes it hard to load all the features entirely for any machine learning models using the movies as features.
2) \textit{features are generated dynamically}. For example, people create and use new terms and hashtags all the time in Twitter, and the "Likes"~\cite{naylor2012beyond} on newly-generated articles in Facebook can be considered as new features describing the interestingness of the user.
3)
Therefore, it is necessary to address online features in traditional robust regression as a new fundamental problem; however, current methods either focus on robust regression or online feature learning separately.
To the best of our knowledge, our proposed approach is the first robust regression algorithm that can handle the online features with adversarial data corruptions.
It is nontrivial to consider online features and adversarial data corruption simultaneously in robust regression because 1) robust methods usually estimate data corruption based on the entire data, but online features make the data can only be partially accessible at one time; and 2) online feature selection methods can only select features based on uncorrupted data. Simply using robust regression and online feature selection methods sequentially makes the recovery result of coefficients worse, which is presented in our experiments in Section \ref{section:experiment}.
To address the above challenges, we proposed a new robust regression algorithm via online feature selection (\textit{RoOFS}). The main contributions of our study are summarized as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textit{design of an efficient algorithm to simultaneously address the problem of data corruption and online feature}. The algorithm \textit{RoOFS} is proposed to recover the regression coefficients and uncorrupted set efficiently. Unlike using entire features, our approach alternately estimates the data corruption and selects the feature set via a robust online feature substitution method.
\item \textit{theoretical analysis of the algorithm}. We prove that our method yields a solution with a restricted error bound compared to ground truth coefficients under the Subset Restricted Strong Convexity (\textit{SRSC}) property.
\item \textit{demonstration of empirical effectiveness and efficiency}. Our proposed algorithm was evaluated with 6 competing methods in both robust regression and online feature selection literatures. The results showed that our approach consistently outperforms existing methods in coefficients recovery and uncorrupted set estimation, delivering a competitive running time.
\end{itemize}
The reminder of this paper is organized as follows. Section \ref{section:related_work} reviews the related work in robust regression model and online feature selection categories. Section \ref{section:problem_setting} gives a formal problem formulation. The proposed \textit{RoOFS} algorithm is presented in Section \ref{section:methodology}. Section \ref{section:analysis} presents the theoretical analysis of proposed algorithm. In Section \ref{section:experiment}, the experimental results are analyzed and the paper concludes with a summary of our work in Section \ref{section:conclusion}.
\section{Related Work} \label{section:related_work}
The work related to this paper is summarized in the categories of robust regression model and online feature selection as below.
\subsection{Robust Regression Model}
A large body of literature on robust regression problem has been established over the last few decades. Most of studies focus on handling stochastic noise in small amounts \cite{loh2011high}; however, these methods cannot be applied to data that may exhibit malicious corruption \cite{icml2013_chen13h}. To recover regression coefficients with adversarial data corruption, Chen et al. \cite{icml2013_chen13h} proposed a robust algorithm based on trimmed inner product. McWilliams et al. \cite{mcwilliams2014fast} proposed a sub-sampling algorithm for large-scale corrupted linear regression, but their theoretical recovery boundaries are not close to the ground truth \cite{bhatia2015robust}. Some $L_1$ penalty based methods \cite{Wright:2010:DEC:1840493.1840533,nguyen2013exact} pursue strong recovery results for robust regression problem, but these methods depend on severe restrictions of the data distribution such as row-sampling from an incoherent orthogonal matrix \cite{nguyen2013exact}. Zhang et al. \cite{8215535} proposed a distributed robust algorithm to handle the large-scale data set under adversarial data corruption.
Most research in this area requires the corruption ratio parameter, which is difficult to estimate under the assumption that the dataset can be adversarially attacked. For instance, She and Owen \cite{10.2307/41416397} rely on a regularization parameter to determine the size of the uncorrupted set based on soft-thresholding. Chen et al. \cite{icml2013_chen13h} require the upper bound of the outliers number, which is also difficult to estimate when the data contain the adversarial data corruption. Bhatia et al. \cite{bhatia2015robust} proposed a hard-thresholding algorithm with a strong guarantee of coefficient recovery under mild assumption on input data. However, the corruption ratio parameter is required by the algorithm and its recovery error can be more than doubled in size if the parameter is far from the true value. Recently, Zhang et al. \cite{ijcai2017-480} proposed a heuristic hard-thresholding based methods that learns the optimal uncorrupted set. However, all these approaches are based on batch feature selection under the assumption that all features can be accessed entirely at any time, which is infeasible to apply in massive and fast growing feature set.
\subsection{Online Feature Selection}
Online feature selection methods \cite{jiang2006similarity,wang2014online,Yu:2016:SAO:3017677.2976744} relaxes the requirement of batch selection and fit the scenarios that feature cannot be accessed entirely at one time. Statistical online feature selection algorithms \cite{zhou2006streamwise,wu2010online,yu2014towards} select features via certain statistical quantity such as mutual information, but these methods lack of specific objectives and usually have sub-optimal solutions for some certain tasks. Optimization based approaches \cite{perkins2003online,zhu2010grafting} use target oriented objective functions solved by some specific optimization techniques. These methods usually require the regression coefficient $\bm \beta$ be sparse, i.e., $\norm{\bm \beta}_0 \le \mu$. Grafting \cite{Perkins:2003:OFS:3041838.3041913} and its variation \cite{zhu2010grafting} relax the hard constraint of feature set into $L_1$ penalty, which makes it a convex problem. However, the parameter of $L_1$ norm \cite{ryali2009feature} is difficult to determine because the usual cross validation strategy is unavailable for the online feature selection scenario \cite{wang2015online}. Yang et al. \cite{Yang:2016:OFS:2939672.2939881} proposed a limited-memory substitution algorithm based on the $L_0$ norm constraint. Although the hard constraint leads to an NP-hard problem, a theoretical guarantee for the error bound of their local optimal solution is provided. However, none of these online feature methods can handle the adversarial data corruption.
\section{Problem Formulation}\label{section:problem_setting}
In this study, we consider the problem of robust regression with adversarial data corruption in the feature selection scenario in which only a few features are accessible at each time. Given data matrix $X_t\in \mathbbm{R}^{{p_t}\times n}$ where $p_t$ is the number of features available in the $t\nth$ time interval, and $n$ are the number of data samples. The data matrix for all the time intervals is represented as $X = \{X_t\}_{t=1}^{\mathcal T}$. We assume the corresponding response vector $\bm y \in \mathbbm{R}^{n \times 1}$ is generated using the following model:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:model}
\bm y = X^T \boldsymbol \beta^* + \bm u + \bm \varepsilon
\end{equation}
where $\bm \beta^*$ represents the $\mu$-sparse ground truth coefficients of the regression model i.e., $\norm{\bm \beta^*}_0 \le \mu$ and $\bm u$ is the unbounded corruption vector introduced by adversarial data attacks. $\bm \varepsilon \in \mathbbm{R}^{n\times 1}$ represents the additive dense noise, where $\varepsilon_i \sim \mathcal{N}(0, \sigma^2)$. Different from the corruption vector $\bm u$ that can be arbitrarily distributed, the dense noise $\varepsilon_i$ follows normal distribution with zero mean and a relatively small variance $\sigma$. The notations used in this paper is summarized in Table \ref{table:math_notation}.
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{Math Notations}
\centering
\label{table:math_notation}
\tabcolsep=0.15cm
\scalebox{0.97}{
\begin{tabular}{ l|l }
\toprule
Notations & Explanations \\ \hline
$p, n \in \mathbbm{R}$ & number of entire features and data samples \\
$p_t \in \mathbbm{R}$ & number of features in $t\nth$ time interval \\
$\mu \in \mathbbm{R}$ & ratio of feature sparsity, where $\norm{\bm \beta}_0 = \mu$ \\
$X_t \in \mathbbm{R}^{p_t\times n}$ & data samples containing features in the $t\nth$ time interval \\
$X \in \mathbbm{R}^{p\times n}$ & data samples containing the entire features \\
$\bm \beta, \bm \beta^* \in \mathbbm{R}^{p\times1}$ & estimated and ground truth regression coefficient \\
$\bm u \in \mathbbm{R}^{n\times1}$ & corruption vector with adversarial values \\
$\bm \varepsilon \in \mathbbm{R}^{n\times1}$ & dense noise vector, where $\varepsilon_i \sim \mathcal{N}(0, \sigma^2)$ \\
$\bm y \in \mathbbm{R}^{n\times1}$ & response vector, where $\bm y = X^T \boldsymbol \beta^* + \bm u + \bm \varepsilon$ \\
$\bm r \in \mathbbm{R}^{n\times1}$ & residual vector, where $\bm r = \abs{\bm y - X^T\bm \beta}$ \\
$ S \subseteq [n]$ & estimated uncorrupted set \\
$ S_* \subseteq [n]$ & ground truth uncorrupted set, where $S_*=\overline{supp(\bm u)}$ \\
$\varPsi, \varPsi_* \subseteq [\mu]$ & estimated and ground truth feature set\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
The goal of our problem is to learn a new robust regression problem with online feature selection, which is to recover the regression coefficients $\bm \beta^*$ and simultaneously determine the uncorrupted point set $\hat{S}$ with sequentially accessible features. The problem is formally defined as follows:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:problem}
\begin{gathered}
\hat{\bm \beta}, \hat{S}= \argminA_{\bm \beta, S}\|\bm y_S - X_{S}^T \bm \beta\|_2^2\\
s.t.\ \ S\subset[n],\ \abs{S} \ge \mathcal{G}(\bm \beta),\ \norm{\bm \beta}_0 \le \mu
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
Given a subset $S \subset [n]$, $\bm y_S$ restricts the row of $\bm y$ to indices in $S$ and $X_S$ signifies that the columns of $X$ are restricted to indices in $S$. Therefore, we have $\bm y_S \in \mathbbm{R}^{|S| \times 1}$ and $X_S \in \mathbbm{R}^{p \times |S|}$. We use the notation $S_*=\overline{supp(\bm u)}$ to denote the ground truth set of uncorrupted points. Also, for any vector $\bm v \in \mathbbm{R}^n$, the notation $\bm v_S$ represents the $|S|$-dimensional vector containing the components in $S$. The notation $\Psi = supp(\bm \beta)$ is used to represent the set of selected features, resulting in $\abs{\Psi} \le \mu$. Similarly, we use $X_{\Psi}$ to signify the rows of $X$ are restricted to indices in $\Psi$ and $X_{\Psi, S}$ to restrict both the rows and columns in set $\Psi$ and $S$.
The function $\mathcal{G}(\cdot)$ determines the size of uncorrupted data according to the regression coefficients $\bm \beta$, which is explained in Section \ref{section:methodology}. It is worth mentioning that the features of data matrix $X$ in Equation \eqref{eq:problem} cannot be loaded entirely, but they can be accessed partially for each time interval. Therefore, the joint optimization of $\bm \beta$ and $S$ in our problem are very challenging because it amounts to a non-convex discrete optimization problem under the assumption that data matrix $X$ cannot be access entirely at one time.
\section{The Proposed Methodology}\label{section:methodology}
To solve the problem in Equation \eqref{eq:problem} efficiently with the guarantee on the strong recovery of regression coefficients, we propose a novel robust regression algorithm with online feature selection, \textit{RoOFS}. The algorithm is only allowed to access part of features at each time, which are defined as the newly incoming features in our problem. One naive solution to handle the sequentially incoming features is to retain all the features in the memory and then apply traditional robust feature selection methods. However, the solution has two major drawbacks: 1) the feature set can be too large to be retained in the memory, and 2) the algorithm becomes slower and slower when the feature set increases. Therefore, we proposed a new ``robust online substitution" method to decide the retained feature set based on an adaptively estimated corrupted set.
The procedure of robust online substitution is defined as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item Update coefficients of retained features $\Psi$ based on the estimated uncorrupted set $S$ as follows: $\bm \beta_\Psi := $$\bm \beta_\Psi - \eta$ $X_{\Psi,S}^T$$(X_{\Psi,S}^T \bm \beta_{\Psi} - \bm y_{S})$, where $\eta$ is the step length.
\item Retain the top $\mu$ largest (in magnitude) elements in $\bm \beta$ and set the rest to zero. Then all the non-zero features will be kept in the retained feature set $\Psi$.
\item Compute the residual vector $\bm r \in \mathbbm{R}^{n \times 1}$ with the updated coefficients $\bm \beta$, then estimate the uncorrupted feature set $S$ via a thresholding operator $\mathcal{H}_{\tau}(\bm r)$, where $\tau$ is the estimated size of uncorrupted set.
\end{itemize}
The procedure will be repeatedly executed until the residual vector $\bm r$ converges. The thresholding operator $\mathcal{H}_{\tau}(\cdot)$ is formally defined as follows:
\begin{definition}[\textbf{Thresholding Operator}] \label{def:HTS}
Defining $\varphi^{-1}_{\bm v}(i)$ as the position of the $i$\nth element in input vector $\bm v$'s ascending order of magnitude and $\tau$ as the threshold parameter, the thresholding operator of $\bm v$ is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:hht}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{H}_{\tau}(\bm v) = \{i \in [n]: \varphi^{-1}_{\bm v}(i) \le \tau \}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
To estimate the uncorrupted set $S$, the thresholding operator $\mathcal{H}_{\tau}(\cdot)$ generally requires two inputs: residual vector $\bm r$ and the size of uncorrupted set $\tau$. The residual vector $\bm r$ can be computed with coefficients $\bm \beta$ as follows:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:residual}
\bm r = \abs{\bm y - X^T\bm \beta}
\end{equation}
For the size of uncorrupted set, two general cases are discussed. The first case is that the size can be estimated by users based on their prior knowledge on the data. For instance, if we know the data corruption happens rarely, then we can estimate the uncorrupted size as 95\% of the entire data. However, it is hard to obtain prior knowledge on the data in the real-world. Thus, in the second case, we propose a method to adaptively estimate the uncorrupted size based on the residual vector $\bm r$.
The method follows an intuition that when the coefficient $\bm \beta$ is close to $\bm \beta^*$, the residuals of uncorrupted samples are smaller than those of corrupted samples in strong possiblity. The intuition can be explained by the generative model in Equation \eqref{eq:model}, where the corrupted samples have the residual $\bm r \approx \bm u + \bm \varepsilon$, but the residual of uncorrupted samples only contains the white noise $\bm \varepsilon$.
The estimation of uncorrupted size can be formalized to solve the following problem:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:tau_opt}
\begin{aligned}
\hat{\tau} :=& \argmaxA_{\ceil*{n/2} < \tau \le n} \tau
\ \ \ \ s.t.\ \ r_{\varphi(\tau)} \le \frac{2\tau r_{\varphi(\tau_o)}}{\tau_o}, \tau \in \mathbbm{Z}^+
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $r_{\varphi(k)}$ represents the $k\nth$ elements of residual vector $\bm r$ in ascending order of magnitude. The variable $\tau_o$ in the constraint is defined as an intermediate variable whose $r_{\varphi(\tau_o)}^2$ has the closest value to $\frac{\norm{\bm r_{\mathcal{H}_{\tau'}(\bm r)}}_2^2}{\tau'}$, where $\tau'=\tau - \ceil*{n/2}$ and $\mathcal{H}_{\tau'}(\bm r)$ represent the position set containing the smallest $\tau'$ elements in residual $\bm r$. The problem in Equation \eqref{eq:tau_opt} can be solved by searching from $n$ to $\ceil*{n/2} + 1$ and return the first value $\hat{\tau}$ which satisfies the constraint. It is important to note that the estimation method in Equation \eqref{eq:tau_opt} requires the coefficients $\bm \beta$ to be close to $\bm \beta^*$. Thus, we optimize the uncorrupted set $S$ along with coefficient $\bm \beta$ until both of them converge.
The details of \textit{RoOFS} algorithm are presented in Algorithm \ref{algo:roofs}. In Line 3, the algorithm receives data matrix $X_{\Psi^k}$ with the incoming feature set $\Psi^k$ at time $k$. The new feature set $\Psi^k$ is combined into the retained feature set $\Psi$ in Line 4. For each incoming feature set, the algorithm iteratively optimizes the regression coefficients $\bm \beta$ and the uncorrupted set $S$ until the value of residual vector $\bm r_{S_t}^t$ is converged in Line 14. Specifically, in Line 6, regression coefficients $\bm \beta$ are updated to a better fit for the current estimated feature set $\Psi$ and uncorrupted set $S_t$.
In Line 8, feature set $\Omega$ that contains features with $\abs{\Psi}-\mu$ smallest weights in $\bm \beta$ is selected. Then features in $\Omega$ are removed from the retained feature set $\Psi$ and the weights in $\bm \beta_\Omega$ are reset to zero in Lines 9 and 10.
The residual vector $\bm r$ is updated in Line 11, while the uncorrupted set $S_{t+1}$ is estimated in Line 12 by the thresholding operator. Finally, both coefficients $\bm \beta$ and uncorrupted set $S$ are returned in Line 17.
\begin{algorithm2e}[t]
\DontPrintSemicolon
\KwIn{Corrupted training data \{$\bm x_i, y_i$\}, $i$ = 1...n, feature ratio $\mu$, tolerance $\epsilon$}
\KwOut{solution $\hat{\bm \beta}$}
$\bm \beta^0 \leftarrow \bm 0$, $\Psi$ = $\emptyset$, $S_0$ = [n], $t$ $\leftarrow$ 0, $k$ $\leftarrow$ 0 \\
\Repeat{No more features;}
{
Receive features $X_{\Psi^k}$ from the pool $\bar{\Psi}$ with index set $\Psi^k$\\
$\Psi = \Psi \cup \Psi^k$ \\
\Repeat{$\|\bm r_{S_{t+1}}^{t+1}-\bm r_{S_{t}}^{t}\|_2 < \epsilon n$}
{
$\bm \beta^{t+1}_\Psi \leftarrow \bm \beta^{t}_\Psi - \eta X_{\Psi,S_t}^T(X_{\Psi,S_t}^T \bm \beta_{\Psi}^t - \bm y_{S_t})$\\
\If{$\abs{\Psi} > \mu$}{
$\Omega = \arg\min_{\Omega \in \Psi}\norm{\bm \beta_\Omega}_1$ \ \ \textit{s.t.} $\abs{\Omega}=\abs{\Psi} - \mu$\\
$\bm \beta_\Omega = 0$ \\
$\Psi = \Psi \setminus \Omega$ \\
}
$\bm r = \abs{\bm y - X^T\bm \beta}$ \\
$S_{t+1} \leftarrow$ $\mathcal{H}_{\tau}(\bm r^{t+1})$, where $\tau$ is the estimated uncorrupted size.\\
$t \leftarrow t+1$ \\
}
$k \leftarrow k+1$
}
\textbf{return} $\bm \beta^{t+1}$, $S_{t+1}$
\caption{{\sc RoOFS Algorithm}}
\label{algo:roofs}
\end{algorithm2e}
\section{Theoretical Analysis} \label{section:analysis}
In this section, we show that the local optimal solution of our algorithm obtains a restricted error bound compared to ground truth solution.
To prove the theoretical properties of our algorithm, we require that the least squares function satisfies the \textit{Subset Restricted Strong Convexity} (SRSC), which is defined as follows:
\begin{definition}[\textbf{SRSC Property}]
The least squares function $f_S(\bm \beta) = \norm{\bm y_S - X_S^T \bm \beta}_2^2$ satisfies Subset Restricted Strong Convexity (SRSC) Property if the following holds for $\forall \bm \beta_1, \bm \beta_2 \in \Omega_\mu$ and $\forall S \in \mathcal{S}_\gamma$:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:SRSC}
\begin{aligned}
f_S(\bm \beta_1) - f_S(\bm \beta_2) \geq \nabla^Tf_S(\bm \beta_2)(\bm \beta_1 - \bm \beta_2)+ \frac{\varphi_\mu}{2}\norm{\bm \beta_1 - \bm \beta_2}_2^2
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
To provide the local optimality property of our solution, the following two lemmas are first proved.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:residual}
For a given least squares function $f(\bm \beta) = \norm{\bm y - X^T \bm \beta}_2^2$, let residual vector $\bm r = \bm y - X^T \bm \beta$ and $\delta(k)$ be the k-th position of the ascending order in vector $\bm r$, i.e. $r_{\delta(1)} \le r_{\delta(2)} \le ... \le r_{\delta(n)}$. For any $1\le\tau_1<\tau_2\le n$ and $\forall \bm \beta^t \in \Omega_m$, let $S_1=\{\delta(i)|1\le i \le \tau_1\}$ and $S_2=\{\delta(i)|1\le i \le \tau_2\}$. We then have $f_{S_1}(\bm \beta^t) \le f_{S_2}(\bm \beta^t)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $S_3 = \{\delta(i): \tau_1 + 1 \le i \le \tau_2\}$. Clearly, we have $f_{S_2}(\bm \beta^t) = f_{S_1}(\bm \beta^t) + f_{S_3}(\bm \beta^t)$. Moreover, since each element in $S_3$ is larger than any of the element in $S_1$, we have $f_{S_1}(\bm \beta^t) \le f_{S_2}(\bm \beta^t) + \frac{|S_3|}{|S_1|}f_{S_1}(\bm \beta^t)$ $\le \frac{|S_1|}{|S_1|+|S_3|}f_{S_2}(\bm \beta^t) = \frac{\tau_1}{\tau_2}f_{S_2}(\bm \beta^t)\le f_{S_2}(\bm \beta^t)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:tau}
Let $\tau_* = \gamma n$ be the true number of uncorrupted samples and $\tau_t$ be the estimated uncorrupted threshold at the $t$-th iteration. If $\tau_t \le \tau_*$, then $f_{S_t}(\bm \beta^t) \le f_{S_*}(\bm \beta^t)$. If $\tau_t > \tau_*$, then $f_{S_t}(\bm \beta^t) \le \lambda f_{S_*}(\bm \beta^t)$, where $\lambda = \Big[1+\frac{128(1-\gamma)}{2\gamma-1}\Big]$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
To simplify the notation, the subscripts $t$ that signify the $t$-th iteration will be omitted and the residual vector $\bm r$ is assumed to be sorted in ascending order of magnitude.
We will discuss the $\tau_t$ value in two different conditions compared to the value of $\tau_*$. In the first condition that $\tau_t \le \tau_*$, let $S_t=\{\delta(i)|1\le i \le \tau_t\}$ and $S_*=\{\delta(i)|1\le i \le \tau_*\}$, we have $f_{S_t}(\bm \beta^t) \le f_{S_*}(\bm \beta^t)$ according to Lemma \ref{lemma:residual}.
When $\tau_t > \tau_*$, we have the following properties according to the constraint specified in equation \eqref{eq:tau_opt}.
\begin{align*}
r_{\tau}^2 \le \bigg(2 \cdot \frac{\tau r_{\tau_o}}{\tau_o} \bigg)^2 \ \stackrel{(a)}{\le}&\ \frac{64}{\tau'}\norm{\bm r_{S_* \cap S_t}}_2^2 \\
\abs{S_t\setminus S_*}r_{\tau}^2 \stackrel{(b)}{\le}& 64(1-\gamma)\cdot \frac{n}{\tau'}\norm{\bm r_{S_* \cap S_t}}_2^2
\end{align*}
The inequality \textit{(a)} follows the definition of $\tau_o$ and the fact that $\abs{S_* \cap S_t} \ge \tau'$. The inequality \textit{(b)} follows $\abs{S_t\setminus S_*} \le (1-\gamma)\cdot n$ and $\norm{\bm r_{S_t\setminus S_*}}_2^2 \le \abs{S_t\setminus S_*}r_{\tau}^2$. Then we have
\begin{align*}
f_{S_t\setminus S_*}(\bm \beta) \le& \Big[64(1-\gamma)\cdot \frac{n}{\tau'} + 1\Big]f_{S_*\setminus S_t}(\bm \beta) \\
+& \Big[64(1-\gamma)\cdot \frac{n}{\tau'}\Big]f_{S_* \cap S_t}(\bm \beta) \\
f_{S_t\setminus S_*}(\bm \beta) + f_{S_* \cap S_t}(\bm \beta) \stackrel{(c)}{\le}& \Big[64(1-\gamma)\cdot \frac{n}{\tau'} + 1\Big] f_{S_*}(\bm \beta) \\
f_{S_t}(\bm \beta) \stackrel{(d)}{\le}& \Big[1+\frac{128(1-\gamma)}{2\gamma-1}\Big] f_{S_*}(\bm \beta)
\end{align*}
The inequality \textit{(c)} follows $f_{S_*}(\bm \beta) = f_{S_*\setminus S_t}(\bm \beta) + f_{S_* \cap S_t}(\bm \beta)$ and the inequality \textit{(d)} follows $\tau' = \tau_t-\frac{n}{2}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:local_optima}
Assume that least squares function $f_S(\bm \beta) = \norm{\bm y_S - X_S^T \bm \beta}_2^2$ satisfies Subset Restricted Strong Convexity (SRSC) Property for $\forall \bm \beta_1, \bm \beta_2 \in \Omega_\mu$ and $\forall S \in \mathcal{S}_\gamma$, then we have
\begin{equation} \label{eq:theorem3}
\begin{aligned}
f_{\hat{S}}(\hat{\bm \beta}) - f_{S^*}(\bm \beta^*) \leq \frac{\alpha\lambda}{1+\alpha} f_{S^*}(\bm 0) + \bigg( \frac{\lambda}{1+\alpha} - 1 \bigg)f_{S^*}(\bm \beta^*) \\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\alpha = \big(\frac{1}{\eta \cdot \varphi_\mu }\big)^2$ and $\lambda = \Big[1+\frac{128(1-\gamma)}{2\gamma-1}\Big]$. Specifically, when the uncorrupted set size is less than ground truth, $\lambda=1$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
As function $f_S(\bm \beta)$ satisfies SRSC property, we have
\begin{equation} \label{eq:theorem3}
\begin{aligned}
f_{S}(\bm \beta_1) - f_S(\bm \beta_2) \geq \langle \nabla f_S(\bm \beta_2), \bm \beta_1 - \bm \beta_2 \rangle + \frac{\varphi_\mu}{2}\norm{\bm \beta_1 - \bm \beta_2}_2^2 \\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
for $\forall \bm \beta_1, \bm \beta_2 \in \Omega_\mu$ and $\forall S \in \mathcal{S}_\gamma$. Let $\supp(\bm \beta_1) = \Omega_{1}$, then we have
\resizebox{.47\textwidth}{!}{\begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:property1}
\begin{aligned}
f_{S}(\bm \beta_1)& - f_S(\bm \beta_2) \\
\ge& \min_{\supp(\bm \beta) \subseteq \Omega_{1}} \Big\{ \langle \nabla f_S(\bm \beta_2), \bm \beta - \bm \beta_2 \rangle + \frac{\varphi_\mu}{2}\norm{\bm \beta - \bm \beta_2}_2^2 \Big\} \\
\stackrel{(a)}{=}& -\frac{1}{2\varphi_\mu} {\Bigg\| \Big[ \nabla f_S(\bm \beta_2) \Big]_{\Omega_1} \Bigg\|}_2^2 \stackrel{(b)}{\ge} -\frac{\abs{\Omega_1}}{2\varphi_\mu} {\Bigg\| \Big[ \nabla f_S(\bm \beta_2) \Big]_{\Omega_1} \Bigg\|}_\infty^2\\
\ge& -\frac{\mu}{2\varphi_\mu} {\Big\| \nabla f_S(\bm \beta_2) \Big\|}_\infty^2
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\end{minipage}}
The equation (a) solves the minimum value of $\min_{\supp(\bm \beta) \subseteq \Omega_{1}}\{\cdot\}$ by setting its gradient to zero, and the inequality (b) follows $\abs{\Omega_1} \le \mu$. Let $\bm \beta_1$, $\bm \beta_2$ be ground truth coefficient $\bm \beta^*$ and estimated solution $\hat{\bm \beta}$ respectively, and set $S$ be ground truth uncorrupted set $S^*$, then we have
\resizebox{.47\textwidth}{!}{\begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
\begin{align*}
f_{S^*}(\hat{\bm \beta}) - f_{S^*}(\bm \beta^*) \le& \frac{\mu}{2\varphi_\mu} {\Big\| \nabla f_{S^*}(\hat{\bm \beta}) \Big\|}_\infty^2 \le& \frac{\mu}{2\varphi_\mu} {\Big( \frac{1}{\eta} \hat{\bm \beta}_{\min} \Big)}^2
\end{align*}
\end{minipage}}
where $\hat{\bm \beta}_{\min} = \min_i \abs{\hat{\bm \beta}_i}$. According to SRSC property, we have
\begin{align*}
f_{S^*}(\bm 0) - f_{S^*}(\hat{\bm \beta}) \geq \langle \nabla f_{S^*}(\hat{\bm \beta}), -\hat{\bm \beta} \rangle + \frac{\varphi_\mu}{2}\norm{\hat{\bm \beta}}_2^2
\end{align*}}
Because of $\langle \nabla f_{S^*}(\hat{\bm \beta}), -\hat{\bm \beta} \rangle \geq 0$, we have
\resizebox{.47\textwidth}{!}{\begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
\begin{align*}
\mu \hat{\bm \beta}_{\min}^2 \le \norm{\hat{\bm \beta}}^2_2 \le& \frac{2}{\varphi_\mu}\Big[ f_{S^*}(\bm 0) - f_{S^*}(\hat{\bm \beta}) \Big] \\
2\varphi_\mu \cdot \eta^2 \Big[ f_{S^*}(\hat{\bm \beta}) - f_{S^*}(\bm \beta^*) \Big] \stackrel{(c)}{\le}& \frac{2}{\varphi_\mu}\Big[ f_{S^*}(\bm 0) - f_{S^*}(\hat{\bm \beta}) \Big]
\end{align*}
\end{minipage}}
The inequality (c) follows the Equation \eqref{eq:property1}. Let $\alpha$ be $\big(\frac{1}{\eta \varphi_\mu}\big)^2$, then we have
\begin{align*}
f_{S^*}(\hat{\bm \beta}) - f_{S^*}(\bm \beta^*) \le \alpha \Big[ f_{S^*}(\bm 0) - f_{S^*}(\hat{\bm \beta}) \Big] \\
f_{S^*}(\hat{\bm \beta}) \le \frac{\alpha}{1+\alpha} \Big[ f_{S^*}(\bm 0) - f_{S^*}(\hat{\bm \beta}) \Big] + f_{S^*}(\bm \beta^*)
\end{align*}
According to Lemma \ref{lemma:tau}, we have
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{\lambda} f_{\hat{S}}(\hat{\bm \beta}) \le f_{S^*}(\bm \beta^*) \le \frac{\alpha}{1+\alpha} \Big[ f_{S^*}(\bm 0) - f_{S^*}(\hat{\bm \beta}) \Big] + f_{S^*}(\bm \beta^*)\\
f_{\hat{S}}(\hat{\bm \beta}) - f_{S^*}(\bm \beta^*) \leq \frac{\alpha\lambda}{1+\alpha} f_{S^*}(\bm 0) + \bigg( \frac{\lambda}{1+\alpha} - 1 \bigg)f_{S^*}(\bm \beta^*)
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
Since the value of $f_{S^*}(\bm 0)$ and $f_{S^*}(\bm \beta^*)$ are both constants and $f_{S^*}(\bm \beta^*)$ is close to 0, the error bound of our solution is depended on the value of $\frac{\alpha\lambda}{1+\alpha}$. When the ratio of data corruption $\gamma$ is close to one, $\lambda$ is close to one according to its definition. In addition, the value of $\alpha$ is smaller when the parameter $\varphi_\mu$ of the SRSC property is smaller. Therefore, the error of our solution can be close to zero when both $\varphi_\mu$ and $\gamma$ are large enough.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\subfigure[p=2K, n=1K, $\mu$/$p$=20\%, dense]{%
\label{fig:beta_1}
\includegraphics[trim=0.6cm 0.1cm 0.6cm 0.1cm,width=0.32\linewidth]{beta-cr_1}
\subfigure[p=4K, n=1K, $\mu$/$p$=20\%, dense]{%
\label{fig:beta_2}
\includegraphics[trim=0.6cm 0.1cm 0.6cm 0.1cm,width=0.32\linewidth]{beta-cr_2}
\subfigure[p=4K, n=2K, $\mu$/$p$=20\%, dense]{%
\label{fig:beta_3}
\includegraphics[trim=0.6cm 0.1cm 0.6cm 0.1cm,width=0.32\linewidth]{beta-cr_3}
\subfigure[p=4K, n=1K, $\mu$/$p$=40\%, dense]{%
\label{fig:beta_4}
\includegraphics[trim=0.6cm 0.1cm 0.6cm 0.1cm,width=0.32\linewidth]{beta-cr_4}
\subfigure[p=4K, n=1K, $\mu$/$p$=80\%, dense]{%
\label{fig:beta_5}
\includegraphics[trim=0.6cm 0.1cm 0.6cm 0.1cm,width=0.32\linewidth]{beta-cr_5}
\subfigure[p=2K, n=1K, $\mu$/$p$=20\%, no dense]{%
\label{fig:beta_6}
\includegraphics[trim=0.6cm 0.1cm 0.6cm 0.1cm,width=0.32\linewidth]{beta-cr_6}
\caption{
\small Performance on regression coefficients recovery for different corruption ratios in uniform distribution.
}%
\label{fig:beta-cr}
\end{figure*}
\section{Experimental Results}\label{section:experiment}
In this section, we report the extensive experimental evaluation performed to verify the robustness, effectiveness of feature selection, and efficiency of the proposed method. All the experiments were conducted on a 64-bit machine with Intel(R) core(TM) quad-core processor ([email protected]) and 32.0GB memory. Details of both the source code and sample data used in the experiment can be downloaded here\footnote{\url{https://goo.gl/C4HQjo}}.
\begin{table*}[h]
\caption{F1 Scores for the Performance on Uncorrupted Set Recovery.}
\centering
\small
\renewcommand\arraystretch{1.2}
\label{table:uncorrupt_set}
\scalebox{1}{
\begin{tabularx}{0.9\textwidth}{c *{13}{Y}}
\toprule
& \multicolumn{4}{c}{\textbf{p=2K, n=1K, $\mu$/$p$=20\% }}
& \multicolumn{4}{c}{\textbf{p=2K, n=2K, $\mu$/$p$=20\%}}
& \multicolumn{4}{c}{\textbf{p=4K, n=2K, $\mu$/$p$=20\%}} \\
\cmidrule(lr){2-5} \cmidrule(lr){6-9} \cmidrule(lr){10-13}
& 10\% & 20\% & 30\% & 40\% & 10\% & 20\% & 30\% & 40\% & 10\% & 20\% & 30\% & 40\%\\
\midrule
\textbf{Homotopy} &0.980 & 0.912 & 0.849 & 0.682 & 0.977 & 0.923 & 0.854 & 0.834 &0.970 & 0.923 & 0.845 & 0.775\\
\textbf{DALM} &0.976 & 0.915 & 0.865 & 0.825 & 0.973 & 0.921 & 0.885 & 0.924 &0.962 & 0.946 & 0.926 & 0.898\\
\textbf{TORR*} &0.983 & 0.950 & 0.927 & 0.893 & 0.983 & 0.960 & 0.919 & 0.934 &0.978 & 0.954 & 0.934 & 0.916\\
\textbf{TORR25} &0.965 & 0.899 & 0.842 & 0.762 & 0.961 & 0.909 & 0.828 & 0.770 &0.958 & 0.905 & 0.848 & 0.752\\
\textbf{RLHH} &0.979 & 0.945 & 0.933 & 0.901 & 0.978 & 0.966 & 0.936 & 0.914 &0.980 & 0.959 & 0.940 & 0.896\\
\textbf{RoOFS} &\textbf{0.991} & \textbf{0.986} & \textbf{0.974} & \textbf{0.933} & \textbf{0.993} & \textbf{0.991} & \textbf{0.976} & \textbf{0.946} &\textbf{0.993} & \textbf{0.988} & \textbf{0.975} & \textbf{0.923}\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabularx}}
\scalebox{1}{
\renewcommand\arraystretch{1.2}
\begin{tabularx}{0.9\textwidth}{c *{13}{Y}}
& \multicolumn{4}{c}{\textbf{p=2K, n=1K, $\mu$/$p$=60\%}}
& \multicolumn{4}{c}{\textbf{p=2K, n=1K, $\mu$/$p$=20\% (nd)}}
& \multicolumn{4}{c}{\textbf{p=4K, n=2K, $\mu$/$p$=20\% (nd)}} \\
\cmidrule(lr){2-5} \cmidrule(lr){6-9} \cmidrule(lr){10-13}
& 10\% & 20\% & 30\% & 40\% & 10\% & 20\% & 30\% & 40\% & 10\% & 20\% & 30\% & 40\%\\
\midrule
\textbf{Homotopy} &0.979 & 0.932 & 0.829 & 0.708 &0.972 & 0.923 & 0.853 & 0.717 &0.985 & 0.913 & 0.868 & 0.789\\
\textbf{DALM} &0.975 & 0.939 & 0.863 & 0.826 &0.965 & 0.910 & 0.886 & 0.842 &0.984 & 0.951 & 0.937 & 0.889\\
\textbf{TORR*} &0.979 & 0.957 & 0.937 & 0.870 &0.974 & 0.950 & 0.935 & 0.896 &0.988 & 0.960 & 0.947 & 0.904\\
\textbf{TORR25} &0.952 & 0.912 & 0.833 & 0.690 &0.952 & 0.911 & 0.859 & 0.758 &0.968 & 0.908 & 0.864 & 0.745\\
\textbf{RLHH} &0.975 & 0.959 & 0.928 & 0.845 &0.973 & 0.959 & 0.935 & 0.907 &0.983 & 0.965 & 0.940 & 0.912\\
\textbf{RoOFS} &\textbf{0.982} & \textbf{0.984} & \textbf{0.962} & \textbf{0.910} &\textbf{0.989} & \textbf{0.993} & \textbf{0.985} & \textbf{0.947} &\textbf{0.994} & \textbf{0.991} & \textbf{0.988} & \textbf{0.933}\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabularx}}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Datasets and Metrics}
To demonstrate the performance of our proposed method, comprehensive experiments are performed in synthetic datasets whose simulation samples were randomly generated according to the model in Equation \eqref{eq:model}. Specifically, we sample the regression coefficients $\bm \beta^* \in \mathbbm{R}^p$ as a random unit norm vector with feature ratio constraint $\norm{\bm \beta}_0 = \mu$. The data matrix $X$ was drawn independently and identically distributed from $\bm x_i \sim \mathcal{N}(\bm 0, I_p)$ and the uncorrupted response variables were generated as $y_i^* = \bm x_i^T \bm \beta^*$. The set of uncorrupted samples $S$ was selected as a uniformly random $\tau_*$-sized subset of $[n]$. The response vector $\bm y$ containing corrupted samples was generated as $\bm y = \bm y^* + \bm u +\bm \varepsilon$, where the corruption vector $\bm u$ was sampled from the uniform distribution $\big [-5\|\bm y^*\|_\infty, 5\|\bm y^*\|_\infty \big]$ and the additive dense noise was $\varepsilon_i \sim \mathcal{N}(0, \sigma^2)$.
For the real-world data set, we applied our methods on the IMDb reviews data set for the review score prediction. The data set contains 50,000 popular movie reviews with the review score from 1 to 10 provided by the IMDb website. The adversarial data corruption vector $\bm u$ was appended to its original review score, where $\bm u$ was also sampled from the range $\big [-5\|\bm y^*\|_\infty, 5\|\bm y^*\|_\infty \big]$ randomly.
Following the setting in \cite{bhatia2015robust}\cite{ijcai2017-480}, we measured the performance of the regression coefficients recovery using the standard $L_2$ error $e = \norm{\hat{\bm \beta} - \bm \beta^*}_2$, where $\hat{\bm \beta}$ represents the recovered coefficients for each method and $\bm \beta^*$ is the true regression coefficients. To validate the performance for corrupted set discovery, the F1 score is measured by comparing the discovered corrupted sets with the actual ones. Similarly, the F1 score is also used to measure the effectiveness of feature selection by comparing the selected feature set with actual ones. To compare the scalability of each method, the CPU running time for each of the competing methods was also measured.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centering
\subfigure[p=2K, corruption ratio=20\%]{%
\label{fig:beta-fr_1}
\includegraphics[trim=0.6cm 0.1cm 0.6cm 0.1cm,width=0.32\linewidth]{beta-fr_1}
\subfigure[p=4K, corruption ratio=20\%]{%
\label{fig:beta-fr_2}
\includegraphics[trim=0.6cm 0.1cm 0.6cm 0.1cm,width=0.32\linewidth]{beta-fr_2}
\subfigure[p=2K, corruption ratio=40\%]{%
\label{fig:beta-fr_3}
\includegraphics[trim=0.6cm 0.1cm 0.6cm 0.1cm,width=0.32\linewidth]{beta-fr_3}
\caption{%
\small Performance on regression coefficients recovery for different ratios of feature ratio (n=1K, dense noise).
}
\label{fig:beta-fr}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Comparison Methods}
The following methods are included in the performance comparison presented here: \textit{Grafting} \cite{Perkins:2003:OFS:3041838.3041913}. The \textit{Grafting} method is an online version of $L_1$ regularization approach to selects features. \textit{Online Substitution} (\textit{OS}) \cite{Yang:2016:OFS:2939672.2939881} is a parameter-free online feature selection algorithm with limited-memory. Both \textit{Grafting} and \textit{OS} cannot handle the adversarial data corruption and train models without considering data corruption. We also compared our method to the robust regression methods \cite{Wright:2010:DEC:1840493.1840533} \cite{nguyen2013exact}. \textit{Homotopy} and \textit{DALM} are two $L_1$ based solvers that outperform other $L_1$ methods both in terms of recovery properties and running time \cite{Yang:EECS-2010-13}. A hard thresholding method, \textit{TORRENT (abbreviated "TORR")} \cite{bhatia2015robust}, developed for robust regression was also compared to our method. As the method requires a parameter for the corruption ratio, which is difficult to estimate in practice, we chose two versions of parameter settings: \textit{TORR*} and \textit{TORR25}. \textit{TORR*} uses the true corruption ratio as its parameter, and \textit{TORR25} applies parameter that is uniformly distributed across the range of $\pm 25\%$ off the true value. Another recently proposed heuristic hard thresholding method, \textit{RLHH} \cite{ijcai2017-480}, is also compared in our experiment. The method is a parameter-free approach, where the data corruption is estimated by a heuristic hard thresholding method. As all these robust methods are not designed for online feature selection, we run them individually in different feature batches and select features with largest $\mu$ weights in regression coefficients when $\norm{\bm \beta}_0 = \mu$.
\subsection{Recovery of regression coefficients}
We selected 6 competing methods with which to evaluate the recovery performance of regression coefficients $\bm \beta$: \textit{Grafting}, \textit{OS}, \textit{Homotopy}, \textit{DALM}, \textit{TORR}, \textit{RLHH}.
Figures \ref{fig:beta_1} and \ref{fig:beta_2} show the recovery performance for different feature numbers when the data size is fixed. The results show that 1) the proposed method, \textit{RoOFS}, outperforms all the competing methods in all the setting of corruption ratios, and 2) The performance of \textit{RoOFS} is very resistant to the corruption data because the error of \textit{RoOFS} method increases much more slowly than others when corruption ratio increases from 5\% to 40\%. Figures \ref{fig:beta_2} and \ref{fig:beta_3} show that when data size increases, we have similar conclusion on the performance except the overall error is decreased since more data is applied. Figures \ref{fig:beta_4} and \ref{fig:beta_5} show that the result of coefficient recovery remains the same when the number of selected features increase. Figure \ref{fig:beta_6} shows that almost all the methods without the dense noise setting perform more than 50\% better than that in dense noise settings. Specifically, the error of \textit{RoOFS} is close to zero which means it can almost exactly recover the ground true regression coefficients without the dense noise setting.
Figure \ref{fig:beta-fr} shows the recovery performance of regression coefficients in different ratios of feature sparsity. In general, the performance of \textit{RoOFS} method outperforms all the other competing methods in all the data settings. Figure \ref{fig:beta-fr_1} and \ref{fig:beta-fr_2} show that 1) when the feature ratio increases, the recovery error of \textit{RoOFS} method grows linearly with a small slope, which means our approach can be fitted into different settings of feature sparsity, and 2) the \textit{RoOFS} method performs constantly well when the feature number increases from 2K to 4K. In addition, Figure \ref{fig:beta-fr_1} and \ref{fig:beta-fr_3} show that the \textit{RoOFS} method is robust to corrupted data, because the error is not significantly impacted when the corruption ratio increases from 20\% to 40\%.
\subsection{Recovery of Uncorrupted Set}
As the online feature selection methods \textit{Grafting} and \textit{OS} do not explicitly estimate uncorrupted sets, we compared our proposed method with the robust methods: \textit{Homotopy}, \textit{DALM}, \textit{TORR}, and \textit{RLHH}. For the \textit{TORR} algorithm, we use two parameter settings of \textit{TORR*} and \textit{TORR25} for 0\% and 25\% deviation of true corrupted ratio, respectively. Table \ref{table:uncorrupt_set} shows the following: 1) \textit{RoOFS} outperforms all the other methods up to 14.9\% in different settings of data sizes, feature numbers and ratios of feature sparsity. 2) When increasing the corruption ratio, the F1 scores decrease for all the methods. Also, the F1 scores slightly increase 0.5\% in average when data size become two times larger, which indicates the number of features has few influence on the estimation of uncorrupted set. 3) The result of \textit{TORR} methods is highly dependent on the corruption ratio parameter: the results of \textit{TORR*} is up to 26.1\% better than \textit{TORR25}. It is important to note that the true corruption ratio parameter used in \textit{TORR*} cannot be estimated exactly in practice. 4) Without the dense noise settings, the F1 scores increase less than 1\% compared to the F1 score based on the same setting with dense noise, which shows that dense noise has small impact on the performance of uncorrupted set recovery.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\scalebox{1.16}{
\subfigure[p=2K, $\mu$/$p$=20\%, cr=10\%]{%
\label{fig:runtime-ds}
\includegraphics[trim=0.6cm 0.1cm 0.6cm 0.1cm,width=0.7\linewidth]{runtime-ds}
}}
\scalebox{1.16}{
\subfigure[n=1K, $\mu$/$p$=20\%, cr=10\%]{%
\label{fig:runtime-fn}
\includegraphics[trim=0.6cm 0.1cm 0.6cm 0.1cm,width=0.7\linewidth]{runtime-fn}
}}
\caption{
\small Running time for different data and feature sizes.
}%
\label{fig:runtime}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Performance of Feature Selection}
We selected all the six competing methods to evaluate the performance of feature selection in different settings including data sizes, feature numbers, and dense noises. For each data setting, we chose different ratios of feature sparsity (also known as $\mu$/$p$) ranging from 10\% to 60\%. Table \ref{table:feature_selection} shows the following: 1) the F1 scores of \textit{RoOFS} method is up to 69.2\% better than other methods, especially when the feature ratio is less than 40\%. 2) Although the F1 scores of most methods such as \textit{Grafting} and \textit{TORR} are above 0.6 when the ratio is larger than 50\%, the performance degraded significantly when the ratio decreased to 10\%. However, the F1 score of \textit{RoOFS} method is constantly higher than 0.85 in all the ratios of features. 3) \textit{OS} method is very competitive in the task of feature selection; however, it still has lower F1 scores in all the settings when the ratio is less than 50\%. 4) The setting of dense noise does not have significant impact on the performance of feature selection, since the F1 score without dense noise is only less than 1\% larger than that in dense noise setting.
\begin{table*}[t]
\caption{F1 Score on Performance of Feature Selection (cr=30\%).}
\centering
\small
\renewcommand\arraystretch{1.2}
\label{table:feature_selection}
\begin{tabularx}{0.9\textwidth}{c *{13}{Y}}
\toprule
& \multicolumn{6}{c}{\textbf{p=10K, n=10K, dense }}
& \multicolumn{6}{c}{\textbf{p=20K, n=10K, dense}} \\
\cmidrule(lr){2-7} \cmidrule(lr){8-13}
& 10\% & 20\% & 30\% & 40\% & 50\% & 60\% & 10\% & 20\% & 30\% & 40\% & 50\% & 60\%\\
\midrule
\textbf{Grafting} &0.130 & 0.201 & 0.302 & 0.543 & 0.759 & 0.789 & 0.111 & 0.399 &0.642 & 0.773 & 0.844 & 0.895\\
\textbf{OS} &0.706 & 0.649 & 0.626 & 0.643 & 0.810 & 0.678 & 0.611 & 0.611 & 0.606 & 0.689 & 0.836 & \textbf{0.975}\\
\textbf{Homotopy} &0.116 & 0.217 & 0.304 & 0.406 & 0.498 & 0.667 & 0.109 & 0.202 & 0.417 & 0.625 & 0.750 & 0.833\\
\textbf{DALM} &0.130 & 0.219 & 0.309 & 0.418 & 0.516 & 0.597 & 0.114 & 0.215 & 0.390 & 0.404 & 0.502 & 0.603\\
\textbf{TORR} &0.275 & 0.297 & 0.368 & 0.446 & 0.525 & 0.647 & 0.320 & 0.338 & 0.395 & 0.458 & 0.535 & 0.623\\
\textbf{RLHH} &0.193 & 0.261 & 0.338 & 0.416 & 0.510 & 0.647 & 0.322 & 0.336 & 0.390 & 0.461 & 0.536 & 0.628\\
\textbf{RoOFS} &\textbf{0.911} & \textbf{0.910} & \textbf{0.876} & \textbf{0.870} & \textbf{0.895} & \textbf{0.891} & \textbf{0.876} & \textbf{0.842} &\textbf{0.832} & \textbf{0.848} & \textbf{0.881} & 0.906\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabularx
\renewcommand\arraystretch{1.2}
\begin{tabularx}{0.9\textwidth}{c *{13}{Y}}
& \multicolumn{6}{c}{\textbf{p=10K, n=5K, dense}}
& \multicolumn{6}{c}{\textbf{p=10K, n=10K, no dense}} \\
\cmidrule(lr){2-7} \cmidrule(lr){8-13}
& 10\% & 20\% & 30\% & 40\% & 50\% & 60\% & 10\% & 20\% & 30\% & 40\% & 50\% & 60\%\\
\midrule
\textbf{Grafting} & 0.114 & 0.206 & 0.426 & 0.641 & 0.765 & 0.836 & 0.142 & 0.224 & 0.293 & 0.527 & 0.698 & 0.797\\
\textbf{OS} & 0.657 & 0.596 & 0.618 & 0.688 & 0.840 & \textbf{0.961} & 0.688 & 0.682 & 0.647 & 0.649 & 0.655 & 0.688\\
\textbf{Homotopy} & 0.107 & 0.207 & 0.304 & 0.395 & 0.500 & 0.667 & 0.126 & 0.203 & 0.307 & 0.405 & 0.500 & 0.667\\
\textbf{DALM} & 0.113 & 0.210 & 0.311 & 0.396 & 0.504 & 0.602 & 0.140 & 0.226 & 0.308 & 0.407 & 0.504 & 0.609\\
\textbf{TORR} & 0.312 & 0.336 & 0.391 & 0.461 & 0.532 & 0.627 & 0.475 & 0.448 & 0.472 & 0.521 & 0.579 & 0.646\\
\textbf{RLHH} & 0.314 & 0.334 & 0.388 & 0.463 & 0.530 & 0.624 & 0.476 & 0.458 & 0.487 & 0.531 & 0.585 & 0.646\\
\textbf{RoOFS} & \textbf{0.873} & \textbf{0.830} &\textbf{0.837} & \textbf{0.859} & \textbf{0.883} & 0.909 & \textbf{0.917} & \textbf{0.922} &\textbf{0.898} & \textbf{0.900} & \textbf{0.889} & \textbf{0.900}\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabularx
\end{table*}
\subsection{Performance in real-world data}
To evaluate the robustness of our proposed methods in a real-world dataset, we compared the performance of sentiment prediction in different corruption settings, ranging from 5\% to 40\%. The dataset was first proposed by Maas et al. \cite{Maas2011Learning} as a benchmark for sentiment analysis. It consists of movie reviews taken from IMDB. One key aspect of this dataset is that each movie review has several sentences. The 100,000 movie reviews are divided into three datasets: 25,000 labeled training instances, 25,000 labeled test instances and 50,000 unlabeled training instances. The unlabeled data were designed as the additional corruption to the dataset: the score of sentiment were random number between one to ten.
Table \ref{table:sentiment prediction} shows the mean absolute error of sentiment prediction in the IMDB datasets.
From the result, we can conclude:
1) \textit{RoOFS} method outperform all the other methods in different corruption settings.
2) Although the absolute error of the other methods such as \textit{Homotopy} and \textit{DALM} are above 4, the performance varied significantly when the ratio changed because these methods highly dependent on the parameters and it's hard to estimate the feature sparsity ratio and true corruption ratio in the real-world data. However, the performance of \textit{RoOFS} method is constantly above 3.10 in all the ratios of corruption.
3) It is true that \textit{OS} has a very competitive performance in all the corruption settings because the deviation of corruption is small, which is less than 50\% from the labeled data. But the running time of \textit{OS} is too high to train the data which has 10k features.
4) When increasing the corruption ratio, the absolute error of \textit{RoOFS} method decreased.
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{Mean Absolute Error of Sentiment Prediction.}
\centering
\small
\renewcommand\arraystretch{1.2}
\label{table:sentiment prediction}
\begin{tabularx}{0.96\linewidth}{c *{13}{Y}}
\toprule
& \multicolumn{6}{c}{\textbf{p=10K, n=10K}}\\
\cmidrule(lr){2-7} \cmidrule(lr){8-13}
& 5\% & 10\% & 20\% & 30\% & 40\% & Avg \\
\midrule
\textbf{Grafting} &3.162 & 3.162 & 3.162 & 3.162 & 3.162 & 3.162 \\
\textbf{OS} &3.111 & 3.078 & 3.078 & 3.113 & 3.108 & 3.098 \\
\textbf{Homotopy} &4.157 & 3.925 & 3.894 & 3.828 & 3.540 & 3.869 \\
\textbf{DALM} &3.573 & 3.311 & 3.523 & 3.459 & 3.252 & 3.424 \\
\textbf{TORR} &5.090 & 3.928 & 4.596 & 5.147 & 4.218 & 4.596 \\
\textbf{RLHH} &5.448 & 4.198 & 3.716 & 4.269 & 4.626 & 4.451 \\
\textbf{RoOFS} &\textbf{3.074} & \textbf{3.073} & \textbf{3.072} & \textbf{3.070} & \textbf{3.066} & \textbf{3.071} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabularx}
\end{table}
\subsection{Efficiency}
To evaluate the efficiency of our proposed method, we compared the performances of all the competing methods for two difference settings: data sizes and feature numbers. For \textit{Grafting} and \textit{OS} methods, the online features are handled individually due to their design. For the other methods, a hundred features are handled together as a batch. As Figure \ref{fig:runtime} shows, we found the following: 1) \textit{RoOFS} algorithm has a very competitive efficiency compared to the thresholding based methods, \textit{TORR} and \textit{RLHH}, and significantly outperforms other four methods. 2) The running time of \textit{RoOFS} algorithm increases linearly when both data size and feature number increase, which indicates that our algorithm can be scaled to massive datasets. 3) The running time of \textit{DALM} method increases exponentially when data size increases, however, its efficiency has rarely impacted by increasing the number of features. 4) The efficiency of \textit{Grafting} method fluctuates largely on the different data sizes, which indicates that its running time depends on the data size and content of data.
\section{Conclusion}\label{section:conclusion}
In this paper, a novel robust regression algorithm via online feature selection, \textit{RoOFS}, is proposed to recover the regression coefficients and the uncorrupted set under the assumption that features cannot be accessed entirely at one time. To achieve this, we designed a robust online substitution method to alternately estimate the optimal uncorrupted set and substitute the retained feature set with newly updated features. We demonstrate that our algorithm can recover regression coefficients with a restricted error bound compared to ground truth. Extensive experiments on massive simulation data demonstrated that the proposed algorithm outperforms other competing methods in both effectiveness and efficiency.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
For my talk at the
workshop
I prepared two examples from my past and current work
that highlight the usefulness and the potential of graph techniques for problems that have
been approached predominantly as questions about terms:
increasing sharing in functional programs,
and tackling problems about Milner's process semantics for regular expressions.
The unifying element of these two illustrations consists in
modeling terms by term graphs or transition graphs with structure
constraints (higher-order features or labelings with added conditions),
and in being able to go back and forth between terms and graphs.
The first illustration, which I only touched on in my talk, concerns the definition, and the efficient implementation
of maximal sharing for the higher-order terms in the $\lambda$\nb-cal\-cu\-lus\ with letrec.
For solving this problem,
Jan Rochel and I developed a representation pipeline from terms via higher-order term graphs
and first-order term graphs to deterministic finite-state automata.
The setting for the second illustration, on which I focused in my presentation,
is Milner's process semantics of regular expressions, which yields nondeterministic finite-state
automata (NFAs) whose equality is studied under bisimilarity.
In my current work with Wan Fokkink, I use labelings of process graphs that
witness direct expressibility by a regular expression via a condition on the graph topology.
My motivation for explaining these two cases together developed as follows.
While working on problems concerning the process semantics of regular expressions
I have repeatedly benefited from the previous work on modeling cyclic \lambdaterm{s}\ by struc\-ture-con\-strained\ term graphs.
It turned out that many concepts and methods that Jan Rochel and I had developed
could be adapted in order to define struc\-ture-con\-strained\ process graphs that directly represent regular expressions
under the process semantics.
It seemed worthwhile to compare the settings and the results
so that the flow of ideas from one setting to the other, and probably back, might become clearer.
Perhaps this can be of help in similar situations.
In this extended abstract I explain the setting and the background of the underlying problems,
provide references, give examples, and informally describe the chosen approaches:
in Section~\ref{sec:maxsharing}, for the implementation of maximal sharing of functional programs,
and in Section~\ref{sec:procsem}, for the problems concerning the process semantics of regular expressions.
In order to highlight differences, and to identify similarities
that enabled a transferal of ideas between the two illustrations,
I compare them in Section~\ref{sec:comparison} with respect to
the initial situation, the desired concepts,
and the defined structure-constrained graphs.
\section{Maximal sharing of functional programs}
\label{sec:maxsharing}
The first example concerns the definition, and the efficient implementation of maximal sharing for functional programs,
and more specifically, for the higher-order terms in the $\lambda$\nb-cal\-cu\-lus\ with \text{\normalfont\sf letrec}\ \cite{grab:roch:2014:ICFP}.
Graph representations of terms in the $\lambda$\nb-cal\-cu\-lus\ with \text{\normalfont\sf letrec}\
are crucial for the implementation of functional programming languages,
in particular for facilitating the efficient execution of compiled programs
in sharing-graph form via graph reduction.
However, these graph representations were never conceived
as term graph representations that keep their intended meaning under bisimilarity.
In fact they do not behave well under bisimilarity with respect to the unfolding semantics
of terms in the $\lambda$\nb-cal\-cu\-lus\ with \text{\normalfont\sf letrec}.
In order to study the compactification of functional programs (in their usual language),
Jan Rochel and I therefore looked for
term graph representations that support compactification under bisimilarity
while preserving the intended meaning, and being easy to compute and to translate back into terms.
Our focus on these desiderata (see also Figure~\ref{fig:motiv:results:lambdaletreccal} later)
led us to structure-constrained term graph representations,
for which we investigated a number of different options \cite{grab:roch:2013:TERMGRAPH}.
We eventually defined classes of `$\lambda$-higher-order-term-graphs' and of `$\lambda$-term-graphs'
that are closed under functional bisimilarity and have natural correspondences with the terms in the $\lambda$\nb-cal\-cu\-lus\ with \text{\normalfont\sf letrec}\
(see again in~Figure~\ref{fig:motiv:results:lambdaletreccal}).
On this basis Jan Rochel and I
developed a `representation pipeline'
from higher-order terms to deterministic finite-state automata (DFAs):
(1)~Terms in the $\lambda$\nb-cal\-cu\-lus\ with \text{\normalfont\sf letrec}\
can be represented by appropriately defined higher-order term graphs,
which are first-order term graphs together with higher-order features
such as a scope function, or an abstraction prefix function, that are defined on the set of vertices (see \cite{grab:roch:2013:TERMGRAPH});
(2)~higher-order term graphs are encoded as first-order term graphs (see also \cite{grab:roch:2013:TERMGRAPH}), and
(3)~first-order term graphs are represented as DFAs (see \cite{grab:roch:2014:ICFP}).
In this way unfolding equivalence on terms is represented by bisimulation equivalence on term graphs (higher-order and first-order),
and ultimately, by language equivalence of DFAs.
In \cite{grab:roch:2014:ICFP} we also define a readback operation from DFAs that arise by the representation pipeline
back to terms in the $\lambda$\nb-cal\-cu\-lus\ with \text{\normalfont\sf letrec}.
This operation makes it possible to go back and forth between terms and representing DFAs:
it has the property that the representation via (1), (2), and (3) is the inverse of the readback operation.
\begin{figure}[p!]
%
\input{figs/pipeline-1.tex}
%
\caption{\label{fig:pipeline-1
Stepwise translation of the term
$\;\,\labs{x}{\labs{f}{\letin{r = \lapp{\lapp{f}{r}}{x}}{r}}}\;\,$ in the $\lambda$\nb-cal\-cu\-lus\ with \text{\normalfont\sf letrec}\
via the construction of its syntax tree, and its modification into a first-order term graph with scope sets
to obtain a $\lambda$\nobreakdash-higher-order term graph in one of two versions:
a higher-order term graph
with scope sets for abstraction nodes, and with an abstraction-prefix function on the set of vertices.}
%
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p!]
%
\input{figs/pipeline-2.tex}
%
\vspace*{-2.75ex}
%
\caption{\label{fig:pipeline-2}
Stepwise translation of the term
$\;\,\labs{x}{\labs{f}{\letin{r = \lapp{\lapp{f}{r}}{x}}{r}}}\;\,$ in the $\lambda$\nb-cal\-cu\-lus\ with \text{\normalfont\sf letrec}\
from the $\lambda$-higher-order term graph obtained in Fig.~\ref{fig:pipeline-1}
via a $\lambda$\nobreakdash-term graph (a first-order term graph in which ends of scopes are encoded by scope vertices)
and via an incomplete $\lambda$\nobreakdash-DFA
into
a $\lambda$\nobreakdash-DFA.
In the last step a non-accepting state is added to the incomplete $\lambda$\nobreakdash-DFA
to which all missing transitions are directed
}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:pipeline-1} and Figure~\ref{fig:pipeline-2} provide an example
for the translation of a term in the $\lambda$\nb-cal\-cu\-lus\ with \text{\normalfont\sf letrec}\
into higher-order and first-order graph representations, and eventually to a finite-state automaton.
Figure~\ref{fig:pipeline-1} covers the part from the syntax tree to $\lambda$\nobreakdash-higher-order-term-graphs,
and Figure~\ref{fig:pipeline-2} the remaining part via a $\lambda$\nobreakdash-term-graph
and an `incomplete $\lambda$\nobreakdash-DFA' to a `$\lambda$\nobreakdash-DFA'.
In Figure~\ref{fig:pipeline-1} we start from the syntax tree of the term,
model the recursive definition by a recursive backlink,
replace variable names by nameless dummies that have binding backlinks to the corresponding abstraction vertices,
and draw scopes.
In this way we obtain first-order term graphs with scope sets
that satisfy the conditions for scope sets in the concept of `higher-order term graph' by Blom~\cite{blom:2001}.
We call the specific version obtained here a $\lambda$\nobreakdash-higher-order term graph \emph{with scope sets}.
In doing so we distinguish it from a $\lambda$\nobreakdash-higher-order term graph \emph{with an abstraction prefix function},
where scopes of abstraction vertices are recorded per vertex $v$ via the stack of those abstraction vertices in whose scope $v$ resides.
See both versions of $\lambda$\nobreakdash-higher-order term graph for the example here at the bottom of Figure~\ref{fig:pipeline-1}.
In Figure~\ref{fig:pipeline-2} we start from the $\lambda$\nobreakdash-higher-order-term-graph obtained in Figure~\ref{fig:pipeline-1},
and crucially encode all scope information (recorded by the scope set, or by the abstraction prefix function)
by introducing a scope vertex for the single edge in this example that crosses the boundary of a scope.
We call the resulting first-order term graph a \emph{$\lambda$\nobreakdash-term-graph}.
By using an intuitive correspondence of term graphs with DFAs, we translate this first-order term graph
further to obtain an incomplete $\lambda$\nobreakdash-DFA and eventually a $\lambda$\nobreakdash-DFA, both of which represent the
term $\,\labs{x}{\labs{f}{\letin{r = \lapp{\lapp{f}{r}}{x}}{r}}}\,$ from which we started.
Via the correspondence statements on which the representation pipeline is based,
unfolding equivalence of terms in the $\lambda$\nb-cal\-cu\-lus\ with \text{\normalfont\sf letrec}\ can be computed in pseudo-quadratic time
$\fap{\sbigO}{n^2 \cdot \fap{\alpha}{n}}$ where $\alpha$ is the inverse Ackermann function (see \cite{grab:roch:2014:ICFP}).
Again via the correspondences described above, via DFA-minimization, and via the readback
a maximally shared form of higher-order terms can be computed in $\fap{\sbigO}{n^2 \cdot \log n}$ time
(again see \cite{grab:roch:2014:ICFP}).
In order to demonstrate the maximal-sharing method as a manageable optimizing transformation for the compilation of functional programs,
we developed the software tool \cite{roch:grab:2014:maxsharing:tool} that is available on Haskell's Hackage platform.
Following the definition of maximally shared representations via the representation pipeline in \cite{grab:roch:2014:ICFP}
(see also Rochel's thesis \cite{roch:2016} for more context),
this tool transforms a given functional program in the $\lambda$\nb-cal\-cu\-lus\ with \text{\normalfont\sf letrec}\
(the basis of the Core Language of the Glasgow Haskell Compiler)
into a $\lambda$\nobreakdash-term-graph, and then into a $\lambda$\nobreakdash-DFA .
It prints intermediate representations textually, and displays the obtained incomplete $\lambda$\nobreakdash-DFA graphically.
The $\lambda$\nobreakdash-DFA is then minimized, and
a maximally shared representation of the original program is computed by the readback operation as the result.
Together with Vincent van Oostrom, I have set out to generalize this
technique of representing higher-order terms as term graphs with added features
that are needed for modeling scopes of binding constructs.
But rather than capturing the constraints on the term graph structure by `ad hoc' features,
we now used `nesting' as the single added structuring concept.
In \cite{grab:oost:2015} we defined, and investigated the behavioral semantics of `nested term graphs' that arise as follows:
by nesting first-order term graphs into the vertices of, initially, a first-order term graph,
and then of nested term graphs that have already been~formed.
\sectio
{Process semantics of regular expressions}
\label{sec:procsem}
The second illustration concerns the process semantics of regular expressions.
Milner developed a complete axiomatization of bisimulation equivalence for finite process graphs
represented in {$\mu$}\nb-term\ notation \cite{miln:1984} (1984).
On this basis he turned to descriptions of finite process graphs by regular expressions
with a unary star operation.%
\footnote{While regular expressions with a binary star operation were introduced by Kleene in \cite{klee:1951} (1951),
regular expressions with a unary star operation seem to have been first formulated by Copi, Elgot, and Wright \cite{copi:elgot:wrig:1958} (1958).}
Also in \cite{miln:1984} he defined a semantics~$\procsem{\cdot}$ for regular expressions as finite-state processes:
$0$ is interpreted as the deadlock process, $1$ as the immediately terminating process,
letters as actions that lead to termination, and the symbols `$+$', `$\cdot$', and $(\cdot)^*$
as operators that enable choice between processes, sequential composition of processes, and iteration of a process, respectively.
See Figure~\ref{fig:expressible:expressible-mod-bisim}
for two examples of process interpretations of regular expressions via $\procsem{\cdot}$.
Formally, Milner's definition of $\procsem{\cdot}$ yields finite process graphs
by an inductive definition on the structure of~regular~expressions.
\begin{figure}[tp ]
\begin{gather*}
\begin{aligned}
&
\AxiomC{\phantom{$\terminates{1}$}}
\UnaryInfC{$\terminates{1}$}
\DisplayProof
& \hspace*{-1.5ex} &
\AxiomC{$ \terminates{\iap{\astexp}{1}} $}
\UnaryInfC{$ \terminates{(\stexpsum{\iap{\astexp}{1}}{\iap{\astexp}{2}})} $}
& \hspace*{2ex} &
\AxiomC{$ \terminates{\iap{\astexp}{i}} $}
\UnaryInfC{$ \terminates{(\stexpsum{\iap{\astexp}{1}}{\iap{\astexp}{2}})} $}
\DisplayProof
& \hspace*{2ex} &
\AxiomC{$\terminates{\iap{\astexp}{1}}$}
\AxiomC{$\terminates{\iap{\astexp}{2}}$}
\BinaryInfC{$\terminates{(\stexpprod{\iap{\astexp}{1}}{\iap{\astexp}{2}})}$}
\DisplayProof
& \hspace*{2ex} &
\AxiomC{$\phantom{\terminates{\stexpit{e}}}$}
\UnaryInfC{$\terminates{(\stexpit{e})}$}
\DisplayProof
\end{aligned}
\\[1ex]
\begin{aligned}
&
\AxiomC{$\phantom{a \:\lt{a}\: 1}$}
\UnaryInfC{$a \:\lt{a}\: 1$}
\DisplayProof
& &
\AxiomC{$ \iap{\astexp}{i} \:\lt{a}\: \iap{\astexpacc}{i} $}
\UnaryInfC{$ \stexpsum{\iap{\astexp}{1}}{\iap{\astexp}{2}} \:\lt{a}\: \iap{\astexpacc}{i} $}
\DisplayProof
& &
\AxiomC{$ \iap{\astexp}{1} \:\lt{a}\: \iap{\astexpacc}{1} $}
\UnaryInfC{$ \stexpprod{\iap{\astexp}{1}}{\iap{\astexp}{2}} \:\lt{a}\: \stexpprod{\iap{\astexpacc}{1}}{\iap{\astexp}{2}} $}
\DisplayProof
& &
\AxiomC{$\terminates{\iap{\astexp}{1}}$}
\AxiomC{$ \iap{\astexp}{2} \:\lt{a}\: \iap{\astexpacc}{2} $}
\BinaryInfC{$ \stexpprod{\iap{\astexp}{1}}{\iap{\astexp}{2}} \:\lt{a}\: \iap{\astexpacc}{2} $}
\DisplayProof
& &
\AxiomC{$e \:\lt{a}\: \astexp'$}
\UnaryInfC{$\stexpit{e} \:\lt{a}\: \stexpprod{\astexp'}{\stexpit{e}}$}
\DisplayProof
\end{aligned}
\end{gather*}
%
\vspace*{-2ex}
%
\caption{\label{fig:StExpTSS}%
Transition system specification $\text{$\saTSS$}$ of computations enabled by regular expressions.}
\end{figure}
A close variant $\procsemTSS{\cdot}$ of Milner's process semantics~$\procsem{\cdot}$ has later been defined via a transition system specification (TSS):
the TSS~$\text{$\saTSS$}$ in Figure~\ref{fig:StExpTSS} explains the operational behavior of
a regular expression (the option to do a labeled step, or to terminate) inductively for each of the
constants and letters, and for each of the operators.
This TSS is an adaptation for regular expressions with a unary star operation
of a TSS that was formulated for regular expressions with a binary star operation
by Bergstra, Bethke, and Ponse \cite{berg:beth:pons:1994} (1994).
By means of the TSS~$\text{$\saTSS$}$ the set~$\fap{\RegExps}{A}$ of regular expressions over a given set~$A$ of action labels
is endowed with the structure of a labeled transition system (LTS)~$\fap{\aLTS}{\text{$\saTSS$}}$:
there is an $a$\nobreakdash-transition from $\iap{\astexp}{1}$ to $\iap{\astexp}{2}$ in $\fap{\aLTS}{\text{$\saTSS$}}$ if and only if $\iap{\astexp}{1} \lt{a} \iap{\astexp}{2}$ is provable in $\text{$\saTSS$}$.
Then the variant process interpretation~$\procsemTSS{e}$ of a regular expression~$e$
is defined within this encompassing LTS~$\fap{\aLTS}{\text{$\saTSS$}}$ on $\fap{\RegExps}{A}$
as the LTS, or process graph, that consists
of the part of $\fap{\aLTS}{\text{$\saTSS$}}$ that is reachable from $e$.
This process graph~$\procsemTSS{e}$ can be shown to be finite for every regular expression~$e$.
It
is closely related,
and in fact always bisimilar to the interpretation $\procsem{e}$ of $e$ according to Milner's process semantics~$\procsem{\cdot}$.
Every labeled transition system with a finite set of vertices can be construed as a non-deterministic finite-state automaton (NFA).
Therefore the process semantics~$\procsem{\cdot}$ for regular expressions can be viewed as a translation
into
NFAs whose equality is studied with respect to bisimilarity, rather than with respect to language equivalence.
Indeed, Antimirov \cite{anti:1996} (1996) arrived at the same automaton-translation for regular expressions,
but without process theory and bisimulation equivalence in mind.
He pursued the goal of obtaining for a given regular expression $e$, in a natural way,
an NFA that accepts the language $\fap{L}{e}$ denoted by $e$, and that is smaller than
NFAs accepting $\fap{L}{e}$ that are obtained by classical algorithms for the translation of regular expressions into NFAs.
For this purpose he introduced, for regular expressions $e\in\fap{\RegExps}{A}$
the set of `partial derivatives'~$\partderivs{a}{e}$ of $e$ with respect to letters~$a\inA$,
and a termination predicate $\fap{\sterms}{e}$. More precisely,
he gave definitions by induction on the structure of regular expressions for the functions:
\begin{align*}
\partderivs{\cdot}{\cdot}
\mathrel{:}
{A} \times \fap{\RegExps}{A} & \longrightarrow \fap{\spowersetof}{\fap{\RegExps}{A}}
&
\textit{tm}
\mathrel{:}
\fap{\RegExps}{A} & \longrightarrow \setexp{0,1}\subseteq\mathbb{N}
\\
\pair{a}{e}
& \longmapsto
\partderivs{a}{e} \punc{,}
&
e
& \longmapsto
\fap{\sterms}{e} \punc{.}
\end{align*}
in such a way that the following correspondences hold with respect to the transition system~$\text{$\saTSS$}$:
\begin{align*}
\partderivs{a}{e}
& =
\descsetexpbig{ \astexp'\in\fap{\RegExps}{A} }
{ \derivablein{\text{$\saTSS$}} e \lt{a} \astexp' } \punc{,}
&
\fap{\sterms}{e}
& =
\begin{cases}
\, 1 & \text{ if $\,\derivablein{\text{$\saTSS$}} \terminates{e}\;$,}
\\
\, 0 & \text{ otherwise$\,$.}
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
In this way the NFA that is obtained by repeated applications of Antimirov's partial derivatives to a regular expression~$e$
coincides with the NFA that corresponds to the LTS~$\procsemTSS{e}$ as obtained by the TSS~$\text{$\saTSS$}$.
That NFA is in turn bisimilar (as a consequence of bisimilarity of the LTSs involved as mentioned above)
to the NFA that corresponds to the interpretation $\procsem{e}$ of $e$ in Milner's process semantics.
Unlike for the standard language semantics~$\langsem{\cdot}\,$,
not every NFA can be expressed by a regular expression under the process interpretation~$\procsem{\cdot}\,$.
That is, not every NFA is
bisimilar to the process translation NFA of some regular expression.
This is witnessed by the two examples in Figure~\ref{fig:not-expressible-mod-bisim},
both of which were suggested already by Milner.
He showed, in \cite{miln:1984}, that the three-vertex example without termination in Figure~\ref{fig:not-expressible-mod-bisim} is not $\procsem{\cdot}$\nb-ex\-press\-ible.
That the second example with two termination-permitting vertices in Figure~\ref{fig:not-expressible-mod-bisim} is not $\procsem{\cdot}$\nb-ex\-press\-ible\
was proved by Bosscher~\cite{boss:1997}.
\begin{figure}[p!]
%
\vspace*{0.5ex}
%
\begin{center}
\input{figs/expressible.tex}
\end{center}
%
\vspace*{-2.5ex}
%
\caption{\label{fig:expressible:expressible-mod-bisim}%
Process graphs that are expressible by regular expressions via the process semantics~$\protect\procsem{\cdot}$,
and expressible modulo bisimilarity~$\protect\sbisim$.
The graph on the left is the process semantic of
\protect\mbox{$a\cdot{(a\cdot(b + b\cdot a))^*} \cdot 0$},
the one on the right of
$(a \cdot a \cdot {(b \cdot a)^*} \cdot b)^* \cdot 0$.
These graphs are bisimilar, as shown here via bisimulations with
their bisimulation collapse, a process graph that is not the process semantic of a regular expression.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p!]
%
\vspace*{0.5ex}
%
\begin{center}
\input{figs/not-expressible-mod-bisim.tex}
\end{center}
%
\vspace*{-2.5ex}
%
\caption{\label{fig:not-expressible-mod-bisim}%
Process graphs that are neither $\procsem{\cdot}$\nb-ex\-press\-ible\ nor $\procsem{\cdot}$\nb-ex\-press\-ible\ modulo bisimilarity~$\sbisim$.
In the process graph on the left, both vertices permit immediate termination (indicated by the outer circles).%
}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p!]
%
%
\vspace*{-1.25ex}
%
\begin{align*}
{({B}_1)} & & \hspace*{-4ex}
\stexpsum{e}{(\stexpsum{f}{g})} & = \stexpsum{(\stexpsum{e}{f})}{g} & \hspace*{4ex}
{({B}_7)} & & \hspace*{-4ex}
\stexpprod{e}{\stexpit{0}} & = e \hspace*{-4.5ex}
\\
{({B}_2)} & & \hspace*{-4ex}
\stexpprod{(\stexpprod{e}{f})}{g}
& = \stexpprod{e}{(\stexpprod{f}{g})} &
\textcolor{red}{({B}_8)} & & \hspace*{-4ex}
\textcolor{red}{\stexpprod{e}{0}} & \mathrel{\textcolor{red}{=}} \textcolor{red}{0}
\\
{({B}_3)} & & \hspace*{-4ex}
\stexpsum{e}{f} & = \stexpsum{f}{e} &
{({B}_9)} & & \hspace*{-4ex}
\stexpsum{e}{0} & = e
\\
{({B}_4)} & & \hspace*{-4ex}
\stexpprod{(\stexpsum{e}{f})}{g}
& = \stexpsum{\stexpprod{e}{g}}{\stexpprod{f}{g}} &
{({B}_{10})} & & \hspace*{-4ex}
\stexpit{e} & = \stexpsum{\stexpit{0}}{\stexpprod{e}{\stexpit{e}}}
\\
\textcolor{red}{({B}_5)} & & \hspace*{-4ex}
\textcolor{red}{\stexpprod{e}{(\stexpsum{f}{g})}}
& \mathrel{\textcolor{red}{=}} \textcolor{red}{\stexpsum{\stexpprod{e}{f}}{\stexpprod{e}{g}}} &
{({B}_{11})} & & \hspace*{-4ex}
\stexpit{e} & = \stexpit{(\stexpsum{\stexpit{0}}{e})}
\\
{({B}_6)} & & \hspace*{-4ex}
\stexpsum{e}{e} & = e &
\colorin{mediumblue}{({A}_8)} & & \hspace*{-4ex}
\colorin{mediumblue}{\stexpprod{0}{e}} & \mathrel{\colorin{mediumblue}{=}} \colorin{mediumblue}{0}
\\
{(\textrm{\nf Ref\/l})} & & \hspace*{-4ex}
e & = e
\end{align*}
%
\vspace*{-4ex}
%
\begin{alignat*}{4}
\begin{aligned}[c]
\AxiomC{$e = f$}
\RightLabel{\textrm{\nf Symm}}
\UnaryInfC{$f = e$}
\DisplayProof
\end{aligned}
& \quad\;\, &
\begin{aligned}[c]
\AxiomC{$e = f$}
\AxiomC{$f = g$}
\RightLabel{\textrm{\nf Trans}}
\BinaryInfC{$e = g$}
\DisplayProof
\end{aligned}
& \quad\;\, &
\begin{aligned}
\AxiomC{$e = f$}
\RightLabel{\textrm{\nf Cxt}}
\UnaryInfC{$\cxtap{\acxt}{e} = \cxtap{\acxt}{f}$}
\DisplayProof
\end{aligned}
& \quad\;\, &
\begin{aligned}[c]
\AxiomC{$ e = \stexpsum{\stexpprod{f}{e}}{g} $}
\RightLabel{\parbox{\widthof{$\textrm{Fix}$ {\scriptsize (if $f$ does not}}}
{\rule{0pt}{3.35ex}%
$\textrm{Fix}$
{\scriptsize (if $f$ does not}%
\\[-1ex]
\phantom{$\textrm{Fix}$ }
{\scriptsize have e.w.p.)}}}
\UnaryInfC{$ e = \stexpprod{\stexpit{f}}{g} $}
\DisplayProof
\end{aligned}
\end{alignat*}
%
\vspace*{-3.25ex}
%
\caption{\label{fig:aanderaa:2:milner}%
Complete axiomatization of equality of regular expressions under the \protect\underline{\protect\smash{language semantics}} $\langsem{\cdot}\,$.
The system is due to Aanderaa, and corresponds to Salomaa's system by commuting product expressions.
Axiom $\colorin{mediumblue}{({A}_8)}$ from Salomaa's system is derivable, and not part of Aanderaa's system.
Axioms that are not sound under the process semantics $\procsem{\cdot}$ are colored~in~red.
Milner's axiomatization \text{$\pbap{\BPA}{\sstar}{\text{\nf\sf 0},\text{\nf\sf 1}}$}}%{\text{$\pbap{\BPA}{\sstar}{\szero,\sone}$}\ of bisimilarity of regular expressions under the \protect\underline{\protect\smash{process semantics}} $\procsem{\cdot}$
arises by dropping the unsound axioms (in red).}
%
\end{figure}
Still in \cite{miln:1984},
Milner adapted the complete axiomatization by Salomaa \cite{salo:1966} for language equivalence of regular expressions.
He started from a version of Salomaa's system in which
all product expressions in the axioms and rules are commuted, see Figure~\ref{fig:aanderaa:2:milner}.
The rule $\textrm{Fix}$ is subject to the `non-algebraic' side-condition that the regular expression $e$ does not have the
`empty word property', that is, the language interpretation $\langsem{e}$ of $e$
does not contain the empty word.
This system is close to the complete axiomatization for language equivalence
that was presented by Aanderaa \cite{aand:1965} independently from Salomaa's work (Aanderaa's system was probably not directly known to Milner).
Milner dropped the two rules from the system that are unsound under the process semantics
(left-distributivity ${B}_5$, and the axiom ${B}_8$),
but additionally took up the axiom~$(A_{8})$ from Salomaa's original system,
which describes a correct interaction property of $0$ as deadlock with process concatenation.
The resulting system is sound for the process semantics~$\procsem{\cdot}\,$.
It has later been called \text{$\pbap{\BPA}{\sstar}{\text{\nf\sf 0},\text{\nf\sf 1}}$}}%{\text{$\pbap{\BPA}{\sstar}{\szero,\sone}$}\
as an adaptation of Basic Process Algebra \text{\sf BPA}\ to regular expressions as terms that describe process behavior with respect to $\procsem{\cdot}$.
Milner noticed that completeness for \text{$\pbap{\BPA}{\sstar}{\text{\nf\sf 0},\text{\nf\sf 1}}$}}%{\text{$\pbap{\BPA}{\sstar}{\szero,\sone}$}\ cannot be settled directly by Salomaa's arguments.
This is due to the incompleteness modulo bisimilarity~$\sbisim$ of the image of the process semantics~$\procsem{\cdot}\,$.
That namely implies that not every finite regular system of equations is solvable by a regular expression
(for example, specifications that correspond to the process graphs in Figure~\ref{fig:not-expressible-mod-bisim} are not solvable).
However, being able to solve arbitrary finite regular systems of equations by regular expressions
is a crucial lemma in Salomaa's and Aanderaa's completeness proofs.
Recognizing this difficulty, Milner formulated the question as to whether \text{$\pbap{\BPA}{\sstar}{\text{\nf\sf 0},\text{\nf\sf 1}}$}}%{\text{$\pbap{\BPA}{\sstar}{\szero,\sone}$}\ is indeed a complete axiomatization
for bisimilarity of interpretations of regular expressions in the process semantics~$\procsem{\cdot}$.
In addition, he also formulated the problem of characterizing those process graphs that are bisimilar to process interpretations of regular expressions,
and a star-height~problem for regular expressions over a single-letter alphabet.
The known approaches to these questions by Milner fall, broadly speaking, into two groups
that are distinguished by how they model processes that are represented by regular expressions:
either by working with process terms whose operational semantics is governed by structural operational semantics (SOS) rules,
such as TSSs,
or by reasoning about regular recursive process specifications of a certain structure.
Taking a new approach, I have set out to use structure-constrained process graphs, see below.
Building on work from the process term tradition,
Fokkink (1996-97) showed that the restriction of Milner's system to exit-less iteration,
which he called `\perpetual-loop' and `terminal cycle',
is complete for the general case with `empty' 1-steps \cite{fokk:1996:terminal:cycle:LGPS},
and for the easier case without \cite{fokk:1997:pl:ICALP}.
To achieve this result
he completely overturned Salomaa's and Aanderaa's proof technique
of extension of terms (obtaining a common extension for semantically equal terms)
into its contrary, a strategy of \mbox{term minimization}.
Also working with term calculi for process terms,
Corradini, De~Nicola, and Labella \cite{corr:nico:labe:2002}
define a subclass of regular expressions, those without occurrences of $0$ that satisfy the `hereditary non-empty word property (hnewp)',
and give a `(purely) equational' axiomatization for $\procsem{\cdot}$ on regular expressions with these restrictions.
Indeed their result shows that Milner's axiomatization without the axioms involving $0$
is complete for regular expressions from that class.
This is because for regular expressions with hnewp the non-equa\-ti\-onal\ side-condition on the fixed-point rule $\textrm{Fix}$
is irrelevant, and therefore can be dropped, which turns the axiomatization into a purely equational one.
Regular expressions that may contain $0$, but satisfy the property hnwep of Corradini, De~Nicola, and Labella can be characterized as follows:
for {\underline{\smash{no}}} iteration subexpression $\stexpit{f}$ of $e$
does $\procsem{f}$ proceed to a process $p$ such that:
$p$ has the option to immediately terminate, \underline{\smash{and}}
$p$ has the option to do a proper step, and terminate later.
Motivated by this, I call these expressions `$1$-return-less(-under-$*$)'.
They turned out to be relevant in my current work on structure-constrained process graphs, see below.
Using recursive specifications to formalize processes that are induced by regular expressions,
Baeten and Corradini (2005) introduced `well-behaved specifications' \cite{baet:corr:2005}.
These systems of equations are arranged according to trees with back-bindings (`palm trees')
with a `loop--exit' structure requirement.
This concept enabled Baeten, Corradini, and myself to show that expressibility modulo bisimilarity of a finite process graph by a regular expression
is decidable \cite{baet:corr:grab:2007}, although via a super-exponential procedure.
My current approach to the axiomatization problem
(in work with Wan Fokkink)
takes the conscious step to reasoning about process graphs for which
the palm-tree form is relaxed significantly as constraint.
A crucial step is the formulation of a concept of transition graph labeling
that is inspired by Milner's notion of `loop'.
Transitions (action-labeled edges)
are decorated by additional marker labels
that witness that the syntax tree of a regular expression can be inscribed on to a (typically cyclic) process graph.
In this way a labeling witnesses that the process graph can be expressed \emph{directly} by a regular expression.
This opens the way to develop bisimilarity-preserving transformations
of directly expressible process~graphs, in order to constructively connect any two given directly expressible process graphs
that are bisimilar.
Figure~\ref{fig:motiv:results:procsem} in Section~\ref{sec:comparison} gathers the initial motivation for defining structure-constrained process graphs,
and puts the desiderata here in the context of the properties of Milner's process semantics~$\procsem{\cdot}$.
It also gives a preliminary overview on results that are being developed at the moment.
\begin{figure}[p!]
\begin{center}
\input{figs/LEE-extraction-2-LEE.tex}
\end{center}
%
\vspace*{-0.75ex}
%
\caption{\label{fig:loop:elimination:synthesis}%
Loop elimination for the left process graph in the upper row by repeatedly identifying a loop-en\-try\ transition,
then removing it, and performing garbage collection.
Since a process graph without infinite behavior is reached,
the original process graph has the property \sLEE.
In the second row a structured version of the original graph is reassembled in converse direction
by using the eliminated~loops.
}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p!]
\begin{center}
\input{figs/LEE-extraction-2-result.tex}
\end{center}
%
\vspace*{-1.5ex}
%
\caption{\label{fig:LEE-witness}%
A $\LEE$\nb-wit\-ness\ for the original process graph in Fig.~\ref{fig:loop:elimination:synthesis}
is obtained by overlaying the loops from the structured version that has been obtained
by loop-addition synthesis in Fig.~\ref{fig:loop:elimination:synthesis},
and by number-labels that record the order of loop removal.
The structured form of the $\LEE$\nb-wit\-ness\ indicates a correspondence
with the process semantics of one of the regular expressions considered in Fig.~\ref{fig:expressible:expressible-mod-bisim}.%
}
\end{figure}
By modifying a concept introduced by Milner in \cite{miln:1984},
we call a process graph a `loop' if all paths from the start vertex return to it, and termination is only permitted at the start vertex.
A `loop subgraph' in a process graph $G$ is a loop that is generated from a vertex $v$ of $G$
by a set $T$ of `loop-en\-try\ transitions' from $v$ as follows:
the subgraph of $G$ that consists of all vertices and edges that are reachable on paths departing from $v$
via an edge in $T$ until $v$ is reached again.
Furthermore we call `loop elimination' a procedure that, starting from a given process graph
repeatedly identifies a loop subgraph, drops its loop-en\-try\ transitions, and performs garbage collection
(removing vertices and edges that have become unreachable from the start vertex).
We say that a process graph $G$ satisfies the \emph{loop existence and elimination condition~(LEE)}
if by loop elimination from $G$ a process graph without an infinite behavior (that is, without an infinite trace) can be reached.
Figure~\ref{fig:loop:elimination:synthesis} in its upper row shows two loop elimination steps
that are performed starting from the process graph in the middle of Figure~\ref{fig:expressible:expressible-mod-bisim}.
These steps lead to a process graph without any transitions, and hence without an infinite trace.
Thus they witness that the
original process graph has the property \sLEE.
By contrast, none of the two process graphs in Figure~\ref{fig:not-expressible-mod-bisim} contains a loop subgraph:
the two-vertex graph does not because the termination condition of a loop would be violated;
and the three-vertex graph does not because no transition from a vertex $v$ generates a subchart in which all infinite paths return to $v$.
Hence these process graphs, which are not $\procsem{\cdot}$\nb-ex\-press\-ible\ modulo~$\sbisim$,
do not satisfy the property~LEE.
In its lower row, Figure~\ref{fig:loop:elimination:synthesis} records a procedure of reassembly
of the process graph in the upper left corner from the results that have been obtained during loop elimination.
Thereby an approximation of the original process graph is assembled that is structured by \onetransition{s}.
We call it a \emph{structured $\LEE$\nb-wit\-ness}.
Figure~\ref{fig:LEE-witness} indicates that a \emph{$\LEE$\nb-wit\-ness} is obtained from the structured version
by overlaying the separately recorded loop subgraphs on to the original process graph,
and by labeling the identified loop-en\-try\ transitions according to the order in which they have been removed
during loop elimination.
A $\LEE$\nb-wit\-ness\ records the loop elimination procedure in a process graph by
marking transitions that have been recognized as loop-en\-try\ transitions
with a label that indicates its number (or nesting depth) in the procedure.
It is subject to conditions that follow from this intuition, and the requirement
that loop elimination leads to a process graph without an infinite trace.
Thus a $\LEE$\nb-wit\-ness\ is a labeling of a process graph that is subject to appropriate conditions
that witnesses that the graph satisfies \sLEE.
In this way we obtain a class of struc\-ture-con\-strained\ process graphs
that consists of all graphs that have a $\LEE$\nb-wit\-ness, and hence satisfy \sLEE.
The arising class properly extends the class of process graphs that are the process semantics of some regular expression:
the process graph in the middle of Figure~\ref{fig:expressible:expressible-mod-bisim}
has a $\LEE$\nb-wit\-ness, and satisfies \sLEE\ (see Figure~\ref{fig:loop:elimination:synthesis} and Figure~\ref{fig:LEE-witness}),
but it is not $\procsem{\cdot}$\nb-ex\-press\-ible.
The concept of $\LEE$\nb-wit\-ness\ is an important technical tool
for investigating transformations between process graphs that satisfy the graph-topological property~\sLEE,
and for extracting regular expressions from such process graphs.
It facilitates a number of results such as the following:
(1)~\sLEE\ is preserved under functional bisimilarity~$\sfunbisim$ for process graphs without empty steps.
The proof of this statement relies on the fact that $\LEE$\hspace*{1.25pt}\nb-wit\-nes\-ses\ can be transferred along functional bisimulations.
(2)~From every process graph~$G$ without \onetransition{s}\ that satisfies \sLEE\
a 1-return-less\ regular expression $e$ can be extracted
for which $\procsem{e} \mathrel{\sbisim\hspace*{1pt}} G$ holds,
that is, such that $e$ expresses $G$ under $\procsem{\cdot}$ modulo bisimilarity.
This statement can be proved by using the number labels of the loop-en\-try\ transitions in a $\LEE$\nb-wit\-ness\
to define a bottom-up extraction procedure of a regular expression.
These statements lead to
a new partial answer to Milner's question about how $\procsem{\cdot}$\nb-ex\-press\-ibi\-li\-ty\ of finite process graphs can be characterized:
A finite process graph $G$ is $\procsem{\cdot}$\nb-ex\-press\-ible\ by a {1-return-less} regular expression
if and only if the bisimulation collapse of $G$ satisfies the property \sLEE.
\section{Comparison desiderata and results}
\label{sec:comparison}
\begin{figure}[bp!]
%
\begin{description}
\item[\framebox{{\it $\lambda$\nb-cal\-cu\-lus\ with \text{\normalfont\sf letrec}} \text{\rm with respect to the} {\it unfolding semantics}}]
\mbox{}
\begin{description}
\item[{\it Known:}]
graph representations of terms in the $\lambda$\nb-cal\-cu\-lus\ with \text{\normalfont\sf letrec}\ are used in compilers of functional languages.
However:
\begin{itemize
\item
these graph representations were not intended for use under transformations that involve bisimilarity~$\sbisim$,
and do not behave well under such transformations.
\end{itemize}
\item[{\it Aim:}]
a term graph semantics that:
\begin{itemize}[label=$\triangleright$]
\item
has a natural correspondence with terms in $\lambda$\nb-cal\-cu\-lus\ with \text{\normalfont\sf letrec},
\item
supports compactification under bisimilarity $\sbisim$,
\item
permits efficient operations to translate between terms to graphs.
\end{itemize}
\item[{\it Defined:}] \emph{Structure-constrained term graphs} as a semantics for terms in the $\lambda$\nb-cal\-cu\-lus\ with \text{\normalfont\sf letrec}:
\begin{itemize}[label=$\raisebox{0.2ex}{\scalebox{0.75}{$\blacktriangleright$}}$,itemsep=0.25ex]\vspace*{0.25ex}
\item
the class ${\cal H}}%{\supap{{\cal H}}{(\lambda)}$ of higher-order $\lambda$\nobreakdash-term graphs, with interpretation function $\graphsemC{{\cal H}}%{\supap{{\cal H}}{(\lambda)}}{\cdot}$,
\item
the class ${\cal F}} %{\supap{{\cal T}}{(\lambda)}$ of first-order $\lambda$\nobreakdash-term graphs, with interpretation function $\graphsemC{{\cal F}} %{\supap{{\cal T}}{(\lambda)}}{\cdot}$.
\end{itemize}
They have the following properties:
\begin{enumerate}[label={(\roman*)},leftmargin=*,align=right,labelsep=0.9ex,itemsep=0.25ex
\item
$\lambda$\nobreakdash-term graphs are first-order term graph encodings of $\lambda$\nobreakdash-higher-order term graphs,
\item[{\bf (ii)}]
${\cal H}}%{\supap{{\cal H}}{(\lambda)}$ and ${\cal F}} %{\supap{{\cal T}}{(\lambda)}$ are closed under functional bisimilarity $\sfunbisim\,$ (and hence under collapse),
\item[{\bf (iii)}]
there is a back-/forth correspondence with terms in the {$\lambda$\nb-cal\-cu\-lus\ with \text{\normalfont\sf letrec}} such that:
\begin{itemize}
\item
there are efficient translation and readback operations (computable in $O(n^2 \log n)$ and $O(n\log n)$ time),
\item
the translation is the inverse of the readback.
\end{itemize}
\end{enumerate
\end{description}
\end{description}
%
\vspace*{-1ex}
%
\caption{\label{fig:motiv:results:lambdaletreccal}%
Motivation for developing \protectstruc\-ture-con\-strained\ term graph representations
for the first illustration, the \protect$\lambda$\nb-cal\-cu\-lus\ with \protect\text{\normalfont\sf letrec}$\,$;
and an overview of the obtained concepts and results.
The key results (ii) and (iii) are highlighted
as they correspond to analogous results for the second illustration,
see Fig.~\ref{fig:motiv:results:procsem}.}
\end{figure}
Apart from demonstrating the usefulness of working with struc\-ture-con\-strained\ graphs,
another motivating aim for my talk was
to obtain a clearer view of the similarity and the difference of the two situations.
In particular I wanted to understand
why I was able to benefit from a flow of ideas from the first to the second illustration.
As a first step towards a better understanding I assembled, for each of the two settings,
a list of the motivations and desiderata for graph representations arising from the initial problems,
and of the results that have been obtained, or that are being developed.
These overviews are gathered
in Figure~\ref{fig:motiv:results:lambdaletreccal} and in Figure~\ref{fig:motiv:results:procsem}.
The initial situations are markedly different:
a graph semantics that is studied under bisimilarity is provided by Milner's process semantics of regular expressions,
whereas graph representations for cyclic \lambdaterm{s}\ that are used in compilers do not behave well under bisimilarity.
For representing cyclic \lambdaterm{s}\ an appropriate class of term graph representations needed to be defined,
for example one based on Blom's higher-order term graphs~\cite{blom:2001}.
Yet also the incompleteness under functional bisimilarity of the image of the process semantics
stimulated extending this class of graphs to one with more satisfying properties.
The joining element of the results obtained in the two settings
consists in the definition of classes of struc\-ture-con\-strained\ graphs
that, on the one hand, are closed under functional bisimilarity (and hence are closed under the operation of taking the bisimulation collapse),
and that, on the other hand, enable a natural, and efficiently computable correspondence with the class of terms that is relevant for the setting.
This observation is highlighted in Figure~\ref{fig:motiv:results:lambdaletreccal} and Figure~\ref{fig:motiv:results:procsem}
by the items with boldface numbers:
(ii)~for closedness under functional bisimilarity $\sfunbisim$,
and (iii)~for the natural correspondence with terms.
In conclusion I want to repeat a request that I have put to the participants of the workshop:
I am interested in, and would like to hear about, other situations and settings
in which struc\-ture-con\-strained\ graph representations might be useful,
or have already been developed and used successfully.
\begin{figure}[tp!]
%
\begin{description}
\item[\framebox{{\it Regular expressions} \text{\rm with respect to the} {\it process semantics}}] \mbox{}
%
\begin{description}
\item[{\it Given:}]
Milner's process graph semantics~$\procsem{\cdot}$ was designed for study under bisimilarity $\sbisim$.
\\
However, the semantics~$\procsem{\cdot}$ has some peculiar properties:
\begin{itemize
\item
the image of $\procsem{\cdot}$ is not closed under functional bisimilarity~$\sfunbisim$
\item
the image of $\procsem{\cdot}$ is incomplete modulo bisimilarity~$\sbisim$
\end{itemize}
\item[{\it Aim:}]
in order to tackle completeness of Milner's axiomatization, and the recognizability of $\procsem{\cdot}$\nb-ex\-press\-ibi\-li\-ty\ modulo $\sbisim$,
it is desirable to:
\begin{itemize}[label=$\triangleright$]
\item
reason with (`sufficiently many') graphs that are $\procsem{\cdot}$\nb-ex\-press\-ible\ modulo $\sbisim$;
\item
understand incompleteness modulo $\sbisim$ by a structural graph property.
\end{itemize}
\item[{\it Defined / under construction / current aim:}]
\emph{Structure-constrained process graphs}, in particular:
\begin{itemize}[label=$\raisebox{0.2ex}{\scalebox{0.75}{$\blacktriangleright$}}$,itemsep=0.25ex]\vspace*{0.25ex}
\item
the class of finite process graphs with the property \sLEE\
which consists of all those process graphs that have a (layered) $\LEE$\nb-wit\-ness\ labeling.
\end{itemize}
It has the following properties:
\begin{enumerate}[label={(\roman*)},leftmargin=*,align=right,labelsep=0.9ex,itemsep=0.25ex
\item[(i)]
it extends the image of the process semantics $\procsem{\cdot}\,$;
\item[{\bf (ii)}]
it is closed under functional bisimilarity~$\sfunbisim\,$ (and hence under bisimulation collapse)
in the special case of the absence of \onetransition{s}\ (empty-step transitions);
\item[{\bf (iii)}]
it permits efficient back and forth translations to and from 1-return-less\ expressions;
\item[(iv)]
it characterizes $\procsem{\cdot}$\nb-ex\-press\-ibi\-li\-ty\ modulo~$\sbisim$ by a \mbox{1-return-less} regular expression of a graph's collapse:
a finite process graph~$G$ is $\procsem{\cdot}$\nb-ex\-press\-ible\ modulo~${\sbisim}$ by a 1-return-less\ regular expression
{if and only if}
the bisimulation collapse of ${G}$ satisfies~\sLEE.
\end{enumerate
\end{description}
\end{description}
%
\vspace*{-1ex}
%
\caption{\label{fig:motiv:results:procsem}%
Motivation for developing structure-constrained process graphs
for the second illustration, the process semantics for regular expressions;
and an overview of the results that we are currently working out.
The key results~(ii) and (iii) are emphasized with their labels in boldface
in order to highlight their correspondence with the analogous results (ii) and (iii) for the first illustration
in Fig.~\ref{fig:motiv:results:lambdaletreccal}.}
\end{figure}
\enlargethispage{2.5ex}
\paragraph{Acknowledgment.}
I want to thank Luca Aceto for his detailed comments and for valuable hints at substantial issues,
Ruben Becker for spotting several errors and inconsistencies,
Omar Inverso for a good number of concise, acute, and helpful suggestions,
and Maribel Fernandez for pointing me to some structural improvements.
\bibliographystyle{eptcs}
|
\section*{Acknowledgement}
We thank Tillmann Miltzow for asking when the translates of two different convex bodies induce the same intersection graphs which inspired us to work on these problems.
\section{Necessity for Contact and Unit Distance Graphs}\label{necsec}
\iffull
In this section we prove the necessity of the condition of Theorem \ref{thm:main} in the case of contact graphs in the setting where $A$ and $B$ are symmetric. The proof for unit distance graphs is completely identical so we will merely provide a remark justifying this claim by the end of the section. The main result of the section is slightly more general than required since we will use it in the classification of intersection graphs.
\else
In this section we prove Theorem~\ref{main:contact}.
The proof for unit distance graphs is completely identical so we will merely provide a remark justifying this claim by the end of the section.
\fi
\iffull
\subsection{Properties of the Signature}
\else
For $\theta\in [0,2\pi)$ we define $e_A(\theta)$ to be the vector of argument $\theta$ and with $\norm{e_A(\theta)}{A}=1$. We also define $\rho_A(\theta)=2\norm{e_A(\theta)}{2}$. Then $\rho_A(\theta)$ be thought of as the ``diameter'' of $A$ in direction $\theta$. One of our most important tools is the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{findirlem}
Let $A$ and $B$ be symmetric convex bodies in $\mathbb{R}^2$.
Suppose that for every finite set $\Theta \subset [0,\pi)$ and for every $\varepsilon>0$, there exists a linear map $T\colon \mathbb{R}^2 \to \mathbb{R}^2$ satisfying that $|\rho_{T(B)}(\theta)-\rho_A(\theta)|<\varepsilon$ for all $\theta\in \Theta$.
Then there exists a linear map $T\colon \mathbb{R}^2\to \mathbb{R}^2$ with $T(B)=A$.
\end{lemma}
\fi
\iffull
\input{Signatureapp}
\else
Due to space limitations we have left out the proof, but it can be found in the full version~\cite{}.
\fi
\iffull
\subsection{Establishing Necessity}
Before proving the part of Theorem~\ref{thm:main} concerning contact graphs we describe certain lattices which gives rise to contact graphs that can be realised in an essentially unique way. We start with the following definition.
\else
We proceed to describe certain lattices which give rise to contact graphs that can only be realized in an essentially unique way. We start with the following definition.
\fi
\begin{definition}
Let $A\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ be a symmetric convex body with the URTC property, and $\norm{\cdot}{A}$ the associated norm. Let $e_1,e_2\in \mathbb{R}^2$ be such that $\norm{e_1}{A}=\norm{e_2}{A}=\norm{e_1-e_2}{A}=2$. We define the lattice $\mathcal{L}_A(e_1,e_2)=\{a_1e_1+a_2e_2\mid (a_1,a_2)\in \mathbb{Z}^2\}$.
\end{definition}
Note that if $e_1$ has been chosen with $\|e_1\|_A=2$, then using the URTC property there are precisely two vectors $v$ with $\|v\|_A=\|v-e_1\|_A=2$. If one is $v_2$ the second is $e_1-v_2$ so regardless how we choose $e_2$ we obtain the same lattice.
Let us describe a few properties of the lattice $\mathcal{L}_A(e_1,e_2)$.
Using the triangle inequality and the URTC property of $A$ it is easily verified that for distinct $x,y\in \mathcal{L}_A(e_1,e_2)$, $\|x-y\|_A\geq 2$ with equality holding exactly if $x-y\in \mathcal{S}_A:=\{e_1,e_2,-e_1,-e_2,e_1-e_2,e_2-e_1\}$.
Another useful fact is the following:
\begin{lemma}\label{normrellem}
With $\mathcal{S}_A$ as above it holds that $\frac{1}{2}\mathop{\mathrm{conv}}(\mathcal{S}_A)\subset A\subset \mathop{\mathrm{conv}}(\mathcal{S}_A)$. Here $\mathop{\mathrm{conv}}(\mathcal{S}_A)$ is the convex hull of $\mathcal{S}_A$. If in particular $B$ is another symmetric convex body for which $\norm{e_1}{B}=\norm{e_2}{B}=\norm{e_1-e_2}{B}=2$, then for all $x\in \mathbb{R}^2$ it holds that $\frac{1}{2}\norm{x}{A}\leq \norm{x}{B}\leq 2\norm{x}{A}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
As $\frac{1}{2}\mathcal{S}_A\subset A$ and $A$ is convex the first inclusion is clear. For the second inclusion we note that all points $y$ on the hexagon connecting the points $e_1,e_2,e_2-e_1,-e_1,-e_2,e_1-e_2$ of $\mathcal{S}_A$ in this order has $\|y\|_A\geq 1$ by the triangle inequality and so $A\subset\mathop{\mathrm{conv}}(\mathcal{S}_A)$.
For the last statement of the lemma note that if $x\in \mathbb{R}^2$ then
\begin{align*}
\norm{x}{B} & =\inf_{\lambda\geq 0}\{x \in \lambda B\}\geq \inf _{\lambda\geq 0}\{ x \in \lambda \mathop{\mathrm{conv}}(\mathcal{S}_B)\}\\
&=\inf _{\lambda\geq 0}\{ x \in \lambda\mathop{\mathrm{conv}}(\mathcal{S}_A)\}\geq \inf _{\lambda\geq 0}\{x \in 2\lambda A\}=\frac{1}{2}\norm{x}{A},
\end{align*}
and similarly $\|x\|_A\geq \frac 12 \|x\|_B$.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}\label{def:latticeu}
We say that a graph $G=(V,E)$ is \emph{lattice unique} if $|V|=n\geq 3$ and there exists an enumeration of its vertices $v_1,\dots,v_n$ such tha
\begin{itemize}
\item The vertex induced subgraph $G[v_1,v_2,v_3]\simeq K_3$ is a triangle.
\item For $i>3$ there exists distinct $j,k,l<i$ such that $G[v_j,v_k, v_l]\simeq K_3$ and both $(v_i,v_j)$ and $(v_i,v_k)$ are edges of $G$.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
Suppose that $A$ is a symmetric convex body with the URTC property, that $\mathcal{A}\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ is compatible with $A$, and that $G=C_A(\mathcal{A})$ is lattice unique. Enumerate the points of $\mathcal{A}=\{v_1,\dots,v_n\}$ according to the definition of lattice uniqueness. Without loss of generality assume that $v_1=0$.
Then the URTC property of $A$ combined with the lattice uniqueness of $G$ gives that $v_4,\dots,v_n$ are uniquely determined from $v_2$ and $v_3$ and all contained in $\mathcal{L}_A(v_2,v_3)$. If moreover $B$ is another convex body with the URTC property, $\mathcal{B}=\{v_1',\dots,v_n'\}\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ has $v_1'=0$ and is compatible with $B$, and $C_B(\mathcal{B})\simeq C_A(\mathcal{A})$ via the graph isomorphism $\varphi:v_i' \mapsto v_i$, then the linear map $T:\mathbb{R}^2 \to \mathbb{R}^2$ defined by $T:a_1v_2'+a_2v_3'\mapsto a_1v_2+a_2v_3$ satisfies that $T|_{\mathcal{B}}=\varphi$.
\\
Before commencing the proof of Theorem~\ref{main:contact} let us highlight the main ideas. The most important tool is Lemma~\ref{findirlem} according to which there exist $\varepsilon>0$ and a finite set of directions $\Theta$ such that for any linear tranformation $B'$ of $B$ there is a direction $\theta\in\Theta$ such that $\rho_A(\theta)$ and $\rho_{B'}(\theta)$ differ by at least $\varepsilon$.
We will construct $G$ by describing a finite set $\mathcal{A}\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ compatible with $A$, and defining $G=C_A(\mathcal{A})$. Now, $\mathcal{A}$ will be a disjoint union of two sets of points, $\mathcal{A}=\mathcal{U}\cup \mathcal{W}$, where $\mathcal{U}$ and $\mathcal{W}$ will play complementary roles.
The construction will be such that $\mathcal{U}$ is a subset of a lattice $\mathcal{L}=\mathcal{L}_A(e_1,e_2)$ and such that the corresponding induced subgraph $G[\mathcal{U}]$ of $G$ is lattice unique. More precisely $\mathcal{U}$ will consist of $|\Theta|$ large hexagons connected along their edges.
When attempting to realize $G$ as a contact graph of $B$ the lattice uniqueness enforces that $G[\mathcal{U}]$ is realized as a subgraph of a lattice $\mathcal{L}_B(e_1',e_2')$ in essentially the same way.
The remaining points of $\mathcal{W}$ do not lie in the lattice $\mathcal{L}$.
They constitute \emph{rigid beams} in the directions from $\Theta$ ``connecting'' diagonally opposite points of the $|\Theta|$ hexagons of $\mathcal{U}$. The construction of $\mathcal{A}$ is depicted in the left-hand side of Figure~\ref{hexagon} and in Figure~\ref{hexagon3}.
When trying to reconstruct the same contact graph (or a supergraph) with beams connecting the corresponding points of $\mathcal{U}'$, we will find that in at least one direction the beam becomes too long or too short.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{main:contact}]
We let $e_1,e_2\in \mathbb{R}^2$ be such that $\|e_1\|_A=\|e_2\|_A=\|e_1-e_2\|_A=2$ and
define the lattice $\mathcal{L}\mydef\mathcal{L}_A(e_1,e_2)$. We also define
the infinite graph $G_0 \mydef C_A(\mathcal{L})$. Without loss of generality
we can assume that $e_1$ and $e_2$ satisfy
that $\|e_1\|_2=\|e_2\|_2=\|e_1-e_2\|_2=2$, since there exists a non-singular
linear transformation $T$ such that $\|T(e_1)\|_2=\|T(e_2)\|_2=\|T(e_1)-T(e_2)\|_2=2$,
and $C(A) = C(T(A))$. Note that in this setting we can use Lemma \ref{normrellem} to compare $A$
to the circle of radius 1 and obtain $\frac12 \| x\|_2\leq \|x\|_A\leq 2\|x\|_2$ for every $x\in \mathbb{R}^2$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{graphics/hexagon.pdf}
\caption{Left: The points of $\mathcal{H}_6$ along with the corresponding lattice unique subgraph $G_0[\mathcal{H}_6]$. Right: The attachment of the beam $\mathcal{B}_{\theta}(\ell)$.}
\label{hexagon}
\end{figure}
As already mentioned we will construct $G$ by specifying a finite point set $\mathcal{A}\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ compatible with $A$ and define $G=C_A(\mathcal{A})$. The construction of $\mathcal{A}$ can be divided into several sub-constructions. We start out by describing a hexagon of points $\mathcal{H}_k$ for $k\in \mathbb{N}$ which satisfies that $C_A(\mathcal{H}_k)$ is lattice unique.
\begin{construction}[$\mathcal{H}_k$
For an illustration of the construction see the left-hand side of Figure~\ref{hexagon}.
For $x,y\in \mathcal{L}$ we write $d(x,y)$ for the distance between $x$ and $y$ in the graph $G_0$, and for $k\in \mathbb{N}$ we define $\mathcal{H}_k=\{x\in \mathcal{L}\mid d(x,0)\in \{k,k+1\}\}$. Clearly $G_0[\mathcal{H}_k]$ is a lattice unique graph. Moreover, using that $e_1$ and $e_2$ satisfy $\|e_1\|_2=\|e_2\|_2=\|e_1-e_2\|_2=2$ it is easy to check that the points $\{x\in \mathcal{L}\mid d(x,0)=k\}\subset \mathcal{H}_k$ lie on a regular hexagon $H_k$ whose corners have distance exactly $2k$ to the origin in the Euclidian norm. In particular the points $p\in \mathcal{H}_k$ has $\|p\|_2\geq \sqrt{3}k$, and thus $\|p\|_A\geq \frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}k$ by Lemma~\ref{normrellem}.
\end{construction}
For a given $\theta\in [0,\pi)$ and $\ell\in \mathbb{N}$ we will construct a set of points $\mathcal{B}_\theta(\ell)\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ compatible with $A$ which constitute a ``beam'' of argument $\theta$:
\begin{construction}[$\mathcal{B}_\theta{(\ell)}$]
Let $e_{\theta}\in \mathbb{R}^2$ be the vector of argument $\theta$ with $\|e_{\theta}\|_A=2$, and let $f_{\theta}\in \mathbb{R}^2$ be such that $\|f_{\theta}\|_A=\|f_{\theta}-e_{\theta}\|_A=2$ (by the URTC property we have two choices for $f_{\theta}$). For a given $\ell\in \mathbb{N}$ we define
\[
\mathcal{B}_\theta(\ell)=\{a e_\theta\mid a \in \{-\ell,\dots,\ell\}\}\cup \{ae_\theta+f_{\theta}\mid a \in \{-\ell,\dots, \ell-1\}\}
\]
Note that $\mathcal{B}_\theta(\ell)$ is compatible with $A$ and that $C(\mathcal{B}_\theta(\ell))$ is lattice unique.
\end{construction}
For a given $k$ we want to choose $\ell$ as large as possible such that $\mathcal{B}_\theta(\ell)$ ``fits inside'' $G_0[\mathcal{H}_k]$. We then wish to ``attach'' $\mathcal{B}_\theta(\ell)$ to $G_0[\mathcal{H}_k]$ with extra points $\mathcal{S}$, the number of which does neither depend on $k$ nor on $\theta$. We wish to do it in such a way that $\mathcal{A}_1^k(\theta):= \mathcal{B}_\theta(\ell)\cup G_0[\mathcal{H}_k] \cup \mathcal{S}$ is compatible with $A$. The precise construction is as follows:
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{graphics/hexagon3.pdf}
\caption{The final point set $\mathcal{A}$ where the point sets $\mathcal C_k(\theta)$ are ``glued'' together by translating them such that the contact graph realized by the union of the subsets $\mathcal H_k\subset \mathcal C_k(\theta)$ is lattice unique.}
\label{hexagon3}
\end{figure}
\begin{construction}[$\mathcal{C}_k(\theta)$]
See Figure~\ref{hexagon} (right).
Consider the open line segment $L_{\theta}=\{re_{\theta}\mid r \in (-r_{\max},r_{\max})\}$ where $r_{\max}$ is maximal with the property that for all points $x\in L_{\theta}$ and all $y\in H_k$ it holds that $\|x-y\|_A>4$. Also let $\ell\in \mathbb{N}$ be maximal such that $\{a e_\theta\mid a \in \{-\ell,\dots,\ell\}\}\subset L_{\theta}$. Note that $\ell \geq \frac{\sqrt{3}}{4}k-3$ as the points $p\in H_k$ has $\|p\|_A\geq \frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}k$. If in particular $k> \frac{12}{\sqrt{3}-1}$ it holds that $\ell > \frac{k}{4}$.
When $\ell$ is chosen in this fashion, we have that $\mathcal{B}_\theta(\ell)$ is contained in the interior of $H_k$. Further, for all points $x\in \mathcal{B}_\theta(\ell)$ and all $y\in H_k$, it holds by the triangle inequality that $\|x-y\|_A>2$ since by construction every point of $\mathcal B_\theta(\ell)$ has distance at most 2 to $L_\theta$ in the norm $\norm{\cdot}{A}$.
Now, $\mathcal{B}_\theta(\ell)$ will constitute our beam in direction $\theta$ and we will proceed to show that we can attach it to $\mathcal{H}_k$, as illustrated, using only a constant number of extra points. That this can be done is conceptually unsurprising but requires a somewhat technical proof.
For this we let $s>0$ be minimal with the property that there exists and $y\in \mathcal{H}_k$ such that $\|se_{\theta}-y\|_A=2$. As $d_A(L_{\theta},\mathcal{H}_k)> 4$ it holds that $s> \ell+1$. Define $\mathcal{S}_1(\theta)=\{se_{\theta},(s-1)e_{\theta},\dots,(s-s')e_{\theta}\}$ where $s'$ is chosen maximal such that $\mathcal{S}_1\cup \mathcal{B}_\theta(\ell)$ is compatible with $A$. In other words $s-s'-1<1+\ell \leq s-s'$.
As $2\leq \|(s-s')e_{\theta}-\ell e_{\theta}\|_A< 4$ we can find at least one point $z_1^\theta\in \mathbb{R}^2$ such that $\|z_1^\theta-(s-s')e_{\theta}\|_A=\|z_1^\theta-\ell e_{\theta}\|_A=2$ (this is one of the red copies of $A$ in Figure~\ref{hexagon}). It is easy to check that $\mathcal{B}_\theta(\ell)\cup \mathcal{S}_1(\theta)\cup \left\{z_1^\theta\right\}$ is compatible with $A$. To see that $\left\{z_1^\theta\right\}\cup \mathcal{H}_k$ is also compatible with $A$ we note that for any point $x\in \mathcal{H}_k$,
$$
\|x-z_1^\theta\|_A\geq \| x-\ell e_{\theta}\|_A-\| \ell e_{\theta}-z_1^\theta\|_A\geq 4-2=2.
$$
Finally, we need to argue that $\abs{\mathcal{S}_1(\theta)}$ is bounded by a constant independent of $\theta$ and $k$. To this end let $P=\ell e_\theta$, $Q$ a point on $H_k$ of minimal Euclidian distance to $P$, and $R$ the intersection between $H_k$ and the line $\{re_\theta \mid r \in \mathbb{R}\}$. It is easy to check that the points $Q$ and $R$ lie on the same edge of $H_k$ and that the angle $\angle QPR\leq \pi/6$. It follows that $\norm{PR}{2}= \norm{PQ}{2}/\cos(\angle QPR)\leq \frac{2}{\sqrt{3}}\norm{PQ}{2}$. Combining this with the fact that $\norm{PQ}{2}\leq 2\norm{PQ}{A}\leq2d_A(\{\ell e_{\theta}\},H_k)\leq 12$ we obtain
$$
\|se_{\theta}-\ell e_\theta\|_A\leq \norm{PR}{A}\leq 2\norm{PR}{2}\leq 16\sqrt{3}<28,
$$
and so $\mathcal{S}_1(\theta)$ consists of at most $13$ points.
We may similarly define $\mathcal{S}_2(\theta)$ and $z_2^\theta$ to attach the other end of the beam, $\mathcal{B}_\theta(\ell)$. Letting $\mathcal{C}_k(\theta)=\mathcal{H}_k\cup \mathcal{B}_\theta(\ell) \cup \mathcal{S}_1(\theta) \cup \mathcal{S}_2 \cup \left\{z_1^\theta,z_2^\theta\right\}$ be the combination of the components completes the construction.
\end{construction}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{graphics/hexagon4.pdf}
\caption{Situation from the argument that no graph in $C(B)$ has a subgraph isomorphic to $G$.}
\label{hexagon4}
\end{figure}
We are now ready to construct $\mathcal{A}$ which will consist of several translated copies $\mathcal{C}_k(\theta)$.
\begin{construction}[$\mathcal{A}$]\label{construction:A}
By Lemma~\ref{findirlem} we can find an $\varepsilon\in (0,1)$ and a finite set of directions $\Theta\subset [0,\pi)$ such that for all linear maps $T:\mathbb{R}^2 \to \mathbb{R}^2$ there exists $\theta \in \Theta$ such that
$$
\left| \frac{\rho_{A}(\theta)}{\rho_{T(B)}(\theta)}-1 \right|\geq \varepsilon.
$$
That we can scale the deviation to be multiplicative rather than additive is possible because $0<\inf_{\theta\in [0, \pi)}\rho_A(\theta)\leq \sup_{\theta\in [0, \pi)}\rho_A(\theta)<\infty$.
For each $\theta\in \Theta$ we construct a copy of $\mathcal{C}_k(\theta)=\mathcal{H}_k\cup \mathcal{B}_\theta(\ell) \cup \mathcal{S}_1(\theta) \cup \mathcal{S}_2(\theta) \cup \{z_1^\theta,z_2^\theta\}$. We then choose translations $t_{\theta}\in \mathbb{R}^2$ for each $\theta \in \Theta$ such that $\bigcup_{\theta \in \Theta}( \mathcal{H}_k+t_{\theta})\subset\mathbb{R}^2$ is compatible with $A$ and induces a lattice unique contact graph. We can choose $(t_\theta)_{\theta\in \Theta}$ in numerous ways to satisfy this. One is depicted in Figure~\ref{hexagon3}. Another is obtained by enumerating $\Theta=\{\theta_1,\dots,\theta_q\}$ and defining $t_{\theta_i}=((2k+3)e_1-(k+1)e_2) \times (i-1)$. The exact choice is not important and picking one, we define $\mathcal{A}(k)=\bigcup_{\theta \in \Theta} (\mathcal{C}_k(\theta)+t_{\theta})$ which is a point set compatible with $A$. Lastly, we set $\mathcal{A}=\mathcal{A}\left(\left\lceil\frac{180}{\varepsilon}\right\rceil\right)$.
\end{construction}
We are now ready for the final step of the proof:
\paragraph*{Proving that no graph in $C(B)$ contains a subgraph isomorphic to $G=C_A(\mathcal{A})$.} Suppose for contradiction that there exists a set of points $\mathcal{B}\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ such that $G$ is isomorphic to a subgraph of $C_B(\mathcal{B})$. We may clearly assume that $|\mathcal{A}|=|\mathcal{B}|$ and we let $\varphi:\mathcal{A}\to \mathcal{B}$ be a bijection which is also a graph homomorphism when considered as a map $C_A(\mathcal{A})\to C_B(\mathcal{B})$.
The points $\bigcup_{\theta \in \Theta}( \mathcal{H}_k+t_{\theta})$ induce a lattice unique contact graph of $A$. Thus, we may write $\bigcup_{\theta \in \Theta}( \mathcal{H}_k+t_{\theta})=\{p_1,\dots,p_n\}$ such that $p_1,p_2$ and $p_3$ induce a triangle of $G$ and such that for $i>3$ there exist distinct $j,k,l< i$ such that $p_j,p_k$ and $p_l$ induce a triangle and such that $(p_i,p_k)$ and $(p_i,p_l)$ are edges of $G$. By translating the point sets $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{B}$ we may assume that $\varphi(p_1)=p_1=0$. Then applying an appropriate linear transformation $T$, thus replacing $B$ by $T(B)$, we may assume that $\varphi(p_2)=p_2$ and $\varphi(p_3)=p_3$. Finally, the discussion succeeding~\Cref{def:latticeu} implies that in fact $\varphi|_{\bigcup_{\theta \in \Theta}( \mathcal{H}_k+t_{\theta})}$ is the identity.
As noted in Construction \ref{construction:A}, there exists $\theta\in \Theta$ such that $\left| \frac{\rho_{A}(\theta)}{\rho_{T(B)}(\theta)}-1 \right|\geq \varepsilon$. The outline of the remaining argument is as follows: The Euclidian length of the beam $\mathcal{B}_\theta(\ell)$ is $2\ell \rho_{A}(\theta)$, but we will see that rigidity of $\bigcup_{\theta \in \Theta}( \mathcal{H}_k+t_{\theta})$ means that it is also $ 2\ell \rho_{T(B)}(\theta)+O(1)$. When $k$ (and hence $\ell$) is large enough, this will contradict the inequality above
Formally, assume $t_\theta=0$ without loss of generality. Let $p,q\in \mathcal{H}_k$ be such that for some $x\in \mathcal{S}_1(\theta)$, $\|p-x\|_A=2$, and for some $y\in \mathcal{S}_2(\theta)$, $\|q-y\|_A=2$. Note that $\varphi(p)=p$ and $\varphi(q)=q$. Also define $p_1=\ell e_\theta$, $q_1=-\ell e_\theta, p_1'=\varphi(p_1)$ and $q_1'=\varphi(q_1)$ (see Figure~\ref{hexagon4}). Then
\begin{align*}
&\left| \|p_1q_1\|_{T(B)} -\|p_1q_1\|_A \right|=\left|\|p_1q_1\|_{T(B)}-\|p_1'q_1'\|_{T(B)}\right| \\
\leq &\left|\|p_1q_1\|_{T(B)}-\|p_1'q_1\|_{T(B)}\right|+\left|\|p_1'q_1\|_{T(B)}-\|p_1'q_1'\|_{T(B)}\right|
\leq \|p_1p_1'\|_{T(B)}+ \|q_1q_1'\|_{T(B)}.
\end{align*}
Next, there is a path of length $\abs{\mathcal S_1(\theta)}+2$ from $p$ to $p_1$ in $\mathcal C_k(\theta)$ with intermediate vertices $\left\{z_1(\theta)\right\}\cup \mathcal S_1(\theta)$. Combining this with Lemma~\ref{normrellem} and the fact that $\varphi(p_1)=p_1'$, we find
$$
\|p_1-p_1'\|_{T(B)}\leq \|p_1-p\|_{T(B)}+\|p-p_1'\|_{T(B)}\leq 2\|p_1-p\|_A + \|p_1-p\|_A\leq 6(|\mathcal{S}_1|+2)\leq 90.
$$
Similarly, $\|q_1q_1'\|_{T(B)}\leq 90$, so $\left| \|p_1q_1\|_{T(B)} -\|p_1q_1\|_{A} \right|\leq 180$. But on the other hand we have that $\ell > k/4$, and so arrive at the contradiction
$$
\left| \|p_1q_1\|_{T(B)} -\|p_1q_1\|_{A} \right|=4 \ell \left| \frac{\rho_{A}(\theta)}{\rho_{T(B)}(\theta)}-1 \right|\geq 4 \ell\varepsilon>k\varepsilon=\left\lceil\frac{180}{\varepsilon}\right\rceil \cdot \varepsilon\geq 180.\qedhere
$$
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
We claimed that the proof of the part of Theorem~\ref{thm:main} concerning unit distance graphs is identical to the proof above.
In fact, if we replace $C(X)$ by $U(X)$ for $X\in\{A,B\}$ in the statement of \Cref{main:contact}, the result remains valid.
To prove it we would construct $\mathcal{A}$ in precisely the same manner.
The important point is then that the comments immediately prior to \Cref{thm:main} concerning the rigidity of the realization of lattice unique graphs remains valid.
If in particular $\mathcal{B}\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ satisfies that $U_A(\mathcal{A})\simeq U_A(B)$ via the isomorphism $\varphi:\mathcal{A}\to \mathcal{B}$, we may assume that $\varphi|_{\bigcup_{\theta \in \Theta}( \mathcal{H}_k+t_{\theta})}$ is the identity as in the proof above.
The remaining part of the argument comparing the lengths of the beams then carries through unchanged.
In conclusion, we are only left with the task of proving \Cref{thm:main} for intersection graphs.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Preliminaries}
We begin by defining some basic geometric concepts and terminology.
\iffull
\subsubsection{Convex Bodies and Graphs as Point Sets}
\fi
For a subset $A\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ of the plane we denote by $A^\circ$ the interior of $A$.
We say that $A$ is a \emph{convex body} if $A$ is compact, convex, and has non-empty interior.
We say that $A$ is \emph{symmetric} if whenever $x\in A$, then $-x\in A$.
It is well-known that if $A$ is a symmetric convex body, then the map $\norm{\cdot}{A}:\mathbb{R}^2 \to \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}$ defined by
$$
\norm{x}{A}=\inf\{\lambda\geq 0 \mid x \in \lambda A\},
$$
is a norm.
Moreover $A=\{x\in \mathbb{R}^2\mid \norm{x}{A}\leq 1\}$ and $A^\circ=\{x\in \mathbb{R}^2\mid \norm{x}{A}< 1\}$.
It follows from these properties that for translates $A_1=A+v_1$ and $A_2=A+v_2$ it holds that $A_1\cap A_2\neq \emptyset$ if and only if $\norm{v_1-v_2}{A}\leq 2$ and $A_1^\circ \cap A_2^\circ \neq \emptyset$ if and only if $\norm{v_1-v_2}{A}<2$.
This means that when studying contact, unit distance, and intersection graphs of a symmetric convex body $A$, we can shift viewpoint from translates of $A$ to point sets in $\mathbb{R}^2$ and their $\norm{\cdot}{A}$-distances:
If $\mathcal{A}\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ is a set of points we define $I_A(\mathcal{A})$ and $U_A(\mathcal{A})$ to be the graphs with vertex set $\mathcal{A}$ and edge sets $\{(x,y)\in \mathcal{A}^2 \mid x \neq y \text { and } \|x-y\|_A\leq 2\}$ and $\{(x,y)\in \mathcal{A}^2 \mid x \neq y \text { and } \|x-y\|_A= 2\}$, respectively.
Moreover, if for all distinct points $x,y\in \mathcal{A}$ it holds that $\|x-y\|_A\geq 2$, we say that $\mathcal{A}$ is \emph{compatible with $A$} and define $C_A(\mathcal{A})$ to be the graph with vertex set $\mathcal{A}$ and edge set $\{(x,y)\in \mathcal{A}^2 \mid x \neq y \text { and } \|x-y\|_A= 2\}$.
Then $I_A(\mathcal{A}), U_A(\mathcal{A})$, and $C_A(\mathcal{A})$, respectively, are isomorphic to the intersection, unit distance, and contact graph of $A$ realized by the translates $(A+a)_{a\in\mathcal{A}}$.
When studying contact, unit distance, and intersection graphs of a symmetric, convex body $A$ we will view them as being induced by point sets rather than by translates of $A$.
\iffull
\subsubsection{The URTC Property}
\fi
We say that a (not necessarily symmetric) convex body $A$ in the plane has the URTC property if the following holds: For any two interior disjoint translates of $A$, call them $A_1$ and $A_2$, satisfying that $A_1\cap A_2\neq \emptyset$, there exists precisely two vectors $v\in \mathbb{R}^2$ such that for $i\in \{1,2\}$, $(A+v)^\circ \cap A_i^\circ=\emptyset$ but $(A+v) \cap A_i\neq\emptyset$. If $A$ is symmetric, this amounts to saying that for any two points $v_1,v_2\in \mathbb{R}^2$ with $\norm{v_1-v_2}{A}=2$, the set $\{v\in \mathbb{R}^2 \mid \norm{v-v_1}{A}=\norm{v-v_2}{A}=2\}$ has size two.
Geh{\'e}r~\cite{geher2015contribution} proved that a symmetric convex body $A$ has the URTC property if and only if the boundary $\partial A$ does not contain a line segment of length more than~$1$ in the $\norm{\cdot}{A}$-norm.
\iffull
\subsubsection{Drawing of a Graph}
\fi
A \emph{drawing} of a graph $G \in I(A)$ as an intersection graph of a convex body
$A$ is a point set $\mathcal{A} \subset \mathbb{R}^2$ and a set of straight line segments
$\mathcal{L}$ such that $I_A(\mathcal{A})$ is isomorphic to $G$ and $\mathcal{L}$
is exactly the line segments between the points $u, v \in \mathcal{A}$
which are connected by an edge in $G$.
We define a drawing of a graph $G$ as a contact
and unit distance graph similarly.
\iffull
\subsubsection{Notation}
\fi
For a norm $\norm{\cdot}{}$ on $\mathbb{R}^2$ and a line segment $\ell$ with endpoints $a$ and $b$ we will often write $\norm{\ell}{}=\norm{ab}{}$ instead of $\norm{a-b}{}$. Also, if $A$ is a symmetric convex body and $U,V\subset \mathbb{R}^2$, we define $d_A(U,V):=\inf\{\norm{uv}{A}\mid (u,v)\in U \times V\}$.
\section{Proof of \Cref{lemma:realizeH}}\label{app:intersection}
Before we can prove \Cref{lemma:realizeH} we need to show some properties
of $Q^k_A$.
First we will show that in every drawing of $Q^k_A$ as an intersection graph, the cycle
$\alpha_k$ is contained in an annulus.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:annulus}
Let $X\in\{A,B\}$.
In any drawing of $Q^k_A$ as an intersection graph with respect to $X$, any $i\in[n]$, and any $j\in\{1,\ldots,k\}$, the vertex $v_i(j)$ is contained in the annulus $\setbuilder{x\in\mathbb{R}^2}{\norm{s_0x}{A}\in(2j-2,2j]}$.
Therefore, the cycle $\alpha_j$ is contained in the annulus $\setbuilder{x\in\mathbb{R}^2}{\norm{s_0x}{A}\in(2j-3,2j]}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The upper bound on $\norm{s_0v_i(j)}{X}$ holds as there is a path from $s_0$ to $v_i(j)$ consisting of only $j+1$ vertices.
For the lower bound, assume for contradiction that for some values of $i$ and $j$, there exists a drawing of $Q^k_A$ as an intersection graph where $\norm{s_0v_i(j)}{X}\leq 2j-2$.
We now claim that (i): $\left\lceil\frac{\norm{s_0u_j}{X}-2}{2}\right\rceil\leq d_j$ for all $j\in\{1,\ldots,k\}$ and (ii): $\left\lceil\frac{\norm{s_0u_i}{X}-2}{2}\right\rceil< d_i$. Together, (i) and (ii) contradict either the minimality of $(d_0,\ldots,d_{n-1})$ (if $X=A$) or the assumption from the remark after \Cref{const:Q}~(if $X=B$).
For part (i), note that since $\pi_j$ consists of $d_j+2$ vertices, we have $\norm{s_0u_j}{X}\leq 2(d_j+1)$, and it follows that $\left\lceil\frac{\norm{s_0u_j}{X}-2}{2}\right\rceil\leq \left\lceil d_j\right\rceil=d_j$.
For part (ii), note that since there is a path from $v_i(j)$ to $u_i$ consisting of $d_i-j+2$ vertices, we have $\norm{v_i(j)u_i}{X}\leq 2(d_i-j+1)$.
By the triangle inequality we now get
$\norm{s_0u_i}{X}\leq \norm{s_0v_i(j)}{X}+\norm{v_i(j)u_i}{X}\leq 2j-2+2(d_i-j+1)=2d_i$.
It now follows that $\left\lceil\frac{\norm{s_0u_i}{X}-2}{2}\right\rceil\leq\left\lceil\frac{2d_i-2}{2}\right\rceil=d_i-1<d_i$.
\end{proof}
We want to be able to conclude that two cycles $\alpha_k, \alpha'_k$ intersect
if the two annuli containing the cycles cross each other (as is also needed for
\Cref{lemma:edgesH}). This will be an easy consequence of the following lemma
which shows that the cycle $\alpha_k$ goes all the way around $s_0$ inside the annulus
in any drawing of $Q^k_A$ as an intersection graph.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:winding}
Let $X\in\{A,B\}$.
Consider any drawing of $Q_A^k$ as an intersection graph with respect to $X$ and any $j\in\{3,\ldots,k\}$, and consider $\alpha_j$ as a parameterized, closed curve $\alpha_j\colon [0,1]\longrightarrow \mathbb{R}^2$, such that for any $i\in[n]$, $\alpha_j$ interpolates linearly from $v_i(j)$ to $v_{i+1}(j)$ on the interval $[\frac{i}{n},\frac{i+1}{n}]$, where indices are taken modulo $n$.
We may then define a continuous argument function $\theta_{\alpha}\colon[0,1]\longrightarrow \mathbb{R}$ such that $\theta_{\alpha}(t)$ is an argument of the vector $\alpha_j(t)-s_0$ for all $t\in[0,1]$.
Then the argument variation of $\alpha_j$ around $s_0$ is $\theta_{\alpha}(1)-\theta_{\alpha}(0)=\pm 2\pi$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Just as $\alpha_j$ is considered as a parameterized curve in the lemma, we may in a similar way consider $\sigma_{k'}$ as a parameterized closed curve $\mathcal \sigma_{k'}\colon [0,1]\longrightarrow \mathbb{R}^2$ such that $\sigma_{k'}$ interpolates linearly from $u_i$ to $u_{i+1}$ on the interval $[\frac{i}{n},\frac{i+1}{n}]$.
We also define $\theta_\sigma\colon[0,1]\longrightarrow\mathbb{R}$ to be a continuous argument function for $\sigma_{k'}$.
Since $\sigma_{k'}$ is a simple closed curve containing $s_0$ in the interior by Lemma~\ref{lemma:christmas}, we get that the argument variation of $\sigma_{k'}$ around $s_0$ is $\theta_\sigma(1)-\theta_\sigma(0)=2\pi$.
For any $\lambda\in[0,1]$, we now define the curve $\varphi_\lambda\colon[0,1]\longrightarrow\mathbb{R}^2$ such that $\varphi_\lambda(t)=(1-\lambda)\alpha_j(t)+\lambda \sigma_{k'}(t)$.
Thus, $\varphi_\lambda$ is a continuous interpolation between $\alpha_j$ (when $\lambda=0$) and $\sigma_{k'}$ (when $\lambda=1$).
We claim that for all $t,\lambda\in[0,1]$, we have $s_0\neq\varphi_\lambda(t)$.
To this end, we prove that the segment $\alpha_j(t)\sigma_{k'}(t)=\varphi_0(t)\varphi_1(t)$ is contained in the ball $D\mydef \setbuilder{x\in\mathbb{R}^2}{\norm{xu_i}{X}\leq \norm{\alpha_j(t)u_i}{X}}$, whereas $s_0\notin D$.
Suppose that $t=i/n+t'$, where $t'\in[0,\frac 1{2n})$.
The case where $t'\in[\frac 1{2n},\frac 1n)$ is similar.
We now have that
$$\norm{\alpha_j(t)u_i}{X}\leq
\norm{\alpha_j(t)v_i(j)}{X}+
\norm{v_i(j)u_i}{X}\leq
1+2(d_i-j+1)<2(d_i-1)+1<\norm{s_0u_i}{X},$$
so $s_0\notin D$.
Obviously, $\alpha_j(t)\in D$ by definition.
Since also $\norm{\sigma_{k'}(t)u_i}{X}\leq 1<\norm{s_0u_i}{X}$, the claim follows.
It now follows that for all $\lambda\in[0,1]$, the curve $\varphi_\lambda$ has the same argument variation around $s_0$ as $\sigma_{k'}$.
In particular, $\theta_{\alpha}(1)-\theta_{\alpha}(0)=\pm 2\pi$ as stated.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{graphics/annulus.pdf}
\caption{Two cases from the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma:realizeH}.}
\label{fig:annulus}
\end{figure}
Now we have the tools available to prove \Cref{lemma:realizeH}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of \Cref{lemma:realizeH}]
To prove the lower bound on $\norm{s_0s'_0}{X}$, we show that $\norm{s_0s'_0}{X}$ is neither in the interval $[0,k-7)$ nor in $[k-7,4k-18)$.
The cases are depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:annulus}.
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{lemma:realizeHcase1}
Suppose that $\norm{s_0s'_0}{X}\in [0,k-7)$.
Let $j\mydef \lceil\frac k2-2\rceil$.
Then $s'_0$ is in the ball $s_0+(2j-3)X$.
By Lemma~\ref{lemma:annulus}, $\alpha_j$ is contained in the annulus $\mathcal A\mydef \setbuilder{x\in\mathbb{R}^2}{\norm{s_0x}{X}\in (2j-3,2j]}$.
Note that $\mathcal A$ has diameter $4j<2k-3$.
It follows from Lemma~\ref{lemma:annulus} that any of the subpaths of $\pi'_{i'}$ from $s'_0$ to $v'_{i'}(k)$ connects the inner and outer boundary of $\mathcal A$.
Therefore, Lemma~\ref{lemma:winding} gives that $\pi'_{i'}$ crosses $\alpha_j$.
Thus, there is also an edge $v_i(j)v'_{i'}(j')$ of $H_A^k(G)$, where $j+j'\leq \lceil\frac k2-2\rceil+k<2k-4$, contradicting Lemma~\ref{lemma:edgesH}.
\item\label{lemma:realizeHcase2}
Suppose now that $\norm{s_0s'_0}{X}\in [k-7,4k-18)$.
By an argument similar to the one used in the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma:edgesH}, one can show that $\alpha_{k-3}$ crosses $\alpha'_{k-3}$.
Hence, there is an edge $v_i(k-3)v'_{i'}(k-3)$, contradicting Lemma~\ref{lemma:edgesH}.
\end{enumerate}
Consider now the case that $ww'$ is an edge of $G$.
By Lemma~\ref{lemma:edgesH}, we know that there is an edge $v_i(k)v'_{i'}(k)$.
Then $\norm{s_0s'_0}{X}\leq \norm{s_0v_i(k)}{X}+\norm{v_i(k)v'_{i'}(k)}{X}+\norm{v'_{i'}(k)s'_0}{X}\leq 4k+2$.
\end{proof}
\section{Intersection Graphs}\label{intsec}
In this section we prove~\Cref{theorem:main}.
Our proof strategy is as follows:
Consider two convex bodies $A$ and $B$ as in the statement of the theorem.
We construct an intersection graph $Q^k_A \in I(A)$ containing a cycle $\alpha_k$ such that in any drawing
of $Q^k_A$ as an intersection graph, $\alpha_k$ is contained in a translation of the annulus $kA \setminus (k - 1)A$. This allows us
to view $\alpha_k$ as an upscaled copy of the boundary of $A$ with a precision error decreasing in $k$.
Similarly, in any drawing of $Q^k_A$ as an intersection graph of $B$, the cycle $\alpha_k$ is an upscaled copy of the boundary of $B$.
The idea is then to build contact graphs using $\alpha_k$ from distinct copies of $Q^k_A$.
Since we know that $C(A)\neq C(B)$, it follows that $I(A)\neq I(B)$.
However, $\alpha_k$ is not a completely fixed figure since there are many drawings of $Q^k_A$ as an intersection graph. To capture this uncertainty, we introduce the concept of \emph{$\varepsilon$-overlap graphs}.
\begin{definition}[$\varepsilon$-overlap Graph]
Let $\varepsilon>0$ and $K \subset \mathbb{R}^2$ be a symmetric convex body, and let
$v_0, \ldots, v_{n - 1} \subset \mathbb{R}^2$ be $n$ points in the plane.
Suppose that for any $i, j \in [n]$, $\norm{v_iv_j}{K}\geq 2-\varepsilon$.
A graph $G$ with vertex set $[n]$ and edge set satisfying
\begin{align*}
E(G) \subseteq \setbuilder{(i, j)\in [n]^2}{\norm{v_iv_j}{K}\leq 2}
\end{align*}
is called an \emph{$\varepsilon$-overlap graph} of $K$.
We say that $\{v_0, \ldots, v_{n - 1}\}$ \emph{realize} the graph $G$ as an $\varepsilon$-overlap graph of $K$.
Further, we denote by $C_\varepsilon(K)$ the set of graphs that can be realized as $\varepsilon$-overlap graphs of $K$.
\end{definition}
We will use $\alpha_k$ to build an $\varepsilon$-overlap graph where
$\varepsilon = O\left(\frac{1}{k}\right)$. We place copies of $Q^k_A$ centered at every point
$v_0, \ldots, v_{n - 1}\in\mathbb{R}^2$, which are the vertices of the graph, and say that there is an edge
between two points $v$, $v'$ if the corresponding cycles $\alpha_k$, $\alpha_k'$
intersect. Then using the following reduction from $\varepsilon$-overlap graphs to contact
graphs finishes our proof.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:implyContact}
Consider a graph $G'=(V,E')$ with $V=[n]$ and a convex body $A$.
If for every $\varepsilon>0$, $G'\in C_\varepsilon(A)$, then there is a graph $G=(V,E)\in
C(A)$ such that $E'\subseteq E$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\varepsilon_m$ be a positive sequence such that $\varepsilon_m\longrightarrow 0$ as
$m\longrightarrow \infty$ and suppose that $\mathcal
A^m=\{v^m_1,\ldots,v^m_n\}\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ realize $G'$ as an $\varepsilon_m$-overlap graph.
We may clearly assume that the values $\|v^m_i\|_A$ are bounded.
By passing from $\mathcal A^m$ to a subsequence, we may therefore assume that
for each $i\in V$, $v^m_i$ converges to some point $v_i$ as
$m\longrightarrow\infty$.
Clearly, $\|v_iv_j\|_A\geq 2$, so $\{v_1,\ldots,v_n\}$ are compatible with $A$ and define a contact graph
$G=(V,E)=C_A(\{v_1,\ldots,v_n\})$.
Furthermore, if $ij\in E'$, then $\|v_iv_j\|_A\leq 2$, so $E'\subseteq E$.
\end{proof}
Combining this with \Cref{main:contact} will exactly give us our result. So the
rest of this section will be dedicated to showing that the graph $Q^k_A$ exists
and describe how to build $\varepsilon$-overlap graphs using it.
In the construction of $Q^k_A$ we have a designated vertex $s_0$ with the
property that for every drawing of $Q^k_A$ as an intersection graph and every vertex $v\in \alpha_k$, we have $\norm{s_0v}{A}=\Omega(k)$.
To obtain this property, we first construct another graph $P^k_A$ (which will be contained in $Q^k_A$)
with a vertex $s_0$ such that in every drawing of $P^k_A$
as an intersection graph, $s_0$ is contained in $k$ nested disjoint
cycles. A priori, it is not clear what it means for $s_0$ to be contained in a cycle
of the graph in every drawing, since the drawing is not necessarily a plane
embedding of the graph.
However, as the following lemma shows, it is well-defined if $P^k_A$ is triangle-free.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:triangle}
If $G$ is a triangle-free graph then every drawing of $G$ as an intersection
graph is a plane embedding.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof will be by contraposition so assume that $A \subset \mathbb{R}^2$ is a
convex body and that $G=(V,E)$ is a drawing as an intersection graph. Then there exists
$x, y, z, w \in V$ with $xy, zw \in E$ and where the edges $xy$
and $zw$ intersect. Call this intersection point $p \in \mathbb{R}^2$. We know
that $\norm{xy}{A} \le 2$ and $\norm{zw}{A} \le 2$. Using the triangle
inequality we get that
\begin{align*}
\norm{xw}{A} &\le \norm{xp}{A} + \norm{wp}{A} \\
\norm{yz}{A} &\le \norm{yp}{A} + \norm{zp}{A}
\end{align*}
combining this we get that
\[
\norm{xw}{A} + \norm{yz}{A} \le \norm{xy}{A} + \norm{zw}{A} \le 4
\]
since $p$ lies on the lines $xy$ and $zw$. This implies that either
$\norm{xw}{A} \le 2$ or $\norm{yz}{A} \le 2$ so either $xw \in E(G)$
or $yz \in E(G)$. An analogous argument shows that either $xz \in E(G)$ or
$yw \in E(G)$. This shows that $G$ contains a triangle which finishes the
proof.
\end{proof}
We are now ready to define $P^k_A \in I(A)$ for any $k > 0$.
Besides being triangle-free, our aim is that $P^k_A$ should have the following properties:
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{prop:P1}
There is a vertex $s_0$ such that in any drawing of $P_A^k$ as an intersection graph of $A$ and $B$, $s_0$ is contained in $k$ nested disjoint, simple cycles $\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_k$.
\item\label{prop:P2}
There is a path $\kappa_k$ from a vertex $s_k$ to a leaf $t_k$ such that in any drawing of $P_A^k$ as an intersection graph of $A$ and $B$, the path $\kappa_k$ is on the boundary of the outer face.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{construction}[$P_A^k$.]
As in the previous section choose $e_1,e_2\in \mathbb{R}^2$ such that $\norm{e_1}{A}=\norm{e_2}{A}=\norm{e_1-e_2}{A}=2$, let $\mathcal{L}:=\mathcal{L}(e_1,e_2)$, and put $G_0=I_A(\mathcal{L})$.
We will define $P_A^k$ to be of the form $G_0[\mathcal{A}_k]$ for some $\mathcal{A}_k\subset \mathcal{L}$ to be defined inductively.
Let first $s_0=0$, $t_0=e_1$, and $\mathcal{A}_0=\{s_0,t_0\}$. Define $\kappa_0$ to be the length-one path between $s_0$ and $t_0$ in $G_0$.
Suppose inductively that $\mathcal{A}_{k-1}$ has been defined.
Write $t_{k-1}=(r-1)e_1$ for some positive integer $r$ and define $\mathcal{R}_{r}=\{x\in \mathcal{L} \mid d_{G_0}(x,0)=r\}$ and $\mathcal{K}_r=\{x\in G_0\mid d_{G_0}(re_1,x)=1\}$.
Define $\tau_k$ and $\sigma_k$ to be the cycles of $G_0$ through the points of $\mathcal{K}_r$ and $(\mathcal{R}_{r}\setminus \{re_1\})\cup (\mathcal{K}_{r}\setminus \{t_{k-1}\})$, respectively.
Finally define $\mathcal{T}_r=\{t_{r-1}+i e_1 \mid i=3,\dots ,\ell\}$ where $\ell$ is chosen so large that the path $\kappa_k$ on the vertices of $\mathcal{T}_r$ is so long that it cannot be contained in the cycle $\sigma_k$ in any drawing of $P^k_A$ as an intersection graph of $A$ and $B$.
Let $t_k=\ell e_1$ and $\mathcal{A}_k=\mathcal{A}_{k-1}\cup (\mathcal{R}_r \setminus \{re_1\})\cup \mathcal{K}_r\cup \mathcal{T}_r$.
See Figure~\ref{fig:christmas}.
\end{construction}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[]{graphics/altconstruc.pdf}
\caption{The construction of $P_A^2$.}
\label{fig:christmas}
\end{figure}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:christmas}
The graph $P_A^k$ has properties~\ref{prop:P1}--\ref{prop:P2}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof
The graph $P_A^0$ trivially has the properties.
Suppose inductively that the $P_A^{k-1}$ has the properties and
consider any drawing of $P^k_A$ as an intersection graph of $A$ or $B$.
Note that $\kappa_k$ is attached to two cycles: $\tau_k$ and $\sigma_k$.
By construction, $\kappa_k$ is so long that it cannot be contained in any of them.
Hence, $\kappa_k$ is in the exterior of both.
It follows that either $\sigma_k$ is contained in $\tau_k$ or $\tau_k$ is contained in $\sigma_k$.
Clearly, $\tau_k$ is too short for the first to be the case.
We therefore get that all of $P_A^{k-1}$ is contained in $\sigma_k$ and that $\kappa_k$ is on the boundary of the outer face.
Furthermore, the induction hypothesis implies that $s_0$ is contained in the $k$ nested, disjoint cycles $\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_k$.
\end{proof}
The most important property of $P^k_A$ is that every vertex $u \in \sigma_k$
has distance $\Omega(k)$ to $s_0$ in any drawing of $P^k_A$ as intersection
graph of $A$ and $B$. This is exactly what we will use when
constructing $Q^k_A$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:cycleDist}
Let $X\in\{A,B\}$.
Consider any drawing of $P_A^k$ as an intersection graph of $X$.
For any vertex $u\in\sigma_k$, we have $\norm{s_0u}{X}> 2(k/9-1)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Note that each cycle $\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_k$ has an edge that intersects the segment $s_0u$, and that the intersection point has distance at most $1$ to a vertex of the cycle.
We claim that each subsegment $r$ of $s_0u$ of length at most $2$ is intersected by at most $9$ cycles.
Otherwise, the midpoint $x$ of $r$ would have distance at most $2$ to at least $10$ independent vertices.
The translates of $X$ centered at these vertices are pairwise disjoint and contained in a ball $D$ centered at $x$ with radius $3$.
But the area of $D$ is only $3^2=9$ times larger than that of $X$, a contradiction.
Let now $\ell=\norm{s_0u}{X}$, and divide $s_0u$ into $\lceil \ell/2\rceil$ equally long pieces, each of length at most $2$.
As each piece is intersected by at most $9$ cycles, the total number of cycles intersecting $s_0u$ is $9\lceil \ell/2\rceil$.
We get that $k\leq 9\lceil \ell/2\rceil<9(\ell/2+1)$ so that $\ell > 2(k/9-1)$.
\end{proof}
Having defined $P^k_A$ we are now ready to the main part of this section: Constructing
$Q^k_A$ and prove that it has the necessary properties for building $\varepsilon$-overlap
graphs.
\begin{construction}[$Q_A^k$]\label{const:Q}
We here define a graph $Q_A^k\in I(A)$ by specifying a drawing of $Q_A^k$ as an intersection graph of $A$.
Let $k'\mydef 18(k+1)$.
We start with $P_A^{k'}$ and explain what to add to obtain $Q_A^k$.
Let $u_0,\ldots,u_{n-1}$ be the vertices of $\sigma_{k'}$ in cyclic, counter-clockwise order.
Consider an arbitrary drawing of $P_A^{k'}$ as an intersection graph of $A$ and a vertex $u_i$.
Note that $d\mydef \left\lceil\frac{\norm{s_0u_i}{A}-2}{2}\right\rceil$ is the number of vertices needed to add in order to create a path from $s_0$ to $u_i$.
It follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:cycleDist} that $d\geq 2k$.
We want to minimize the vector of these values $d$ with respect to each vertex $u_i\in\sigma_{k'}$.
To be precise, we define
$$(d_0,\ldots,d_{n-1})\mydef
\min\left(
\left\lceil\frac{\norm{s_0u_0}{A}-2}{2}\right\rceil,\ldots,\left\lceil\frac{\norm{s_0u_{n-1}}{A}-2}{2}\right\rceil
\right),$$
where the minimum is with respect to the lexicographical order and taken over all drawings of $P_Q^{k'}$ as an intersection graph.
Consider an drawing of $P_A^{k'}$ as an intersection graph realizing the minimum and let $\mathcal P$ be the set of vertices in the drawing.
For each vertex $u_i$, we create a path $\pi_i$ from $s_0$ to $u_i$ as follows.
Let $\mathbf v_i$ be the unit-vector in direction $u_i-s_0$.
We add new vertices placed at the points $v_i(j)\mydef s_0+2j\mathbf v_i$ for $j\in\{1,\ldots,d_i\}$.
We now define the vertices of $Q_A^k$ as $\mathcal Q\mydef \mathcal P\cup\bigcup_{i=0}^{n-1}\{v_i(1),\ldots,v_i(d_i)\}$ and define $Q_A^k=I_A(\mathcal Q)$.
See Figure~\ref{fig:Q}.
\end{construction}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{graphics/chains.pdf}
\caption{A part of a graph $Q_A^k$.
The vertices $v_i(j)$ are only shown for $j\in\{1,2\}$, and only edges on paths $\pi_i$ and cycles $\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\sigma_{k'}$ are shown.}
\label{fig:Q}
\end{figure}
\begin{remark}\label{remark:minimality}
By construction, there exists a drawing of $Q_A^k$ as an intersection graph of $A$.
If there does not exist one with respect to $B$, we are done, since we then clearly have that $I(A) \neq I(B)$.
Now suppose that there exists a drawing of $P_A^{k'}$ as an intersection graph of $B$ such that
\begin{align}\label{remark:minimality:eq}
\left(
\left\lceil\frac{\norm{s_0u_0}{B}-2}{2}\right\rceil,\ldots,\left\lceil\frac{\norm{s_0u_{n-1}}{B}-2}{2}\right\rceil
\right)\prec
(d_0,\ldots,d_{n-1}),
\end{align}
where $\prec$ denotes the lexicographical order.
We can now define a graph $Q_B^k\in I(B)$ in a similar way as we defined $Q_A^k$ by adding $\left\lceil\frac{\norm{s_0u_i}{B}-2}{2}\right\rceil$ vertices to form a path from $s_0$ to each $u_i$.
It then follows from~\eqref{remark:minimality:eq} that $Q_B^k\notin I(A)$, so in this case we have likewise succeeded in proving $I(A)\neq I(B)$.
In the following, we therefore assume that $Q_A^k\in I(B)$ for any $k$ and that no drawing of $P_A^{k'}$ as an intersection graph of $B$ satisfying~\eqref{remark:minimality:eq} exists.
\end{remark}
First we need to show that $Q^k_A$ does contain a cycle $\alpha_k$ as described
in the beginning of this section.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:cycleQ}
The set of edges of $Q_A^k$ contain the pairs $v_i(j)v_{i+1}(j)$ for any $i\in[n]$ and $j\in\{1,\ldots,k\}$, and for each $j\in\{1,\ldots,k\}$, these edges thus form a cycle $\alpha_j$.
In the specific drawing of $Q^k_A$ as an intersection graph defined in Construction~\ref{const:Q}, the cycle $\alpha_j$ is contained in the annulus $\setbuilder{x\in\mathbb{R}^2}{\norm{s_0x}{A}\in[2j-1,2j]}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider the pair $v_i(j)v_{i+1}(j)$.
Note that $\norm{u_iu_{i+1}}{A}\leq 2$ as $u_iu_{i+1}$ is an edge of $\sigma_{k'}$.
Assume without loss of generality that $\norm{s_0u_i}{A}\leq\norm{s_0u_{i+1}}{A}$, and let $u'_{i+1}$ be the point on $s_0u_{i+1}$ such that $\norm{s_0u'_{i+1}}{A}=\norm{s_0u_i}{A}$.
Note that
$$\norm{s_0u'_{i+1}}{A}+\norm{u'_{i+1}u_{i+1}}{A}=
\norm{s_0u_{i+1}}{A}\leq
\norm{s_0u_i}{A}+\norm{u_iu_{i+1}}{A},$$ so
$\norm{u'_{i+1}u_{i+1}}{A}\leq \norm{u_iu_{i+1}}{A}\leq 2$.
Hence,
$$\norm{u_iu'_{i+1}}{A}\leq
\norm{u_iu_{i+1}}{A}+\norm{u_{i+1}u'_{i+1}}{A}\leq 4.$$
It follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:cycleDist} that $\norm{s_0u_i}{A}\geq 4k$, and thus $\norm{s_0v_i(j)}{A}\leq 2k\leq\norm{s_0u_i}{A}/2$.
As the triangles $s_0u_iu'_{i+1}$ and $s_0v_i(j)v_{i+1}(j)$ are similar, we get
$$\norm{v_i(j)v_{i+1}(j)}{A}\leq \norm{u_iu'_{i+1}}{A}/2\leq2.$$
For the second part, note that the edge $v_i(j)v_{i+1}(j)$ is in the ball $s_0+2jA$.
As any point on $v_0(j)v_{i+1}(j)$ is within distance $1$ from $v_i(j)$ or $v_{i+1}(j)$, the statement follows.
\end{proof}
This shows that the cycle $\alpha_k$ behaves nicely in one particular drawing
of $Q^k_A$ as an intersection graph.
We now show that something similar holds for every drawing.
\iffull
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:annulus}
Let $X\in\{A,B\}$.
In any drawing of $Q^k_A$ as an intersection graph with respect to $X$, any $i\in[n]$, and any $j\in\{1,\ldots,k\}$, the vertex $v_i(j)$ is contained in the annulus $\setbuilder{x\in\mathbb{R}^2}{\norm{s_0x}{A}\in(2j-2,2j]}$.
Therefore, the cycle $\alpha_j$ is contained in the annulus $\setbuilder{x\in\mathbb{R}^2}{\norm{s_0x}{A}\in(2j-3,2j]}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The upper bound on $\norm{s_0v_i(j)}{X}$ holds as there is a path from $s_0$ to $v_i(j)$ consisting of only $j+1$ vertices.
For the lower bound, assume for contradiction that for some values of $i$ and $j$, there exists a drawing of $Q^k_A$ as an intersection graph where $\norm{s_0v_i(j)}{X}\leq 2j-2$.
We now claim that (i): $\left\lceil\frac{\norm{s_0u_j}{X}-2}{2}\right\rceil\leq d_j$ for all $j\in\{1,\ldots,k\}$ and (ii): $\left\lceil\frac{\norm{s_0u_i}{X}-2}{2}\right\rceil< d_i$. Together, (i) and (ii) contradict either the minimality of $(d_0,\ldots,d_{n-1})$ (if $X=A$) or the assumption from Remark~\ref{remark:minimality}~(if $X=B$).
For part (i), note that since $\pi_j$ consists of $d_j+2$ vertices, we have $\norm{s_0u_j}{X}\leq 2(d_j+1)$, and it follows that $\left\lceil\frac{\norm{s_0u_j}{X}-2}{2}\right\rceil\leq \left\lceil d_j\right\rceil=d_j$.
For part (ii), note that since there is a path from $v_i(j)$ to $u_i$ consisting of $d_i-j+2$ vertices, we have $\norm{v_i(j)u_i}{X}\leq 2(d_i-j+1)$.
By the triangle inequality we now get
$\norm{s_0u_i}{X}\leq \norm{s_0v_i(j)}{X}+\norm{v_i(j)u_i}{X}\leq 2j-2+2(d_i-j+1)=2d_i$.
It now follows that $\left\lceil\frac{\norm{s_0u_i}{X}-2}{2}\right\rceil\leq\left\lceil\frac{2d_i-2}{2}\right\rceil=d_i-1<d_i$.
\end{proof}
We want to be able to conclude that two cycles $\alpha_k, \alpha'_k$ intersect
if the two annuli containing the cycles cross each other. This will be an easy consequence of the following lemma
which shows that the cycle $\alpha_k$ goes all the way around $s_0$ inside the annulus
in any drawing of $Q^k_A$ as an intersection graph.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:winding}
Let $X\in\{A,B\}$.
Consider any drawing of $Q_A^k$ as an intersection graph with respect to $X$ and any $j\in\{3,\ldots,k\}$, and consider $\alpha_j$ as a parameterized, closed curve $\alpha_j\colon [0,1]\longrightarrow \mathbb{R}^2$, such that for any $i\in[n]$, $\alpha_j$ interpolates linearly from $v_i(j)$ to $v_{i+1}(j)$ on the interval $[\frac{i}{n},\frac{i+1}{n}]$, where indices are taken modulo $n$.
We may then define a continuous argument function $\theta_{\alpha}\colon[0,1]\longrightarrow \mathbb{R}$ such that $\theta_{\alpha}(t)$ is an argument of the vector $\alpha_j(t)-s_0$ for all $t\in[0,1]$.
Then the argument variation of $\alpha_j$ around $s_0$ is $\theta_{\alpha}(1)-\theta_{\alpha}(0)=\pm 2\pi$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Just as $\alpha_j$ is considered as a parameterized curve in the lemma, we may in a similar way consider $\sigma_{k'}$ as a parameterized closed curve $\mathcal \sigma_{k'}\colon [0,1]\longrightarrow \mathbb{R}^2$ such that $\sigma_{k'}$ interpolates linearly from $u_i$ to $u_{i+1}$ on the interval $[\frac{i}{n},\frac{i+1}{n}]$.
We also define $\theta_\sigma\colon[0,1]\longrightarrow\mathbb{R}$ to be a continuous argument function for $\sigma_{k'}$.
Since $\sigma_{k'}$ is a simple closed curve containing $s_0$ in the interior by Lemma~\ref{lemma:christmas}, we get that the argument variation of $\sigma_{k'}$ around $s_0$ is $\theta_\sigma(1)-\theta_\sigma(0)=2\pi$.
For any $\lambda\in[0,1]$, we now define the curve $\varphi_\lambda\colon[0,1]\longrightarrow\mathbb{R}^2$ such that $\varphi_\lambda(t)=(1-\lambda)\alpha_j(t)+\lambda \sigma_{k'}(t)$.
Thus, $\varphi_\lambda$ is a continuous interpolation between $\alpha_j$ (when $\lambda=0$) and $\sigma_{k'}$ (when $\lambda=1$).
We claim that for all $t,\lambda\in[0,1]$, we have $s_0\neq\varphi_\lambda(t)$.
To this end, we prove that the segment $\alpha_j(t)\sigma_{k'}(t)=\varphi_0(t)\varphi_1(t)$ is contained in the ball $D\mydef \setbuilder{x\in\mathbb{R}^2}{\norm{xu_i}{X}\leq \norm{\alpha_j(t)u_i}{X}}$, whereas $s_0\notin D$.
Suppose that $t=i/n+t'$, where $t'\in[0,\frac 1{2n})$.
The case where $t'\in[\frac 1{2n},\frac 1n)$ is similar.
We now have that
$$\norm{\alpha_j(t)u_i}{X}\leq
\norm{\alpha_j(t)v_i(j)}{X}+
\norm{v_i(j)u_i}{X}\leq
1+2(d_i-j+1)<2(d_i-1)+1<\norm{s_0u_i}{X},$$
so $s_0\notin D$.
Obviously, $\alpha_j(t)\in D$ by definition.
Since also $\norm{\sigma_{k'}(t)u_i}{X}\leq 1<\norm{s_0u_i}{X}$, the claim follows.
It now follows that for all $\lambda\in[0,1]$, the curve $\varphi_\lambda$ has the same argument variation around $s_0$ as $\sigma_{k'}$.
In particular, $\theta_{\alpha}(1)-\theta_{\alpha}(0)=\pm 2\pi$ as stated.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{graphics/annulus.pdf}
\caption{Two cases from the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma:realizeH}.}
\label{fig:annulus}
\end{figure}
\else
To see that something similar holds for every drawing, we refer the reader to the full version.
\fi
We will now use use copies of $Q^k_A$ to construct $\varepsilon$-overlap graphs which will finish the proof.
\begin{construction}[$H_A^k(G)$]\label{const:H}
For any $G\in C(A)$, consider a fixed drawing of $G$ as a contact graph of $A$.
For each vertex $w$ of $G$, we make a copy of the drawing of $Q_A^k$ as an intersection graph as defined in Construction~\ref{const:Q} which we translate so that $s_0$ is placed at $s_0^w\mydef (2k-2)w$.
We then add all edges induced by the vertices, and the result is denoted as $H_A^k(G)$.
\end{construction}
To show that $H^k_A(G)$ does in fact construct $G$ as a $\varepsilon$-overlap graph, we need to show that if $w w'$ is an edge of $G$, then the corresponding cycles $\alpha_k$ and $\alpha'_k$ intersect each other.
That implies the existence of vertices $v_i(k)$ and $v'_{i'}(k)$ of $\alpha_k$ and $\alpha'_k$, respectively, such that $v_i(k)v'_{i'}(k)$ is an edge of $H_A^k(G)$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:edgesH}
Consider two vertices $w,w'$ of a drawing of a graph $G$ as a contact graph.
Denote by $Q$ and $Q'$ the copies of $Q_A^k$ in $H_A^k(G)$ corresponding to $w$ and $w'$, respectively, such that $s_0,\pi_i,\alpha_j,v_i(j)$ denote objects in $Q$ and $s'_0,\pi'_i,\alpha'_j,v'_i(j)$ denote objects in $Q'$.
If $v_i(j)v'_{i'}(j')$ is an edge of $H_A^k(G)$, then $j+j'\geq 2k-4$.
If $ww'$ is an edge of $G$, then there is an edge $v_i(k)v_{i'}'(k)$ in $H_A^k(G)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assume that $j+j'\leq 2k-3$.
In the drawing of $H^k_A(G)$ as an intersection graph defined by Construction~\ref{const:H}, we have
$$\norm{v_i(j)v'_{i'}(j')}{A}\geq \norm{s_0s'_0}{A}-\norm{s_0v_i(j)}{A}-\norm{s'_0v'_{i'}(j')}{A}= 4k-4-2j-2j'\geq 4>2,$$
so $v_i(j)v'_{i'}(j')$ is not an edge of $H_A^k(G)$.
Suppose now that $ww'$ is an edge of $G$.
Let $\mathcal A\mydef \setbuilder{x\in\mathbb{R}^2}{\norm{s_0x}{A}\in[2k-1,2k]}$ be the annulus containing $\alpha_k$ (by Lemma~\ref{lemma:cycleQ}) and $\mathcal A'\mydef \setbuilder{x\in\mathbb{R}^2}{\norm{s'_0x}{A}\in[2k-1,2k]}$ be that containing $\alpha'_k$.
The annuli $\mathcal A$ and $\mathcal A'$ cross over each other as two Olympic rings (i.e., the difference $\mathcal A\setminus\mathcal A'$ has two connected components).
\iffull
\Cref{lemma:winding} then shows the
\else
A lemma from the full version then shows the
\fi
intuitive fact that $\alpha_k$ and $\alpha'_k$ must intersect.
Therefore, there is an edge $v_i(k)v'_{i'}(k)$.
\end{proof}
We need one last fact before concluding that $H^k_A(G)$ constructs $G$ as an
$\varepsilon$-overlap graph:
for $X\in\{A,B\}$ and any two centers $s_0, s'_0$ of copies
of $Q^k_A$, we have $\norm{s_0s'_0}{X}=\Omega(k)$, and if the corresponding
vertices $w, w'$ share an edge in $G$, then $\norm{s_0s'_0}{X}=O(k)$, as made precise in the following
\iffull
lemma.
\else
lemma, the proof of which is deferred to the full version.
\fi
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:realizeH}
Let $X\in\{A,B\}$ and $k\geq 7$.
In the setting of Lemma~\ref{lemma:edgesH}, consider an arbitrary drawing of $H_A^k(G)$ as in intersection graph of $X$.
Then $\norm{s_0s'_0}{X}\geq 4k-18$ and if $ww'$ is an edge of $G$, then $\norm{s_0s'_0}{X}\leq 4k+2$.
\end{lemma}
\iffull
\begin{proof}
To prove the lower bound on $\norm{s_0s'_0}{X}$, we show that $\norm{s_0s'_0}{X}$ is neither in the interval $[0,k-7)$ nor in $[k-7,4k-18)$.
The cases are depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:annulus}.
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{lemma:realizeHcase1}
Suppose that $\norm{s_0s'_0}{X}\in [0,k-7)$.
Let $j\mydef \lceil\frac k2-2\rceil$.
Then $s'_0$ is in the ball $s_0+(2j-3)X$.
By Lemma~\ref{lemma:annulus}, $\alpha_j$ is contained in the annulus $\mathcal A\mydef \setbuilder{x\in\mathbb{R}^2}{\norm{s_0x}{X}\in (2j-3,2j]}$.
Note that $\mathcal A$ has diameter $4j<2k-3$.
It follows from Lemma~\ref{lemma:annulus} that any of the subpaths of $\pi'_{i'}$ from $s'_0$ to $v'_{i'}(k)$ connects the inner and outer boundary of $\mathcal A$.
Therefore, Lemma~\ref{lemma:winding} gives that $\pi'_{i'}$ crosses $\alpha_j$.
Thus, there is also an edge $v_i(j)v'_{i'}(j')$ of $H_A^k(G)$, where $j+j'\leq \lceil\frac k2-2\rceil+k<2k-4$, contradicting Lemma~\ref{lemma:edgesH}.
\item\label{lemma:realizeHcase2}
Suppose now that $\norm{s_0s'_0}{X}\in [k-7,4k-18)$.
By an argument similar to the one used in the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma:edgesH}, one can show that $\alpha_{k-3}$ crosses $\alpha'_{k-3}$.
Hence, there is an edge $v_i(k-3)v'_{i'}(k-3)$, contradicting Lemma~\ref{lemma:edgesH}.
\end{enumerate}
Consider now the case that $ww'$ is an edge of $G$.
By Lemma~\ref{lemma:edgesH}, we know that there is an edge $v_i(k)v'_{i'}(k)$.
Then $\norm{s_0s'_0}{X}\leq \norm{s_0v_i(k)}{X}+\norm{v_i(k)v'_{i'}(k)}{X}+\norm{v'_{i'}(k)s'_0}{X}\leq 4k+2$.
\end{proof}
\else
\fi
We are now ready to show that $H^k_A(G)$ does in fact construct $G$ as a
$\varepsilon$-overlap graph.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:overlap}
For a graph $G=(V,E)\in C(A)$, if $H_A^k(G)\in I(B)$ for $k\geq 7$, then $G\in C_{10/k}(B)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $H_A^k(G)\in I(B)$ and consider a drawing of $H_A^k(G)$ as an intersection graph of $B$, and define $\mathcal A\mydef \setbuilder{\frac{s_0^u}{2k+1}}{u\in V}$.
It follows directly from Lemma~\ref{lemma:realizeH} that $I_B(\mathcal A)$ is a drawing of $G$ as a $\left(2-\frac{4k-18}{2k+1}\right)$-overlap graph of $B$.
Since $\frac{4k-18}{2k+1}\geq 2-10/k$, the statement follows.
\end{proof}
\Cref{theorem:main} is an easy consequence of \Cref{lemma:overlap} and \Cref{lemma:implyContact}:
\begin{proof}[Proof of \Cref{theorem:main}]
Let $G=(V,E')$ have the property from the theorem and suppose that $I(A)=I(B)$.
Then in particular, $H_A^k(G)\in I(B)$ for all $k>0$.
By Lemma~\ref{lemma:overlap} and~\ref{lemma:implyContact}, there is a graph $H=(V,E)\in C(B)$ such that $E'\subseteq E$, which is a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\section{Introduction}
\iffalse
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{graphics/escher.pdf}
\end{figure}
\fi
Consider a convex body $A$, i.e., a convex, compact region of the plane with non-empty interior, and let $\mathcal A=\{A_1,\ldots,A_n\}$ be a set of $n$ translates of $A$.
Then $\mathcal A$ gives rise to an \emph{intersection graph} $G=(V,E)$, where $V=\{1,\ldots,n\}$ and $E=\{uv\mid A_u\cap A_v\neq\emptyset\}$, and a \emph{unit distance graph} $G'=(V,E')$, where $uv\in E'$ if and only if $uv\in E$ and $A_u$ and $A_v$ have disjoint interiors.
In the special case that $G=G'$ (i.e., the convex bodies of $\mathcal A$ have pairwise disjoint interiors), we say that $G$ is a \emph{contact graph} (also known as a \emph{touch graph} or \emph{tangency graph}).
Thus, $A$ defines three classes of graphs, namely the intersection graphs $I(A)$, the unit distance graphs $U(A)$, and the contact graphs $C(A)$ of translates of $A$.
The study of intersection graphs has been an active research area in discrete and computational geometry for the past three decades.
Numerous papers consider the problem of solving classical graph problems efficiently on various classes of geometric intersection graphs.
From a practical point of view, the research is often motivated by the applicability of intersection graphs when modeling wireless communication networks and facility location problems.
If a station is located at some point in the plane and is able to transmit to and receive from all other stations within some distance then the stations can be represented as disks in such a way that two stations can communicate if and only if their disks overlap.
Meanwhile, the study of contact graphs of translates of a convex body has older roots. It is closely related to the packings of such a body, which has a very long and rich history in mathematics going back (at least) to the seventeenth century, where research on the packings of circles of varying and constant radii was conducted and Kepler famously conjectured upon a 3-dimensional counterpart of such problems, the packing of spheres.
An important notion in this area is that of the \emph{Hadwiger number} of a body $K$, which is the maximum possible number of pairwise interior-disjoint translates $K_i$ of $K$ that each touch but do not overlap $K$.
The Hadwiger number of $K$ is thus the maximum degree of a contact graph of translates of $K$.
In the plane, the Hadwiger number is $8$ for parallelograms and $6$ for all other convex bodies.
We refer the reader to the books and surveys by L{\'a}szl{\'o} and G{\'a}bor Fejes T{\'o}th~\cite{toth1983new,toth1972lagerungen} and B{\"o}r{\"o}czky~\cite{boroczky2004finite}.
Another noteworthy result on contact graphs is the Circle Packing Theorem (also known as the Koebe--Andreev--Thurston Theorem):
A graph is simple and planar if and only if it is the contact graph of some set of circular disks in the plane (the radii of which need not be equal).
The result was proven by Koebe in 1935~\cite{koebe1936kontaktprobleme} (see~\cite{felsner2018primal} for a streamlined, elementary proof).
Schramm~\cite{schramm2007combinatorically} generalized the circle packing theorem by showing that if a smooth planar convex body is assigned to each vertex in a planar graph, then the graph can be realized as a contact graph where each vertex is represented by a homothet (i.e., a scaled translation) of its assigned body.
In this paper we investigate the question of when two convex bodies $A$ and $B$ give rise to the same classes of graphs.
We restrict ourselves to convex bodies $A$ that have the URTC property (\emph{unique regular triangle constructibility}). This is the property that given two interior disjoint translates $A_1,A_2$ of $A$ that touch, there are exactly two ways to place a third translate $A_3$ such that $A_3$ is interior disjoint from $A_1$ and $A_2$, but touches both.
Convex bodies with the URTC property include all linear transformations of regular polygons except squares and all strictly convex bodies~\cite{geher2015contribution}.
The main result of the paper is summarized in the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:main}
Let $A$ and $B$ be convex bodies with the URTC property. Then each of the identities $I(A)=I(B)$, $U(A)=U(B)$, and $C(A)=C(B)$ holds if and only if the following condition is satisfied:
there is a linear transformation $B'$ of $B$ such that for any slope, the longest segments contained in $A$ and $B'$, respectively, with that slope are equally long.
\end{theorem}
\subsection{Other Related Work}
Several papers have compared classes of intersection graphs of various geometric objects, see for instance~\cite{cabello2017refining,cardinal2017intersection,chaplick2014grid,janson1992thresholds,kratochvil1994intersection}.
Most of the results are inclusions between classes of intersection graphs of one-dimensional objects such as line segments and curves.
A survey by Swanepoel~\cite{swanepoel2018combinatorial} summarizes results on minimum distance graphs and unit distance graphs in normed spaces, including bounds on the minimum/maximum degree, maximum number of edges, chromatic number, and independence number.
Perepelitsa~\cite{perepelitsa2003bounds} studied unit disk intersection graphs in normed planar spaces and showed that they are $\chi$-bounded in any such space.
Kim et al.~\cite{kim2004chromatic} improved Perepelitsa's bound.
For other work on intersection graphs of translates of a fixed convex body, see~\cite{dumitrescu2011piercing,dumitrescu2012coloring, kim2008coloring,kim2006transversal}.
In the area of computational geometry, M{\"{u}}ller et al.~\cite{muller2013integer} gave sharp upper and lower bounds on the size of an integer grid used to represent an intersection graph of translates of a convex polygon with corners at rational coordinates.
Their results imply that for any convex polygon $R$ with rational corners, the problem of recognizing intersection graphs of translates of $R$ is in \textsc{NP}.
On the contrary, it is open whether recognition of unit disk graphs in the Euclidean plane is in NP.
Indeed, the problem is $\exists\mathbb{R}$-complete (and thus in PSPACE), and using integers to represent the center coordinates and radii of the disks in some graphs requires exponentially many bits~\cite{cardinal2015computational,mcdiarmid2013integer}.
\subsection{Structure of the Paper}\label{papstruc}
\iffull
In Section~\ref{suffapp}, we establish the sufficiency of the condition of Theorem~\ref{thm:main}, which is relatively straightforward.
\else
Establishing the sufficiency of the condition of Theorem~\ref{thm:main} is relatively straightforward so due to space limitations we have deffered that part of the proof to the full version~\cite{}.
\fi
\iffull
In Section~\ref{symmetriapp} we show how to reduce Theorem~\ref{thm:main} to the case where the convex bodies are symmetric.
For contact graphs, we then prove the following more general version of the necessity of the condition of Theorem~\ref{thm:main} in Section~\ref{necsec}.
\else
In the full version, we show how to reduce Theorem~\ref{thm:main} to the case where the convex bodies are symmetric.
In Section~\ref{necsec}, we show the following generalization of necessity in the theorem in the symmetric case.
\fi
\begin{theorem}\label{main:contact}
Let $A$ and $B$ be symmetric convex bodies with the URTC property such that $A$ is not a linear transformation of $B$. There exists a graph $G\in C(A)$ such that for all $H\in C(B)$ and all subgraphs $H'\subset H$, $G$ is not isomorphic to $H'$. In particular $C(A) \setminus C(B) \neq \emptyset$.
\end{theorem}
As we will also discuss in Section~\ref{necsec} the same result holds if $C(X)$ is replaced by $U(X)$ for $X\in \{A,B\}$ everywhere in the theorem above. The proof is identical.
In Section~\ref{intsec} we prove the following result which combined with~Theorem~\ref{main:contact} yields the necessity of the condition of Theorem~\ref{thm:main} for \emph{intersection graphs}.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:main}
Let $A$ and $B$ be symmetric convex bodies. If there exists a graph $G\in C(A)$ such
that for all $H \in C(B)$ and all subgraphs $H'\subset H$, $G$
is not isomorphic to $H'$, then $I(A) \neq I(B)$.
\end{theorem}
This result holds for general symmetric convex bodies.
An improvement of Theorem~\ref{main:contact} to general symmetric convex bodies (not necessarily having the URTC property) would thus yield a version of Theorem~\ref{thm:main} that also holds for general convex bodies.
\section{Initial Classification Work and Structure of the Paper}\label{classec}
\section{Sufficiency of the Condition of Theorem \ref{thm:main}}\label{suffapp}
This section establishes the sufficiency of the condition stated in Theorem~\ref{thm:main} -- this is the easy direction. It is worth noting that for this direction our result holds for general convex bodies.
Essentially, we show that the classes of contact, unit distance, and intersection graphs arising from a convex body $A$ are closed under linear transformations of $A$ and under operations on $A$ maintaining the \emph{signature} of $A$ which we proceed to define.
\begin{definition}[Profile]
Let $A\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ be a convex body. A \emph{profile} through $A$ at angle $\theta\in [0, \pi)$ is a closed line segment $\ell_\theta$ of maximal length which has argument $\theta$ and is contained in $A$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}[Signature]
Let $A\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ be a convex body. The \emph{signature} of $A$ is the function $\rho_A\colon [0, \pi)\to \mathbb{R}$ satisfying that for every $\theta\in [0, \pi)$, $\rho_A(\theta)=\abs{\ell_\theta}$ is the length of a profile through $A$ at angle $\theta$.
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}\label{Lem-Moving_with_argument}
Let $A\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ be a convex body and $v\in \mathbb{R}^2$ a vector with argument $\theta\in [0, 2\pi)$ and magnitude $r$. Then
\begin{enumerate}
\item $(A+v)\cap A \neq \emptyset$ if and only if $r\leq \rho_A(\theta)$.
\item $(A+v)^{\circ}\cap A^\circ\neq\emptyset$ if and only if $r< \rho_A(\theta)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, suppose that $a\in (A+v)\cap A$. Then $a-v\in A$ and by convexity, the line segment $\ell$ from $a-v$ to $a$, which has length $r$ and argument $\theta$, is contained in $A$. It follows that $r\leq \rho_A(\theta)$. If further $a\in A^{\circ}$, there exists a vector $u$ of length $\epsilon>0$ and argument $\theta$ such that $a+u\in A$. It follows that $(A+v+u)\cap A\neq \emptyset$ implying that $r+\epsilon\leq \rho_A(\theta)$, so $r<\rho_A(\theta)$.
Second, suppose $r\leq \rho_A(\theta)$ and let $a, b$ be the endpoints of a profile, $\ell_\rho$, through $A$ at angle $\theta$ such that the vector from $a$ to $b$ has argument $\theta$. Then $a+v\in \ell_\theta$ as $r\leq \rho_A(\theta)=\abs{\ell_\theta}$. It follows that $a+v\in A\cap (A+v)$ implying $A\cap (A+v)\neq \emptyset$. If further $r<\rho_A(\theta)$, then $a+v\neq b$. Let $c\in A$ be such that $a,b$ and $c$ are not colinear. (Such a point exists as $A$ has non-empty interior.) The interiors of the triangles with vertices $a,b,c$ and $a+v,b+v,c+v$ are contained in $A^\circ$ and $(A+v)^\circ$, respectively and their intersection is non-trivial. It follows that $A^\circ \cap (A+v)^\circ\neq \emptyset$, as desired.
\end{proof}
\begin{comment}
\noindent
From this we immediately get the following corollary directly related to contact, unit distance, and intersection graphs.
\begin{corollary}\label{Cor-Moving_with_argument}\todo{Do we need it?}
Let $A\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ be a convex body and $v\in \mathbb{R}^2$ a vector with argument $\theta\in [0, \pi)$ and magnitude $r$. Then
\begin{enumerate}
\item $A+v$ and $A$ intersect if and only if $r\leq\rho_A(\theta)$.
\item $A+v$ and $A$ touch if and only if $r = \rho_A(\theta)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
\end{comment}
Second, the following lemma demonstrates closure of contact, unit distance, and intersection graphs under linear transformations.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lem-Graphs_invariant_under_lt}
Let $A\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ be a compact and connected subset of the plane and $M\colon \mathbb{R}^2\to\mathbb{R}^2$ be an invertible linear transformation. Then $C(A)=C(M(A))$, $U(A)=U(M(A))$, and $I(A)=I(M(A))$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $A_1, \dots, A_n$ is a realization of a graph $G$ as either a contact, unit distance, or intersection graph of $A$. Then $M(A_1), \dots, M(A_n)$ is a realization of $G$ as a contact, unit distance, or intersection graph, respectively, of $M(A)$.
\end{proof}
Finally, we combine the above observations to prove our sufficient condition.
\begin{theorem}\label{suff:thm}
Let $A, B\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ be convex bodies. If there exists a linear transformation $M\colon \mathbb{R}^2\to\mathbb{R}^2$ such that the signatures of $A$ and of $M(B)$ are identical, i.e.,~$\rho_A=\rho_{M(B)}$, then $C(A)=C(B)$, $U(A)=U(B)$, and $I(A)=I(B)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Having already established Lemma \ref{Lem-Graphs_invariant_under_lt}, it suffices to show that if $\rho_A=\rho_B$ then $C(A)=C(B)$, $U(A)=U(B)$, and $I(A)=I(B)$.
Let $A_1, \dots, A_n\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ be translated copies of $A$ in the plane; let $v_1, \dots, v_n\in \mathbb{R}^2$ be vectors satisfying $A_i=A+v_i$ for every $i\in [n]$; and let $n$ translated copies of $B$, $B_1, \dots, B_n$, be defined by $B_i=B+v_i$ for $i\in [n]$. Now, consider any pair $(i, j)\in [n]^2$ and denote by $\theta_{i, j}$ and $r_{i, j}$ the argument and magnitude of the vector $v_i-v_j$.
By~\Cref{Lem-Moving_with_argument}, $A_i\cap A_j\neq \emptyset$ if and only if $r_{i, j}\leq\rho_A(\theta_{i, j})=\rho_B(\theta_{i, j})$, which is true if and only if $B_i\cap B_j\neq \emptyset$. Similarly, $A_i^\circ\cap A_j^\circ\neq \emptyset$ if and only if $B_i^\circ \cap B_j^\circ\neq \emptyset$. It follows that if $A_1, \dots, A_n$ is a realization of a graph $G$ as a contact, unit distance, or intersection graph then $B_1, \dots, B_n$ is a realization of $G$ as a contact, unit distance, or intersection graph, respectively.
\end{proof}
\section{Reducing to Symmetric Convex Bodies}\label{symmetriapp}
In this section we show that for proving the necessity of the condition of~\Cref{thm:main} it suffices to consider only symmetric convex bodies with the URTC property.
We use the well-known trick in discrete geometry of considering the ``symmetrization'' of a convex body $A$, $K=\frac12(A+(-A))$.
\begin{lemma}\label{finishlem}
Let $A\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ be a convex body with signature $\rho_A$. Then $K=\frac12(A+(-A))$ is a symmetric convex body with signature $\rho_K=\rho_A$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It is well-known and easy to check that $K$ is symmetric, bounded and convex.
For the statement concerning the signature, let $\theta\in [0, \pi)$ be given.
Consider a profile $\ell_\theta$ through $A$ at angle $\theta$. Then $\frac12\left(\ell_\theta + (-\ell_\theta)\right)\subset K$ is a line segment of the same length and argument as $\ell_\theta$ and hence, $\rho_K(\theta)\geq \rho_A(\theta)$.
Conversely, consider a profile $\ell_\theta'$ through $K$ at angle $\theta$ and let $\frac12(a_1-a_2)$ and $\frac12(a_3-a_4)$ be the endpoints of $\ell_\theta'$ with $a_1, \dots, a_4\in A$. Then the vector $v = \frac12(a_1-a_2)-\frac12(a_3-a_4)$ has argument $\theta$ and magnitude $\rho_K(\theta)$, but since
$$\frac12(a_1-a_2)-\frac12(a_3-a_4) = \frac12(a_1+a_4)-\frac12(a_2+a_3)$$
and $\frac12(a_1+a_4),\frac12(a_2+a_3)\in A$ by convexity of $A$, there is a line segment from $\frac12(a_1+a_4)$ to $\frac12(a_2+a_3)$ in $A$ with the same argument and magnitude as $v$. It follows that $\rho_K(\theta)\leq \rho_A(\theta)$.
\end{proof}
Thus, for every convex body $A$ there is a symmetric convex body $K$ with the same signature and which by~\Cref{suff:thm} therefore has the same contact, unit distance, and intersection graphs as $A$.
\begin{proposition}\label{finishprop}
Let $A$ and $B$ be convex bodies such that $\rho_A=\rho_B$. Then $A$ has the URTC property if and only if $B$ has the URTC property. In particular this applies when $B=\frac{1}{2}(A+(-A))$ is the symmetrization of $A$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $A$ has the URTC property. Let $B_1=B+v_1$ and $B_2=B+v_2$ be translates of $B$ satisfying that $B_1\cap B_2\neq \emptyset$ but $B_1^\circ \cap B_2^\circ=\emptyset$. Let $A_1=A+v_1$ and $A_2=A+v_2$. Since $\rho_A=\rho_B$, ~\Cref{Lem-Moving_with_argument} implies that $A_1\cap A_2\neq \emptyset$ but $A_1^\circ \cap A_2^\circ=\emptyset$. Again using~\Cref{Lem-Moving_with_argument} we obtain that for a vector $v_3$ it holds that $B+v_3$ intersects $B_1$ and $B_2$ but only at their boundary if and only if $A+v_3$ intersects $A_1$ and $A_2$ but only on at the boundary. As $A$ has the URTC property it follows that there are exactly two choices of $v_3$ such that $B+v_3$ intersect $B_1$ and $B_2$ but only at their boundary. Since $B_1$ and $B_2$ were arbitrary it follows that $B$ has the URTC property. The converse implication is identical.
\end{proof}
Combined with the work done in the main body of this paper (Section~\ref{necsec} and~\ref{intsec})~\Cref{thm:main} follows immediately:
\begin{proof}[Proof of~\Cref{thm:main}]
We have already seen the sufficiency (Theorem~\ref{suff:thm}) of the condition.
Theorems~\ref{main:contact} and~\ref{theorem:main} (to be proved in the following sections) give the necessity in case $A$ and $B$ are symmetric. Suppose now that $A$ and $B$ are arbitrary convex bodies with the URTC property satisfying that for any linear transformation $B'$ of $B$, $\rho_{A}\neq \rho_{B'}$. For $X\in \{A,B\}$ let $K_X=\frac{1}{2}(X+(-X))$. If there exists a linear transformation $T$ satisfying that $\rho_{K_A}=\rho_{T(K_B)}$ then symmetri yields that $K_A=T(K_B)=K_{T(B)}$. Applying~\Cref{finishlem} we obtain the contradiction that $\rho_A=\rho_{T(B)}$ and we conclude that for no linear transformation $T$ is $\rho_{K_A}=\rho_{T(K_B)}$. Since $K_A$ and $K_B$ are symmetric and by~\Cref{finishprop} both have the URTC property, we conclude that $C(K_A)\neq C(K_B)$, $U(K_A)\neq U(K_B)$, and $I(K_A)\neq I(K_B)$.
But $C(K_X)=C(X)$, $U(K_X)=U(X)$, and $I(K_X)=I(X)$ for $X\in \{A,B\}$ by~\Cref{suff:thm}, so the result follows.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
Quantum walks (QWs), or more precisely discrete time QWs, are quantum counterparts of classical random walks \cite{ADZ93PRA, ABNVW01, Gudder88Book}. We can find the early prototypes in the context of Feynman path integral \cite{FH10Book, Riazanov58SPJETP} and Quantum Lattice Boltzmann methods \cite{Bialynicki-Birula94PRD, Meyer96JSP, SB93PD}.
QWs are now attracting diverse interest because of its connection to various fields of mathematics and physics such as orthogonal polynomials on the unit circle \cite{CGMV10CPAM}, quantum search algorithms \cite{AKR05Proc},
topological insulators \cite{
Kitagawa12QIP, KRBD10PRA}.
Further, since the early works studying QWs \cite{Bialynicki-Birula94PRD, FH10Book, Gudder88Book, Riazanov58SPJETP, SB93PD} are all more or less motivated by the discretization of Dirac equation, the relation between QWs and Dirac equation and other wave equation have repeatedly discussed by many authors from various viewpoints \cite{ANF14JPA, BDT15AP,BES07PRA, LKN15PRA,MB18PRA, MBD13PRA, MD12JMP, Sh13,Strauch06PRA73}.
Nonlinear QWs (NLQWs), which are nonlinear versions of the usual (linear) QWs with the nonlinearity coming into the dynamics through the state-dependence of the quantum coin, was first proposed in \cite{NPR07PRA} as an ``optical Galton board \cite{BMKSW99PRA}" with Kerr effect.
From then, several models of NLQWs have been proposed motivated by simulating nonlinear Dirac equations (NLD) \cite{LKN15PRA,MDB15PRE} and studying the nonlinear effect to the topological insulators \cite{GTB16PRA}.
See also \cite{MSSSS18DCDS, MSSSS18QIP, MSSSSnum} for the study of scattering phenomena, weak limit theorem and soliton-like behavior for NLQWs.
We note that for continuous time QWs, which are substantially described by discrete Schr\"odinger equations, nonlinear models are also attracting interest because it can speed up the quantum search \cite{MW13NJP}.
In this paper, motivated by the above works, we study the connection between NLQWs and nonlinear Dirac equations (NLD).
In particular, we show that the walker (or the solution) of NLQWs converges to the solution to the NLD.
Very roughly, we show that for fixed $T>0$,
\begin{align}\label{roughmain}
\| u(m \delta) -v_\delta(m \delta)\|_{L^2}\to 0\ \text{as}\ \delta\to0,\quad \text{uniformly for }m\in\Z,\ 0\leq m\leq T/\delta,
\end{align}
where $u$ is the solution to the NLD, $v_\delta$ is the walker of NLQW on $\delta\Z$(for the precise statement, see Theorem \ref{thm:1}
below).
Thus, we see that the walker converges to the solution to the NLD uniformly in a fixed time interval.
We emphasize that our model incorporates a linear quantum walk as a particular case and hence Theorem \ref{thm:1} says that the walker of the linear QW also converges to the solution to a Dirac equation.
This paper is organized as follows.
In Subsections \ref{subsec:NLQW} and \ref{subsec:NLD} we introduce NLQW and NLD respectively.
In Subsection \ref{subsec:Main}, we state our main result Theorem \ref{thm:1}.
In Section \ref{sec:pre} we recall some facts of the Shannon interpolation.
In Section \ref{sec:Proof}, we prove Theorem \ref{thm:1}.
\subsection{Nonlinear quantum walks}\label{subsec:NLQW}
We now introduce NLQWs, which are space-time discretized dynamics conserving $l^2$ norm (in the linear case, it is a unitary dynamics).
Let $\delta>0$ be a constant and set
\begin{align}\label{zd}
\zd:=\{\delta n\ |\ n\in \Z\}.
\end{align}
We set
\begin{align}\label{def:hd}
\hd :=l^2(\delta\Z,\C^2),\quad \<u,v\>_{ \hd}:=\delta \sum_{x\in\zd}\<u(x),v(x)\>_{\C^2}\text{ and }\|u\|_{ \hd}^2:=\<u,u\>_{ \hd},
\end{align}
where $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_{\C^2}$ is the inner-product
of $\C^2$, i.e.\ for $u=(u_1,u_2)\in \C^2$ and $v=(v_1,v_2)\in \C^2$, $\<u,v\>_{\C^2}= \sum_{j=1,2}u_j\bar v_j$, and we set $\|u\|_{\C^2}^2:=\<u,u\>_{\C^2}$.
We also use the standard Pauli matrices
\begin{align}\label{pauli}
\sigma_0:=\begin{pmatrix}1&0\\0&1\end{pmatrix},\ \sigma_1:=\begin{pmatrix}0 &1\\1&0\end{pmatrix},\ \sigma_2:=\begin{pmatrix}0&-\im \\ \im &0\end{pmatrix},\ \sigma_3:=\begin{pmatrix}1 &0\\0&-1\end{pmatrix}.
\end{align}
We define a shift operator $\sd:\hd\to\hd$ by
\begin{align}\label{sd}
\sd:=\begin{pmatrix} \mathcal T_{+,\delta}& 0\\ 0 & \mathcal T_{-,\delta} \end{pmatrix},\quad \mathcal T_{\pm, \delta}f:=f(\cdot\mp \delta).
\end{align}
It is clear that $\sd$ is a unitary operator on $\hd$.
\begin{remark}
Recall (formally) $\(e^{t \partial_x}f\)(x)=f(x+t)$.
Thus, we can express $\sd$ as
\begin{align}\label{sd2}
\sd=\begin{pmatrix} e^{-\delta \partial_x}& 0\\ 0 & e^{\delta \partial_x} \end{pmatrix}=e^{-\delta \sigma_3 \partial_x}=e^{\im \delta A},\quad A:=\im \sigma_3 \partial_x.
\end{align}
In the following, we will use the expression of \eqref{sd2} for $\sd$.
\end{remark}
We next fix a smooth function $\mathbf s=(s_0,s_1,s_2,s_3):\R\to \R^4$ and set a linear coin operator
$
\mathcal C_{\delta,\mathbf s}:\hd\to\hd$ by
\begin{align*}
\(
\mathcal C_{\delta,\mathbf s} u\)(x):=e^{-\im \delta \mathbf s(x)\cdot \bsig}u(x),\quad x\in \zd,
\end{align*}
where $\mathbf s(x)\cdot \bsig=\sum_{\alpha=0}^3s_\alpha(x)\sigma_\alpha$.
For simplicity, we often suppress the explicit dependence on
$\mathbf s$ and write $\cd$ for $\mathcal C_{\delta,\mathbf s}$.
Since for each $x\in \zd$, $e^{-\im \delta \mathbf s(x)\cdot \bsig}$ is a $2\times 2$ unitary matrix, it is clear that $ \cd $ is unitary operator on $\hd$.
To define a nonlinear (or state-dependent) coin operator,
we fix $\gamma $ to be a $2\times 2$ Hermitian matrix and smooth function $g\in C^\infty(\R,\R)$.
We now define the nonlinear coin
$
\mathcal N_{\delta,\gamma,g }:\hd\to\hd$ by
\begin{align}\label{nonlinearity}
\(
\mathcal N_{\delta,\gamma,g }
u\)(x) =e^{-\im\delta g(\<u(x),\gamma u(x)\>_{\C^2})\gamma }u(x),
\quad x\in \zd.
\end{align}
When there is no ambiguity we drop the dependence on $\gamma$ and $g$ and write just $\nd$ for $\mathcal N_{\delta,\gamma,g }$.
Notice that since
$
\<\nd u(x), \nd u(x)\>_{\C^2}=\<u(x),u(x)\>_{\C^2},
$
we have
\begin{align}\label{nunit}
\|\nd u\|_{\hd}=\|u\|_{\hd}.
\end{align}
\begin{definition}
For $u_0\in \hd$ and $m\in \Z$, $m\geq 0$, we define $\ud(m)u_0\in \hd$ by the recurrence relation
\begin{align}\label{qw1}
\ud(0)u_0=u_0,\quad
\ud(m+1)u_0=\mathcal S_\delta \cd \nd\(\ud(m)u_0\).
\end{align}
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
If $g=0$, then $\mathcal U_\delta$ is a linear unitary operator.
However, if $g\neq 0$, $\mathcal U_\delta$ becomes a nonlinear operator.
This is the reason why we need to define $\mathcal U_\delta(t)u_0$ be the recurrence relation \eqref{qw1}.
\end{remark}
We give several examples of our model, which cover various QWs appeared in the literature.
\begin{example}[Free QWs]
When $g=0$ and $\mathbf s$ do not depend on $x\in \Z$, we will call the corresponding QW a free QW.
This quantum walk is also called homogeneous since the coin operator is spatially homogeneous.
A typical example is the case $\mathbf s=(0,-1,0,0)$, which appeared in the Feynman checkerboard model \cite{FH10Book}.
In particular, the coin operator in this case have the form
\begin{align*}
\mathcal C_{\delta,(0,-1,0,0)} =e^{\im \delta\sigma_1}=\begin{pmatrix} \cos \delta& \im \sin \delta\\ \im \sin \delta & \cos \delta\end{pmatrix}.
\end{align*}
Another important example is the Hadamard walk \cite{ABNVW01}, which is usually considered for the case $\delta=1$, and the coin operator is given by the Hadamard matrix:
\begin{align}\label{Hadamardcoin}
\mathcal C_{1,\frac{\pi}{4}(2,0,1,-2)} =e^{-\im \frac{\pi}{4}\(2,0,1,-2\)\cdot \bsig}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\begin{pmatrix} 1&1\\ 1 & -1\end{pmatrix}.
\end{align}
\end{example}
\begin{example}[Linear QWs]
When $g=0$, we will call the corresponding QW a linear QW.
A typical example will be the case $\mathbf s(x)=(0,0,\theta(x),0)$ where $\theta:\R\to \R$ is a function converging to some limit $\theta_\pm$ as $x\to \pm \infty$.
In this case, the coin operator
\begin{align*}
\mathcal C_1=R(\theta)=\begin{pmatrix} \cos \theta & -\sin \theta \\ \sin \theta & \cos \theta\end{pmatrix}
\end{align*}
is spatially inhomogeneous and called a position-dependent coin.
Such a model appears in the context of topological insulators \cite{Kitagawa12QIP} and the scattering theory for linear QWs are studied in \cite{MSSSSdis, MoriokaQW1, RST18LMPII,RST18LMPI, Suzuki16QIP}.
\end{example}
\begin{example}[NLQWs, I]\label{NPR}
When $g\neq 0$, we will call the corresponding QW a NLQW.
NLQW first proposed in \cite{NPR07PRA} is of the form
\begin{align*}
\mathcal U_{\mathrm{NPR}}:=\mathcal S_1 \mathcal C_{1,\frac{\pi}{4}(2,0,1,-2)} \mathcal N_{1,\gamma_1,g} \mathcal N_{1,\gamma_2,g},
\end{align*}
where the linear coin is given by the Hadamard matrix \eqref{Hadamardcoin}
and the two nonlinear coins are defined by $g(s)=\lambda s$ ($\lambda\in\R$), $\gamma_1=\frac{1}{2}(\sigma_0+\sigma_3)$ and $\gamma_2=\frac{1}{2}(\sigma_0-\sigma_3)$.
In particular, for $u=(u_1,u_2)$, we have
\begin{align*}
\mathcal N_{1,\gamma_1,g} u(x)=\begin{pmatrix}e^{\im \lambda |u_1(x)|^2}&0\\ 0 & 1\end{pmatrix}u(x),\quad \mathcal N_{1,\gamma_2,g} u(x)=\begin{pmatrix}1&0\\ 0 & e^{\im \lambda |u_2(x)|^2}\end{pmatrix}u(x).
\end{align*}
\end{example}
\begin{remark}
Even though our result in this paper is proved for
the case of a single nonlinear coin, it can be extended to
the case of two nonlinear coins as stated above without difficulty.
\end{remark}
\begin{example}[NLQWs, II]\label{GNT}
Another example of NLQW, which was proposed in \cite{LKN15PRA} as a simulator of a nonlinear Dirac equation, is
\begin{align*}
\mathcal U_{LKN}:=\mathcal S_\delta\mathcal C_\delta \mathcal N_{\delta,\sigma_j,g} ,
\end{align*}
where $g(s)= s$, $\mathcal C_1=R(\theta)$ ($\theta\in\R$) and $j=0$ or $3$.
The case $j=3$ is for simulating the Gross-Neveu model (scaler type interaction)
and
the nonlinear coin is of the form
\begin{align*}
\mathcal N_{\delta,\sigma_3,g}u(x)=\begin{pmatrix} e^{-\im \delta (|u_1(x)|^2-|u_2(x)|^2)} & 0 \\ 0 & e^{\im \delta (|u_1(x)|^2-|u_2(x)|^2)}\end{pmatrix}.
\end{align*}
The case $j=0$ is for simulating the Thirring model (vector type interaction) and
the nonlinear coin is of the form
\begin{align*}
\mathcal N_{\delta,\sigma_3,g}u(x)=e^{-\im \delta (|u_1(x)|^2+|u_2(x)|^2)}u(x).
\end{align*}
\end{example}
\subsection{Nonlinear Dirac equations in $1+1$ space-time}\label{subsec:NLD}
The Dirac equation on $\R$ is given by
\begin{align}\label{Dirac}
\im \partial_t u=-\im \sigma_3\partial_xu +\mathbf s \cdot \bsig u+g(\<u,\gamma u\>_{\C^2})\gamma u,\quad (t,x)\in \R\times \R,\ u:\R\to\C^2.
\end{align}
Here, $\mathbf s:\R\to\R^4$, $\gamma$ is a $2\times2$ Hermitian matrix and $g:\R\to\R$ corresponds to the ones given in the definition of the NLQW.
Indeed, we will show that a solution to the NLQW converges to a solution to the NLD with the same $\mathbf s$, $\gamma$ and $g$.
We will denote the solution
$u = u(t)$
to the Dirac equation \eqref{Dirac}
with the initial condition $u(0) = u_0$
by
\begin{align*}
u(t)=U_{\mathrm{Dirac}}(t)u_0.
\end{align*}
Note that if the Dirac equation \eqref{Dirac} is
nonlinear (i.e.\ if $g$ is not a constant),
then so is $U_{\mathrm{Dirac}}$.
For a comprehensive introduction for the linear Dirac equation, see \cite{Thaller92Book}.
As the NLQW, we introduce several examples of the NLD.
\begin{example}[NLD: Gross-Neveu model and Thirring model]
For the case $\mathbf s=(0,0,m,0)$ ($m$ is a constant), $\gamma=\sigma_3$ (resp. $\gamma=\sigma_0$), $g(s)=s$, NLD \eqref{Dirac} is called the Gross-Neveu model \cite{GN74PRD} (resp.\ Thirring model \cite{Thirring58AP}).
Further, a generalized Gross-Neveu model, which is the case of general $g\in C^\infty(\R,\R)$, has been studied in \cite{CPS17AIHPAN}.
\end{example}
\begin{example}[Nonlinear coupled mode equations]\label{ex:NCME}
Let $\mathbf s=(V,\kappa,0,0)$ and suppose that
$V,\kappa\in C^\infty(\R,\R)$ are bounded functions and $\gamma_1=\frac12 (\sigma_0 +\sigma_3)$, $\gamma_2=\frac12 (\sigma_0 - \sigma_3)$.
Then the NLD becomes
\begin{align*}
\im \partial_t u = -\im \sigma_3 u + \mathbf s\cdot \bsig u + 2\<u,u\>_{\C^2}u -\<u,\gamma_1u\>_{\C^2}\gamma_1u-\<u,\gamma_2u\>_{\C^2}\gamma_2u.
\end{align*}
Such a model appears in the study of nonlinear propagation of light in an optical fiber waveguide \cite{GSWK05CM, GWH01JNS}.
A similar model also appears in the study of Bose-Einstein condensation.
In particular, in \cite{PCP06PRE}, the following model is studied:
\begin{align*}
\im \partial_t u = -\im \sigma_3 u + \mathbf s\cdot \bsig u + \<u,u\>_{\C^2}^2 u -2\<u,\gamma_1u\>_{\C^2}^2\gamma_1u-2\<u,\gamma_2u\>_{\C^2}^2\gamma_2u.
\end{align*}
As we remarked in Example \ref{NPR}, our result in this paper can be generalized to the case of several nonlinear coins without difficulty.
\end{example}
We introduce some mathematical results about NLD.
To do so, we prepare several notations.
We set $L^2=L^2(\R,\C^2)$ and $H^s:=H^s(\R,\C^2)$ ($s\in \N$), the $\C^2$-valued Sobolev spaces.
The inner product of $L^2$ will be denoted by
\begin{align*}
\<u,v\>:=\int_\R \<u(x),v(x)\>_{\C^2}\,dx.
\end{align*}
We set $\|u\|_{L^2}:=\<u,u\>^{1/2}$.
The norm of $H^s$ is defined by
\begin{align}\label{norm:Hs}
\|u\|_{H^s}^2:=\sum_{j=0}^s
\| \partial_x^j u\|_{L^2}^2.
\end{align}
We further, define the innerproduct of $H^s$ by
\begin{align*}
\<u,v\>_{H^s}:=\sum_{j=0}^s \<\partial_x^j u, \partial_x^j v\>.
\end{align*}
Since for $s\geq 1$, $H^s$ becomes an algebra, one can show the following result by standard fixed point argument.
\begin{proposition}\label{lwp:dirac}
Let $s\geq 1$ and suppose that
$\|\mathbf s\|_{L^\infty}+\|\mathbf s'\|_{H^{s-1}}<\infty$.
Let $L>0$. Then there exists $T>0$ such that a unique solution $u(t) = U_{\mathrm{Dirac}}(t)u_0\in C([0,T],H^s )$ of NLD \eqref{Dirac} exists for any $u_0\in H^s$ with $\|u_0\|_{H^s}\leq L$.
Further, for $u_j \in H^s$ with $\|u_j\|_{H^s} \leq L$ ($j=1,2$),
$U_{\mathrm{Dirac}}(t)u_j$ satisfies
\begin{align*}
\sup_{t\in[0,T]}\|U_{\mathrm{Dirac}}(t)u_1 - U_{\mathrm{Dirac}}(t) u_2 \|_{H^s}\leq C \|u_1-u_2\|_{H^s},
\end{align*}
where $C$ is a constant depends only on $L$.
\end{proposition}
Inspired by the above result for the solutions of nonlinear Dirac equations, we define the condition $(\mathrm{Lip})_s$ as follows.
\begin{definition}\label{def:unifLip}
Let $s\geq 1$ and $T,L>0$.
We say that the pair $(T,L)$ satisfies condition $(\mathrm{Lip})_s$
if there exists a constant $C_{T,L}>0$ such that for $u_j\in H^s$
with $\|u_j\|_{ H^s}\leq L$ ($j=1,2$),
$\udi(\cdot)u_j\in C([0,T],H^s)$ and
\begin{align}\label{unifLip}
\sup_{0\leq t\leq T}\|\udi(t) u_1-\udi(t) u_2\|_{ H^s}\leq C_{T,L} \|u_1-u_2\|_{ H^s}.
\end{align}
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
By proposition \ref{lwp:dirac}, for any $L>0$, we can always find $T>0$ such that $(T,L)$ satisfies $(\mathrm{Lip})_s$.
Moreover, if NLD \eqref{Dirac} is globally wellposed,
we can take $T=\infty$ in proposition \ref{lwp:dirac} for arbitrary $L>0$
and hence
$(\mathrm{Lip})_s$ holds for arbitrary $(T,L)\in \R_+\times \R_+$.
It is known that if the nonlinearity
comes only from $\sigma_0$, $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ (as Example \ref{ex:NCME}), then the NLD is globally wellposed
(see \cite{Pelinovsky11RIMS} for more information).
\end{remark}
\subsection{Main results}\label{subsec:Main}
To state our result precisely, we introduce some notation.
When there exists a constant $C>0$
such that $a\leq Cb$, we write $a\lesssim b$ or $b\gtrsim a$.
If the implicit constant $C$ depends on some parameter $\alpha$ ($C=C_\alpha$), then we write $a\lesssim_\alpha b$.
If $a\lesssim b$ and $b\lesssim a$, we write $a\sim b$.
For Banach spaces $X,Y$, we set $\mathcal L(X,Y)$ to be the Banach space of all bounded linear operators from $X$ to $Y$.
We set $\mathcal L(X):=\mathcal L(X,X)$.
We set $\hchd:=L^2(\R/2\pi \delta^{-1}\Z,\C^2)$
and define the inner product and norm by
\begin{align*}
\<u,v\>_{\hchd}:=\int_{-\pi/\delta}^{\pi/\delta}\<u(\xi),v(\xi)\>_{\C^2}\,d\xi,\quad
\|u\|_{\hchd}^2:=\<u,u\>_{\hchd }.
\end{align*}
We define the discrete Fourier transform $\mathcal F_\delta\in \mathcal L( \hd,\hchd )$ and its inverse $\mathcal F_\delta^{-1}\in \mathcal L(\hchd , \hd)$ as
\begin{align*}
\mathcal F_\delta u(\xi):=\frac{\delta}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\sum_{x\in \delta \Z} e^{-\im x \xi}u(x),\quad \mathcal F_\delta^{-1}v(x)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_{-\pi/\delta}^{\pi/\delta} e^{\im x \xi}v(\xi)\,d\xi,
\end{align*}
where $\hd$ is defined in \eqref{def:hd}.
Then, we have
\begin{align*}
\<\mathcal F_\delta u, \mathcal F_\delta v\>_{\hchd }=\<u,v\>_{ \hd},\quad \<\mathcal F_\delta^{-1} u, \mathcal F_\delta^{-1} v\>_{ \hd}=\<u,v\>_{\hchd }.
\end{align*}
We denote the Fourier transform on $L^2$ by $F$.
In particular, we set
\begin{align*}
F u(\xi):=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_\R e^{-\im x \xi}u(x)\,dx,\quad F^{-1}u(x)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_\R e^{\im x \xi}u(x)\,dx.
\end{align*}
We define $H_\delta\subset L^2$ by
\begin{align*}
H_\delta:=\{u\in L^2\ |\ \mathrm{supp} Fu\subset [-\pi/\delta,\pi/\delta]\}.
\end{align*}
Since the Fourier transform has compact support, we have $H_\delta\subset \cap_{s\geq 0}H^s$.
We define the projection to $H_\delta$ by
\begin{align}\label{def:j}
j_\delta= F^{-1} \chi_{[-\pi/\delta,\pi/\delta]} F\in \mathcal L(L^2),
\end{align}
where $\chi_A$ is the characteristic function of $A$.
Obviously, we have
\begin{align}\label{j1}
j_\delta^2=j_\delta,\quad \mathrm{Ran}j_\delta= H_\delta,\quad \<j_\delta u,v\>=\<u,j_\delta v\>.
\end{align}
We next define the Shannon interpolation (see, e.g.\ \cite{BF18pre}), which is an isometry from $\hd$ to $H_\delta\subset L^2$, by
\begin{align}\label{def:i}
\id:=F^{-1}\circ \hid \circ \mathcal F_\delta \in \mathcal L( \hd,L^2),
\end{align}
where $\hid$ is the natural identification between $\hat{\mathcal H}_\delta$ and $H_\delta$ given by
\begin{align}\label{def:idelta}
\hid:\hchd \to H_\delta \subset L^2,\quad \hid u (\xi):=\begin{cases} u(\xi),& \xi\in [-\pi/\delta,\pi/\delta]\\ 0, & |\xi|>\pi/\delta.
\end{cases}
\end{align}
We are now in a position to state our main result precisely.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:1}
Let
$s\geq 1$, $T>0$ and $L>0$.
Assume $\|\mathbf s\|_{L^\infty}+\| \mathbf s'\|_{H^{s}(\R,\R^4)}<\infty$ and $(T,L)$ satisfies condition $(\mathrm{Lip})_s$.
Assume $\|u_0\|_{ H^{s+1}}\leq L$.
Then, there exists $\delta_0>0$
such that for $\delta\in (0,\delta_0]$,
\begin{align}\label{errorest}
\sup_{m\in\Z, 0\leq \delta m\leq T}\| \id \circ \ud(m)\circ \id^{-1}\circ j_\delta u_0 -\udi(m \delta) u_0 \|_{H^s}
\lesssim_{T,L} \delta,
\end{align}
where the implicit constant is independent of $\delta$.
\end{theorem}
Since $\|\cdot\|_{L^2}\leq \|\cdot\|_{H^s}$ for $s\geq 0$,
we have the following continuous limit.
\begin{corollary}
Under the same assumptions as in Theorem \ref{thm:1},
the walker
of the NLQW
converges to the solution
to the NLD in the following sense:
\[
\lim_{\delta \to 0}
\sup_{m\in\Z, 0\leq \delta m\leq T}\| \id \circ \ud(m)\circ \id^{-1}\circ j_\delta u_0 -\udi(m \delta) u_0 \|_{L^2} = 0.
\]
\end{corollary}
\begin{remark}
Theorem \ref{thm:1} calls for some explanation.
For the solution $u(t) = \udi(t) u_0 $ to the NLD in $\R$ with the initial condition
$u(0) = u_0 \in H^{s+1}$ (on $\R$),
we discretize the initial condition $u_0$ by $\id^{-1} \circ j_\delta$, evolve it by the NLQW by \eqref{qw1}.
After m steps of the NLQW evolution, we can put it back to a function by the Shannon interpolation $\id$ since it is unitary from
$\hd$ to $H_\delta$ (see Lemma \ref{lem:shanon1}).
Theorem \ref{thm:1} ensures that the resulting function $\id \circ \ud(m)\circ \id^{-1}\circ j_\delta u_0 $ successively approximates the solution to the NLD. In this sense, we can say that the continuous limit
of the NLQW is the NLD.
\end{remark}
Although many works discuss the continuous limit of (linear and nonlinear) QWs, it seems that they just informally compare the equation of QWs and the Dirac equation by, for instance, expanding the equation or referring the Trotter-Kato formula.
What is really needed is the estimate of the difference of the walker of the QW and solution to the Dirac equation as given in \eqref{errorest}.
The only result of such kind we are aware is \cite{ANF14JPA}, where the authors show \eqref{errorest} for $m=1$.
In this sense, our result is new even in the linear QWs.
From the viewpoint of numerical analysis,
the NLQW
gives a splitting method of the NLD.
Splitting methods are now popular numerical schemes for approximating semilinear Hamiltonian partial differential equations such as nonlinear Schr\"odinger equations \cite{Faou12Book}.
In this point of view, it may be interesting to investigate higher-order methods such as Strang splitting for the NLD.
However, to make our paper simple, we will not investigate them.
For the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:1}, we employ the energy method of Holden-Karlsen-Risebro-Tao \cite{HKRT11MC}, which was originally applied to the KdV equation.
\section{Preliminary}\label{sec:pre}
In this section, we collect technical tools which we use in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:1}. Recall the definitions of $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_\hd$ and $\id$ given in \eqref{def:hd} and \eqref{def:i} respectively.
\begin{lemma}[\cite{BF18pre}]\label{lem:shanon1}
$\id:\hd \to H_\delta $ is unitary and
\begin{align}\label{i1}
\id u (x)=u(x), \qua
x\in \delta\Z.
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By definition, $\id$ is an isometry and the image of $\id$ is $H_\delta$. Hence, $\id$ is unitary.
\eqref{i1} is shown by
\begin{align*}
\id u(x)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_\R e^{\im x \xi} \hid \mathcal F_\delta u(\xi)\,d\xi=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_{-\pi/\delta}^{\pi/\delta} e^{\im x \xi} \mathcal F_\delta u(\xi)\,d\xi=\mathcal F_\delta^{-1}\circ \mathcal F_\delta u (x)=u(x).
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
Recall $j_\delta$ given in \eqref{def:j}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:j2}
For $\sigma \geq 1$,
\begin{align}\label{j2}
\|(1- j_\delta) u\|_{H^{s}}\lesssim \delta^{\sigma}\|u\|_{H^{s+\sigma}}.
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By the definition of $j_\delta$ and the norm of $H^s$ given in \eqref{norm:Hs}, we have
\begin{align*}
\|(1- j_\delta)u\|_{H^{s}}=
\| \<\cdot\>^{s}
\chi_{\{|\cdot|>\pi/\delta\}}
\mathcal F u\|_{L^2}
\lesssim \delta^{\sigma}\|\<\cdot\>^{s+\sigma} \mathcal F u\|_{\mathcal H}=\delta^{\sigma}\|u\|_{\mathcal H^{s+\sigma}},
\end{align*}
where we have used the fact that $(\delta \<\xi\>)^\sigma \geq 1$ if $|\xi| > \pi/\delta$.
Therefore, we have \eqref{j2}.
\end{proof}
Recall $\mathcal T_{-,\delta}u(x)=u(x+\delta)$.
We set
\begin{align}\label{differenceop}
\mathcal D_\delta:=\delta^{-1}\(\mathcal T_{-,\delta}-1\)\in \mathcal L( \hd).
\end{align}
Formally, we can write $\mathcal D_\delta=\frac{e^{\delta \partial_x}-1}{\delta}$.
Further, we set $$ D_\delta:=\frac{e^{\delta \partial_x}-1}{\delta}\in \mathcal L(L^2).$$
\begin{remark}
The operators $\mathcal D_\delta$ and $D_\delta$ formally have the same definition.
However, $\mathcal D_\delta$ is defined on $\mathcal H_\delta=l^2(\delta\Z,\C^2)$ and $D_\delta$ is defined on $L^2(\R,\C^2)$.
\end{remark}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:difdif}
Let $s\geq 0$.
For $u \in H^{1}$, we have
\begin{align*}
\|D_\delta u\|_{L^2}\leq \|\partial_x u\|_{L^2}.
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By $e^{\delta \partial_x}=1+\delta \int_0^1 e^{\delta t \partial_x }\,dt \partial_x$, we have
\begin{align*}
\|D_\delta u\|_{L^2}\leq \|\int_0^1 e^{\delta t \partial_x }\,dt\|_{\mathcal L(L^2)}\|\partial_x u\|_{L^2}.
\end{align*}
Since
\begin{align*}
\|\int_0^1 e^{\delta t \partial_x }v\,dt\|_{L^2}
=\|\int_0^1 v(\cdot+\delta t)\,dt\|_{L^2}\leq \|v\|_{L^2},
\end{align*}
we have $\|\int_0^1 e^{\delta t \partial_x }\,dt\|_{\mathcal L(L^2)}\leq 1$.
Therefore, we have the conclusion.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{est:HdNorm}
Let $s\geq 0$ and $u\in H^{s+1}$.
Then, for $0\leq j\leq s$, we have
\begin{align}\label{HdNorm}
\delta \sum_{x\in \Z^d}\|D_\delta^j u(x)\|_{\C^2}^2\leq \|\partial_x^j u\|_{L^2}^2+2\delta\|\partial_x^j u\|_{L^2}\|\partial_x^{j+1} u\|_{L^2}.
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{remark}
By Sobolev embedding, we have $ u \in H^1(\R,\C^2)\hookrightarrow
C^1(\R,\C^2)
$.
Therefore $u$ is defined pointwise and $ D_\delta^j u (x)$ has a meaning.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
We first prove the case $j=0$.
Fix $x\in \delta\Z$.
Set $F_x(t)=\|u(x+t)\|_{\C^2}^2$.
Then, since $\partial_t F_x=2\Re\<u(x+t),\partial_x u(x+t)\>_{\C^2}\in L^1(\R)$, we have
\begin{align*}
F_x(t)=F_x(0)+\int_0^t \partial_t F_x(s)\,ds.
\end{align*}
By the Fubini Theorem,
\begin{align*}
\delta\sum_{x\in \delta\Z}\|u(x)\|_{\C^2}^2
&=\sum_{x\in\delta\Z}\int_0^\delta F_x(0)\,
dt
= \sum_{x\in \delta\Z}\int_0^\delta F_x(t)\,dt-\sum_{x\in\delta\Z}\int_0^\delta \int_0^t \partial_t F_x(s) \,ds dt \\
&= \|u\|_{L^2}^2-2 \Re\sum_{x\in \delta\Z}\int_0^{\delta}(\delta-s)\<u(x+s),\partial_x u(x+s)\>_{\C^2}ds\\
&\leq
\|u\|_{L^2}^2
+2 \delta \int_\R \|u(x)\|_{\C^2}\|\partial_x u(x)\|_{\C^2}\,dx.
\end{align*}
Therefore, by Schwartz, we have the conclusion.
Next, for $j\geq 1$, assume that we have \eqref{HdNorm} for $j-1$.
Then, by Lemma \ref{lem:difdif}, since $\partial_x$ and $D_\delta$ commute, we have
\begin{align*}
\delta\sum_{x\in \Z^d}\| D_\delta^j u(x)\|_{\C^2}^2&\leq \|\partial_x^{j-1} D_\delta u\|_{L^2}^2+2\delta\|\partial_x^{j-1} D_\delta u\|_{L^2}\|\partial_x^j D_\delta u\|_{L^2}\\&\leq \|\partial_x^j u\|_{L^2}^2+2\delta\|\partial_x^j u\|_{L^2}\|\partial_x^{j+1} u\|_{L^2}.
\end{align*}
Therefore, we have the conclusion.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:difdif2}
Let $u\in H_\delta$.
Then, we have
\begin{align*}
\|\partial_x^j u\|_{L^2}\sim \| D_\delta^j u\|_{L^2}.
\end{align*}
Here, the implicit constant is independent of $\delta$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, for $|\eta|\leq \pi$, we have
\begin{align*}
|\int_0^1e^{\im \eta t}\,dt|\sim 1.
\end{align*}
We have
\begin{align*}
\|D_\delta^j u\|_{L^2}^2&=\int_{-\pi/\delta}^{\pi/\delta}\left|\frac{e^{\im \delta \xi}-1}{\delta}\right|^{2j} \|\hat u(\xi)\|_{\C^2}^2\,d\xi=\int_{-\pi/\delta}^{\pi/\delta}|\xi \int_0^1 e^{\im \delta \xi t}\,dt|^{2j} \|\hat u(\xi)\|_{\C^2}^2\,d\xi\\
&\sim\int_{-\pi/\delta}^{\pi/\delta}|\xi|^{2j} \|\hat u(\xi)\|_{\C^2}^2\,d\xi=\|\partial_x^j u\|_{L^2}^2.
\end{align*}
Therefore, we have the conclusion.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:shanon}
Let $s\geq 0$, $\sigma\geq 1$.
Let $u\in H_\delta$ and $v\in H^{s+\sigma}$ with $u(x)=v(x)$ for all $x\in \delta\Z\subset \R$.
Then, we have
\begin{align}\label{differencepoint}
\|u- v\|_{H^s}\lesssim \delta^\sigma \|v\|_{H^{s+\sigma}}.
\end{align}
Here, the implicit constant is independent of $u,v$ and $\delta$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{remark}
Notice that the right hand side of \eqref{differencepoint}
does
not depend on $u$.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
First, by Lemma \ref{lem:j2}, we have
\begin{align}\label{pr:sha1}
\|u-v\|_{H^s}\lesssim \|u-j_\delta v\|_{H^s}+\delta^\sigma\|v\|_{H^{s+\sigma}}.
\end{align}
For $0\leq j\leq s$, since $u-j_\delta v\in H_\delta$,
by Lemma \ref{lem:difdif2} we have
\begin{align*}
\|\partial_x^j(u-j_\delta v)\|_{L^2}\sim \|D_\delta^j(u-j_\delta v)\|_{L^2}.
\end{align*}
By Lemmas \ref{lem:shanon1}, \ref{lem:j2} and \ref{est:HdNorm}, we have
\begin{align*}
&\|D_\delta^j(u-j_\delta v)\|_{L^2}^2=\|\mathfrak I_\delta^{-1}\circ D_\delta^j\( u-j_d v\)\|_{ \hd}^2=\delta\sum_{x\in \Z_d}\| D_\delta^j\( u-j_d v\)(x)\|_{\C^2}^2\\&=\delta\sum_{x\in \Z^d}\| D_\delta^j(j_\delta-1)v(x)\|_{\C^2}^2
\lesssim \|(j_\delta-1)\partial_x^j v\|_{L^2}^2+\delta \|(j_\delta-1)\partial_x^jv\|_{L^2}
\|(j_\delta-1)\partial_x^{j+1} v\|_{L^2}
\\
&\lesssim \delta^{2\sigma}
\|v\|_{H^{j+\sigma}}^2.
\end{align*}
Therefore, we have the conclusion.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:1}}\label{sec:Proof}
In this section, we prove Theorem \ref{thm:1}.
In the following, as claimed in Theorem \ref{thm:1}, we fix $T,L>0$ and $s\geq 1$ and assume
\begin{align}\label{Assumption,thm:1}
\|u_0\|_{H^{s+1}}\leq L,\ \|\mathbf s\|_{L^{\infty}(\R,\R^4)}+\|\mathbf s'\|_{H^s(\R,\R^4)}<\infty
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}\label{Assumption,thm:1,2}
(T,L)\ \text{satisfies condition } (\mathrm{Lip})_s.
\end{align}
Since $\mathbf s$ is fixed, we will not denote the dependence of $\|\mathbf s\|_{L^{\infty}(\R,\R^4)}+\|\mathbf s'\|_{H^s(\R,\R^4)}$ in the implicit constant in the inequalities below.
We start with decomposing $\| \hid \circ \ud(m)\circ \hid^{-1}\circ j_\delta u_0 -\udi(m \delta) u_0 \|_{ H^s}$ as
\begin{equation}\label{Tri1}
\begin{aligned}
&\|
\hid
\circ \ud(m) \circ \hid^{-1}\circ j_\delta u_0 -\udi(m \delta) u_0\|_{ H^s}\\&\quad\leq
\|
\hid
\circ \ud(m) \circ \hid^{-1}\circ j_\delta u_0 -\udi(m \delta) j_\delta u_0\|_{ H^s}+\|\udi (m \delta) j_\delta u_0-\udi (m \delta) u_0\|_{ H^s}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
For $m \delta\leq T$, one can estimate the second term of the right hand side of \eqref{Tri1} by
the assumptions \eqref{Assumption,thm:1} and \eqref{Assumption,thm:1,2}.
Indeed,
by Lemma \ref{lem:j2},
\begin{align}\label{pthm1:1}
\|\udi(m \delta) j_\delta u_0-\udi(m \delta) u_0\|_{H^s}\lesssim_{T,L} \|(j_\delta-1) u_0\|_{ H^s}\lesssim_{T, L} \delta .
\end{align}
We further decompose the first term of \eqref{Tri1} as
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}\label{pthm2:2}
&\|
\hid
\circ \ud(m) \circ \hid^{-1}\circ j_\delta u_0 -\udi(m \delta) j_\delta u_0\|_{ H^s}\\&\quad\leq
\|
\hid
\circ \ud(m) \circ \hid^{-1}\circ j_\delta u_0 - U_\delta(m) j_\delta u_0\|_{ H^s}+\| U_\delta(m) j_\delta u_0 - \udi(m \delta) j_\delta u_0\|_{ H^s},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{align}\label{def:qwincont}
U_\delta(0)u_0=u_0,\quad
U_\delta(m+1)u_0= S_\delta C_\delta N_\delta\(U_\delta(m)u_0\).
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}\label{def:qwincont2}
S_\delta:=\begin{pmatrix} e^{-\delta \partial_x}& 0 \\ 0 & e^{\delta \partial_x} \end{pmatrix}, \ C_\delta:=e^{-\im \delta \mathbf s(\cdot)\cdot \bsig} \text{ and } N_\delta:=e^{-\im g(\<\cdot,\gamma \cdot\>_{\C^2})\gamma}\cdot.
\end{align}
\begin{remark}
$U_\delta$, $S_\delta$, $C_\delta$ and $N_\delta$ are the continuous counterparts of $\ud$, $\sd$, $\cd$ and $\nd$ respectively.
That is, $U_\delta$, $S_\delta$, $C_\delta$ and $N_\delta$ is defined on $L^2(\R,\C^2)$ instead of $\mathcal H_\delta$ with formally the same definition as $\ud$, $\sd$, $\cd$ and $\nd$.
\end{remark}
We next bound the second term in \eqref{pthm2:2} following Holden-Karlsen-Risebro-Tao \cite{HKRT11MC}.
To this end, we introduce $v_\delta(t_1,t_2,t_3)$ as follows.
Let
\begin{align}\label{def:omega1}
\Omega_\delta =\cup_{m\in \Z_{\geq 0}}\Omega_\delta^m,
\end{align}
where $\Omega_\delta^m:=[m \delta, (m+1)\delta]^3$.
We define self-adjoint operators $A$ and $B$
as
\[ A = -\im \sigma_3 \partial_x,
\quad B = \mathbf {s}\cdot \bsig. \]
We define a nonlinear operator $G$ as
\[ G(v) = g(\<v, \gamma v \>_{\C^2})\gamma v,
\quad v \in L^2(\R,\C^2). \]
Let $v_\delta(0,0,0)= j_\delta u_0 \in L^2(\R,\C^2)$ and define
$v_\delta(t_1,t_2,t_3)\in L^2(\R,\C^2)$ for $(t_1,t_2,t_3)\in \Omega_\delta $ by
\begin{equation}\label{def:v}
\begin{aligned}
\im \partial_{t_1} v_\delta
&= G(v_\delta),\quad t_2=t_3=\delta m,\\
\im \partial_{t_2} v_\delta
&= Bv_\delta,\quad t_3=\delta m,\\
\im \partial_{t_3} v_\delta
& = Av_\delta.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
More precisely, given the value of $v_{\delta}(m \delta,m \delta, m \delta)$, we are defining $v_{\delta}(\tilde t_1,\tilde t_2,\tilde t_3)$ for $(\tilde t_1,\tilde t_2,\tilde t_3)\in \Omega_\delta^m$ by first solving the first equation of \eqref{def:v} in the $t_1$ direction up to $t_1=\tilde t_1$ and then solve the second equation of \eqref{def:v} in the $t_2$ direction up to $t_2=\tilde t_2$ and finally solve the third equation of \eqref{def:v} in the $t_3$ direction up to $t_3=\tilde t_3$.
By this procedure we can define $v_{\delta}((m+1)\delta,(m+1)\delta,(m+1)\delta)$ and thus we can define the value of $v_\delta$ for all $(t_1,t_2,t_3)\in \Omega_\delta$ by induction because $v_\delta(0,0,0)=j_\delta u_0$ is given.
\begin{remark}
We note that $v_\delta=v_\delta(t_1,t_2,t_3,x)$ is a $\C^2$-valued function defined on $\Omega_\delta \times \R$.
However, since we want to view $v_\delta$ as an $L^2(\R,\C^2)$-valued function on $\Omega_\delta$, we write $v_\delta=v_\delta(t_1,t_2,t_3)$ and suppress the dependence on the spatial variable $x$.
We further remark that the differential operator $A=-\im \sigma_3 \partial_x$ acts on this spatial variable $x$.
\end{remark}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:vdeltaisU}
Let $v_\delta$ be the solution to \eqref{def:v} with $v_\delta(0,0,0)= j_\delta u_0$.
Then, $v_\delta$ correspond to $U_\delta(\cdot) j_\delta u_0$ at the diagonal lattice point.
That is, we have
\begin{align}\label{vdeltaisU}
v_\delta(\delta m, \delta m, \delta m)= U_\delta(m) j_\delta u_0.
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall \eqref{def:qwincont} and \eqref{def:qwincont2}.
We prove \eqref{vdeltaisU} by induction.
Thus, we can assume \eqref{vdeltaisU}.
Our goal will be to show \eqref{vdeltaisU} with $m$ replaced by $m+1$.
We first show
\begin{align}\label{1ststep}
v_{\delta}((m+1)\delta,m \delta, m \delta)=N_\delta(U_\delta(m)j_\delta u_0).
\end{align}
By the first equation of \eqref{def:v},
\begin{align*}
\frac{d}{dt_1} \<v_{\delta}(t_1,\delta m, \delta m), \gamma v_{\delta}(t_1,\delta m, \delta m)\>
&=\<-\im G(v_{\delta}), \gamma v_{\delta}\> -\<v_{\delta}, \im \gamma G(v_{\delta})\> \\&
=\<-\im g(\<v_{\delta}, \gamma v_{\delta}\>_{\C^2})\gamma v_{\delta}, \gamma v_{\delta}\> -\<v_{\delta}, \im g(\<v_{\delta}, \gamma v_{\delta}\>_{\C^2}) \gamma^2 v_{\delta}\>=0.
\end{align*}
Hence, $\<v_{\delta}(t_1,\delta m, \delta m), \gamma v_{\delta}(t_1,\delta m, \delta m)\>$
conserves.
By \eqref{def:qwincont2} and the first equation of \eqref{def:v} again,
we obtain \eqref{1ststep}.
Similarly, from
the second and third equations of \eqref{def:v},
we can prove
\begin{align*}
v_\delta((m+1)\delta,(m+1)\delta,m \delta)=C_\delta N_\delta(U_\delta(m)j_\delta u_0),
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
v_\delta((m+1)\delta,(m+1)\delta,(m+1) \delta)=S_\delta C_\delta N_\delta(U_\delta(m)j_\delta u_0).
\end{align*}
Therefore, we have the conclusion.
\end{proof}
Setting $v_\delta(t):=v_\delta(t,t,t)$, we show the following proposition.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:mainthm1}
For sufficiently small $\delta>0$,
we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:mainthm1}
\sup_{t\in[0,T]}\|v_\delta(t)-u_\delta(t)\|_{ H^s}\lesssim_{T,L} \delta,
\end{align}
where $u_\delta(t):=\udi(t) j_\delta u_0$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:pr}
By Lemma \ref{lem:vdeltaisU} and Proposition \ref{prop:mainthm1}, we obviously have
\begin{align}\label{eq:mainthm12}
\|U_\delta(m) u_0-
\udi(m\delta) j_\delta
u_0\|_{ H^s}\lesssim_{T,L} \delta,\quad \text{for }m\in\N,\ m \delta \leq T,
\end{align}
where the implicit constant are independent of $m,\delta$.
Thus, we obtain the bound for the second term of \eqref{pthm2:2}.
It remains to obtain the bound for the first term of \eqref{pthm2:2}.
\end{remark}
Before proving Proposition \ref{prop:mainthm1}, we prepare several notations and lemmas.
First, we set
\begin{align}\label{Ndash}
G '(v)w=2g'(\<v ,\gamma v \>_{\C^2})\Re\<w,\gamma v \>_{\C^2}\gamma v +g(\<v ,\gamma v \>_{\C^2})\gamma w,
\end{align}
where $G'(v)$ is the Fr\'echet derivative of $G$, $\Re \<w,\gamma v\>_{\C^2}$ is the real part of $\<w,\gamma v\>_{\C^2}$
and
\begin{align}\label{commutator}
[X,G](v ):=X G(v )-G'(v )X v \text{\ for }X=A,B.
\end{align}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:com}
We have
\begin{align*}
\|[A,B]v\|_{ H^s}\lesssim \|v\|_{ H^{s+1}},\quad
\|[A,G]v\|_{ H^s}\lesssim_{\|v\|_{H^s}}\|v\|_{ H^{s+1}},\quad
\|[B,G]v\|_{ H^s}\lesssim_{\|v\|_{ H^s}}1.
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, recall \eqref{Assumption,thm:1}.
Thus, by
\begin{align*}
[A,B]v=-\im \sigma_3 (\mathbf s'\cdot \bsig) v+\im \mathbf s \cdot [\bsig,\sigma_3]\partial_x v,
\end{align*}
the bound for $\|[A,B]v\|_{ H^s}$ is obvious since for $s\geq 1$, $H^s$ becomes an algebra.
Next, we have
\begin{align*}
[A,G](v)=&\im g(\< v, \gamma v\>_{\C^2}) [\gamma,\sigma_3] \partial_x v+2 g'(\< v, \gamma v\>_{\C^2})\(\Re\<\im \sigma_3 \partial_x v, \gamma v\>_{\C^2}\gamma v-\<v, \gamma v\>_{\C^2} \im \sigma_3 \gamma v\).
\end{align*}
Again, since $ H^s$ is an algebra, we can bound each term by using the elementary inequality
\begin{align*}
\| hf\|_{H^s}\lesssim \(\|h\|_{L^\infty}+\|\partial_x h\|_{H^{s-1}}\)\|f\|_{H^s}.
\end{align*}
By a similar manner, we have the estimate for $\|[B,G]v\|_{ H^s}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:boundH1QW}
Let $T'>0$.
Suppose there exists $\delta_1>0$ such that for $\delta\in (0,\delta_1]$,
$$\sup_{0\leq t\leq T'}\|v_\delta(t)\|_{ H^s}\leq M.$$
Then, there exists $\delta_0>0$ such that for $\delta\in(0,\delta_0]$,
$$\sup_{0\leq t\leq T'}\|v_\delta(t)\|_{ H^{s+1}}\lesssim_{T', L,M} 1.$$
In particular, the implicit constant is independent of $\delta$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For $0\leq \tau\leq \delta$, we set
\begin{align}\label{v1andv2}
v_{\delta,1}(\delta m+\tau):=v_\delta(\delta m+\tau, \delta m, \delta m).
\end{align}
Since we have
\begin{align*}
v_\delta(\delta m+\tau_1,\delta m+\tau_2,\delta m+\tau_3)=
e^{-i\tau_3 A}
v_{\delta}(\delta m+\tau_1,\delta m+\tau_2,\delta m),
\end{align*}
by the 3rd line of \eqref{def:v},
we see $$\|v_\delta(\delta m + \tau_1,\delta m +\tau_2,\delta m+\tau_3)\|_{ H^{s+1}}=\|v_{\delta}(\delta m+\tau_1,\delta m+\tau_2,\delta m)\|_{ H^{s+1}}.$$
Similarly, by the 2nd line of \eqref{def:v}, we have
$$v_{\delta}(\delta m+\tau_1,\delta m+\tau_2,\delta m)
=
v_{\delta,1}(\delta m+\tau_1)
-\im\int_0^{\tau_2} B
v_\delta(\delta m + \tau_1, \delta m + \sigma, \delta m)
\,d\sigma.
$$
Thus,
\begin{align*}
\sup_{0\leq \tau_2\leq \tau}\|v_{\delta}(\delta m+\tau,\delta m+\tau_2,\delta m)\|_{H^{s+1}}\leq &\|v_{\delta,1}(\delta m+\tau)\|_{H^{s+1}}\\&+\widetilde C \tau \sup_{0\leq \tau_2\leq \tau}\|v_{\delta}(\delta m+\tau,\delta m+\tau_2,\delta m)\|_{H^{s+1}},
\end{align*}
where we have used assumption \eqref{Assumption,thm:1}.
Therefore, we conclude
\begin{align}\label{v2bound}
\|v_{\delta}(\delta m + \tau, \delta m+\tau, \delta m)\|_{ H^{s+1}}\leq (1+C \tau)\|v_{\delta,1}(\delta m+\tau)\|_{ H^{s+1}}\leq e^{C \tau} \|v_{\delta,1}(\delta m+\tau)\|_{ H^{s+1}}.
\end{align}
Now, since $v_{\delta,1}(\delta m+\tau)$
is the solution to
$
\im \partial_\tau v_{\delta,1}= G(v_{\delta,1})$ with $v_{\delta,1}(\delta m)=v_\delta(\delta m).
$
Therefore, since we can express $v_{1,\delta}=e^{\im g(\<v_\delta(\delta m),\gamma v_\delta(\delta m)\>)\gamma}v_\delta(\delta)$, we have
\begin{align}\label{v1bound}
\|v_{1,\delta}(\delta m+\tau)\|_{ H^s}\lesssim_M 1.
\end{align}
Further, since
\begin{align*}
\left|\frac{d}{d\tau}\|v_{\delta,1}\|_{ H^{s+1}}^2\right|\leq\sum_{j=0}^{s+1}\sum_{k=0}^j2{}_jC_k\left |\<\partial_x^k \( g(\<v_{\delta,1},\gamma v_{\delta,1}\>_{\C^2})\)\gamma \partial_x^{j-k} v_{\delta,1},\partial_x^j v_{\delta,1}\>\right|,
\end{align*}
and by \eqref{v1bound}, we have
\begin{align}\label{v1bound2}
\left|\frac{d}{d\tau}\|v_{\delta,1}\|_{ H^{s+1}}\right|\lesssim_M\|v_{\delta,1}\|_{ H^{s+1}}.
\end{align}
Therefore, by comparison theorem of ordinarily differential equation (or Gronwall's inequality), we have
\begin{align*}
\|v_{\delta ,1}(\delta m+\tau)\|_{ H^{s+1}}\leq e^{C_M \tau}\|v_{\delta}(\delta m)\|_{ H^{s+1}},
\end{align*}
where $C_M>0$ is the implicit constant in \eqref{v1bound2}.
Combining \eqref{v2bound} and \eqref{v1bound2}, we have
\begin{align*}
\|v_{\delta}(\delta m+\tau)\|_{H^{s+1}}\leq e^{C_0\tau}\|v_\delta(\delta m)\|_{H^{s+1}},
\end{align*}
with $C_0=C+C_M$.
Thus for $0\leq t\leq T'$, we have
\begin{align*}
\|v_\delta(t)\|_{ H^{s+1}}\leq e^{C_0 T'}\|u_0\|_{ H^{s+1}}.
\end{align*}
This gives us the conclusion.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:vboundimplyerror}
Let $T'>0$ and suppose
\begin{align}\label{assHsbound}
\sup_{0\leq t\leq T'} \|v_\delta(t)\|_{H^s}\leq M.
\end{align}
Then, we have
\begin{align}\label{boundtoconv}
\sup_{0\leq t\leq T'}\|v_\delta(t)-u_\delta(t)\|_{H^s}\lesssim_{T',L,M}\delta.
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Set $w_\delta(t):=v_\delta(t)-u_\delta(t)$.
By \eqref{assHsbound} and Lemma \ref{lem:boundH1QW}, we have
\begin{align*}
\sup_{0\leq t\leq T'}\|v_\delta(t)\|_{ H^{s+1}}\lesssim_{T',L,M} 1.
\end{align*}
Next, by \eqref{def:v}, we have
\begin{align*}
\im \partial_t w_\delta&=\im\partial_{t_1} v_\delta+\im\partial_{t_2} v_\delta +\im\partial_{t_3}v_\delta-\im\partial_t u_\delta \\&=
\im\partial_{t_1}v_\delta - G(v_\delta) + \im \partial_{t_2}v_\delta - Bv_\delta +(A w_\delta +B w_\delta + G(v_\delta)-G(u_\delta)).
\end{align*}
Then, setting $F_{12}(t_1,t_2,t_3):=\im \partial_{t_1}v_\delta - G(v_\delta) + \im \partial_{t_2}v_\delta - Bv_\delta$, we have
\begin{align*}
\frac{d}{dt}\|w_\delta(t)\|_{ H^s}^2=2\Re\(\<\im w_\delta,F_{12}\>_{ H^s}+\<\im w_\delta, G(v_\delta)-G(u)\>_{ H^s}+\<\im w_\delta, B w_\delta\>_{ H^s}\).
\end{align*}
and thus
\begin{align}\label{diffofw}
\frac{d}{dt}\|w_\delta(t)\|_{ H^s}\leq\|F_{12}\|_{ H^s}+\|G(v_\delta)-G(u)\|_{ H^s}+\|B w_\delta\|_{ H^s}.
\end{align}
Recall we have $\|B w_\delta\|_{ H^s}\lesssim \|w_\delta\|_{ H^s}$.
By \eqref{def:v} we have $F_{12}(t,\delta m, \delta m)=0$.
Further,
\begin{align*}
\im\partial_{t_3}F_{12} &= \im \partial_{t_1}(A v_\delta) - G'(v_\delta)(A v_\delta) + \im \partial_{t_2}(A v_\delta) - BAv_\delta \\&
= A F_{12} +[A, G](v_\delta) + [A,B]v_\delta.
\end{align*}
By lemma \ref{lem:com}, we have
\begin{align*}
\|[A,G]v_\delta\|_{ H^s}+\|[A,B](v_\delta)\|_{ H^s}\lesssim_{T',L,M} \|v_\delta\|_{ H^{s+1}}\lesssim_{T',L,M}1.
\end{align*}
Therefore, we have
\begin{align}\label{est:F12}
\|F_{12}(t,t,t)\|_{H^s}\leq \|F_{12}(t,t,\delta m)\|_{H^s}+ C \delta,
\end{align}
where $C=C_{T',L,M}>0$ is a constant.
Now, we set $$F_1(t_1,t_2):=F_{12}(t_1,t_2,\delta m)=\im \partial_{t_1}v_\delta - G(v_\delta).$$
By \eqref{def:v}, we have $F_1(t,\delta m)=0$ and
\begin{align*}
\im \partial_{t_2}F_1=\partial_{t_1} ( B v_{\delta})+\im G'(v_\delta)( B v_\delta)= B F_1 + [B,G]v_\delta.
\end{align*}
The estimate of $\|F_1(t,t)\|_{H^s}$ need a little care since $B$ do not commutate with the derivatives.
Since, by Lemma \ref{lem:com}, we have
$
\|[B,G]v_\delta\|_{H^s}\lesssim_{T',L,M} 1,
$
we first get the estimate
\begin{align}\label{est:F1}
\|F_1(t,t)\|_{L^2}\lesssim_{T',L,M} \delta.
\end{align}
Suppose that for $s'\leq s$, we have the estimate
\begin{align}\label{est:F13}
\|F_1(t,t)\|_{H^{s'-1}}\lesssim_{T',L,M} \delta.
\end{align}
Since
\begin{align*}
\Re\<\partial_x^j F_1, -\im \partial_x^j\(B F_1\)\>=\sum_{k=0}^{j-1}{}_jC_k\Re\<\partial_x^j F_1, -\im \partial_x^{j-k}\mathbf s\cdot\bsig \partial_x^k F_1\),
\end{align*}
we have
\begin{align*}
\partial_t \|F_1(t,t)\|_{H^{s'}}\lesssim_{T',L,M} \delta + 1.
\end{align*}
Therefore, we obtain \eqref{est:F13} with $s'-1$ replaced by $s'$ and thus by induction we have \eqref{est:F13} with $s'-1$ replaced by $s$.
Therefore, substituting \eqref{est:F1} into \eqref{est:F12}, we have
\begin{align}\label{est:F122}
\|F_{12}\|_{ H^s}\lesssim_{T',L,M} \delta.
\end{align}
Next, since
\begin{align*}
G(v_\delta)-G(u_\delta)=\int_0^1 G'(u_\delta + \tau w_\delta) w_\delta \,d\tau.
\end{align*}
we have
\begin{align}\label{est:G}
\|G(v_\delta)-G(u_\delta)\|_{ H^s}\lesssim_{T',L,M} \|w_\delta\|_{ H^s}.
\end{align}
Therefore, by \eqref{diffofw}, \eqref{est:F122} and \eqref{est:G}, we have
\begin{align}\label{est:wdelta}
\frac{d}{dt}\|w_\delta\|_{ H^s}\lesssim_{T',L,M} \delta+\|w_\delta\|_{H^{s}}.
\end{align}
This gives us the conclusion.
Indeed, if we have such inequality, setting $A(t)$ by
\begin{align*}
A(0)=\|w_\delta(0)\|_{H^s}=0,\quad A'(t)=\widetilde C(A+\delta),
\end{align*}
we have $\|w_\delta(t)\|_{H^s}\leq A(t)$, where $\widetilde C=\widetilde C_{T',L,M}>0$ is the implicit constant in \eqref{est:wdelta}.
Moreover, since we have $A(t)=e^{\widetilde Ct}(A(0)+\delta)-\delta$, we can conclude
\begin{align*}
\sup_{0\leq t\leq T'}\|w_\delta(t)\|_{H^s}\leq e^{\widetilde CT'}\delta,
\end{align*}
which is the desired estimate.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{prop:mainthm1}]
By Lemma \ref{lem:vboundimplyerror}, it suffices to prove \eqref{assHsbound} for $T'=T$.
Let $\widetilde C_{T,L}$ be the constant given by the assumption that $(T,L)$ satisfies $(\mathrm{Lip})_s$.
Without loss of generality, we can assume $\widetilde C_{T,L}L> \max(1,L)$.
Set $M=M_{T,L}:=4\widetilde C_{T,L}L$.
Let $C_{T,L,M}$ the implicit constant given in \eqref{boundtoconv} in Lemma \ref{lem:vboundimplyerror}.
Set $\delta_{T,L}:=C_{T,L,M_{T,L}}^{-1}$.
For $\delta\in (0, \delta_{T,L})$, we set $$\mathcal T_\delta:=\{T'\in[0,T]\ |\ \sup_{0\leq t\leq T'}\|v_\delta(t)\|_{H^s}<M\}.$$
Then, it suffices to show $T\in \mathcal T_\delta$.
First, $0\in \mathcal T_\delta$ so $\mathcal T_\delta$ is not empty.
Further, since $v_\delta$ is continuous in $H^s$, we see that $\mathcal T_\delta$ is an open interval in $[0,T]$ (i.e.\ there exists an open interval $\mathcal O\subset \R$ s.t.\ $\mathcal T_\delta=[0,T]\cap \mathcal O$).
Now, suppose $T^*:=\sup \mathcal T_\delta<T$.
Then, for any $T'<T^*$, by Lemma \ref{lem:vboundimplyerror}, we have
\begin{align*}
\sup_{0\leq t\leq T'}\|v_\delta(t)\|_{H^s}&\leq \sup_{0\leq t\leq T'}\|u_\delta(t)\|_{H^s}+\sup_{0\leq t\leq T'}\|v_\delta(t)-u_\delta(t)\|_{H^s}\\&\leq \widetilde C_{T,L}L + C_{T,L,M}\delta\leq C_{T,L}L+1<\frac12 M.
\end{align*}
Therefore, by continuity, we have
\begin{align*}
\sup_{0\leq t\leq T^*}\|v_\delta(t)\|_{H^s}\leq \frac12 M,
\end{align*}
and thus for sufficiently small $\epsilon>0$, we have $T^*+\epsilon\in \mathcal T_\delta$, which contradicts the definition of $T^*$.
Therefore, we have $T\in \mathcal T_\delta$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:1}]
As mentioned in Remark \ref{rem:pr},
we need only bound the first term of \eqref{pthm2:2}.
We note that from Proposition \ref{prop:mainthm1}, Lemma \ref{lem:boundH1QW} and the assumption \eqref{Assumption,thm:1,2} we have
\begin{align}\label{boundednessUdelta}
\sup_{0\leq m\leq \lfloor T/\delta \rfloor}\|U_\delta(m)j_\delta u_0\|_{ H^{s+1}}\lesssim_{T,L} 1.
\end{align}
Further, notice that from the definition of $U_\delta$ and $\mathcal U_\delta$ and \eqref{i1}, we have
\begin{align}\label{latticeeq}
\hid
\circ \ud(m) \circ \hid^{-1}\circ j_\delta u_0(x) = U_\delta(m) j_\delta u_0(x)\text{ for each }x\in \delta\Z.
\end{align}
Thus we can apply Proposition \ref{prop:shanon} and obtain
\begin{align}
\|\id \circ \ud(m) \circ \id^{-1}\circ j_\delta u_0 - U_\delta(m) j_\delta u_0\|_{ H^s}&\lesssim \delta\| U_\delta(m) j_\delta u_0\|_{H^{s+1}} \lesssim_{T,L} \delta.
\end{align}
This completes the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:1}.
\end{proof}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
M.M.\ was supported by the JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers 19K03579, JP17H02851 and\\ JP17H02853.
A. S. was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP26800054 and JP18K03327.
|
\section{Sketch of the Analysis}
\label{sec:analysis_idea}
In this section we briefly explain the main arguments at the basis of our analysis.
We start from the analysis of the localized excess risk, which is decomposed into the generalization error (i.e., the difference between the risk and empirical risk) and the gap between the empirical risk and the risk of the minimizer $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq:gibbs_gen_error_decomp}
\E\br{R(\boldsymbol{w}) - R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) \mid \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}(r)}
&= \E\br{R(\boldsymbol{w}) - \wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) \mid \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}(r)}\\
\label{eq:gibbs_gen_error_decomp2}
&+ \E\br{\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) - R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) \mid \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}(r)}
\end{align}
where the expectation is taken with respect to the empirical Gibbs density~\eqref{eq:gibbs}.
For brevity we omit the indices corresponding to the minima, as in the localized setting we consider a local minimum at the time.
The generalization error of Gibbs-ERM is captured by Theorem~\ref{thm:gibbs_gen_error} below (whose proof can be found in Section~\ref{sec:stability}).
\begin{theorem}[Generalization bound]
\label{thm:gibbs_gen_error}
Consider any loss function $f : \reals^d \times \mathcal{Z} \to \mathbb{R}$ that is $\sigma$-sub-Gaussian in the first argument with respect to the Gibbs density
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gibbs_finite_sums}
\wh{p}_{S,\gamma}(\boldsymbol{w}) \propto e^{-\frac{\gamma}{m} \sum_{i=1}^m f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)} \qquad \gamma > 0
\end{equation}
conditioned on a measurable $A \subseteq \reals^d$. Then the generalization error of Gibbs-ERM satisfies
\[
\E_S\br{ \E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim \wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{R(\boldsymbol{w}) - \wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in A} } \leq \frac{4 \sigma^2 \gamma}{m}~.
\]
\end{theorem}
Assuming that $f$ is everywhere bounded by $M$, Hoeffding Lemma implies the bound $\frac{M^2 \gamma}{2 m}$.
Under the same boundedness assumption, a bound with similar rates was also shown by~\cite{xu2017information} within the mutual information framework.
Our proof works by showing that the Gibbs density is on-average replace-one stable in the sense of~\cite[Section 13]{shalev2014understanding} (we include it here for completeness).
The second quantity~\eqref{eq:gibbs_gen_error_decomp2} is less straightforward to control in a distribution-dependent setting.
\cite{raginsky2017nonconvex} give a global upper bound
\[
\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) - R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) = \mathcal{\tilde{O}}\pr{\frac{d}{\gamma}}
\]
by further decomposing~\eqref{eq:gibbs_gen_error_decomp2} as follows
\[
\E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim \wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}[\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w})] - \min_{\boldsymbol{u} \in \reals^d} \wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{u}) + \min_{\boldsymbol{u} \in \reals^d} \wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{u}) - \E_S[\wh{R}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})]~.
\]
The second term is bounded trivially, while the analysis of the first term follows the so called ``almost ERM'' argument. In other words, understanding how ``close'' the solutions generated by Gibbs-ERM are to the solutions of \ac{ERM}.
In our distribution-dependent setting we follow a different route: consider the case of \ac{RLS}, where the empirical risk is an average of square-regularized losses.
A rather straightforward argument (based on Gaussian integration) gives the following \emph{identity} in an ``almost ERM'' style:
\begin{align*}
\E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim \wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w})} - \min_{\boldsymbol{u} \in \reals^d} \wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{u})
=
\frac{1}{\gamma} \, \mathrm{tr}\pr{\nabla^2 \wh{R}_S(\bhatw_{\lambda}) \pr{\nabla^2 \wh{R}_S(\bhatw_{\lambda}) + \lambda \boldsymbol{I}}^{-1} }
\end{align*}
where $\bhatw_{\lambda}$ is a minimizer of the \ac{RLS} problem.
Observe that in the above identity we obtain an empirical counterpart of the effective dimension introduced in~\eqref{eq:gibbs_local_excess}.
Since our goal is a distribution-dependent result, one possibility is to consider the concentration of Hessian eigenvalues. However, we follow a more direct approach. As we said earlier, the ``almost ERM'' analysis of \ac{RLS} is relatively easy using Gaussian integration (since $\wh{p}_{S,\gamma}$ is a Gaussian density).
Since we deal instead with general smooth densities, our idea is to quantify the gap between the density at hand and the Gaussian density.
This is nicely handled by the \emph{transportation lemma}~\citep[Lemma 4.18]{boucheron2013concentration}, characterizing the difference between the expectations of different densities in terms of the KL-divergence between them.
As a comparison we choose the Gaussian density
$
q_{\gamma} \propto \exp\big(-\frac{\gamma}{2} \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}}^2\big)
$,
which only depends only on distribution-related quantities.
An ``almost ERM'' style analysis applied to $q_{\gamma}$ will give us exactly a distribution-dependent effective dimension.
So, the only issue is the actual gap between densities. By expanding the KL-divergence we observe that the critical terms are
\begin{align}
&- \gamma \E_S\br{\E_{\wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{\wh{R}_{S,\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w}) \mid \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}}}
+ \frac{\gamma}{2} \E_S\br{\E_{\wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{ \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}}^2 \mid \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r} }} \nonumber\\
\lesssim \ &-\gamma \E_S\br{\E_{\wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{R_{\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w}) \mid \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}}} + \frac{\gamma^2}{m}
+ \frac{\gamma}{2} \E_S\br{ \E_{\wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{ \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}}^2 \mid \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r} }} \label{eq:analysis_explained_1}\\
\lesssim \ &\gamma \varepsilon(r) + \frac{\gamma^2}{m}~. \label{eq:analysis_explained_2}
\end{align}
To obtain~\eqref{eq:analysis_explained_1}, instead of using concentration, we resort to the generalization bound of Theorem~\ref{thm:gibbs_gen_error}, whereas~\eqref{eq:analysis_explained_2} is obtained by Taylor expansion of the regularized risk around its minimizer.
This is formally shown in Lemma~\ref{lem:truncated_EER_to_ERM}, while the decomposition~\eqref{eq:gibbs_gen_error_decomp} is bounded in Theorem~\ref{thm:gibbs_local_excess}.
Hence, the gap is quantified by the approximation error at the radius $r$ plus a sample-dependent term due to the use of empirical Gibbs density.
These terms appear in excess risk bounds~\eqref{eq:gibbs_local_excess},~\eqref{eq:gibbs_global_excess}, and~\eqref{eq:gibbs_global_pseudo_excess}.
\subsection{Global Analysis}
Starting from the conditional local excess risk in the form given by the left-hand side of~\eqref{eq:gibbs_gen_error_decomp}, we analyze a notion of global risk by bounding the probability of individual ellipsoids (i.e., neighborhoods of minima) and that of the complement of their union. Since for $\gamma \to \infty$ the probability of a complement approaches zero (as discussed in Remark~\ref{rem:tuning_r}), in order to obtain an asymptotic bound it is enough to focus on the relative probability of ellipsoids. In Lemma~\ref{lem:erm_prob} we derive upper and lower bounds on this probability via Laplace approximation (Lemma~\ref{lem:ellipse_prob}), and then analyze their limit for $\gamma \to \infty$. Combining the local excess risk bound and the bound on the asymptotic relative probability of ellipsoids allows us to control the asymptotic global pseudo excess risk~\eqref{eq:gibbs_global_pseudo_excess} ---see Corollary~\ref{cor:global_excess_risk_asymptotic}.
Finally, using a nonasymptotic bound on the probability of a complement ---see the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:global_excess_risk}--- we can apply the law of total expectation to get also a nonasymptotic bound on the global excess risk.
\subsubsection*{Acknowledgments}
Authors would like to thank Olivier Bousquet, Sébastien Gerchinovitz, and Abbas Mehrabian for stimulating discussions on this work.
\section{Preliminaries}
Throughout this paper, we use $f \lesssim g$ to indicate that there exists a universal constant $C > 0$ such that $f \leq C g$ holds uniformly over all arguments.
Let $\mathcal{B}_r(\boldsymbol{z}) \subset \field{R}^d$ be the ball of center $\boldsymbol{z}$ and radius $r > 0$ and let $\mathcal{B}_r = \mathcal{B}_r(\boldsymbol{0})$.
Given a positive definite $d \times d$ matrix $\boldsymbol{M}$, define $\|\boldsymbol{x}\|_{\boldsymbol{M}}^2 = \boldsymbol{x}^{\top} \boldsymbol{M} \boldsymbol{x}$ for $\boldsymbol{x} \in \mathbb{R}^d$.
Then, for any positive semi-definite $d \times d$ matrix $\boldsymbol{A}$ and $r > 0$ the corresponding ellipsoid centered at $\boldsymbol{x}_0\in\mathbb{R}^d$ is defined as $\mathcal{E}(\boldsymbol{x}_0, \boldsymbol{A}, r) \equiv \cbr{\boldsymbol{x} \in \mathbb{R}^d ~:~ \|\boldsymbol{x}_0 - \boldsymbol{x}\|_{\boldsymbol{A}} \leq r}$.
If $p$ and $q$ are densities that are absolutely continuous with respect to a measure $\mu$ over $\reals^d$, the Kullback-Liebler (KL) divergence between $p$ and $q$ is defined as
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{KL}(p, q) &= \E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim p}\Big[\ln\big(p(\boldsymbol{w})\big) - \ln\big(q(\boldsymbol{w})\big)\Big]~.
\end{align*}
\section{Introduction}
In the parametric setting of statistical learning, the learner is given a tuple $S = \pr{z_1, \ldots, z_m}$ of \emph{training examples}, that are drawn independently of each other from a fixed and unknown probability distribution $\mathcal{D}$ supported on an \emph{example space} $\mathcal{Z}$. Based on the training examples $S$ the learner selects a model $\boldsymbol{w}$ from a parameter space $\reals^d$.
The learner's goal is to minimize the \emph{statistical risk} $R(\boldsymbol{w}) = \E_z[\ell(\boldsymbol{w}, z)]$ of the selected model, where $z$ is drawn from $\mathcal{D}$ and $\ell \,:\, \reals^d \times \mathcal{Z} \to [0, M]$ is some known \emph{loss function}, which we assume to be non-negative, bounded, and twice differentiable.
A learner following the \acf{ERM} principle selects a model with the smallest empirical risk. Learners often also incorporate a penalty, leading to selecting a model from the set
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:erm}
\argmin_{\boldsymbol{w} \in \reals^d}\cbr{ \wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) + \lambda \|\boldsymbol{w}\|^2}\,, \qquad \lambda > 0\,,
\end{equation}
where $\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w})$ is the \emph{empirical risk} of $\boldsymbol{w}$, defined by
\[
\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) = \frac{1}{m} \sum_{i=1}^m \ell(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)\,.
\]
In the following, we will abbreviate the regularized empirical risk by $\wh{R}_{S,\lambda}$ and its population counterpart, $\E[\wh{R}_{S,\lambda}]$, by $R_{\lambda}$.
In this paper we study a randomized version of \ac{ERM} known as \emph{Gibbs-ERM}.
A Gibbs algorithm outputs a model $\boldsymbol{w} \in \reals^d$ sampled from the \emph{Gibbs density}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gibbs}
\wh{p}_{S,\gamma}(\boldsymbol{w}) = \frac{1}{Z} \, e^{-\gamma \pr{ \wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) + \lambda \|\boldsymbol{w}\|^2 }}\,, \qquad \gamma > 0\,,
\end{equation}
where $Z = \int_{\reals^d} e^{-\gamma \pr{ \wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) + \lambda \|\boldsymbol{w}\|^2 }} \diff \boldsymbol{w}$ is the normalization constant and $\wh{R}_S$ is assumed to be such that $Z < \infty$ (for instance, this is the case when $\|\cdot\|$ is any norm and $\wh{R}_S$ is nonnegative).
It is not hard to see that we obtain \ac{ERM} as a special case of~\eqref{eq:gibbs} for $\gamma \to \infty$.
In the following expectations $\E[\cdot]$ are taken with respect to the joint distribution over the sample space $\mathcal{Z}^m \times \mathbb{R}^d$ (i.e., the product of the example space and the parameter space) unless explicitly stated otherwise, for instance $\E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim \wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}[\cdot]$.
Gibbs-ERM reveals its usefulness when the regularized empirical risk is non-convex and~\eqref{eq:erm} becomes intractable. This scenario brings out the connections between Gibbs-ERM and stochastic optimization algorithms, for instance \ac{SGLD} ---see below, along with a number of other settings in which Gibbs-ERM arises naturally.
One tantalizing related line of research lies in understanding theoretical properties of learning in overparameterized problems, such as deep neural networks, through the prism of stochastic optimization, since in these settings \ac{SGD} and its variants become de facto method of choice.
We believe that Gibbs-ERM principle provides an opportunity for explaining some of the learning-theoretic phenomena in this area.
In this paper we focus on the statistical properties of the Gibbs-ERM by analyzing distribution-dependent excess risk bounds.
In particular, we give upper bounds on the excess risk that can be much smaller compared to the previous literature, for instance \ac{SGLD}~\citep{raginsky2017nonconvex}, depending on the interplay between the data-generating distribution and the loss function.
\paragraph{\emph{\ac{SGLD} algorithm.}}
The recent interest in stochastic gradient descent algorithms for non-convex optimization led to the study of a variant called \ac{SGLD}. Apart from its simplicity, \ac{SGLD} has amenable theoretical properties, such as asymptotic convergence to global minima and polynomial saddle-point escape times~\citep{ge2015escaping}.
The update rule of plain \ac{SGLD} is
\[
\widehat{\boldsymbol{w}}_{ t + 1 } = \widehat{\boldsymbol{w}}_{ t } - \eta \nabla \wh{R}_{S,\lambda}(\widehat{\boldsymbol{w}}_t) + \sqrt { \frac{2 \eta}{\gamma} } \, \boldsymbol{\xi}_t \qquad t=0, 1, 2, \ldots
\]
where $\widehat{\boldsymbol{w}}_1$ is sampled from a fixed distribution, $\boldsymbol{\xi}_t$ is a standard Gaussian ``noise'' vector (independent from the choice of $\widehat{\boldsymbol{w}}_1$), and $\eta$ is a step size.
The \ac{SGLD} algorithm is known to approximate the continuous-time Langevin diffusion equation
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:langevin}
\diff \boldsymbol{w}(t) = - \nabla \wh{R}_{S,\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w}(t)) \diff t + \sqrt { \frac{2}{\gamma} } \, \diff \boldsymbol{b}(t) , \quad t \geq 0
\end{equation}
where $\boldsymbol{b}(t)$ is the standard Brownian motion.
Indeed, under appropriate assumptions on the empirical risk, one can show that the solution to~\eqref{eq:langevin} admits~\eqref{eq:gibbs} as a stationary distribution~\citep{raginsky2017nonconvex,tzen2018local}.
While convergence in the limit is reassuring, the best known bound on the mixing time is of order $\text{polylog}(1/\varepsilon) \, e^{\mathcal{\tilde{O}}(d)}$ for non-convex empirical risks assuming that objective is smooth and dissipative (roughly speaking, assuring that the process~\eqref{eq:langevin} on average moves towards the origin)~\citep{raginsky2017nonconvex,xu2018global},
and it is not clear whether the exponential dependence on the parameters can be eliminated.
\paragraph{\emph{Information Risk Minimization.}}
Gibbs-ERM naturally arises when introducing a relative entropy regularization in the so-called Information Risk Minimization framework~\citep{zhang2006information,xu2017information}. Indeed $\wh{p}_{S,\gamma}$ in~\eqref{eq:gibbs} can be equivalently defined as the solution to the following convex optimization problem
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:IRM}
\arginf_{\widehat{p} \in \mathcal{M}_1}\cbr{ \E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim \widehat{p}}\br{\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w})} + \frac{1}{\gamma} \, \mathrm{KL}\pr{\widehat{p} \ || \ \mathcal{N}(\boldsymbol{0}, \lambda^{-1} \boldsymbol{I})} }\,,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{M}_1$ is the set of all sample-dependent probability densities on $\reals^d$, with sample drawn from $\mathcal{D}$, and $\mathrm{KL}$-divergence is defined between densities that are absolutely continuous with respect to some measure over $\reals^d$.
Problem~\eqref{eq:IRM} can be also motivated from perspective of the PAC-Bayesian analysis~\citep{mcallester1998some,seeger2002pac}, where~\eqref{eq:gibbs} is the density minimizing the bound on the expected risk.
Another instance of~\eqref{eq:IRM} is the well-known Maximum Entropy Discrimination framework of~\cite{jaakkola1999maximum}.
\paragraph{\emph{Sampling from~\eqref{eq:gibbs}.}}
Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithms can be used to sample directly from~\eqref{eq:gibbs}. Unfortunately, this is often known to be computationally inefficient~\citep{andrieu2003introduction}. On the other hand, there is a number of cases where MCMC demonstrates amenable computational properties, for instance when sampling from log-concave densities~\citep{andrieu2003introduction}.
Recent works have also showed that for a particular class of densities (such as smooth and strongly concave densities) variations of MCMC algorithms can sometimes achieve linear convergence~\citep{cheng2018underdamped},
for certain non-log-concave densities MCMC variants can achieve polynomial convergence in the dimension~\citep{cheng2018sharp}, or ever achieve faster convergence than optimization algorithms~\citep{ma2018sampling}.
Another popular line of research is a variational approximations of the Gibbs density, such as Variational Bayes~\citep{wang2018frequentist} where one resorts to the variational approximation of a target density.
\subsection{Our Contribution}
The algorithms discussed above perform randomized empirical risk minimization.
However, minimizing empirical risk does not always lead to minimization of the risk.
Hence, the quality of the solution $A(S)$ generated by the randomized algorithm $A$ given the training set $S$
is typically analyzed through the notion of \emph{excess risk} $\E_{S, A}\br{R(A(S))} - R(\bw^{\star})$, where $\bw^{\star}$ is one of the minimizers of the risk. This is decomposed into the generalization error $R(A(S)) - \wh{R}_S(A(S))$ and the term $\wh{R}_S(A(S)) - R(\bw^{\star})$.
Similarly to~\cite{raginsky2017nonconvex}, we follow instead a Gibbs-centric decomposition of the excess risk
\[
\E_{S, A}\br{R(A(S))} - R(\bw^{\star})
=
\underbrace{\E_{S, A, \boldsymbol{w} \sim \wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{R(A(S)) - R(\boldsymbol{w})}}_{\text{Computational excess risk}}
+
\underbrace{\E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim \wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{R(\boldsymbol{w})} - R(\bw^{\star})}_{\text{Statistical excess risk}}\,.
\]
The first term is due solely to the dynamics of the algorithm, be it \ac{SGLD} or a sampling procedure, while the second one is a purely learning-theoretic quantity.
\cite{raginsky2017nonconvex} mainly focused on the finite-time analysis of the first term for \ac{SGLD} while showing convergence for non-convex objective functions.
Their analysis of the second term ---the statistical excess risk--- provides a bound of order (ignoring logarithmic factors)
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:raginsky_excess}
\frac{(\gamma + d)^2}{\lambda_{\star} m} + \frac{d}{\gamma}
\end{equation}
where $\lambda_{\star}$ is a positive spectral gap characterizing the exponential convergence rate of the Langevin diffusion to the stationary point. They conservatively bounded the reciprocal of $\lambda_{\star}$ as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:raginsky_spectral_gap}
\frac{1}{\lambda_{\star}} = \mathcal{\tilde{O}} \pr{ \frac { 1 } { \gamma ( d + \gamma ) } } + \pr{1 + \frac { d } { \gamma } } e ^ { \mathcal{\tilde{O}} ( \gamma + d ) }~.
\end{equation}
This results in a statistical excess risk bound with a rather pessimistic exponential dependence on the ambient dimension $d$.
Therefore, a natural question to ask is whether the dependence on $d$ can be improved by taking into account specific properties of the learning problem,
and whether the dependence on $\lambda_{\star}$ can be avoided altogether (since the \emph{statistical} excess risk does not really depend on the convergence properties of \ac{SGLD}).
We believe that $\lambda_{\star}$ (which has exponential dependence on the dimension) can be avoided in the analysis of \cite{raginsky2017nonconvex}, although in their case this would not have improved the final result due to the contribution of the computational excess risk.
In this paper we consider the statistical excess risk, while we forego computational aspects of concrete algorithms.
In particular, we focus on the \emph{distribution-dependent} analysis of \emph{statistical excess risk} (or, simply, excess risk).
In the following we show upper bounds on the statistical excess risk that can be much smaller than~\eqref{eq:raginsky_excess} depending on the interplay between the data-generating distribution and the loss function.
The notion of excess risk considered in this paper is defined with respect to the \emph{regularized} minimizer of the risk
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:regularized_risk}
\bw^{\star}_{\lambda} \in \argmin_{\boldsymbol{w} \in \reals^d}\cbr{R(\boldsymbol{w}) + \lambda \|\boldsymbol{w}\|^2}~.
\end{equation}
Note that this is not a limitation because we can always recover the regularizer-free analysis by looking at the asymptotic behavior $\lambda \rightarrow 0$.
In the following, we assume that both risk and empirical risk are bounded and twice differentiable, and the Hessian matrix of the risk is locally-Lipschitz (in a sense precisely defined later on).
Therefore, the objective function of~\eqref{eq:regularized_risk} (as well as the one of~\eqref{eq:erm}) can have more than one minimum. However we assume that local minima are \emph{isolated}, meaning that a sufficiently small neighborhood of $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}$ contains a unique minimum.
One compelling example is a large family of non-convex \emph{strict-saddle} \ac{ERM} problems~\citep{ge2015escaping,gonen2017fast}, such as matrix completion, tensor decomposition, PCA, ICA, and others.
Another example of such is an empirical risk of a \emph{ReLU neural network} with weight decay, or L2 regularization,~\cite[Theorem 1]{milne2018piecewise} where minima resulting in a sufficiently small empirical risk are locally strongly-convex.
Even though the theorem holds for empirical measures, we suspect that it could be extended to the population risk through the uniform convergence argument.
\paragraph{Localized excess risk.}
Before delving into the global analysis of the excess risk, we look at the \emph{local} approximation properties of the Gibbs-ERM principle, which will also be instrumental in the forthcoming global analysis.
We begin by looking at the \emph{localized} excess risk with respect to a fixed minimizer $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}$.
Specifically, we consider the excess risk of a parameter $\boldsymbol{w}$ generated by Gibbs-ERM within a certain neighborhood around $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}$. This is defined as
\[
\Delta(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) = \E_S\br{\E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim \wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{R(\boldsymbol{w}) - R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) \mid \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}}} \,,
\]
where conditioning is taken on the event that $\boldsymbol{w}$ lies in the ellipsoid $\mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}$ of radius $r$ centered at the minimizer $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}$ and aligned with the curvature of the risk at that minimum.
We prove (Theorem~\ref{thm:gibbs_local_excess}) that
the local excess risk behaves as%
\footnote{Throughout this paper, we use $f \lesssim g$ to say that there exists a universal constant $C > 0$ such that $f \leq C g$ holds uniformly over all arguments.}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gibbs_local_excess}
\Delta(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})
\lesssim
\frac{1}{\gamma} \, \mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda}}
+ \varepsilon(r)
+ \sqrt{\gamma \varepsilon(r)}
+ \frac{\gamma}{\sqrt{m}}
\end{equation}
where $\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}$ is the Hessian matrix $\nabla^2 R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})$, $\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda} = \boldsymbol{H}^{\star} + 2 \lambda \boldsymbol{I}$, and $\varepsilon(r)$ is a local approximation error that vanishes as $r\to 0$
(defined precisely in Section~\ref{sec:smooth_loss}).
The trace term in~\eqref{eq:gibbs_local_excess}, a distribution-dependent quantity known as the \emph{effective dimension} of minimizer $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}$, can be also expressed as $\lambda_1 / (\lambda_1 + \lambda) + \cdots + \lambda_d / (\lambda_d + \lambda)$ where $\lambda_1, \ldots, \lambda_d$ are the eigenvalues of $\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}$. This can be viewed as a ``soft'' version of the rank of $\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}$.
Note that $\mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda}} \leq d$ always, and $\mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda}} \ll d$ whenever the spectrum of the Hessian matrix is light-tailed.
This notion of effective dimension occasionally appears in the analysis of ridge regression~\citep{audibert2011robust,neu2018iterate}.
Next, to get a sense of the strength of the bound and as a sanity check, one may look at limiting cases
with respect to parameters $\lambda$ and $\gamma$.
When $\lambda \to 0$, corresponding to the unregularized Gibbs-ERM principle, our bound becomes
\[
\Delta(\bw^{\star}) \lesssim \frac{1}{\gamma} \, \rank(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}) + \text{poly}(m, \gamma, r, \lambda_{\mathrm{min}}(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}))
\]
where $\lambda_{\mathrm{min}}(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star})$ denotes the smallest non-zero eigenvalue of $\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}$.
Assuming the radius is set to $r = \gamma^{-\frac{1+p}{3}}$ for some $p > 0$, the polynomial term in the right-hand side of the above bound vanishes as $\gamma,m\to\infty$, even for singular $\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}$.
On the other hand, for $\lambda > 0$ and $\gamma,m\to\infty$
the right-hand side of~\eqref{eq:gibbs_local_excess} tends to zero, and the bound backs up the intuition that the Gibbs-ERM principle should exactly recover the \ac{ERM} solution. This observation also serves as a sanity check that the bound is reasonably tight, at least with respect to $\gamma$.
Finally, in cases when the Hessian matrix of the risk is constant, for instance in \ac{RLS} problems, $\varepsilon(r) = 0$ and our bound specializes to
\begin{equation*}
\Delta(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})
\lesssim
\frac{1}{\gamma} \, \mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda}}
+ \frac{\gamma}{\sqrt{m}}~.
\end{equation*}
When $\gamma$ is tuned optimally the above bound becomes $\Delta(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) \lesssim m^{-\frac{1}{4}}\sqrt{\mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda}}}$.
Note that, for the square loss, the best known dependence on $m$ that can be achieved is $m^{-\frac{1}{2}}$. The worse exponent in our bound is the price we pay for the generality of our approach.
Although our results are never worse in terms of the dimension, the dependence on the sample size in our bounds is worse than in those of~\cite[(3.27)]{raginsky2017nonconvex}.
This is because we are stating bounds in terms of the distribution-dependent effective dimension. We can obtain the same rate as~\cite{raginsky2017nonconvex} by expressing the effective dimension in terms of the empirical risk.
\paragraph{Global excess risk.}
Next, we consider a \emph{global} notion of excess risk,
\[
\Delta(\pi) = \E_S\br{\E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim \wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{R(\boldsymbol{w})}} - \E_{I \sim \pi} \br{R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda, I})}\,.
\]
Here, in the second term $\pi$ is a distribution over the countable set $\mathcal{I}$ of all minima (recall that minima are isolated).
In this setting, all minima, Hessian matrices, approximation errors, and ellipsoids gain a corresponding subscript $i \in \mathcal{I}$: $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda, i}$, $\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda,i}$, $\varepsilon_i(r)$, and $\mathcal{E}^{\star}_i(r)$.
We first focus on the finite-temperature distribution over minima of the regularized risk
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:pi_gamma}
\pi_{\gamma,r}(i) = \frac{\mathbb{P}_{\gamma}(\mathcal{E}^{\star}_i(r))}{\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}} \mathbb{P}_{\gamma}(\mathcal{E}^{\star}_j(r)) }\,, \qquad i \in \mathcal{I}\,,
\end{equation}
where probabilities are taken with respect to the population Gibbs density $p_{\gamma}(\boldsymbol{w}) \propto e^{-\gamma R_{\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w})}$.
For this distribution we prove that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gibbs_global_excess}
\Delta(\pi_{\gamma,r})
\lesssim
\frac{1}{\gamma} \, \E\br{\mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{I} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda,I}}}
+ \frac{\gamma}{\sqrt{m}}
+ \E[\varepsilon_I(r)] + \sqrt{\gamma \E[\varepsilon_I(r)]} + \mathbb{P}_{\gamma}(\sC^{\star}(r))\,,
\end{equation}
for any $r < r_0$ where the radius $r_0$ is chosen such that all ellipsoids in the set $\big\{\mathcal{E}^{\star}_i(r) \,:\, i \in \mathcal{I}\big\}$ are disjoint,
$\sC^{\star}(r)$ is the \emph{complement} of the union of the ellipsoids in this set (i.e., the volume outside of minima), and the expectation is taken with respect to $I \sim \pi_{\gamma,r}$.
Note that there is a trade-off in~\eqref{eq:gibbs_global_excess} between the first term, which is essentially a bound on the expected excess risk in the neighborhood of a minimum drawn according to $\pi_{\gamma,r}$, and the last term, which is the probability of sampling outside of the neighborhood of any minimum.
This means that we can obtain an \emph{oracle inequality} by choosing $r \in [0, r_0]$ such that it minimizes the right-hand side of~\eqref{eq:gibbs_global_excess}.
Now we focus on the probability of the complement, which behaves as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:intro_prob_complement}
\mathbb{P}_{\gamma}(\sC^{\star}(r)) \leq 1 - \pr{1 - d e^{-r^2 \gamma \alpha_{d/2}}} \sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}} e^{-\frac{1}{3} \gamma \varepsilon_i(r)}\,,
\end{equation}
where $\alpha_{d/2}$ depends only on $d$.
So, as long as $r^2 \gamma$ is increasing and $\gamma \varepsilon_i(r)$ is non-increasing, the probability of generating a solution outside of the minima decreases.
For example, when $r = \gamma^{\frac{p-1}{2}}$ for $p \in (0, 1/3]$ (as discussed in Section~\ref{sec:global}) the right-hand side of~\eqref{eq:intro_prob_complement} vanishes as $\gamma \to \infty$.
\paragraph{Asymptotic pseudo excess risk.}
It is also natural to ask what happens in the zero-temperature regime $\gamma \to \infty$, when the Gibbs-ERM principle reduces to a rule for selecting empirical risk minimizers.
We can study this by observing that~\eqref{eq:gibbs_global_excess} vanishes when the radius is set to $r = \gamma^{\frac{p-1}{2}}$ ---as we previously discussed--- and $\gamma$ is set to $m^{\frac{1}{4}}$,
which is a meaningful result. Indeed, whenever $m = \infty$, then $\gamma = \infty$ and the risk of Gibbs-ERM should not differ from the risk of a minimum drawn from the limiting distribution $\pi_{\infty} = \lim_{\gamma \rightarrow \infty} \pi_{\gamma,r}$.
Interestingly, the distribution $\pi_{\infty}$ has the following analytic form (this is shown in Lemma~\ref{lem:erm_prob} assuming the tuning $r = \gamma^{\frac{p-1}{2}}$):
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:pi_infty}
\pi_{\infty}(i) = \frac{1}{\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{glob}}}} \sqrt{\frac{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda, i})}{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda, j})} }}\,,
\qquad i \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{glob}}}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{glob}}}$ is a countable set enumerating global minima of the regularized risk.
Hence, the probability of a minimum $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda, i}$ is proportional to the reciprocal of the normalized volume of the ellipsoid defined by the eigenvalues of the Hessian at that minimum. In particular, this implies that the probability of choosing a global minimum with larger volume is higher.
Note that all suboptimal minima have zero probability under $\pi_{\infty}$.
At the same time, in this asymptotic regime it is also rather clear that Gibbs-ERM generates models outside of the neighborhoods of the minima with zero probability.
These two observations show how to strike a middle ground between the nonasymptotic bound of~\eqref{eq:gibbs_global_excess} and the asymptotic distribution~\eqref{eq:pi_infty}. This is captured by the global asymptotic \emph{pseudo} excess risk
\[
\Delta^{\infty}_r = \E_{I \sim \pi_{\infty}}\br{\E_S\br{\E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim \wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{R(\boldsymbol{w}) \mid \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}_I(r)}} - R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda, I})}\,, \qquad r > 0\,,
\]
which bounds the localized excess risk at finite temperature $\gamma > 0$ when minima are drawn from the global limiting distribution $\pi_{\infty}$.
For any $r \geq 0$ we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gibbs_global_pseudo_excess}
\Delta^{\infty}_r \lesssim \frac{1}{\gamma} \, \E\br{\mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{I} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda,I}}}
+ \E \br{\varepsilon_I(r)}
+ \sqrt{\gamma \E \br{\varepsilon_I(r)}}
+ \frac{\gamma}{\sqrt{m}}~.
\end{equation}
Observe that whereas the local excess risk~\eqref{eq:gibbs_local_excess} is essentially controlled by the soft rank of the minimum, the bound~\eqref{eq:gibbs_global_pseudo_excess} implies that globally this is not necessarily the case, since low-rank minima have smaller probability under distribution $\pi_{\infty}$.
\subsection{Additional Related Work}
\input{related}
\subsection{Common Tools}
We compute the Taylor expansion of $R_{\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w})$ for $\boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}, \nabla^2 R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}), r)$, where $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}$ is a minimizer of the regularized risk,
%
\begin{align}
R_{\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w})
&\geq
R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) + \frac{1}{2} \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}}^2 - \frac{L^{\star}(r)}{6} \, \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|^3 \nonumber\\
&\geq
R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) + \frac{1}{2} \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}}^2 - \frac{L^{\star}(r)}{6} \pr{\frac{r}{\sqrt{\lambda_{\mathrm{min}} + \lambda}}}^3 \label{eq:taylor_lower_lmin}\\
&=
R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) + \frac{1}{2} \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}}^2 - \frac{1}{6} \varepsilon(r)~ \label{eq:taylor_lower}
\end{align}
where $\varepsilon(r)$ is defined in~\eqref{eq:approx}, and~\eqref{eq:taylor_lower_lmin} follows because $\sqrt{\lambda_{\mathrm{min}} + \lambda} \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\| \leq r$ where $\lambda_{\mathrm{min}}$ is the smallest non-zero eigenvalue of $\nabla^2 R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})$. In a similar way we have the upper expansion
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:taylor_upper}
R_{\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w})
\leq
R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) + \frac{1}{2} \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}}^2 + \frac{1}{6} \varepsilon(r)~.
\end{equation}
We now introduce a crucial \emph{transportation lemma} which is instrumental in the following proofs.
\begin{lemma}[\protect{\citep[Lemma~4.18]{boucheron2013concentration}}]
\label{lem:transportation}
Let $Z$ be a real-valued integrable random variable with distribution $P$ such that
\[
\ln \E\br{e^{\alpha (Z - \E[Z])}} \leq \frac{\alpha^2 \sigma^2}{2} \qquad \alpha > 0
\]
for some $\sigma > 0$ and let $Z'$ be another random variable with distribution $Q$.
If $Q$ is absolutely continuous with respect to $P$ and such that $\mathrm{KL}(Q \ || \ P) < \infty$, then
$
\E[Z'] - \E[Z] \leq \sqrt{2 \sigma^2 \mathrm{KL}\pr{Q \ || \ P}}
$.
\end{lemma}
Next, we prove a helpful lemma about the log-ratio of Gibbs integrals.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:ln_Z_Z_bound}
Let $f_A, f_B : \mathcal{X} \to \mathbb{R}$ such that
\[
Z_A = \int_{\mathcal{B}} e^{-\gamma f_A(\boldsymbol{x})} \diff \boldsymbol{x}
\]
is finite for all $\gamma > 0, \mathcal{B} \subseteq \mathcal{X}$
and let
\[
p_A(\boldsymbol{x}) = \frac{1}{Z_A} \, e^{-\gamma f_A(\boldsymbol{x})} \quad \gamma > 0, \ \boldsymbol{x} \in \mathcal{B}
\]
where $f_B$ is similarly defined.
Whenever $Z_A > 0$ we have that
\[
- \ln\pr{\frac{Z_A}{Z_B}}
\leq
\gamma \int_{\mathcal{B}} p_B(\boldsymbol{x}) \pr{f_A(\boldsymbol{x}) - f_B(\boldsymbol{x})} \diff \boldsymbol{x}~.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Observe that
\begin{align*}
\frac{Z_A}{Z_B} &=
\frac{\int_{\mathcal{B}} e^{-\gamma f_A(\boldsymbol{x})} \diff \boldsymbol{x}}{\int_{\mathcal{B}} e^{-\gamma f_B(\boldsymbol{x})} \diff \boldsymbol{x}}
=
\frac{\int_{\mathcal{B}} e^{-\gamma f_A(\boldsymbol{x})} e^{\gamma \pr{f_B(\boldsymbol{x}) - f_B(\boldsymbol{x})}} \diff \boldsymbol{x}}{\int_{\mathcal{B}} e^{-\gamma f_B(\boldsymbol{x})} \diff \boldsymbol{x}}
=
\int_{\mathcal{B}} p_B(\boldsymbol{x}) e^{\gamma \pr{f_B(\boldsymbol{x}) - f_A(\boldsymbol{x})}} \diff \boldsymbol{x}~.
\end{align*}
Since $-\ln()$ is a convex function, by Jensen's inequality we obtain the desired result.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Statements about Probability Mass of Ellipsoids}
Before we prove our bound on the global excess risk, we introduce some necessary technical notions about the \emph{regularized gamma function}, which can be interpreted as the probability of an Euclidean ball of radius $z$ under a Gaussian density with covariance matrix $\boldsymbol{I}$.
\begin{theorem}[\protect{\citep[Regularized Gamma Function]{nist2018gamma}}]
Denote the regularized gamma function by
\[
P(a, z) = \frac{\Gamma(a) - \Gamma(a,z)}{\Gamma(a)}
\]
where $\Gamma(a,z)$ is the upper incomplete Gamma function given by
\[
\Gamma(a,z) = \int_z^{\infty} t^{a-1} e^{-t} \diff t~.
\]
Then, for all $z \geq 0$ and $a > 0$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:lb_regularized_gamma}
\pr{1 - e^{-\alpha_a z}}^a \leq P(a, z)
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:alpha_a}
\alpha_a =
\begin{cases}
1 & 0 < a < 1\\
\frac{1}{\Gamma(1+a)^{\frac{1}{a}}} & a > 1~.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
with equality in~\eqref{eq:lb_regularized_gamma} only when $a=1$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{prop}[Truncated Gaussian Integrals]
\label{prop:ball_trunc_gaussian_int}
For any $\gamma, r > 0$,
\[
\int_{\mathcal{B}(r)} e^{-\frac{\gamma}{2} \|\boldsymbol{u}\|^2} \diff \boldsymbol{u} = \pr{\frac{2 \pi}{\gamma}}^{\frac{d}{2}} P\pr{\frac{d}{2}, \frac{r^2 \gamma}{2}}
\]
where $\mathcal{B}(r)$ is the $d$-dimensional Euclidean ball.
In addition, for any $d \times d$ semi-definite matrix $\boldsymbol{A}$,
\[
\int_{\mathcal{E}(\boldsymbol{0}, \boldsymbol{A}, r)} e^{-\frac{\gamma}{2} \|\boldsymbol{u}\|_{\boldsymbol{A}}^2} \diff \boldsymbol{u}
=
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\det(\boldsymbol{A})}} \pr{\frac{2 \pi}{\gamma}}^{\frac{d}{2}} P\pr{\frac{d}{2}, \frac{r^2 \gamma}{2}}~.
\]
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
By the integration of radial functions
\begin{align*}
\int_{\mathcal{B}(r)} e^{-\frac{\gamma}{2} \|\boldsymbol{u}\|^2} \diff \boldsymbol{u}
&=
2 \, \frac{\pi^{\frac{d}{2}}}{\Gamma\pr{\frac{d}{2}}} \int_0^r e^{-\frac{\gamma}{2} x^2} x^{d-1} \diff x \\
&=
\pr{\frac{2 \pi}{\gamma}}^{\frac{d}{2}} \, \frac{\Gamma\pr{\frac{d}{2}} - \Gamma\pr{\frac{d}{2}, \frac{r^2 \gamma}{2}}}{\Gamma\pr{\frac{d}{2}}} \\
&=
\pr{\frac{2 \pi}{\gamma}}^{\frac{d}{2}} P\pr{\frac{d}{2}, \frac{r^2 \gamma}{2}}~.
\end{align*}
In addition we have
\begin{align*}
\int_{\mathcal{E}(\boldsymbol{0}, \boldsymbol{A}, r)} e^{-\frac{\gamma}{2} \|\boldsymbol{u}\|_{\boldsymbol{A}}^2} \diff \boldsymbol{u}
&=
\int_{\|\boldsymbol{u}\|_{\boldsymbol{A}} \leq r} e^{-\frac{\gamma}{2} \|\boldsymbol{u}\|_{\boldsymbol{A}}^2} \diff \boldsymbol{u}\\
&=
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\det(\boldsymbol{A})}} \int_{\|\boldsymbol{v}\| \leq r} e^{-\frac{\gamma}{2} \|\boldsymbol{v}\|^2} \diff \boldsymbol{v}\\
&=
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\det(\boldsymbol{A})}} \pr{\frac{2 \pi}{\gamma}}^{\frac{d}{2}} P\pr{\frac{d}{2}, \frac{r^2 \gamma}{2}}~.
\end{align*}
where the third step is obtained through the change of variables $\diff \boldsymbol{A}^{\frac{1}{2}} \boldsymbol{u} = \diff \boldsymbol{v}$.
\end{proof}
Recall that $\mathcal{E}^{\star}(r) \equiv \mathcal{E}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}, \boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}, r)$, where $\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda} = \nabla^2 R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})$.
\begin{lemma}[Bounds on the Ellipsoid probability mass.]
\label{lem:ellipse_prob}
Let $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}$ be any minimizer of $R_{\lambda}$.
Then the following results hold for probabilities of ellipsoids under the density $e^{-\gamma R_{\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w})} / Z$,
\begin{align*}
\P\big(\mathcal{E}^{\star}(r)\big)
&\leq
\frac{1}{Z} \, e^{-\gamma R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) + \frac{\gamma}{6} \varepsilon(r)} \,
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda})}} \pr{\frac{2 \pi}{\gamma}}^{\frac{d}{2}} P\pr{\frac{d}{2}, \frac{r^2 \gamma}{2}}
\\
\P\big(\mathcal{E}^{\star}(r)\big)
&\geq
\frac{1}{Z} \, e^{-\gamma R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) - \frac{\gamma}{6} \varepsilon(r)} \,
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda})}} \pr{\frac{2 \pi}{\gamma}}^{\frac{d}{2}} P\pr{\frac{d}{2}, \frac{r^2 \gamma}{2}}
\\
\P\big(\mathcal{E}^{\star}(r)\big) &\geq e^{-\frac{\gamma}{3} \varepsilon(r)} P\pr{\frac{d}{2}, \frac{r^2 \gamma}{2}}~.
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By applying the lower Taylor expansion~\eqref{eq:taylor_lower} in the exponent of the Gibbs density we get
\begin{align}
\P\big(\mathcal{E}^{\star}(r)\big) &= \frac{1}{Z} \int_{\mathcal{E}^{\star}(r)} e^{-\gamma R_{\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w})} \diff \boldsymbol{w} \nonumber\\
&\leq \frac{1}{Z} \, e^{-\gamma R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) + \frac{\gamma}{6} \varepsilon(r)}
\int_{\mathcal{E}^{\star}(r)} e^{- \frac{\gamma}{2} \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}}^2} \diff \boldsymbol{w} \nonumber\\
&= \frac{1}{Z} \, e^{-\gamma R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) + \frac{\gamma}{6} \varepsilon(r)} \,
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda})}} \int_{\mathcal{B}(r)} e^{- \frac{\gamma}{2} \|\boldsymbol{u}\|^2} \diff \boldsymbol{u} \label{eq:P_ellipse_bounds_change}\\
&= \frac{1}{Z} \, e^{-\gamma R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) + \frac{\gamma}{6} \varepsilon(r)} \,
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda})}} \pr{\frac{2 \pi}{\gamma}}^{\frac{d}{2}} P\pr{\frac{d}{2}, \frac{r^2 \gamma}{2}}
\label{eq:P_ellipse_bounds_gauss_int}
\end{align}
where~\eqref{eq:P_ellipse_bounds_change} is obtained via the change of variables $\boldsymbol{u} = \boldsymbol{H}^{\star \frac{1}{2}}_{\lambda} (\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda})$
and~\eqref{eq:P_ellipse_bounds_gauss_int} via Proposition~\ref{prop:ball_trunc_gaussian_int}.
This shows the first result.
The second result follows in a similar way exploiting the upper Taylor expansion~\eqref{eq:taylor_upper},
\begin{align}
\P\big(\mathcal{E}^{\star}(r)\big) &\geq \frac{1}{Z} \, e^{-\gamma R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) - \frac{\gamma}{6} \varepsilon(r)}
\int_{\mathcal{E}^{\star}(r)} e^{- \frac{\gamma}{2} \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}}^2} \diff \boldsymbol{w} \nonumber\\
&= \frac{1}{Z} \, e^{-\gamma R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) - \frac{\gamma}{6} \varepsilon(r)} \,
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda})}} \int_{\mathcal{B}(r)} e^{- \frac{\gamma}{2} \|\boldsymbol{u}\|^2} \diff \boldsymbol{u} \nonumber\\
&= \frac{1}{Z} \, e^{-\gamma R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) - \frac{\gamma}{6} \varepsilon(r)} \,
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda})}} \pr{\frac{2 \pi}{\gamma}}^{\frac{d}{2}} P\pr{\frac{d}{2}, \frac{r^2 \gamma}{2}}~.
\label{eq:P_ellipse_bounds_gauss_int_lower}
\end{align}
Finally, we give a lower bound on the probability of $\mathcal{E}^{\star}(r)$.
We start by upper bounding the normalization constant using the lower Taylor expansion~\eqref{eq:taylor_lower},
\begin{align*}
Z &= \int_{\reals^d} e^{-\gamma R_{\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w})} \diff \boldsymbol{w}\\
&\leq e^{-\gamma R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) + \frac{\gamma}{6} \varepsilon(r)} \int_{\reals^d} e^{- \frac{\gamma}{2} \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}}^2} \diff \boldsymbol{w}\\
&\leq e^{-\gamma R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) + \frac{\gamma}{6} \varepsilon(r)} \, \frac{1}{\sqrt{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda})}} \pr{\frac{2 \pi}{\gamma}}^{\frac{d}{2}}~.
\end{align*}
Combining the above with~\eqref{eq:P_ellipse_bounds_gauss_int_lower} gives
$
\P\big(\mathcal{E}^{\star}(r)\big) \geq e^{-\frac{\gamma}{3} \varepsilon(r)} P\pr{\frac{d}{2}, \frac{r^2 \gamma}{2}}
$
thus completing the proof.
\end{proof}
\paragraph{Lemma~\ref{lem:erm_prob} (restated)}
%
For all $r > 0$,
\begin{align*}
\pi_{\gamma,r}(i)
\leq
\frac{e^{\frac{\gamma}{3} \max_{k \in \mathcal{I}}\varepsilon_k(r)}}
{\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}} e^{\gamma \pr{ R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda, i}) - R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda, j})}}
\sqrt{\frac{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda,i})}{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda,j})} }
}
\qquad i \in \mathcal{I}~.
\end{align*}
%
Moreover, assuming without loss of generality that $R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda, i}) = 0$ for all $i \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{glob}}}$, and setting $r = \gamma^{-p}$ for $p > 0$, we have
%
\[
\lim_{\gamma \rightarrow \infty}\pi_{\gamma,r}(i)
= \begin{cases}
\frac{1}{\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{glob}}}} \sqrt{\frac{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda, i})}{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda, j})} }} & i \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{glob}}}
\\
0 & i \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{subopt}}}~.
\end{cases}
\]
\begin{proof}
Throughout this proof we consider probabilities of ellipsoids under the density $e^{-\gamma R_{\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w})} / Z$, and we abbreviate $R^{\star}_{\lambda,i} = R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda, i})$.
Applying Lemma~\ref{lem:ellipse_prob} with $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda} = \bw^{\star}_{\lambda, i}$ readily gives
\begin{align}
\pi_{\gamma,r}(i)
&=
\frac{\P(\boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}_i(r))}{\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}} \P(\boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}_j(r))} \nonumber\\
&\leq
\frac{e^{\frac{\gamma}{6} \varepsilon_i(r)}}
{\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}} e^{\gamma \pr{ R^{\star}_{\lambda,i} - R^{\star}_{\lambda,j}} - \frac{\gamma}{6} \varepsilon_j(r)}
\sqrt{\frac{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda,i})}{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda,j})} }
} \nonumber\\
&\leq
\frac{e^{\frac{\gamma}{6} \max_{k \in \mathcal{I}}\varepsilon_k(r)}}
{\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}} e^{\gamma \pr{ R^{\star}_{\lambda,i} - R^{\star}_{\lambda,j}} - \frac{\gamma}{6} \max_{k \in \mathcal{I}}\varepsilon_k(r)}
\sqrt{\frac{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda,i})}{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda,j})} }
} \nonumber\\
&=
\frac{e^{\frac{\gamma}{3} \max_{k \in \mathcal{I}}\varepsilon_k(r)}}
{\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}} e^{\gamma \pr{ R^{\star}_{\lambda,i} - R^{\star}_{\lambda,j}}}
\sqrt{\frac{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda,i})}{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda,j})} }
}~.
\label{eq:pi_gamma_bound_proof}
\end{align}
This proves the first statement.
Now we look at the asymptotics of $\pi_{\gamma,r}(i)$ as $\gamma \to \infty$ assuming that $r = \gamma^{-p}$ for $p > 0$.
First, observe that for any $i \in \mathcal{I}$
\begin{align*}
\lim_{\gamma \rightarrow \infty} \varepsilon_i(\gamma^{-p})
&=
\lim_{\gamma \rightarrow \infty} L^{\star}_i(\gamma^{-p}) \pr{\frac{1}{\gamma^p \sqrt{\lambda_{\mathrm{min},i} + \lambda}}}^3
= 0
\end{align*}
because $\lim_{\gamma \to \infty} L^{\star}_i(\gamma^{-p}) = \mathcal{O}(1)$ and $\lambda_{\mathrm{min},i} + \lambda > 0$.
Thus, the numerator of~\eqref{eq:pi_gamma_bound_proof} approaches $1$.
Now, we turn our attention to the denominator. First, we consider global minimizers recalling our assumption that $R^{\star}_{\lambda,i} = 0$.
Denoting $\delta_{i,j}(\gamma) = e^{\gamma \pr{ R^{\star}_{\lambda,i} - R^{\star}_{\lambda,j}}}$, we observe that for all $\gamma \geq 0$ and $i \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{glob}}}$,
\begin{align*}
\lim_{\gamma \rightarrow \infty} \delta_{i,j}(\gamma) =
\begin{cases}
1 & j \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{glob}}}
\\
0 & j \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{subopt}}}
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
where the second case holds because the exponent in $\delta_{i,j}(\gamma)$ is negative.
This implies
\[
\lim_{\gamma \rightarrow \infty}\pi_{\gamma,r}(i) \leq
\frac{1}{\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{glob}}}} \sqrt{\frac{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda, i})}{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda, j})} }}
\qquad i \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{glob}}}.
\]
Next, we consider the local minima, and observe that for all $\gamma \geq 0$ and $i \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{subopt}}}$,
\begin{align*}
\lim_{\gamma \rightarrow \infty} \delta_{i,j}(\gamma) =
\begin{cases}
0 & \text{if $R^{\star}_{\lambda,i} \leq R^{\star}_{\lambda,j}$}
\\
\infty & \text{otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
Therefore, for all $i \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{subopt}}}$,
$
\lim_{\gamma \rightarrow \infty}\pi_{\gamma,r}(i) = 0
$.
This proves the second statement and completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Generalization Bound for Gibbs-ERM}
\label{sec:stability}
We start by proving a generalization bound for Gibbs-ERM.
\paragraph{Theorem~\ref{thm:gibbs_gen_error} (restated)}
Consider any loss function $f : \reals^d \times \mathcal{Z} \to \mathbb{R}$ that is $\sigma$-sub-Gaussian in the first argument with respect to the Gibbs density
\[
\wh{p}_{S,\gamma}(\boldsymbol{w}) \propto e^{-\frac{\gamma}{m} \sum_{i=1}^m f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)} \qquad \gamma > 0
\]
conditioned on a measurable $A \subseteq \reals^d$. Then the generalization error of Gibbs-ERM satisfies
\[
\E_S\br{ \E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim \wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{R(\boldsymbol{w}) - \wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in A} } \leq \frac{4 \sigma^2 \gamma}{m}~.
\]
\begin{proof}
Consider the training examples $S$ drawn i.i.d.\ from $\mathcal{D}$ and, for $i=1,\ldots,m$, denote by ${S^{(i)}} = \cbr{z_1, \ldots, z_{i-1}, z, z_{i+1}, \ldots, z_m}$ a replace-one training data, where $z$ is independently drawn from $\mathcal{D}$.
Throughout the proof, we drop $\gamma$ from the notation for the Gibbs density $\wh{p}_{S,\gamma}$.
Introduce the conditional Gibbs densities
$
\wh{p}_{S \mid A}(\boldsymbol{w})
$
and
$
\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A}(\boldsymbol{w})
$.
We denote by $\E_{\wh{p}_{S \mid A}}[\cdot]$ and $\E_{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A}}[\cdot]$ expectations with respect to $\wh{p}_{S \mid A}$ and $\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A}$.
We start by rewriting the expected generalization error as
\begin{align}
\E_S \E_{\wh{p}_{S}}\br{R(\boldsymbol{w}) - \wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) \mid \boldsymbol{w} \in A}
&= \E_S\br{ \E_{\wh{p}_{S \mid A}}\br{R(\boldsymbol{w}) - \wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) } }\\
&= \E_{S,z}\br{ \E_{\wh{p}_{S \mid A}}\br{f(\boldsymbol{w}, z)} } - \frac{1}{m} \sum_{i=1}^m \E_{S}\br{ \E_{\wh{p}_{S \mid A}}\br{f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)} } \label{eq:gibbs_replace_one_stab_1}\\
&= \frac{1}{m} \sum_{i=1}^m \pr{ \E_{S,z}\br{ \E_{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A}}\br{f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)} } - \E_{S}\br{ \E_{\wh{p}_{S \mid A}}\br{f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)} } } \tag{switch $z$ and $z_i$ in the first term}\\
&= \frac{1}{m} \sum_{i=1}^m \pr{ \E_{S,z}\br{ \E_{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A}}[f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)] - \E_{\wh{p}_{S \mid A}}[f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)] } }~. \label{eq:gibbs_replace_one_stab}
\end{align}
Now we bound~\eqref{eq:gibbs_replace_one_stab} showing the average replace-one stability of Gibbs distribution.
We use the transportation Lemma~\ref{lem:transportation} with $Q = \wh{p}_{S \mid A}$ and $P = \wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A}$ we get that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:stab_bound_sqrt_sigma_KL}
\E_{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A}}[f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)] - \E_{\wh{p}_{S \mid A}}[f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)] \leq \sqrt{2 \sigma^2 \mathrm{KL}\pr{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A} ~||~ \wh{p}_{S \mid A}}}~.
\end{equation}
Next, we focus on $\mathrm{KL}$-divergence,
\begin{align}
\mathrm{KL}\pr{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A} ~||~ \wh{p}_{S \mid A}}
&=
\gamma \E_{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A}}\br{\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) - \wh{R}_{{S^{(i)}}}(\boldsymbol{w})} - \ln\pr{\frac{Z_{{S^{(i)}}}}{Z_S} \, \frac{\P_{\wh{p}_{\Srep}}(A)}{\P_{\wh{p}_{S}}(A)} }\\
&=
\gamma \E_{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A}}\br{\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) - \wh{R}_{{S^{(i)}}}(\boldsymbol{w})} - \ln\pr{\frac{\int_A e^{-\gamma \wh{R}_{{S^{(i)}}}(\boldsymbol{w})} \diff \boldsymbol{w}}{\int_A e^{-\gamma \wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w})} \diff \boldsymbol{w}} }\\
&\leq
\gamma \E_{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A}}\br{\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) - \wh{R}_{{S^{(i)}}}(\boldsymbol{w})}
+
\gamma \E_{\wh{p}_{S \mid A}}\br{\wh{R}_{{S^{(i)}}}(\boldsymbol{w}) - \wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w})} \tag{by Lemma~\ref{lem:ln_Z_Z_bound}}\\
&=
\frac{\gamma}{m} \E_{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A}}\br{ f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i) - f(\boldsymbol{w}, z) } +
\frac{\gamma}{m} \E_{\wh{p}_{S \mid A}}\br{f(\boldsymbol{w}, z) - f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)}\\
&=
\frac{\gamma}{m} \pr{ \E_{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A}}\br{f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)} - \E_{\wh{p}_{S \mid A}}\br{f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)} }\\
&+\frac{\gamma}{m} \pr{ \E_{\wh{p}_{S \mid A}}\br{f(\boldsymbol{w}, z)} - \E_{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A}}\br{f(\boldsymbol{w}, z)} } ~. \label{eq:gibbs_stability_bound_on_kl}
\end{align}
By taking expectation with respect to $S$ and $z$ on both sides, we get that the first term in~\eqref{eq:gibbs_stability_bound_on_kl} can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gibbs_stability_expectation_of_kl}
\E_{S,z}\br{ \E_{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A}}\br{f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)} - \E_{\wh{p}_{S \mid A}}\br{f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)} } = \E_{S,z}\br{\E_{\wh{p}_{S \mid A}}\br{f(\boldsymbol{w}, z)} - \E_{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A}}\br{f(\boldsymbol{w}, z)}}
\end{equation}
where we could switch $z_i$ and $z$ on the right-hand side because their are both independently drawn from $\mathcal{D}$.
Thus, the expectation of~\eqref{eq:stab_bound_sqrt_sigma_KL} with respect to $S$ and $z$ is upper-bounded as
\begin{align}
\E_{S,z}\br{\E_{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A}}[f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)] - \E_{\wh{p}_{S \mid A}}[f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)]}
&\leq
\E_{S,z}\sqrt{2 \sigma^2 \mathrm{KL}\pr{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A} ~||~ \wh{p}_{S \mid A}}}\\
&\leq
\sqrt{2 \sigma^2 \E_{S,z}\br{\mathrm{KL}\pr{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A} ~||~ \wh{p}_{S \mid A}}}} \tag{Jensen's inequality}\\
&\leq
2 \sqrt{\frac{\sigma^2 \gamma}{m}
\E_{S,z}\br{\E_{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A}}\br{f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)} - \E_{\wh{p}_{S \mid A}}\br{f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)}} }~.
\end{align}
Solving the above with respect to the term on the left-hand side we get that for any $i=1,\ldots,m$,
\begin{align}
\E_{S,z}\br{\E_{\wh{p}_{\Srep \mid A}}[f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)] - \E_{\wh{p}_{S \mid A}}[f(\boldsymbol{w}, z_i)]} \leq \frac{4 \sigma^2 \gamma}{m}~.
\end{align}
Substituting the above into~\eqref{eq:gibbs_replace_one_stab_1} gives the desired generalization bound.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Global Excess Risk Bounds}
We first show a nonasymptotic (i.e., finite $\gamma$) global excess risk bound.
\paragraph{Theorem~\ref{thm:global_excess_risk} (restated)}
Assume the same as in Lemma~\ref{lem:truncated_EER_to_ERM}.
Then for any $r \in [0, r_0]$ the global excess risk satisfies
\begin{equation*}
\Delta(\pi_{\gamma,r})
\lesssim
\frac{1}{\gamma} \, \E\br{\mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{I} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda,I}}}
+ \frac{\gamma}{\sqrt{m}}
+ \E[\varepsilon_I(r)] + \sqrt{\gamma \E[\varepsilon_I(r)]} + \mathbb{P}_{\gamma}(\sC^{\star}(r))
\end{equation*}
where the expectation is taken with respect to $I \sim \pi_{\gamma,r}$
and the probability of the complement of the minima is bounded as
\begin{align}
\mathbb{P}_{\gamma}(\sC^{\star}(r))
&\leq
1 - \pr{1 - d e^{-r^2 \gamma \alpha_{d/2}}} \sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}} e^{-\frac{1}{3} \gamma \varepsilon_i(r)}
\end{align}
with $\alpha_{d/2}$ defined in~\eqref{eq:alpha_a}.
\begin{proof}
Denote the sample-dependent global excess risk by
\begin{align*}
\Delta_S(\pi_{\gamma,r}) = \E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim \wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{ R(\boldsymbol{w}) } - \E_{I \sim \pi_{\gamma,r}}\br{ R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda, I}) }
\end{align*}
and let the probabilities $\P\big(\mathcal{E}^{\star}_i(r)\big)$ and $\P\big(\sC^{\star}(r)\big)$ be defined with respect to the population Gibbs distribution
$
p_{\gamma}(\boldsymbol{w}) \propto e^{-\gamma R_{\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w})}
$ with $\gamma > 0$.
We first focus on the first term on the right-hand side of $\Delta_S(\pi_{\gamma,r})$. By the law of total expectation, for any $r \in [0, r_0]$,
\begin{align}
\E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim \wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{ R(\boldsymbol{w}) } &= \sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}} \P\big(\mathcal{E}^{\star}_i(r)\big) \E\br{R(\boldsymbol{w}) \,\big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}_i(r)}
+ \P\big(\sC^{\star}(r)\big) \E\br{R(\boldsymbol{w}) \,\big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \sC^{\star}(r)} \nonumber\\
&\leq \sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}} \frac{\P\big(\mathcal{E}^{\star}_i(r)\big)}{\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}} \P\big(\mathcal{E}^{\star}_j(r)\big)} \, \E\br{R(\boldsymbol{w}) \,\big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}_i(r)} \tag{ellipsoids are disjoint by Assumption~\ref{asm:global}}\\
&+ \P\big(\sC^{\star}(r)\big) M \tag{risk is bounded}\\
&= \sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}} \pi_{\gamma,r}(I=i) \E\br{R(\boldsymbol{w}) \,\big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}_i(r)} \tag{by definition of $\pi_{\gamma,r}$} \nonumber\\
&+ \P\big(\sC^{\star}(r)\big) M~. \label{eq:half_bound_on_global_excess_risk}
\end{align}
An upper bound on $\E\br{R(\boldsymbol{w}) \,\big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}_i(r)}$ is given by Theorem~\ref{thm:gibbs_local_excess}, thus all that is left to show is that the probability of the complement is small. Since the ellipsoids are disjoint
\[
\P\big(\sC^{\star}(r)\big) = 1 - \sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}} \P\big(\mathcal{E}^{\star}_i(r)\big)~.
\]
To upper bound $\P\big(\sC^{\star}(r)\big)$ we need a lower bound on $\P\big(\mathcal{E}^{\star}(r)\big)$. This is provided by the last inequality in Lemma~\ref{lem:ellipse_prob}, that is,
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}} \P\big(\mathcal{E}^{\star}_i(r)\big)
&\geq
P\pr{\frac{d}{2}, \frac{r^2 \gamma}{2}} \sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}} e^{-\frac{\gamma \varepsilon_i(r)}{3}}\\
&\geq
\pr{1 - e^{-r^2 \gamma \alpha_{d/2}}}^{\frac{d}{2}} \sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}} e^{-\frac{\gamma \varepsilon_i(r)}{3}} \label{eq:lower_bound_on_sum_P_Estar_2}\\
&\geq
\nonumber
\pr{1 - d e^{-r^2 \gamma \alpha_{d/2}}} \sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}} e^{-\frac{\gamma \varepsilon_i(r)}{3}}
\end{align}
where~\eqref{eq:lower_bound_on_sum_P_Estar_2} is derived from the lower bound on the regularized Gamma function~\eqref{eq:lb_regularized_gamma},
and the last inequality is obtained from the Bernoulli inequality
\[
(1 + x)^{\frac{d}{2}} \geq (1 + x)^d \geq 1 + d x \qquad d \in \mathbb{N}, \ x \geq -1~.
\]
Thus,
\begin{align}
\P\big(\sC^{\star}(r)\big) \leq 1 - \pr{1 - d e^{-r^2 \gamma \alpha_{d/2}}} \sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}} e^{-\frac{1}{3} \gamma \varepsilon_i(r)}~.
\end{align}
Taking expectation with respect to $S$, and combining Theorem~\ref{thm:gibbs_local_excess} with~\eqref{eq:half_bound_on_global_excess_risk} and Jensen's inequality, we obtain
\begin{align*}
\Delta(\pi_{\gamma,r})
&\leq
\E_{I \sim \pi_{\gamma,r}}\br{ \E_S\Big[\E\br{R(\boldsymbol{w}) \,\big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}_i(r)} \Big] - R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda, I}) }
+ M\, \P\big(\sC^{\star}(r)\big) \\
&\leq
\frac{1}{\gamma} \, \E_{I \sim \pi_{\gamma,r}}\br{\mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{I} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda,I}}} + \frac{1}{6}\E_{I \sim \pi_{\gamma,r}}\br{\varepsilon_I(r)}
+ \frac{M}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma}{3} \E_{I \sim \pi_{\gamma,r}}\br{\varepsilon_I(r)} + \frac{M^2 \gamma^2}{2 m}}
+ \frac{M^2 \gamma}{2 m} \\
&+ M\, \P\big(\sC^{\star}(r)\big)~.
\end{align*}
The proof is concluded by stating the above with respect to radius $r \in [0, r_0]$ ---recall that the radius cannot exceed $r_0$, the largest radius ensuring that ellipsoids remain disjoint.
\end{proof}
\paragraph{Corollary~\ref{cor:global_excess_risk_asymptotic} (restated)}
Assume the same as in Lemma~\ref{lem:truncated_EER_to_ERM}.
Then, for any $r > 0$, the global asymptotic pseudo-excess risk satisfies
\[
\Delta^{\infty}_r \lesssim \frac{1}{\gamma} \, \E\br{\mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{I} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda,I}}}
+ \E \br{\varepsilon_I(r)}
+ \sqrt{\gamma \E \br{\varepsilon_I(r)} + \frac{\gamma^2}{m}}
+ \frac{\gamma}{m}
\]
where $I$ is distributed according to
\[
\pi_{\infty}(i) =
\frac{1}{\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{glob}}}} \sqrt{\frac{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda, i})}{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda, j})} }}~.
\]
\begin{proof}
Recall that the global asymptotic pseudo-excess risk is defined as
\begin{align*}
\Delta^{\infty}_r = \E_{I \sim \pi_{\infty}}\br{\E_S\br{\E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim \wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{R(\boldsymbol{w}) \,\big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}_I(r)}} - R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda, I})}~.
\end{align*}
%
Distribution $\pi_{\infty}$ is given by Lemma~\ref{lem:erm_prob}, while the local excess risk centered at $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda, I}$ is bounded by Theorem~\ref{thm:gibbs_local_excess}.
This immediately yields the statement.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Localized Excess Risk Bounds}
\label{sec:proofs_smooth}
First, we prove a key lemma about the conditional expectation of quadratic forms.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:conditional_trace_lemma}
Suppose that $\boldsymbol{x} \sim \mathcal{N}(\boldsymbol{0}, \boldsymbol{M})$.
Then for the ellipsoid
\[
\mathcal{E}(r) \equiv \cbr{\boldsymbol{x} \in \mathbb{R}^d ~:~ \|\boldsymbol{x}\|_{\boldsymbol{M}^{-1}} \leq r} \qquad r > 0
\]
and for any \ac{PSD} $d \times d$ matrix $\boldsymbol{A}$
we have that
\begin{align*}
\E\br{\boldsymbol{x}^{\top} \boldsymbol{A} \boldsymbol{x} \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{x} \in \mathcal{E}(r)} &= \frac{F_{d+2}(r^2)}{F_{d}(r^2)} \, \mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{A} \boldsymbol{M}}
\leq \mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{A} \boldsymbol{M}}~.
\end{align*}
where $F_k$ is the CDF of a $\mathcal{X}^2$-distribution with $k$ degrees of freedom.
Moreover the above implies that
\begin{equation}
\lim_{r \rightarrow 0} \E\br{\boldsymbol{x}^{\top} \boldsymbol{A} \boldsymbol{x} \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{x} \in \mathcal{E}(r)} = 0~.
\end{equation}
%
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Observe that
%
\begin{align}
\E\br{\boldsymbol{x}^{\top} \boldsymbol{A} \boldsymbol{x} \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{x} \in \mathcal{E}(r)}
&= \E\br{\mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{A} \boldsymbol{x} \boldsymbol{x}^{\top}} \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{x} \in \mathcal{E}(r)}\\
&= \mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{A} \E\br{\boldsymbol{x} \boldsymbol{x}^{\top} \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{x} \in \mathcal{E}(r)}} \tag{by linearity of trace}\\
&= \mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{A} \boldsymbol{\tilde{M}}}
\end{align}
%
where $\boldsymbol{\tilde{M}}$ is the covariance matrix of the Gaussian density $\mathcal{N}(\boldsymbol{0}, \boldsymbol{M})$ conditioned on $\mathcal{E}(r)$.
Next, we apply a result about moments of multivariate Gaussian densities under elliptical truncation~\cite[p. 941]{tallis1963elliptical} to get that
\begin{align}
\boldsymbol{\tilde{M}} &= \frac{F_{d+2}(r^2) - F_{d+2}(0)}{F_{d}(r^2) - F_{d}(0)} \, \boldsymbol{M}
= \frac{F_{d+2}(r^2)}{F_{d}(r^2)} \, \boldsymbol{M} \label{eq:ratio_of_chi_square_CDF}
\end{align}
%
where $F_d$ is a CDF of a $\mathcal{X}^2$ distribution.
This proves the first identity.
The inequality is proven by expanding $\boldsymbol{\tilde{M}}$ further in terms of the Gamma function $\Gamma(\cdot)$ and the incomplete Gamma function $\gamma(\cdot, \cdot)$:
%
\begin{align*}
\boldsymbol{\tilde{M}} &= \frac{\Gamma\pr{\frac{d}{2}}}{\Gamma\pr{1 + \frac{d}{2}}} \, \frac{\gamma\pr{1 + \frac{d}{2}, \frac{r^2}{2}}}{\gamma\pr{\frac{d}{2}, \frac{r^2}{2}}} \, \boldsymbol{M}
= \frac{2}{d} \, \frac{\gamma\pr{1 + \frac{d}{2}, \frac{r^2}{2}}}{\gamma\pr{\frac{d}{2}, \frac{r^2}{2}}} \, \boldsymbol{M}
\preceq \boldsymbol{M}~.
\end{align*}
Finally, we look at the limit of the ratio in the right-hand side of~\eqref{eq:ratio_of_chi_square_CDF} as $r \rightarrow 0$.
By L'H\^opital's rule,
\begin{align*}
\lim_{r \rightarrow 0} \frac{F_{d+2}(r^2)}{F_{d}(r^2)}
&=
\lim_{r \rightarrow 0} \frac{\mathcal{X}^2_{d+2}(r^2)}{\mathcal{X}^2_{d}(r^2)}\\
&=
\lim_{r \rightarrow 0} \frac{r^d e^{-\frac{r^2}{2}}}{2^{1 + \frac{d}{2}} \Gamma\pr{1 + \frac{d}{2}}}
\,
\frac{2^{\frac{d}{2}} \Gamma\pr{\frac{d}{2}}}{r^{d - 2} e^{-\frac{r^2}{2}}}\\
&=
\lim_{r \rightarrow 0} \frac{r^d e^{-\frac{r^2}{2}}}{2^{1 + \frac{d}{2}} \Gamma\pr{1 + \frac{d}{2}}}
\,
\frac{2^{\frac{d}{2}} \Gamma\pr{\frac{d}{2}}}{r^{d - 2} e^{-\frac{r^2}{2}}}\\
&=
\lim_{r \rightarrow 0} \frac{r^2}{d}
= 0
\end{align*}
concluding the proof.
\end{proof}
Recall that $\mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r} \equiv \mathcal{E}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}, \boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}, r)$ is the ellipsoid of radius $r$ centered at $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}$.
\paragraph{Lemma~\ref{lem:truncated_EER_to_ERM} (restated)}
For any minimizer $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}$ of the regularized risk we have
\begin{align*}
\E_S\br{ \E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim \wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) \mid \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}} } - R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})
\leq
\frac{1}{\gamma} \, \mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda}} + \frac{\varepsilon(r)}{6}
+ \frac{M}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma \varepsilon(r)}{3} + \frac{M^2 \gamma^2}{2 m}}~.
\end{align*}
\begin{proof}
We abbreviate the regularized empirical risk by
$
\wh{R}_{S,\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w}) = \wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) + \lambda \|\boldsymbol{w}\|^2
$
and recall that the regularized risk is denoted by
$
R_{\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w}) = R(\boldsymbol{w}) + \lambda \|\boldsymbol{w}\|^2
$.
Throughout the proof, we drop $\gamma$ from the notation for the Gibbs densities $\wh{p}_{S,\gamma}$.
Let $\wh{p}_{S \mid \sEstar}$ be the Gibbs density~\eqref{eq:gibbs} conditioned on the ellipsoid $\mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}$.
Similarly, let $q_{\mid \sEstar}$ be the the Gaussian density
\[
q(\boldsymbol{w}) = \frac{1}{Z_q} \, e^{- \frac{\gamma}{2} \|\boldsymbol{w} - \widehat{\boldsymbol{w}}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}}^2} \qquad \boldsymbol{w} \in \reals^d
\]
conditioned on $\mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}$.
We begin by observing that $\wh{R}_S$ is trivially $M^2/8$-sub-Gaussian since the loss function is bounded by $M$. Hence, by the transportation Lemma~\ref{lem:transportation},
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\E_S&\br{ \E_{\wh{p}_{S}}\br{\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}} - \E_{q}\br{\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}} }\\
&= \E_S\br{ \E_{\wh{p}_{S \mid \sEstar}}\br{\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w})} - \E_{q_{\mid \sEstar}}\br{\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w})} } \label{eq:almost_erm_smooth:1}\\
&\leq \frac{M}{2} \E_S\br{\sqrt{\mathrm{KL}\pr{\wh{p}_{S \mid \sEstar} \ || \ q_{\mid \sEstar}}}}
\leq \frac{M}{2} \sqrt{\E_S\br{\mathrm{KL}\pr{\wh{p}_{S \mid \sEstar} \ || \ q_{\mid \sEstar}}}} \label{eq:almost_erm_smooth:transportation_KL}
\end{align}
where the last inequality is obtained by Jensen's inequality.
The KL term can be written as follows
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\E_S\br{\mathrm{KL}\pr{\wh{p}_{S \mid \sEstar} \ || \ q_{\mid \sEstar}}} = &\E_S\E_{\wh{p}_{S \mid \sEstar}}\br{ \ln\pr{\frac{\wh{p}_{S \mid \sEstar}(\boldsymbol{w})}{q_{\mid \sEstar}(\boldsymbol{w})}} }\\
\nonumber
= &\E_S\E_{\wh{p}_{S}}\br{ \ln\pr{\wh{p}_{S \mid \sEstar}(\boldsymbol{w})} } - \E_S\E_{\wh{p}_{S}}\br{ \ln\pr{q_{\mid \sEstar}(\boldsymbol{w})} }\\
\nonumber
= &- \gamma \E_S \E_{\wh{p}_{S}}\br{ \wh{R}_{S,\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w}) \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r} } - \E_S\br{\ln(\P_{\wh{p}_{S}}(\mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}) \, Z_{\wh{p}_{S}})} \\
\label{eq:almost_erm_smooth:Rhat_lower}
&+ \frac{\gamma}{2} \E_S \E_{\wh{p}_{S}}\br{ \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}}^2 \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r} } + \E_S\br{\ln(\P_{q}(\mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}) \, Z_{q})}~.
\end{align}
Now we relate the regularized empirical risk~\eqref{eq:almost_erm_smooth:Rhat_lower} to the regularized risk.
By applying Theorem~\ref{thm:gibbs_gen_error} with $A \equiv \mathcal{E}^{\star}(r)$ we get
\begin{align*}
\E_S\E_{\wh{p}_{S}}\br{R_{\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w}) - \wh{R}_{S,\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w}) \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}}
&= \E_S\E_{\wh{p}_{S}}\br{R(\boldsymbol{w}) - \wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}}
\leq \frac{M^2 \gamma}{2 m}~.
\end{align*}
Using this result we can write
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\E_S\br{\mathrm{KL}\pr{\wh{p}_{S \mid \sEstar} \ || \ q_{\mid \sEstar}}} \leq &- \gamma \E_S\E_{\wh{p}_{S}}\br{R_{\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w}) \,\big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}} + \frac{M^2 \gamma^2}{2 m}\\
\nonumber
&+ \frac{\gamma}{2} \E_S \E_{\wh{p}_{S}}\br{ \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}}^2 \,\big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r} }\\
\nonumber
&- \E_S\br{\ln\pr{\frac{\P_{\wh{p}_{S}}(\mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}) \, Z_{\wh{p}_{S}}}{\P_{q}(\mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}) \, Z_{q}}}}\\
\leq &- \gamma R^{\star}_{\lambda} + \frac{\gamma \varepsilon(r)}{6}
+ \frac{M^2 \gamma^2}{2 m} \label{eq:almost_erm_smooth:Rl_taylor_lower}\\
&- \E_S\br{\ln\pr{\frac{\P_{\wh{p}_{S}}(\mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}) \, Z_{\wh{p}_{S}}}{\P_{q}(\mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}) \, Z_{q}}}} \label{eq:almost_erm_smooth:expected_log_ratio}
\end{align}
where~\eqref{eq:almost_erm_smooth:Rl_taylor_lower} is obtained by applying the lower Taylor expansion~\eqref{eq:taylor_lower} to $\boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}$ .
Now we bound the expected log-ratio term in~\eqref{eq:almost_erm_smooth:expected_log_ratio} as
\begin{align}
- \E_S\br{\ln\pr{\frac{\P_{\wh{p}_{S}}(\mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}) Z_{\wh{p}_{S}}}{\P_{q}(\mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}) Z_{q}}}}
&=
- \E_S\br{\ln\pr{\frac{\int_{\mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}} e^{-\gamma \wh{R}_{S,\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w})} }{\int_{\mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}} e^{-\frac{\gamma}{2} \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}}^2} }}}\\
&\leq
\gamma \E_S \E_q\br{\wh{R}_{S,\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w}) - \frac{1}{2} \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}}^2 \mid \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}} \tag{by Lemma~\ref{lem:ln_Z_Z_bound}}\\
&=
\gamma \E_q\br{R_{\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w}) - \frac{1}{2} \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}}^2 \mid \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}} \tag{Since $\E_S[\wh{R}_{S,\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w})] = R_{\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w})$}\\
&\leq
\gamma R^{\star}_{\lambda} + \frac{\gamma \varepsilon(r)}{6}~.
\end{align}
where the last inequality is derived from the upper Taylor expansion~\eqref{eq:taylor_upper}.
Substituting the above into~\eqref{eq:almost_erm_smooth:expected_log_ratio} gives
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bound_KL_term}
\E_S\br{\mathrm{KL}\pr{\wh{p}_{S \mid \sEstar} \ || \ q_{\mid \sEstar}}} \leq \frac{\gamma \varepsilon(r)}{3} + \frac{M^2 \gamma^2}{2 m}~.
\end{equation}
Now we go back to~\eqref{eq:almost_erm_smooth:1} and, using the upper Taylor expansion~\eqref{eq:taylor_upper}, we get
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\E_S \E_{q_{\mid \sEstar}}\br{\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w})} &= \E_{q_{\mid \sEstar}}\br{R(\boldsymbol{w})} \tag{since $\E_S[\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w})] = R(\boldsymbol{w})$}\\
\nonumber
&\leq R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})\\
&+ \nabla R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})^{\top} \pr{ \E_q \br{\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda} \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}} } \label{eq:almost_erm_smooth:truncated_first_moment}\\
\nonumber
&+ \E_q\br{ \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}}^2 \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r} }
+ \frac{1}{6} L^{\star}(r) \E_q\br{\|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|^3 \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r} }\\
\nonumber
&\leq R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})\\
\label{eq:almost_erm_smooth:truncated_second_moment}
&+ \E_q\br{ \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}}^2 \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r} }
+ \frac{\varepsilon(r)}{6}~.
\end{align}
where~\eqref{eq:almost_erm_smooth:truncated_first_moment} vanishes since the first moment of elliptically-truncated Gaussian is zero~\citep{tallis1963elliptical}.
Finally, we bound the first term in~\eqref{eq:almost_erm_smooth:truncated_second_moment} by invoking Lemma~\ref{lem:conditional_trace_lemma}.
By taking $\boldsymbol{M} = \gamma \boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}$, $\boldsymbol{A} = \boldsymbol{H}^{\star}$, and $\boldsymbol{x} = \boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}$, and using Lemma~\ref{lem:conditional_trace_lemma} we get
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r} &\equiv \cbr{\boldsymbol{w} \in \mathbb{R}^d \ : \ \sqrt{\gamma (\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda})^{\top} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda} (\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda})} \leq r }
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
\E_q\br{ \|\boldsymbol{w} - \bw^{\star}_{\lambda}\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}}^2 \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r} }
&\leq
\frac{1}{\gamma} \, \mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda}}~.
\end{align*}
Now, combining these results with the bound on KL-divergence~\eqref{eq:bound_KL_term}, and
substituting into~\eqref{eq:almost_erm_smooth:transportation_KL}, gives the stated result.
\end{proof}
\paragraph{Theorem~\ref{thm:gibbs_local_excess} (restated)}
Assume the same as in Lemma~\ref{lem:truncated_EER_to_ERM}.
Then,
\begin{equation*}
\Delta(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})
\leq
\frac{1}{\gamma} \, \mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda}} + \frac{\varepsilon(r)}{6}
+ \frac{M}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma \varepsilon(r)}{3} + \frac{M^2 \gamma^2}{2 m}}
+ \frac{M^2 \gamma}{2 m}~.
\end{equation*}
\begin{proof}
%
From the definition of local generalization error,
%
\begin{align*}
\Delta(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})
&=
\E_S\br{ \E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim \wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{R(\boldsymbol{w}) \mid \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}} } - R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})\\
&= \E_S\br{ \E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim \wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{R(\boldsymbol{w}) - \wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) \mid \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}} }\\
&+ \E_S\br{ \E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim \wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) \mid \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}} } - R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})\\
&\leq \frac{M^2 \gamma}{2 m}
+\frac{1}{\gamma} \, \mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda}} + \frac{\varepsilon(r)}{6}
+ \frac{M}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma \varepsilon(r)}{3} + \frac{M^2 \gamma^2}{2 m}}
\end{align*}
%
where the last inequality is derived from Theorem~\ref{thm:gibbs_gen_error} and Lemma~\ref{lem:truncated_EER_to_ERM}.
\end{proof}
\section{Proofs}
\input{proofs_common.tex}
\input{proofs_gibbs_stability.tex}
\input{proofs_local.tex}
\input{proofs_erm_gibbs.tex}
\input{proofs_global.tex}
\section{Main results}
\label{sec:smooth_loss}
\subsection{Local analysis}
We first turn our attention to the local analysis considering a fixed minimizer\footnote{We will drop subscript indexing of minima in this section.}
\begin{equation}
\bw^{\star}_{\lambda} \in \argmin\cbr{R(\boldsymbol{w}) + \lambda \|\boldsymbol{w}\|^2}~.
\end{equation}
Specifically, we prove that the risk of Gibbs-ERM in a neighborhood of $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}$ is controlled by the \emph{local} effective dimension
$
\mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda}}
$,
defined in terms of the Hessian $\boldsymbol{H}^{\star} = \nabla^2 R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})$ of the risk of the minimizer, where $\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda} = \boldsymbol{H}^{\star} + 2 \lambda \boldsymbol{I}$.
We require that Hessians do not change ``too quickly'' by assuming that Hessian of the risk is Lipschitz in an ellipsoid $\mathcal{E}^{\star}(r) = \mathcal{E}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}, \boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda}, r)$ centered at the minimizer and aligned with the local curvature. Formally the \emph{local Lipschitzness} of the Hessian is defined as follows.
\begin{definition}[Locally-Lipschitz Hessian]
The Hessian $\nabla^2 R$ is locally Lipschitz around a minimizer $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}$ if there exists a function $L^{\star} : \mathbb{R}_+ \to \mathbb{R}_+$ such that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:lipschitz_hessian}
\|\nabla^2 R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) - \nabla^2 R(\boldsymbol{w})\|_2 \leq L^{\star}(r) \|\bw^{\star}_{\lambda} - \boldsymbol{w}\| \qquad \text{for all} \quad \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}(r)~.
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
Note that local Lipschitzness of the risk Hessian implies local Lipschitzness of the regularized risk Hessian for the same function $L^{\star}$.
Local Lipschitzness of Hessians plays an important role in bounding the gap between the Gibbs density and the Gaussian density, as discussed in Section~\ref{sec:analysis_idea}.
In particular, the approximation error introduced by taking a Taylor expansion of the regularized risk up to the third term is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:approx}
\varepsilon(r) = L^{\star}\pr{r} \pr{\frac{r}{\sqrt{\lambda_{\mathrm{min}} + \lambda}}}^3 \qquad r \geq 0
\end{equation}
where $\lambda_{\mathrm{min}}$ is the smallest non-zero eigenvalue of $\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}$.
Observe that $\lim_{r \rightarrow \infty}\varepsilon(r) = 0$ because $L^{\star}(r)$ converges to $\|\nabla^2 R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})\|_2$, and that $\varepsilon(r) = 0$ for any constant Hessian matrices (e.g., in the case of \ac{RLS}).
Lemma~\ref{lem:truncated_EER_to_ERM} below here establishes a result needed to prove our bound on the local excess risk.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:truncated_EER_to_ERM}
For any minimizer $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}$ of the regularized risk we have
\begin{align*}
\E_S\br{ \E_{\boldsymbol{w} \sim \wh{p}_{S,\gamma}}\br{\wh{R}_S(\boldsymbol{w}) \,\Big|\, \boldsymbol{w} \in \mathcal{E}^{\star}\pr{r}} } - R(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})
\leq
\frac{1}{\gamma} \, \mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda}} + \frac{\varepsilon(r)}{6}
+ \frac{M}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma \varepsilon(r)}{3} + \frac{M^2 \gamma^2}{2 m}}~.
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
(The proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:truncated_EER_to_ERM}, along with that of all remaining statements in this section, can be found in Section~\ref{sec:proofs_smooth}.)
This lemma, combined with the bound on the generalization error (Theorem~\ref{thm:gibbs_gen_error}), gives the desired result.
\begin{theorem}[Localized Excess Risk Bound]
\label{thm:gibbs_local_excess}
Assume the same as in Lemma~\ref{lem:truncated_EER_to_ERM}.
Then,
%
\begin{equation*}
\Delta(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})
\leq
\frac{1}{\gamma} \, \mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda}} + \frac{\varepsilon(r)}{6}
+ \frac{M}{2} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma \varepsilon(r)}{3} + \frac{M^2 \gamma^2}{2 m}}
+ \frac{M^2 \gamma}{2 m}~.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\subsection{Global analysis}
\label{sec:global}
We now turn our attention to the global analysis of the excess risk.
Since we deal with a countable set of local minima (indexed by $\mathcal{I}$), we add a subscript to all minima-dependent quantities, such as $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda, i}$, $\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda,i}$, $\mathcal{E}^{\star}_i(r)$. In particular, the approximation error is now defined as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:approx_global}
\varepsilon_i(r) = L^{\star}_i\pr{r} \pr{\frac{r}{\sqrt{\lambda_{\mathrm{min},i} + \lambda}}}^3 \qquad r > 0, i \in \mathcal{I}
\end{equation}
where $L^{\star}_i$ is the local Lipschitz constant with respect to the minimum $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda, i}$, and $\lambda_{\mathrm{min},i}$ is the smallest non-zero eigenvalue of the Hessian matrix $\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda,i}$.
Next, we introduce an important assumption on the geometry of the regularized risk around its minimizers.
\begin{assumption}
\label{asm:global}
All local minima $\bw^{\star}_{\lambda} \in \argmin_{\boldsymbol{w} \in \reals^d}R_{\lambda}(\boldsymbol{w})$ satisfy
$\nabla R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda}) = \boldsymbol{0}$ and are such that $\nabla^2 R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda})$ is positive definite.
In other words all local minima are \emph{isolated}.
\end{assumption}
The above assumption implies that there exists a number $r_0 > 0$ such that
\[
r_0 = \max\cbr{ r > 0 ~:~ \bigcap_{i \in \mathcal{I}} \mathcal{E}^{\star}_i(r) \equiv \varnothing }~.
\]
In other words, ellipsoids centered at minimizers and aligned with the local curvature of $R_{\lambda}$ are non-overlapping.
In addition to the set $\mathcal{I}$, indexing minima of the regularized risk, let $\mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{glob}}} \subseteq \mathcal{I}$ index the global minima and denote its complement by $\mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{subopt}}} \equiv \mathcal{I} \setminus \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{glob}}}$.
Finally, introduce the complement of the ellipsoids centered at the minima (later called, with some abuse of terminology, \emph{complement of the minima}),
\[
\sC^{\star}(r) \equiv \reals^d \setminus \bigcup_{i \in \mathcal{I}} \mathcal{E}^{\star}_i(r) \qquad r \leq r_0~.
\]
The first result in this section concerns the distribution of local minima.
In particular, we give an upper bound on the relative probability $\pi_{\gamma,r}(i)$ of the $i$-th minimum, and then derive the analytic form of the asymptotic distribution $\pi_{\infty}$.
\begin{lemma}[Distribution of Minima]
\label{lem:erm_prob}
%
For all $r > 0$,
\begin{align*}
\pi_{\gamma,r}(i)
\leq
\frac{e^{\frac{\gamma}{3} \max_{k \in \mathcal{I}}\varepsilon_k(r)}}
{\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}} e^{\gamma \pr{ R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda, i}) - R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda, j})}}
\sqrt{\frac{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda,i})}{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda,j})} }
}
\qquad i \in \mathcal{I}~.
\end{align*}
%
%
Moreover, assuming without loss of generality that $R_{\lambda}(\bw^{\star}_{\lambda, i}) = 0$ for all $i \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{glob}}}$, and setting $r = \gamma^{-p}$ for $p > 0$, we have
%
\[
\lim_{\gamma \rightarrow \infty}\pi_{\gamma,r}(i)
= \begin{cases}
\frac{1}{\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{glob}}}} \sqrt{\frac{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda, i})}{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda, j})} }} & i \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{glob}}}
\\
0 & i \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{subopt}}}~.
\end{cases}
\]
\end{lemma}
We are now ready to state the main result of this section.
\begin{theorem}[Global Excess Risk Bound]
\label{thm:global_excess_risk}
Assume the same as in Lemma~\ref{lem:truncated_EER_to_ERM}.
Then for any $r \in [0, r_0]$ the global excess risk satisfies
\begin{equation*}
\Delta(\pi_{\gamma,r})
\lesssim
\frac{1}{\gamma} \, \E\br{\mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{I} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda,I}}}
+ \frac{\gamma}{\sqrt{m}}
+ \E[\varepsilon_I(r)] + \sqrt{\gamma \E[\varepsilon_I(r)]} + \mathbb{P}_{\gamma}(\sC^{\star}(r))
\end{equation*}
where the expectation is taken with respect to $I \sim \pi_{\gamma,r}$
and the probability of the complement of the minima is bounded as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:lb_P_complement}
\mathbb{P}_{\gamma}(\sC^{\star}(r))
\leq
1 - \pr{1 - d e^{-r^2 \gamma \alpha_{d/2}}} \sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}} e^{-\frac{1}{3} \gamma \varepsilon_i(r)}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
\alpha_{d/2} =
\begin{cases}
1 & d = 1\\
\Gamma\pr{1+\frac{d}{2}}^{-\frac{2}{d}} & \text{otherwise}~.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:tuning_r}
We compute the value of $r$ approximately minimizing the the right-hand side in Theorem~\ref{thm:global_excess_risk}.
Note that the probability of the complement of the minima decreases if we ensure that $r^2 \gamma$ increases in $\gamma$ and $\gamma \varepsilon_i(r) \propto r^3 \gamma$ is non-increasing.
For instance we may set $r^2 \gamma = \gamma^p$ for $p > 0$
so that $r^3 \gamma = \gamma^{1 + \frac{3}{2} (p-1)}$. Hence we require $1 + \frac{3}{2} (p-1) \leq 0$ which is satisfied for any $p \in (0, 1/3]$.
This implies that when $r = \gamma^{\frac{p-1}{2}}$ and $p \in (0, 1/3]$ the probability of the complement of the minima and the approximation terms $\gamma \varepsilon_i(r), \varepsilon_i(r)$ all vanish as $\gamma \to \infty$.
\end{remark}
Finally, combining the localized excess risk bound in Theorem~\ref{thm:gibbs_local_excess} with Lemma~\ref{lem:erm_prob} allows us to prove the following result about the asymptotic pseudo excess risk.
\begin{cor}
\label{cor:global_excess_risk_asymptotic}
Assume the same as in Lemma~\ref{lem:truncated_EER_to_ERM}.
Then, for any $r > 0$, the global asymptotic pseudo-excess risk satisfies
\[
\Delta^{\infty}_r
\lesssim
\frac{1}{\gamma} \, \E\br{\mathrm{tr}\pr{\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{I} \boldsymbol{H}^{\star -1}_{\lambda,I}}}
+ \E \br{\varepsilon_I(r)}
+ \sqrt{\gamma \E \br{\varepsilon_I(r)} + \frac{\gamma^2}{m}}
+ \frac{\gamma}{m}
\]
where $I$ is distributed according to
\[
\pi_{\infty}(i) =
\frac{1}{\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}^{\text{\scshape{glob}}}} \sqrt{\frac{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda, i})}{\det(\boldsymbol{H}^{\star}_{\lambda, j})} }}~.
\]
\end{cor}
|
\section{Introduction}
The interests of counting irreducible polynomials over finite fields have stretched from eighteenth century to the modern era. Let $\irdf$ denote the number of irreducible polynomials of total degree $d$ in $n$ variables with coefficients in $\fq$ up to scalar multiplications. For example, Gauss (\cite{Gauss}, page 611) first calculated the size of $\ir_{d,1}(\fq)$. In 1963, Carlitz \cite{Car} proved that for integers $n>1$
\begin{equation}\label{Car}
\frac{|\irdf|}{q^{{{d+n}\choose n}-1}}\longrightarrow 1+q^{-1}+q^{-2}+\cdots \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \text{as $d\to\infty$.}
\end{equation}
In 2018, Hyde (Theorem 1.1 in \cite{Hyde}) proved that $|\irdf|$ is always a polynomial in $q$ which converges coefficient-wise to a formal power series $P_d(q)$ as $n\to\infty$. In other words, in the formal power series ring $\QQ[[q]]$ equipped with the $q$-adic topology (under which higher powers of $q$ are considered smaller),
\begin{equation}\label{Hyde}
|\irdf|\longrightarrow P_d(q) \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \text{as $n\to\infty$.}
\end{equation}
In this paper, we will pass from $\fq$ to $\CC$ and study the topology of the following manifold:
$$\ird:=\{\text{irreducible complex polynomials in $n$ variables with degree $d$}\}/\CC^\times.$$
In \cite{CEF}, Church-Ellenberg-Farb used the Grothendieck-Lefschetz trace formula to connect asymptotic point-counts over finite fields and stability phenomena in cohomology. Heuristics based on this connection lead us to ask the following topological questions inspired by the aforementioned counting results of Carlitz and Hyde (see Section \ref{why} for a brief explanation of the heuristics):
\begin{question}\label{q1}
Does $H^i(\ird;\QQ)$ stabilize as $d\to\infty$?
\end{question}
\begin{question}\label{q2}
Does $H^i_c(\ird;\QQ)$ stabilize as $n\to\infty$?
\end{question}
Observe that $H^i_c(\ird;\QQ)$ is Poincar\'e dual to $H^{D-i}_c(\ird;\QQ)$ where $D$ is the real dimension of the manifold $\ird$. Thus, Question \ref{q2} equivalently asks if $\ird$ satisfies cohomological stability in codimensions.
We will prove the following two theorems, each respectively answering the questions above affirmatively.
\begin{thm}\label{homo stab low}
For $n>1$ and $d$ any positive integer, when $i\le2\bigg[{{d+n-1}\choose {n-1}}-n-1\bigg]$, we have
\[
H_i(\ird,\Z)\cong
\begin{cases}
\Z \ \ \ & i\text{ is even} \\
0 \ \ \ & i\text{ is odd.}
\end{cases}
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{rmk}
Theorem \ref{homo stab low} implies that $H^i(\ird,\Z)$ stabilizes as either $n$ or $d$ increases, giving a positive answer to Question \ref{q1}. In fact, Carlitz also proved that the same limit in (\ref{Car}) holds as $n\to\infty$ (see equation (11) in \cite{Car}), although he didn't state it in the main theorem. Thus, Theorem \ref{homo stab low} can be viewed as a topological analog of Carlitz' result.
\end{rmk}
Observe that there is a natural inclusion $\ird \hookrightarrow\irdd$ given by forgetting the $(n+1)$-th variable. This inclusion is an embedding of a closed subspace, and hence a proper map.
\begin{thm
\label{high stab}
For $n,d>1$ and for any $i<\frac{2n}{d-1}-\frac{(d-2)(d-3)}{2}-1$, the natural inclusion $\ird \hookrightarrow\irdd$ induces an isomorphism
$$H^i_c(\ird; \QQ)\xleftarrow[]{\cong} H^i_c(\irdd;\QQ).$$
\end{thm}
$\ird$ is a complex manifold and satisfies Poincar\'e duality for compactly supported cohomology. Theorem \ref{high stab} equivalently says that the cohomology of $\ird$ stabilizes in fixed codimensions as $n\to\infty$. Hence, Theorem \ref{homo stab low} and Theorem \ref{high stab} cover different ranges of the cohomology of $\ird$.
Unlike Theorem \ref{homo stab low}, Theorem \ref{high stab} only shows cohomological stability without telling us what the stable cohomology is. In the last part of the paper, we will study the limit
$$b_i(d):=\lim_{n\to\infty}\dim H^i_c(\ird;\QQ).$$
We prove that $b_i(d)=0$ when $i\le 2d$ and $d\ge2$ (Corollary \ref{van limit}). However, $b_i(d)$ are generally nonzero when $i$ is large enough. As examples, in the Appendix we compute $b_i(d)$ for all $i$ in the range $d\le 3$ and showed that $b_{11}(4)=1$.
Our methods are topological and do not use the Grothendieck-Lefschetz trace formula. We will consider a stratification of the space of polynomials according to how they factor (Section \ref{pre}), and then analyze the spectral sequence induced by the stratification (Section 4, 5 and 6).
\begin{rmk}[\textbf{Related works}]
Hyde (Theorem 1.22 in \cite{Hyde2}) recently proved that the compactly supported Euler characteristic of $\ird$ is 0 when $d>1$. Note that $\chi_c(\ird)=\chi(\ird)$ by Poincar\'e duality. Since the stable cohomology of $\ird$ as in Theorem \ref{homo stab low} is supported in even degrees, we expect $\ird$ to have nonzero odd cohomology groups in the unstable range.
Tommasi \cite{Tommasi} proved that the rational cohomology of the space $X_{d,n}$ of nonsingular complex homogeneous polynomials of degree $d$ in $n+1$ variables stabilizes as $d\to\infty$. Since the defining equation of any nonsingular hypersurface is irreducible, $\ir_{d,n+1}(\CC)$ contains the projectivized $X_{d,n}/\CC^\times$.
Comparing Theorem \ref{homo stab low} and Tommasi's result, we see that even though $\ird$ and $X_{d,n}/\CC^\times$ both satisfy cohomological stability as $d\to\infty$, their stable cohomology groups are different: Tommasi's theorem implies that the stable cohomology of $X_{d,n}/\CC^\times$ is isomorphic to the cohomology of $\mathrm{PGL}_{n+1}(\CC)$ which is generated by classes with odd degrees; in contrast, Theorem \ref{homo stab low} tells us that the stable cohomology of $\ird$ is supported in even degrees.
The theme of this paper is close to that of Farb-Wolfson-Wood \cite{FWW}, where they proved surprising coincidences in the Poincar\'e series of certain apparently unrelated spaces, which were predicted by the corresponding point-counting results over finite fields (Theorem 1.2 in \cite{FWW}). Our Theorem \ref{homo stab low} and \ref{high stab}, as well as the reasoning that leads us to discover them, provide another example where the Grothendieck-Lefschetz trace formula, despite not playing any role in the proofs, can still provide heuristics leading to plausible conjectures, which are then settled by topological methods.
\end{rmk}
\section*{Acknowledgement}
The author would like to thank Ronno Das, Nir Gadish, and Trevor Hyde for helpful conversations, and thank an anonymous referee for pointing out an error in an earlier version of the paper.
\section{From counting to cohomology}
\label{why}
We will briefly explain the heuristic that leads us to ask Question \ref{q1} and \ref{q2} from Carlitz' and Hyde's counting results. Our reasoning here was inspired by the work of Church-Ellenberg-Farb \cite{CEF}.
For $X$ a variety over $\ZZ$, the Grothendieck-Lefschetz trace formula gives
\begin{equation}\label{GL}
|X(\fq)| = \sum_i (-1)^i \mathrm{Trace}\Big(\mathrm{Frob}_q:\ H^i_\text{\'et,c}(X_{/{\overline{\fq}}};\QQ_{\ell})\Big)
\end{equation}
where $X(\fq)$ is the set of $\fq$-points on $X$, and the right hand side involves the trace of Frobenius acting on the compactly supported \'etale cohomology of $X$ over $\overline{\fq}$ with $\QQ_\ell$-coefficient for $\ell$ a prime not dividing $q$. Deligne proved that all the eigenvalues of Frobenius on $H^i_\text{\'et,c}(X;\QQ_{\ell})$ have absolute values no more than $q^{i/2}$ (Th\'eor\`eme 2 in \cite{Deligne}).
For the sake of heuristic reasoning, let us suppose that there is a variety $X_{d,n}$ over $\ZZ$ such that $X_{d,n}(\fq)=\irdf$ and $X_{d,n}(\CC)=\ird$. Since Hyde proved that $|\irdf|$ is a polynomial in $q$, the Grothendieck-Lefschetz trace formula (\ref{GL}) together with Deligne's bounds would tell us that roughly the low $q$-powers in the polynomial $|\irdf|$ come from $H^i_c(\ird;\QQ)$ for $i$ small. Since Hyde (\ref{Hyde}) proved that the low $q$-powers in $|\irdf|$ converge as $n\to\infty$, one would expect that $H^i_c(\ird;\QQ)$ should stabilize as $n$ increases. Similarly, Carlitz (\ref{Car}) proved that the high $q$-powers in $|\irdf|$ converge as $d\to\infty$. One would therefore expect that $H^i(\ird;\QQ)$ should stabilize as $d$ increases, after applying Poincar\'e duality. These are the reasons why we ask Question \ref{q1} and \ref{q2} and expect positive answers.
\begin{rmk}[\textbf{Counting geometrically irreducible polynomials}]
It turns out that the variety $X_{d,n}$ satisfying our assumptions above does not exist. However, there does exist a variety $Y_{d,n}$ over $\ZZ$ such that $Y_{d,n}(\CC)=\ird$ and $Y_{d,n}(\fq)$ is the set of \emph{geometrically} irreducible polynomials, namely, polynomials over $\fq$ that cannot be written as a nontrivial product of polynomials over $\overline{\fq}$. Moreover, $|Y_{d,n}(\fq)|$ can be expressed in terms of $|\ir_{d/e,n}(\ff_{q^e})|$ for $e$ divisors of $d$. Hyde (personal communication) verified that $|Y_{d,n}(\fq)|$ satisfies the same convergence phenomena as $|\irdf|$. Therefore, one can make the heuristic reasoning above a rigorous argument if one replaces $|\irdf|$ by $|Y_{d,n}(\fq)|$, although we will not adopt this approach in the present paper.
\end{rmk}
\section{Preliminary lemmas}
\label{pre}
We first prove some preliminary results that will be used later in the paper. The results we collect here can be viewed as topological analogs of Lemma 2.1 in \cite{Hyde}.
Consider the space
$$\pl_{\le d,n}(\CC):=\{\text{nonzero complex polynomials in $n$ variables with total degree $\le d$}\}/\CC^\times.$$
Note that $\pl_{\le d,n}(\CC)= \PP^{{d+n\choose n}-1}$ because there are $d+n\choose n$ many monomials of degree $\le d$ in $n$ variables. Next define $\pld:=\pl_{\le d,n}(\CC)\setminus \pl_{\le d-1,n}(\CC)$. This is the space of normalized multivariate polynomials with total degree $d$.
\begin{lemma}\label{projective}
For any $d$ and $n$, we have a homeomorphism:
$$\pld\cong \CC^{\binom{d+n-1}{n}}\times \PP^{\binom{d+n-1}{n-1}-1}.$$
Thus, $\pld$ is homotopy equivalent to $\PP^{\binom{d+n-1}{n-1}-1}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Observe that any $f\in\pld$ can be written uniquely as
$$f = f_d+f_{<d}$$
where $f_d$ is a homogeneous polynomial of degree $d$ (up to scalar) and $f_{<d}$ is an arbitrary polynomial of degree $<d$. The map $f\mapsto (f_{<d},f_d)$ gives the isomorphism.
\end{proof}
Define $$\rd:=\{f\in\pld:\text{$f$ is reducible}\}$$
which is a closed subspace of $\pld$ with open complement $\ird$. We have a long exact sequence:
\begin{equation}\label{les}
\cdots \to H^i_c(\ird;\Z)\to H^i_c(\pld;\Z)\to H^i_c(\rd;\Z)\to \cdots
\end{equation}
Every $f\in\pld$ can be factorized uniquely into a product of irreducible polynomials up to scalars $f=f_1f_2\cdots f_l$, which gives a unique partition $\ld_f$ of the integer $d=\deg f$ by
$$\ld_f: \deg(f_1)+\deg(f_2)+\cdots +\deg(f_l)=d.$$
For any partition $\ld$ of $d$ (written as $\ld\vdash d$ in the future), we define the following subspace of $\pld$:
$$\s:=\{f\in\pld : \ld_f=\ld\}.$$
We use $\sym^m X$ to denote the \emph{$m$-th symmetric power} of a topological space $X$. So $\sym^m X:=X^m/{S}_m$ where the symmetric group ${S}_m$ acts on $X^m$ by permuting the coordinates. For $\ld\vdash d$ and for $j\in\Z_{>0}$, we will let $m_j(\ld)$ denote the multiplicity of $j$ in $\ld$. Every polynomial $f\in \s$ can be factorized uniquely into $\prod_{j=1}^d f_{j,1}f_{j,2}\cdots f_{j,m_j}$ where each $f_{j,k}\in \ir_{j,n}(\CC)$, up to reordering. Thus, we have
\begin{equation}\label{sym}
\s\cong\prod_{j=1}^d\mathrm{Sym}^{m_j(\ld)}\Big(\ir_{j,n}(\CC)\Big).
\end{equation}
The unique factorization of polynomials gives the following decomposition of $\pld$ into disjoint subsets:
\begin{equation}\label{strata}
\pld = \bigcup_{\ld\vdash d} \s
\end{equation}
Let $(d)$ denote the trivial partition with a single part. Notice that $T_{(d),n}=\ird$.
We will focus on the decomposition of the space of reducible polynomials:
\begin{equation}\label{red strata}
\rd = \bigcup_{\ld\vdash d, |\ld|\ge2} \s
\end{equation}
where $|\ld|:=\sum_j m_j(\ld)$ denote the total number of parts in the partition $\ld$.
\begin{lemma}\label{ss}
There is a spectral sequence
\begin{equation}\label{spec}
E_1^{p,q} = \bigoplus_{\ld:\ \ld\vdash d, |\ld|=d-p\ge2} H_c^{p+q}(\s;\Z)\ \Longrightarrow\ H^{p+q}_c(\rd;\Z).
\end{equation}
Moreover, its convergence happens at $E_{d-1}=E_\infty.$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider the following increasing filtration of $\rd$:
\begin{equation}\label{fil}
\emptyset=\mathcal{F}_{0}\subset\mathcal{F}_{1}\subset\cdots\subset\mathcal{F}_{d-1}=\rd\ \ \ \ \text{ where each }\ \ \ \ \mathcal{F}_p := \bigcup_{\ld:\ |\ld|\ge d+1-p}\s.
\end{equation}
We claim that each $\mathcal{F}_p$ is a closed subspace of $\pld$. In fact, we have $\s\subseteq \overline{T_{\mu,n}}$ if $\ld$ is finer than or equal to $\mu$. To see this, notice that if a sequence of polynomials $f_n\in T_{\mu,n}$ converges to a limit $f$, then $f$ can be factorized in the same pattern as each $f_n$ because being a product is a closed condition. However, the irreducible factors of $f_n$ might become reducible in the limit because being irreducible is an open condition. Hence, $\ld_f$ is finer than or equal to $\ld_\mu$.
We will abbreviate the compactly supported cochain complex $C^*_c(\rd;\Z)$ simply as $C^*$. The increasing filtration $\{\mathcal{F}_{p}\}$ of $\rd$ induces a decreasing filtration $\{\mathcal{G}^{p} C^*\}$ of $C^*$:
$$ C^*=\mathcal{G}^{0}C^*\supset\mathcal{G}^{1}C^*\supset\cdots\supset\mathcal{G}^{d-1}C^*=0 \ \ \ \ \text{ where each }\ \mathcal{G}^{p}C^*:=C^*_c(\rd\setminus \mathcal{F}_{p};\Z).
$$
Since each $\mathcal{F}_p$ is a closed subspace of $\rd$, we have $$\frac{\mathcal{G}^{p}C^*}{\mathcal{G}^{p+1}C^*}
\cong C_c^*(\mathcal{F}_{p+1}\setminus \mathcal{F}_{p};\Z).$$
Thus, the filtered complex $\{\mathcal{G}^{p} C^*\}$ induces a spectral sequence with $E_1$-page:
$$E_1^{p,q}=H_c^{p+q}(\mathcal{F}_{p+1}\setminus \mathcal{F}_{p};\Z)\ \ \Longrightarrow\ \ \ H^{p+q}_c(\rd;\Z).$$
Finally, by (\ref{fil}) we have
\begin{equation}\label{disjoint}
\mathcal{F}_{p+1}\setminus \mathcal{F}_{p} = \bigcup_{\ld:\ |\ld|= d-p}\s.
\end{equation}
For any two distinct partitions $\ld$ and $\mu$ of equal size $d-p$, we have $\overline{T_{\mu,n}}\cap \s=\emptyset$ because it is impossible that $\ld$ is finer than $\mu$. Thus, the set-theoretical disjoint union (\ref{disjoint}) is actually a disjoint union of topological spaces. Hence, we obtain the spectral sequence (\ref{spec}).
Notice that $E_1^{p,q}$ is nonzero only when $0\le p\le d-2$. Thus, all $E_r$-differentials are zero when $r\ge d-1$.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{homo stab low}} \label{proof1}
Theorem \ref{homo stab low} in the Introduction will follow from Theorem \ref{iso} below together with Lemma \ref{projective}.
\begin{thm}
\label{iso}
For $n>1$, the inclusion $\ird\hookrightarrow \pld$ induces an isomorphism
$$H_i(\ird,\Z)\xrightarrow{\cong} H_i(\pld,\Z)$$
when $i\le2\bigg[{{d+n-1}\choose {n-1}}-n-1$\bigg].
\end{thm}
\begin{rmk}
In \cite{Car}, Carlitz obtained his result by showing that $|\irdf|\sim|\mathrm{Poly}_{d,n}(\fq)|$ as $d\to\infty$ when $n>1$. Theorem \ref{iso} is a topological analog of Carlitz' observation that ``when the number of indeterminates is greater than one we find that almost all polynomials are irreducible" (\cite{Car}, Section 1). The assumption $n>1$ is needed in our proof below.
\end{rmk}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{iso}]
Since $\ird\hookrightarrow\pld$ is an inclusion of complex (hence orientable) manifolds of equal complex dimension $\Big[{{{d+n}\choose n}-1}\Big]$, by Poincar\'e duality, in order to prove Theorem \ref{iso}, it suffices to prove that the inclusion $\ird\hookrightarrow \pld$ induces an isomorphism on compactly supported cohomology
$$H^i_c(\ird,\Z)\xleftarrow{\cong} H^i_c(\pld,\Z)$$
when $i\ge 2\Big[{{{d+n}\choose n}-1}\Big]-2\Big[{{d+n-1}\choose {n-1}}-n-1\Big]=2[\binom{d+n-1}{n}+n]$. By the long exact sequence (\ref{les}), it suffices to prove the following proposition:
\begin{prop}\label{vanishing}
For $n>1$, we have $H^i_c(\rd;\Z)=0$ when $i\ge 2\Big[\binom{d+n-1}{n}+n\Big]-1$.
\end{prop}
Before proving Proposition \ref{vanishing}, we will first prove the following lemma:
\begin{lemma}\label{bound}
For any partition $\ld$ of $d$ such that $|\ld|\ge2$, we have $\dim_\CC(\s)\le\binom{d+n-1}{n}+n-1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
$\ird$ is an open subset of $\pld$ and thus is a manifold of complex dimension $\Big[{{{d+n}\choose n}-1}\Big]$. Hence, $\sym^m(\ird)$ is a orbifold (\emph{i.e.} a manifold quotient by a finite group action) of complex dimension $m\Big[{{{d+n}\choose n}-1}\Big]$. By (\ref{sym}), each $\s$ is also an orbifold with dimension
\begin{equation}
\label{dim}
\dim_\CC(\s)=\sum_{j=1}^d m_j(\ld) \bigg[\binom{j+n}{n}-1\bigg].
\end{equation}
Since the function $\binom{j+n}{n}-1$ is strictly convex in $j$ when $n>1$, we have $ \dim_\CC(\s)< \dim_\CC(T_{\mu,n})$ if $\ld$ is strictly finer than $\mu$. Therefore, $\dim_\CC (\s)$ is maximized at some partition $\ld$ of size exactly 2. Hence, it suffices to consider $\ld$ to be of the form $k+(d-k)$ for some integer $k=1,\cdots,d-1$. For such $\ld$, we have
$$\dim_\CC(\s)=\binom{k+n}{n}+\binom{d-k+n}{n}-2=:f(k).$$
By checking its second derivative, the function $f(k)$ is strictly convex for $k\in[1,d-1]$ and thus the only possible local maximum occur at the two endpoints. Hence, for any $k\in[1,d-1]$, we have $f(k)\le f(1)=f(d-1)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{vanishing}]
Consider the spectral sequence in Lemma \ref{ss}:
$$ E_1^{p,q} = \bigoplus_{\ld:\ \ld\vdash d, |\ld|=d-p\ge2} H_c^{p+q}(\s;\Z)\ \Longrightarrow\ H^{p+q}_c(\rd;\Z).$$
Lemma \ref{bound} implies that $E_1^{p,q}=0$ when $p+q>2\Big[\binom{d+n-1}{n}+n-1\Big]$. Thus, we have
$$H^{i}_c(\rd;\Z)=0$$
when $i>2\Big[\binom{d+n-1}{n}+n-1\Big]$.
\end{proof}
Theorem \ref{iso} now follows from Proposition \ref{vanishing}.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{high stab}}
\subsection{Preliminary results} We first obtain some preliminary results to be used later in the proof.
\begin{lemma}\label{red ird}
For any $n$ and $d>1$, and for any $i$ in the range as stated in Theorem \ref{high stab}, the natural connecting homomorphism is an isomorphism:
\begin{equation}\label{delta}
H^{i}_c(\rd;\QQ)\xrightarrow{\cong} H^{i+1}_c(\ird;\QQ).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Again as in the proof of Theorem \ref{iso} above, the decomposition $\ird = \pld\setminus\rd$ gives the following long exact sequence
$$\cdots\to H^{i}_c(\ird;\QQ)\to H^i_c(\pld;\QQ)\to H^{i}_c(\rd;\QQ)\to \cdots$$
By Lemma \ref{projective}, we have $H^i_c(\pld;\QQ)=0$ when $i<2{n+d-1\choose n}$. Thus, (\ref{delta}) is an isomorphism when $i<2{n+d-1\choose n}-1$. Finally, we need to check that the reasoning above holds in the range of $i$ stated in Theorem \ref{high stab}, which is equivalent to checking that
$$\frac{2n}{d-1}-1-\frac{(d-2)(d-3)}{2}\le2{n+d-1\choose n}-1.$$
Indeed, when $d>1$, we have
$$\text{LHS}\le \frac{2n}{d-1}-1<\frac{2(n+d-1)}{d-1}-1\le 2\cdot \frac{n+d-1}{d-1}\frac{n+d-2}{d-2}\cdots \frac{n}{1}-1=\text{RHS}.$$
\end{proof}
Next, we prove the following general results about graded vector spaces.
\begin{lemma}\label{graded vs}
Suppose $f:A\to B$ and $g:C\to D$ are maps of graded vector spaces. If for any $i\le r$, the maps $f:A_i\xrightarrow[]{\cong} B_i$ and $g:C_i\xrightarrow[]{\cong} D_i$ are isomorphisms on the $i$-th graded pieces, then the following maps
$$ (A\otimes C)_i\xrightarrow[]{f\otimes g} (B\otimes D)_i$$
$$ (A^{\otimes m})^{{S}_m}_i\longrightarrow(B^{\otimes m})^{{S}_m}_i$$
are also isomorphisms for any $i\le r$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For any $i\le r$, we have
\begin{align*}
(A\otimes C)_i&=\bigoplus_{ s+t=i}A_s\otimes C_t\xrightarrow[\cong]{f\otimes g}\bigoplus_{s+t=i}B_s\otimes D_t= (B\otimes D)_i
\end{align*}
since each $s$ and $t$ in the summand are no more than $i$ and hence $r$. Moreover, applying the reasoning above inductively on $m$, we have
$$(A^{\otimes m})_i\xrightarrow[\cong]{f^{\otimes m}} (B^{\otimes m})_i\ \ \ \ \ \text{for }i\le r.$$
Observe that the isomorphism is equivariant with respect to the action of ${S}_m$. Taking the ${S}_m$-invariants, we obtain the second claim.
\end{proof}
Finally, we apply Lemma \ref{graded vs} to study the compactly supported cohomology of symmetric powers.
\begin{lemma}
\label{sym coh}
Suppose $X$ is a closed subspace of $Y$ such that the inclusion $inc:X\hookrightarrow Y$ induces an isomorphism
$$inc^*:H^i_c(Y;\QQ)\xrightarrow{\cong} H^i_c(X;\QQ)$$
for any $i\le r$. Then for any natural number $m$, the inclusion $inc: \sym^m(X)\hookrightarrow \sym^m(Y)$ also induces an isomorphism
$$inc^*:H^i_c(\sym^m(Y);\QQ)\xrightarrow{\cong} H^i_c(\sym^m(X);\QQ)$$
for any $i\le r$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $X$ is a closed subspace of $Y$, the symmetric power $\sym^m(X)$ is also a closed subspace of $\sym^m(Y)$. Hence the inclusion map $\sym^m(X)\hookrightarrow \sym^m(Y)$ is proper and induces maps on cohomology groups with compact support.
Moreover, we have
$$H^*_c(\sym^m Y;\QQ) = H^*_c(Y^m/{S}_m;\QQ)\cong H^*_c(Y^m ;\QQ)^{{S}_m}\cong (H^*_c(Y;\QQ)^{\otimes m})^{{S}_m}$$
where the second isomorphism is the transfer homomorphism. Lemma \ref{sym coh} now follows by applying Lemma \ref{graded vs} to $A=H^*_c(\sym^m Y;\QQ)$ and $B=H^*_c(\sym^m X;\QQ)$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The proof of Theorem \ref{high stab}}
We proceed by induction on $d\ge 2$. First we check the base case when $d=2$. We have
$$\red_{2,n}(\CC)= \sym^2\pl_{1,n}(\CC) \cong \sym^2\CC P^{n-1}.$$
The inclusion $\CC P^{n-1}\hookrightarrow \CC P^n$ induces an isomorphism on $i$-th rational compactly supported cohomology when $i\le 2n-2$. Thus, by Lemma \ref{sym coh}, we have
$$H^i_c(\red_{2,n}(\CC);\QQ)\cong H^i_c(\red_{2,n+1}(\CC);\QQ) $$
when $i\le2n-2$. By Lemma \ref{red ird}, we have
$$H^i_c(\ir_{2,n}(\CC);\QQ)\cong H^i_c(\ir_{2,n+1}(\CC);\QQ) $$
when $0<i\le 2n-1.$ The isomorphism also holds when $i=0$ because $\ir_{2,n}(\CC)$ and $\ir_{2,n+1}(\CC)$ are both connected (by Theorem \ref{homo stab low}) and noncompact and thus both have $H_c^0=0$.
For induction, suppose that for a fixed $d>1$, our claim is true for any $j<d$. We want to prove the claim for $d$. Again, since $\ird$ is connected and noncompact, it has vanishing $H^{0}_c$. Theorem \ref{high stab} is already true for $i=0$. By Lemma \ref{red ird}, it suffices to prove the following claim for our fixed $d$.
\begin{claim}
\label{red stab}
For any $n>1$ and for any $i<\frac{2n}{d-1}-\frac{(d-2)(d-3)}{2}-2$, the inclusion $\rd \hookrightarrow\rdd$ induces an isomorphism
$$H^i_c(\rd; \QQ)\xleftarrow[]{\cong} H^i_c(\rdd;\QQ).$$
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
We will prove Claim \ref{red stab} in two steps: first, we show that it will follow from Claim \ref{ld stab} below, and second, we show that Claim \ref{ld stab} follows from the induction hypothesis.
\noindent\textbf{Step 1.} We first reduce Claim \ref{red stab} to the following claim:
\begin{claim}
\label{ld stab}
For any $n>1$, for any non-singleton partition $\ld\vdash d$ , and for any $i<\frac{2n}{d-1}-\frac{(d-2)(d-3)}{2}+d-4$, the inclusion $\s \hookrightarrow T_{\ld,n+1}$ induces an isomorphism
$$H^i_c(\s; \QQ)\xleftarrow[]{\cong} H^i_c(T_{\ld,n+1};\QQ).$$
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}[Proof of that Claim \ref{ld stab} $\Rightarrow$ Claim \ref{red stab}]
Consider the spectral sequence in Lemma \ref{ss} tensored with $\QQ$:
\begin{equation}
\label{ss1}
E_1^{p,q} = \bigoplus_{\ld\vdash d, |\ld|=d-p\ge2} H_c^{p+q}(\s;\QQ)\ \Longrightarrow\ H^{p+q}_c(\rd;\QQ)
\end{equation}
Consider the same spectral sequence for $\red_{d,n+1}$:
\begin{equation}
\label{ss2}
F_1^{p,q} = \bigoplus_{\ld\vdash d, |\ld|=d-p\ge2} H_c^{p+q}(\sn;\QQ)\ \Longrightarrow\ H^{p+q}_c(\rdn;\QQ)
\end{equation}
Since the inclusion $\rd\hookrightarrow\rdn$ preserves the filtration (\ref{fil}), it induces a map between the two spectral sequences (\ref{ss1}) and (\ref{ss2}).
Claim \ref{ld stab} implies that the inclusion $\rd\hookrightarrow\rdn$ induces an isomorphism between the 1st pages of the spectral sequences (\ref{ss1}) and (\ref{ss2})
$$E_1^{p,q}\xleftarrow[]{\cong}F_1^{p,q},\ \ \text{ when } p+q<\frac{2n}{d-1}-\frac{(d-2)(d-3)}{2}+d-4.$$
Taking the next page, we have
$$E_2^{p,q}\xleftarrow[]{\cong}F_2^{p,q},\ \ \text{ when } p+q<\frac{2n}{d-1}-\frac{(d-2)(d-3)}{2}+d-5.$$
In general, we have
$$E_r^{p,q}\xleftarrow[]{\cong}F_r^{p,q},\ \ \text{ when } p+q<\frac{2n}{d-1}-\frac{(d-2)(d-3)}{2}+d-3-r.$$
By Lemma \ref{ss}, the spectral sequences $E$ and $F$ both converge at page $d-1$. Thus we have
$$H^i_c(\rd; \QQ)\xleftarrow[]{\cong} H^i_c(\rdd;\QQ)$$
when $i<\frac{2n}{d-1}-\frac{(d-2)(d-3)}{2}-2.$
\end{proof}
\noindent\textbf{Step 2.} Finally, we will prove Claim \ref{ld stab} assuming our induction hypothesis:
for any $j<d$, for any $n>1$, the natural inclusion $\ir_{j,n}(\CC) \hookrightarrow\ir_{j,n+1}(\CC)$ induces an isomorphism
$$H^i_c(\ir_{j,n}(\CC); \QQ)\xleftarrow[]{\cong} H^i_c(\ir_{j,n+1}(\CC);\QQ)$$
when $i<\frac{2n}{j-1}-\frac{(j-2)(j-3)}{2}-1$.
To prove Claim \ref{ld stab}, we first notice that since $\ld\vdash d$ is a non-singleton partition, each part of $\ld$ must have length at most $d-1$. Compare the following two isomorphisms of graded vector spaces given by (\ref{sym}):
\begin{align}
H^*_c(\s;\QQ)&\cong\bigotimes_{j= 1}^{d-1}H^*_c(\mathrm{Sym}^{m_j(\ld)}\ir_{j,n}(\CC);\QQ)\label{1}\\
H^*_c(T_{\ld,n+1};\QQ)&\cong\bigotimes_{j= 1}^{d-1}H^*_c(\mathrm{Sym}^{m_j(\ld)}\ir_{j,n+1}(\CC);\QQ)\label{2}
\end{align}
Let $r:=\frac{2n}{d-1}-\frac{(d-2)(d-3)}{2}+d-4$, which is the upper bound for $i$ in Claim \ref{ld stab}. We claim that
\begin{equation}
\label{e}
r\le \frac{2n}{j-1}-\frac{(j-2)(j-3)}{2}-1\ \text{ for any } j<d.
\end{equation}
Notice that the right hand side is non-increasing in $j$ taken integer values. So it suffices to check the inequality (\ref{e}) for $j=d-1$. We calculate that
$$ \bigg(\text{RHS of (\ref{e}) evaluated at } j=d-1\bigg)-r = \frac{2n}{d-2}-\frac{2n}{d-1}>0
$$
confirming the inequality (\ref{e}). Hence, for any $i<r$ as in the assumption of Claim \ref{ld stab}, we must also have $i<\frac{2n}{j-1}-\frac{(j-2)(j-3)}{2}-1$ and hence by the induction hypothesis we have
$$H^i_c(\ir_{j,n}(\CC); \QQ)\xleftarrow[]{\cong} H^i_c(\ir_{j,n+1}(\CC);\QQ).$$
Thus, if we compare (\ref{1}) and (\ref{2}) using Lemma \ref{graded vs} and Lemma \ref{sym coh}, we have that for any $i<r$
$$H^*_c(\s;\QQ)\xleftarrow[]{\cong} H^*_c(T_{\ld,n+1};\QQ)$$
which gives Claim \ref{ld stab}. As a consequence, Claim \ref{red stab} follows. By induction, we obtain Theorem \ref{high stab}.
\end{proof}
\section{A vanishing theorem}
\begin{thm}
\label{vanishing2}
For $d,n>1$, when $k\le 2d$, we have
$$H^k_c(\ird;\QQ)=0.$$
\end{thm}
Taking the limit $n\to\infty$, we obtain the following corollary.
\begin{cor}\label{van limit}
For $d>1$, when $k\le 2d$, we have
$$b_k(d):=\lim_{n\to\infty}\dim H^k_c(\ird;\QQ)=0.$$
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{vanishing2}]
We will prove Theorem \ref{vanishing2} in three steps.
\noindent\textbf{Step 1.} We first collect some general results about graded vector spaces.
\begin{lemma}\label{graded 0}
Suppose $A$ and $B$ are graded vector spaces. If $A_i=0$ for any $i<a$, and $B_j=0$ for any $j<b$, then
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item $(A\otimes B)_k=0$ for any $k<a+b$,
\item $(A^{\otimes m})^{{S}_m}_k=0$ for any $k<ma$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose (i) is false: there exists some $k< a+b$ such that $(A\otimes B)_k=\bigoplus_{i+j=k} A_i\otimes B_j\ne0$. There exist some $i,j$ such that $i+j=k$ and $A_i\ne0$ and $B_j\ne 0$, which implies that $i\ge a$ and $j\ge b$, and thus $i+j\ge a+b$, contradicting the assumption that $i+j=k<a+b$.
Applying (i) inductively on $m$, we obtain that $(A^{\otimes m})_k=0$ for any $k< ma$. Thus the ${S}_m$-invariant subspace must also be zero.\end{proof}
\noindent\textbf{Step 2.} We will inductively define a function $r:\NN\to\NN$ and compute its value.
\begin{defn}
For each positive integer $d$, define $r(d)$ inductively by
\begin{align}
&r(1)=2\nonumber\\
\forall d>1,\ \ \ \ &r(d)=1+\min\Big\{ r(\ld): \ld\vdash d, |\ld|\ge 2\Big\},\label{r}\\
&\text{ \ \ \ \ where for each $\ld\vdash d$ such that $|\ld|\ge 2$, we define } r(\ld):=\sum_{j=1}^{d-1} m_j(\ld) r(j).\nonumber
\end{align}
\end{defn}
\begin{prop}\label{r2}
Suppose that $d>1$.
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\alph*)]
\item For any $\ld\vdash d$ such that $|\ld|\ge 2$, we have $r(\ld)=2d+|\ld|-m_1(\ld)$.
\item The minimum $r(\ld)$ is uniquely achieved at $\ld=\hat{1}$ where $\hat{1}$ stands for the partition $d=1+\cdots+1$.
\item $r(d)=2d+1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We will prove the three statements by induction on $d\ge2$. For the base case when $d=2$, the three statements are easily verified since $1+1$ is the only non-singleton partition of $2$.
For induction, we consider the case when $d>2$, assuming the three statements all hold for any $e<d$. For any non-singleton partition $\ld\vdash d$ with $|\ld|\ge 2$, we have
\begin{align*}
r(\ld)&:= \sum_{j=1}^{d-1} m_j(\ld) r(j)\\
&= m_1(\ld)\cdot 2+\sum_{j=2}^{d-1} m_j(\ld) (2j+1)&\text{by induction hypothesis (3)}\\
&= \underbrace{\sum_{j=1}^{d-1} m_j(\ld)\cdot 2j}_{=2d}\ +\ \underbrace{\sum_{j=2}^{d-1} m_j(\ld)}_{=|\ld|-m_1(\ld)} \\
&= 2d+|\ld|-m_1(\ld)
\end{align*}
Thus, (a) is verified. (b) and (c) follow immediately from (a).
\end{proof}
\noindent\textbf{Step 3.} We will prove the following vanishing result in a range defined by the function $r$.
\begin{prop}\label{van r}
For any $d\ge1$ and $n\ge 2$,
\begin{enumerate}
\item for any partition $\ld\vdash d$ such that $|\ld|\ge2$, we have
$$H^k_c(\s;\QQ)=0\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \text{ when $k<r(\ld)$
}$$
\item $$H^k_c(\ird;\QQ)=0\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \text{ when $k<r(d)$.
}$$
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We will prove both statements by induction on $d$. For the base case when $d=1$, part (1) is vacuously true. We have
$$\ir_{1,n}(\CC)= \pl_{1,n}(\CC) \cong \CC\times \CC P^{n-1}$$
where the second homeomorphism comes from Lemma \ref{projective}. Part (2) is also verified.
We consider the case when $d\ge 2$ for the induction, assuming both (1) and (2) hold for any $e<d$. Since $\ld$ has at least two parts, each part has size at most $d-1$. Recall that (\ref{sym}) gives:
$$ \s\cong\prod_{j=1}^{d-1}\mathrm{Sym}^{m_j(\ld)}\Big(\ir_{j,n}(\CC)\Big).$$
By induction hypothesis part (2), for each $j\le d-1$, we have that
$H^k_c(\ir_{j,n}(\CC);\QQ)=0$ when $k<r(j)$. Now we briefly digress to prove the following general results about symmetric powers.
\begin{lemma}\label{sym 0}
If $H^k_c(Y;\QQ)=0$ for any $k<r$, then $H^k_c(\sym^m Y;\QQ)=0$ for any $k<mr$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Observe that
$$H^*_c(\sym^m Y;\QQ) =H^*_c(Y^{\times m}/{S}_m;\QQ) \cong H^*_c(Y^{\times m};\QQ)^{{S}_m} \cong (H^*_c(Y;\QQ)^{\otimes m})^{{S}_m}.$$
Apply part (ii) of Lemma \ref{graded 0}.
\end{proof}
Thus, by Lemma \ref{sym 0}, we have that $H^k_c\Big(\sym^{m_j(\ld)}\ir_{j,n}(\CC);\QQ\Big)=0$ when $k<m_j(\ld)r(j)$. By Lemma \ref{graded 0} part (i), we have
\begin{equation}\label{l vanishing}
H^k_c(\s;\QQ)=0
\end{equation}
when $k<\sum_{j=1}^{d-1}m_j(\ld)r(j)=r(\ld)$. Part (1) is verified.
To prove part (2), we consider the spectral sequence (\ref{spec})
$$ E_1^{p,q} = \bigoplus_{\ld:\ \ld\vdash d, |\ld|=d-p\ge2} H_c^{p+q}(\s;\QQ)\ \Longrightarrow\ H^{p+q}_c(\rd;\QQ)$$
By (\ref{l vanishing}), we know that $E_1^{p,q}=0$ in the range when $p+q<r(d)-1$. Thus, when $k<r(d)-1$,
$$H^{k}_c(\rd;\QQ)=0.$$
Since $n,d\ge 2$, by Proposition \ref{r2}, we have $r(d)-1=2d< 2{n+d-1\choose n}-1$. Thus, by Lemma \ref{red ird}, when $i<r(d)-1$, we have
$$H^{i+1}_c(\ird;\QQ)\cong H^{i}_c(\rd;\QQ)=0.$$
Part (2) is verified.
\end{proof}
Finally, combining part (2) of Proposition \ref{van r} and part (c) of Proposition \ref{r2}, we obtain Theorem \ref{vanishing2}.
\end{proof}
\section{Appendix: Computation for $d\le4$}
In this appendix, we consider the stable cohomology in Theorem \ref{high stab}, more precisely, the limit
\begin{equation}
\label{b_i}
b_i(d):=\lim_{n\to\infty} \dim H^i_c(\ird;\QQ)
\end{equation}
for $d\le 4$. Theorem \ref{high stab} tells us that the limit exists. The purpose of our computations here is to illustrate that the stable cohomology in Theorem \ref{high stab} are generally nonzero despite the vanishing result in Theorem \ref{vanishing2}, and that the spectral sequence (\ref{spec}) which is central in the previous proofs has nontrivial differentials, even in the stable range. To keep this appendix brief, we will only sketch the computations, highlighting the analysis of differentials in the spectral sequence.
As in Theorem \ref{high stab}, there is a closed embedding (hence a proper map) $\pld\to\pl_{d,n+1}(\CC)$ for each $n$. We define the following direct limits
\begin{align*}
&\pl_d(\CC):=\lim_{\longrightarrow} \pld\\ &\ir_d(\CC):=\lim_{\longrightarrow} \ird\\
&\red_d(\CC):=\lim_{\longrightarrow} \rd\\
&\mathrm{T}_{\ld}:=\lim_{\longrightarrow} \s \ \ \ \text{ for each $\ld\vdash d$}.
\end{align*}
Since compactly supported cohomology preserves limits, the stable cohomology can be expressed as:
$$b_i(d)=\dim H^i_c(\ir_d(\CC);\QQ).$$
All cohomology considered in this section will be over $\QQ$. We will therefore suppress the $\QQ$-coefficients from our notation. We will encode our computation of $H^i_c(\ii)$ into a Poincar\'e series:
$$P_d(t):=\sum_{i} b_i(d) t^i.$$
\noindent\textbf{d=1.} We have $\ir_{1,n}(\CC)=\pl_{1,n}(\CC) = \CC\times \CC P^{n-1}$ by Lemma \ref{projective}. Thus, as $n\to\infty$, we have
$$P_1(t)= \frac{t^2}{1-t^2}.$$
\noindent\textbf{d=2.}
By Lemma \ref{red ird}, when $d>1$ and $n\to\infty$, we have that for every $i$,
\begin{equation}\label{r vs i}
H^i_c(\red_d(\CC))\cong H^{i+1}_c(\ii).
\end{equation}
For $V$ a graded vector space, we use $s^k V$ to denote $V$ with grading shifted by $k$ (\emph{a.k.a} the $k$-th suspension of $V$) where $(s^k V)_i = V_{i-k}$. When $d=2$, we have
\begin{align*}
H^*_c(\red_2(\CC))&=H^*_c\Big(\sym^2 \big(\ir_1(\CC)\big)\Big)\\
&\cong\sym^2 \big( H^*_c(\ir_1(\CC))\big)\\
&\cong s^4\sym^2 H^*(\CC P^\infty)\\
&\cong s^4 \QQ[e_1,e_2]\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \text{ where } |e_1|=2, |e_2|=4
\end{align*}
The last isomorphism comes from the fundamental theorem of symmetric polynomials. Thus, we conclude
\begin{equation}\label{d=2}
P_2(t)=\frac{t^5}{(1-t^2)(1-t^4)}.
\end{equation}
\noindent\textbf{d=3.} There are two non-singleton partitions of $d=3$, namely $3=1+1+1$ and $3=1+2$. Let $T_{1+1+1}$ denote the stratum corresponding to the partition $1+1+1=3$, and so on. We have $\red_3(\CC)=T_{1+2}\cup T_{1+1+1}$ where $T_{1+1+1}$ is closed. The associated long exact sequence gives the following connecting homomorphism:
$$\delta_i:H^i_c(\sym^3\ir_{1}(\CC))\to H^{i+1}_c(\ir_2(\CC)\times \ir_1(\CC)).$$
We now show that the differential $\delta_i$ must be injective for every $i$. There is a surjective map $\pl_2(\CC)\times \ir_1(\CC)\to \red_3(\CC)$, given by the multiplication of two polynomials. The preimage of the closed subspace $T_{1+1+1}$ is $T_{1+1}\times T_1$, while the preimage of the open subspace $T_{1+2}$ is $T_2\times T_1$. We obtain the following commutative diagram:
\begin{equation}\label{inj}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\diagram (m)
{ H^i_c(\sym^3\ir_{1}(\CC))& H^{i+1}_c(\ir_2(\CC)\times \ir_1(\CC)) \\
H^i_c(\sym^2\ir_{1}(\CC)\times \ir_1(\CC)) & H^{i+1}_c(\ir_2(\CC)\times \ir_1(\CC)) \\};
\path [->] (m-1-1) edge node [above] {$\delta_i$} (m-1-2)
edge node [left] {transfer} (m-2-1)
(m-2-1) edge node [above] {$\delta_i^\prime\otimes id$} (m-2-2)
(m-2-2) edge node [right] {$=$} (m-1-2);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{equation}
The vertical map is a transfer homomorphism, given by including the ${S}_3$-invariant subspace of $H^i_c(\ir_{1}(\CC))^{\otimes 3}$ into the ${S}_2\times {S}_1$-invariant subspace. The differential $\delta_i^\prime: H^i_c(\sym^2\ir_{1}(\CC))\to H^{i+1}_c(\ir_2(\CC) $ is an isomorphism for all $i$ by (\ref{r vs i}). Hence, $\delta$ must be injective, which implies
\begin{align*}
H^{*+1}_c(\red_3(\CC))&\cong coker(\delta_i)\\
&\cong \frac{\text{$S_2\times S_1$-invariant subspace of $H^*_c(\ir_1(\CC))^{\otimes 3}$}}{\text{$S_3$-invariant subspace of $H^*_c(\ir_1(\CC))^{\otimes 3}$}}
\end{align*}
We calculate the Poincar\'e series of the numerator and the denominator in the same way as in (\ref{d=2}), taking their difference and multiply by an appropriate power of $t$ to account for the degree shift, and obtain
$$P_3(t)=\frac{t^{10}}{(1-t^2)(1-t^6)}.$$
\noindent\textbf{d=4.} A calculation of $P_4(t)$ is already too complex for us to sketch here in any reasonable length. Instead, we will be content with finding the first nonzero stable cohomology. We will show that $b_i(4)=0$ for any $i<11$ and that $b_{11}(4)=1$. Hence, $P_4(t)=t^{11}+O(t^{12})$.
There are four non-singleton partitions of 4. The partition poset is ordered below:
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node (a) at (-1,1) {$1+3$};
\node (c) at (1,1) {$2+2$};
\node (e) at (0,0) {$1+1+2$};
\node (min) at (0,-1) {$1+1+1+1$};
\draw (e) -- (min);
\draw[preaction={draw=white, -,line width=6pt}] (a) -- (e) -- (c);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
The three levels of the partition lattice above induce a spectral sequence (\ref{spec}) with three columns. All terms in the spectral sequence with total degree $\le 8$ must be zero, by our previous computations for $d\le3$. Below we draw the region of the spectral sequence with total degree $\le 10$. The column $p=0$ comes from $H^*_c(T_{1+1+1+1})$ where $H^{8}_c\cong H^{10}_c\cong \QQ$. The column $p=1$ comes from $H^*_c(T_{2+1+1})$ where $H^9_c\cong H^{11}_c\cong \QQ.$ The column $p=2$ comes from $H^*_c(T_{3+1})\oplus H^*_c(T_{2+2})$ where $H^{10}_c(T_{2+2})\cong \QQ$ by the case $d=2$ above, and $H^{10}_c(T_{1+3})=0$ by the cases $d=1$ and $d=3$ above.
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\matrix (m) [matrix of math nodes,
nodes in empty cells,nodes={minimum width=5ex,
minimum height=5ex,outer sep=-5pt},
column sep=1ex,row sep=1ex]{
q & & & & \\
10 & \QQ & \QQ & & \\
9 & 0 & 0 & & \\
8 & \QQ & \QQ & \ZZZ & \\
\quad\strut & 0 & 1 & 2 & p& \strut \\};
\draw[-stealth] (m-4-2.east) -- (m-4-3.west);
\draw[-stealth] (m-4-3.east) -- (m-4-4.west);
\draw[-stealth] (m-2-2.east) -- (m-2-3.west);
\draw[thick] (m-1-1.east) -- (m-5-1.east) ;
\draw[thick] (m-5-1.north) -- (m-5-5.north) ;
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
By the same argument as in (\ref{inj}), the two differentials from the first column $p=0$ to the second column $p=1$ in the diagram above must be injective. Consequently, the differential $\delta: E_1^{1,8}\to E_1^{2,8}$ must be zero. Hence, $E_1^{2,8}$, circled in the diagram, must survive in the $E_\infty$-page, contributing to $H^{10}_c(\red_4(\CC))\cong H^{11}_c(\ir_4(\CC))\cong \QQ$.
|
\section{Introduction}
Fundamental physics and cosmology are at the dawn of a revolution. The evidence for the acceleration of the universe shows that their canonical theories are at least incomplete, and possibly incorrect. Observationally we know that the component responsible for this acceleration has a gravitational behaviour very similar to that of a cosmological constant (or equivalently, vacuum energy). Whether or not this is the case, the implications are dramatic. If the answer is yes, this vacuum energy is many orders of magnitude smaller than expected in Quantum Field Theories. If the answer is no, any plausible alternative mechanism will violate the Einstein Equivalence Principle.
One way or the other, at the most fundamental level our current view of the Universe is incomplete. New physics is out there, waiting to be discovered. Thus the most compelling task of the next generation of experimental and observational facilities is to search for, identify and ultimately characterise this new physics. In this contribution I will highlight the unique role of the ELTs in this quest. Given the limited time of the invited talk (and the limited space of the present written version) I will mostly focus on the science cases relying on high-resolution spectroscopy (thus in the scope of the ELT-HIRES instrument), but I will also briefly mention other instruments, as well as other facilities. Full disclosure: I am a member of ESO's ELT Project Science Team, the ESPRESSO and ELT-HIRES Science Teams, and also Euclid and LISA.
It is worth starting by defining the term {\it fundamental physics}. For our present purposes, this comprises two distinct but nevertheless inter-related aspects: tests of fundamental laws and symmetries (e.g., tests of the Equivalence Principle in its various forms, or of the behaviour of gravity on all scales), and searches for Nature’s fundamental constituents (including scalar fields as an explanation for dark energy, new particles for dark matter, magnetic monopoles or fundamental strings. Importantly, many of these principles are necessarily violated in extensions of the standard model: the spacetime structure is modified (violating Lorentz Invariance), fundamental couplings become dynamical, violating the Einstein Equivalence Principle (which we will discuss in detail in what follows), and gravity laws are modified at large and/or small scales.
Fundamental scalar fields are particularly relevant, because we know (thanks to the LHC) that they are among Nature's building blocks. These fields will naturally couple to the rest of the model, unless there is an unknown principle to suppress them. These couplings will therefore lead to potentially observable long-range forces and varying couplings, as discussed in \cite[Carroll (1998)]{Carroll}. Improved measurements of these couplings (whether they are detections or null results) constrain fundamental physics and cosmology. This ensures a 'minimum guaranteed science' for the forthcoming observational facilities. These issues are further described in \cite[Martins (2017)]{ROPP}.
\section{Varying fundamental couplings}
Nature is characterised by some physical laws and dimensionless couplings, which historically we have assumed to be spacetime-invariant. For the former, this is a cornerstone of the scientific method (it's hard to imagine how one could do science otherwise), but for latter it is merely a simplifying assumption without further justification. We have no {\it theory of constants} describing their role in physical theories---and if they vary, all the physics we know is incomplete. Improved null results are important and theoretically very useful, while a detection of variations would be revolutionary: among other consequences, varying dimensionless physical constants imply a violation of the Einstein Equivalence Principle and a fifth force of Nature. Currently the observational status is somewhat unclear, and limited by the lack of sufficiently precise instruments such as high-resolution ultra-stable spectrographs---see \cite[Martins (2017)]{ROPP} for a recent review. However, forthcoming facilities such as the ELTs will lead to dramatic progress in the field.
It is worth emphasising a key point: if no variations are seen at a certain level of sensitivity, should one make an effort to tighten these bounds? An analogy with dynamical dark energy provides the clearest way to understand the answer. Let’s consider the present-day value of the dark energy equation of state, $w_0$, or more specifically $(1 + w_0)$ which is the dynamically relevant quantity (for a canonical scalar field this is just the ratio of the field's kinetic and total energies. Naively we would expect this to be of order unity, but observationally we know that it must (conservatively) be less than 0.1. The point is that if this number is not of order unity there is no natural scale for it: either there is some fine-tuning to make it small, or there is a new (currently unknown) symmetry which forces it to be zero. An analogous argument holds for relative variations of dimensionless couplings, such as the fine-structure constant or the proton-to-electron mass ratio, the only difference being that the must be less than must be less than $10^{-5}$.
Thus if no variations are confirmed at the $10^{-6}$ level (the sensitivity of spectrographs such as ESPRESSO), should the ELTs push even further? Certainly the answer is yes, and the Strong CP Problem in QCD clearly illustrates why: a parameter which we would have expected (given current knowledge of particle physics) to be of order unity is actually smaller than $10^{-10}$, leading to the postulate of the Peccei-Quinn symmetry and a range of further interesting consequences. A sufficiently tight bound will either imply that there are no dynamical scalar fields fields in cosmology or that its couplings to the rest of the model are suppressed by some currently unknown symmetry of Nature---whose existence would be at least as significant as that of the original field.
In theories where a dynamical scalar field leads to a varying fine-structure constant, not only does one expect other couplings such as the proton-to-electron mass ration to vary, but there must also be impacts in other cornerstones of the standard cosmological model. Notably, there will be violations of the temperature-redshift law (which canonically assumes adiabatic expansion and photon number conservation) and of the distance duality relation (also known as Etherington relation, which canonically assumes a metric theory of gravity and photon number conservation). These relations therefore provide a unique opportunity for fundamental consistency tests of the standard cosmological model: current joint constraints are at the $0.8\%$ level---see \cite[Avgoustidis \etal\ (2016)]{Avgoustidis}---and are expected to improve in the future. For this reason, astrophysical targets where several parameters can be measured simultaneously are particularly relevant from a theoretical point of view.
As for measurements of the proton-to-electron mass ratio, the most common way of astrophysically measuring is using vibrational and rotational transitions of molecular hydrogen. Analogous measurements in other molecules (which are often far more sensitive to possible variations than $H_2$ itself) one is actually measuring a ratio of an effective nucleon mass to the electron mass, and its relative variation of this quantity will only equal that of the proton-to-electron mass ratio if there are no composition-dependent forces: in other words, if protons and neutrons have identical couplings to the putative scalar fields. This provides a golden opportunity to the ELTs: stringent astrophysical constraints on composition-dependent forces can by carried out by finding a system where relevant vibrational and rotational transitions can be separately measured from different molecules with different numbers of protons and neutrons: for example $H_2$, $HD$, and perhaps also carbon monoxide, ammonia or methanol which are all (comparatively) common molecules. This will be a revolutionary direct astrophysical test of the Weak Equivalence Principle. Apart from identifying a suitable astrophysical system (searches for such targets are ongoing) the main bottleneck is a suitable wavelength coverage in the blue part of the spectrum---an issue to which we will return.
\section{Implications for dark energy}
The Universe is seemingly dominated by a component whose gravitational behaviour is similar to that of a cosmological constant. A cosmological constant may indeed be behind it, but given the well-known problems associated with such a solution, a dynamical scalar field is (arguably) more likely. Such a field must be presently slow-rolling (which is mandatory for $p<0$) and be dominating the dynamics around the present day. These are sufficient to ensure that couplings of this field will lead to potentially observable long-range forces and varying fundamental couplings, as discussed in \cite[Carroll (1998)]{Carroll}. In what follows we will illustrate how current measurements already provide competitive constraints on fundamental physics and cosmology. This explains why these tests are flagship science cases (and design drivers) for forthcoming astrophysical facilities including the ELTs.
Any scalar field couples to gravity; it couples to nothing else if a global symmetry suppresses couplings to the rest of the Lagrangian (in which case only derivatives and derivative couplings survive). However quantum gravity effects do not respect global symmetries and there are no unbroken global symmetries in string theory. From a fundamental physics perspective, the most natural scenario is therefore that the same scalar degree of freedom yields dynamical dark energy and a varying fine-structure constant. It follows that in the simplest models (including, but not limited to, quintessence-type models) the latter's evolution is parametrically determined. A combination of astrophysical and local measurements of the fine-structure constant and background cosmology data (such as Type Ia supernova and Hubble parameter data) then constrains the coupling $\zeta$ of the scalar field to the electromagnetic sector of the theory. The current best constrains are $|\zeta|<4\times10^{-6}$---see \cite[Martins \etal\ (2016)]{Pinho}---at the $95.4\%$ confidence level, which is further discussed in \cite[Martins (2017)]{ROPP}. With the recently started ESPRESSO GTO this bound is expected to improve by an order of magnitude (for null results), or a non-zero $\zeta$ should be detected at 3 standard deviations for variations saturating the current bounds. These forecasts are discussed in \cite[Alves \etal\ (2017)]{Alves}.
In these models the scalar field inevitably couples to nucleons, leading to Weak Equivalence Principle violations. For detailed discussions of this point see \cite[Dvali \& Zaldarriaga (2002)]{Dvali} and \cite[Chiba \& Kohri (2002)]{Chiba}. Hence astrophysical tests of the stability of the fine-structure constant constrain the Eotvos parameter. The current 2-sigma bound for these models is from \cite[Martins \etal\ (2016)]{Pinho},
\begin{equation}
\eta<1.6\times10^{-14}
\end{equation}
which is about an order of magnitude stronger than the ground-based direct bounds, from torsion balance or lunar laser ranging experiments. The MICROSCOPE satellite has recently announced a preliminary bound of $\eta<1.4\times10^{-14}$---at 1 sigma, and expected to improve, see \cite[Touboul \etal\ (2017)]{Microscope}---but high-resolution ultra-stable spectrographs are competitive: the ESPRESSO GTO can reach a sensitivity about 5 times better than MICROSCOPE, while the ELT-HIRES sensitivity is expected to be similar to that of the proposed STEP satellite.
Astrophysical measurements of the fine-structure constant can also be used to reconstruct the dark energy equation of state. Standard methods (such as Type Ia supernovae) are of limited use as dark energy probes: since the field is slow-rolling when dynamically important, a convincing detection of a dynamical equation of state will be difficult at low redshifts. One must probe the deep matter era regime, where the speed of the hypothetical scalar field is likely fastest (even though it is not yet dominating the cosmological dynamics). Next-generation facilities will map the dark side of the universe to $z\sim4$. As discussed in \cite[Leite \etal\ (2014)]{Leite}, constraints comparable to that of a SNAP-like survey can be obtained from fine-structure constant measurements in about 20 nights of ELT-HIRES time. Alternatively, this would take about 700 nights of ESPRESSO time---raising the interesting possibility of building a dedicated post-ESPRESSO spectrograph to use one of the VLT telescopes full-time for a few years.
\section{Synergies and the redshift drift}
In addition to the fundamental nature and direct implications of these measurements, they are also important sources of synergies with other cosmological experiments. In other words, even in the cases where these constraints, on their own are not as stringent as those obtained from other observables, they often probe regions of parameter space that are otherwise inaccessible to other observables, and their combination therefore leads to significantly improved constraints. An example of such a synergy with ESA's Euclid satellite has been discussed in \cite[Calabrese \etal\ (2014)]{Erminia}. The addition of ELT measurements of the fine-structure constant to Euclid constraints on the $w_0$--$w_a$ dark energy parameterisation lead to a small improvement on the $w_0$ constraint, but improves the constraint on $w_a$ by about a factor of 5, due to the much larger redshift lever arm of the former measurements,
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=4in]{figure1.eps}
\caption{Constraints on the $\Omega_n$--$h$ plane from redshift drift measurements by the ELT and SKA (Phase 2), assuming a flat $\Lambda$CDM model and no external priors. The figures of merit listed in the legend correspond to the inverse of the area of the displayed 1-sigma confidence ellipses.}
\label{fig1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Another example of an astrophysical probe which combines fundamental significance with synergistic value is that of the redshift drift. This is a direct non-geometric model-independent measurement of the universe's expansion history. It is independent of gravity, geometry or clustering: instead of mapping our (present-day) past light-cone, it directly compares different past light-cones. This is a key ELT-HIRES driver (probing $2<z<5$) as discussed in \cite[Liske \etal\ (2008)]{Liske}, while the full (Phase 2) SKA may measure it at $z<1$, as discussed in \cite[Klockner \etal\ (2015)]{Klockner}. Forecasts for these measurements, using the specifications in the two references, as well as for the combined constraint, are shown in Figure \ref{fig1}, for the pessimistic case where no external priors are used (but assuming the simplest, flat $\Lambda$CDM fiducial model). Further details can be found in \cite[Alves \etal\ (2018a)]{Alves18}.
\section{The blue bottleneck}
An important limiting factor in the above measurements is the access to the blue part of the spectrum (ideally, starting right at the atmospheric cutoff). We will illustrate this with a comparative forecast, assuming as fiducial model a class of so-called Olive-Pospelov models which have been recently studied in \cite[Alves \etal\ (2018b)]{Alves18s}. These models have two free particle physics parameters, which can be constrained using astrophysical measurements of the fine-structure constant. We forecast how well they can be constrained by the ESPRESSO spectrograph, either using only its GTO targets or using all the good targets that ESPRESSO can see (given its wavelength range). This forecast is then repeated for the next-generation high-resolution spectrographs: G-CLEF for the GMT, HROS for the TMT, and ELT-HIRES for the ELT. For the first two we assume the blue cutoffs provided in the publicly available literature, while for ELT-HIRES (whose blue cutoff is not yet decided) we study three possible scenarios. The metric used in the comparison is the {\it figure of merit}, in the usual cosmological constraints sense: the inverse of the area of the 1-sigma confidence ellipse in the plane of the two free parameters. (The overall normalisation of the figure of merit is irrelevant, what is meaningful is the comparison of its value in the different scenarios being studied.)
\begin{figure}[b]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=4in]{figure2a.eps}
\includegraphics[width=4in]{figure2b.eps}
\caption{Forecasts of constraints on the two particle physics parameters in the Olive-Pospelov model, for the ESPRESSO spectrographs and the high-resolution spectrographs foreseen for the ELTs, under various assumptions discussed in the text. The figures of merit listed in the legend correspond to the inverse of the area of the displayed 1-sigma confidence ellipses. The bottom panel is a zoomed-in version of the top one.}
\label{fig2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig2} shows the results of this analysis. It is clear that for these fundamental physics tests the blue coverage is at least as important as collecting area. The important overall conclusion is that for ELT-HIRES to be competitive with G-CLEF (a first-light instrument) or HROS (a second-generation instrument) it needs to be at least as blue as ESPRESSO---recall that the latter starts at 380 nm.
\section{Conclusions and outlook}
The acceleration of the universe shows that canonical theories of cosmology and particle physics are incomplete, if not incorrect. This contribution highlighted how precision astrophysical spectroscopy provides a direct and competitive probe of the (still unknown) new physics that must be out there, focusing on astrophysical tests of the stability of fundamental dimensionless couplings such as the fine-structure constant and the proton-to-electron mass ratio.
Current data shows that nothing is varying at the few parts per million level. This is already a strong constrain (stronger, for example, than the Cassini spacecraft bound on the behaviour of gravity in the solar system), and it leads to the best available (albeit mildly model-dependent) constraints on Weak Equivalence Principle violations. The arrival of the ESPRESSO spectrograph (whose GTO has just started, at the time of writing) has opened a new era in the field, and significantly improved results will come shortly.
The ELTs have the potential to become the leading gravity and fundamental cosmology probes. Key contributions include Weak Equivalence Principle tests (mostly from measurements of the fine-structure constant), test of composition-dependent force tests (mostly from measurements of the proton-to-electron mass ratio), mapping the dark side of the Universe from $z=0$ to $z=4$, and a direct model-independent probe of the universe dynamics (through the redshift drift measurements, which are within the reach of the ELT, though likely not the TMT or the GMT). Further possibilities not discussed in this contributions include improved measurements of the primordial Deuterium abundance, strong-field tests of gravity (including the so-called No-hair Theorem), and probing the weak acceleration MOND-like regime in the outskirts of the Milky Way.
The requirements include 50 to 250 nights of telescope time over the instruments' lifetime (depending on how much of the above portfolio one subscribes to), the identification of further 'clean' targets (especially for measurements of the proton-to-electron mass ratio and the redshift drift), and improved measurements of the laboratory (rest) wavelengths of most of the relevant atomic and molecular transitions. (In the above I have assumed that one is only interested in redshifts up to $z=4$; in principle one can go beyond this, either by going into the infra-red or by using transitions below 160 nm---although these are not well known in the lab.) Last but by no means least, reasonable access to UV/blue wavelengths is essential.
The ELTs will therefore be the flagship tool in a new generation of precision consistency tests of fundamental cosmology, leading to competitive guaranteed science implications for dark energy and fundamental physics: any new and improved measurement will rule out some previously allowed classes of theories or regions of parameter space, even if they are null results. They also possess a unique value of complementarity, redundancy, and synergies with other facilities including ALMA, Euclid and SKA (and many of these synergies remain unexplored).
This work was financed by FEDER---Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento
Regional funds through the COMPETE 2020---Operational Programme for
Competitiveness and Internationalisation (POCI), and by Portuguese
funds through FCT---Funda\c c\~ao para a Ci\^encia e a Tecnologia in the
framework of the project POCI-01-0145-FEDER-028987.
Many interesting discussions with other members of the CAUP Dark Side team (Ana
Catarina Leite, Ana Marta Pinho, Catarina Alves, Jo´s\'e Guilherme Matos,
Maria Carolina Faria and Tom\'as Silva) as well as with many other colleagues and
collaborators in the work discussed herein (Erminia Calabrese, Gemma Luzzi, Hugo
Messias, Joe Liske, John Webb, Matteo Martinelli, Paolo Molaro, Ricardo
G\'enova-Santos, Stefano Cristiani and Tasos Avgoustidis) are gratefully acknowledged.
|
\section{Introduction}
We want to use data and our understanding of the world to better manage health --- we want evidence and understanding to guide clinical and personal health-related decisions. Of course at a high level this is generally what medicine is about: interventions are undertaken only when they are understood or predicted to improve an individual's health. However, traditionally this prediction is done in a non-personalized manner, meaning that interventions treat the "mean" person or patient. Personalized and precision medicine were conceptualized to relax this constraint by tailoring an intervention to a person. While genetics offers a path to personalizing treatment, we can also use data science machinery together with personal (\cite{da_glucose_forecast_t2d}) and population-scale data to better personalize treatment (\cite{pop_phys,pmlr-v56-Xu16,dyn_pheno}). Specifically here, we want to leverage our knowledge encapsulated in mechanistic physiologic models and combine it with free living or clinical data to allow this knowledge and data to be used to make decisions related to health. In this context, computational problems related to personalized medicine can be broken into two broad categories: \emph{forecasting}, where we make quantitative predictions about a patient's future state that can be used by clinicians and patients to take corrective action, and \emph{phenotyping} (\cite{high_fide_pheno,emerge3,phenome_model,anchor_phenome_jamia,google_deep_pheno}), where we identify properties of macroscopic observables that can be used to classify patients into subgroups that can give clinicians and researchers actionable insight into commonly occurring treatment outcomes and biological phenomena.
The idea of using mechanistic models and data assimilation in biomedicine or healthcare is old, but what is new is attempting to integrate models with variable complexity with sparse, noisy free-living and clinically collected data. Many mathematical biology models were designed to have variable degrees of biological fidelity, fidelity that we do not necessarily want to eliminate or reduce, but fidelity that we generally need to constrain in the usual case where we cannot estimate all the parameters because of data limitations that always exist in practice. This problem poses a significant barrier to using data assimilation---enough of a barrier that often data assimilation is not even attempted because the models, given data are hopelessly poorly resolved. This paper poses a machine learning solution to this problem---by using machine learning to identify and rank-order which model parameters are the most necessary to estimate.
Returning to the more practical contexts of phenotyping and forecasting, both applications impose particular demands on certain aspects of computational machinery used to model data. The properties we focus on here are the selection of the model parameters to estimate and the ensuing \emph{identifiability} of a model, or ability to uniquely solve for parameters that yield optimal solutions (\cite{physio_uncertainty_book,system_id_ljun,linear_id_nonlinear_setting}). Our goal is to strike a balance between identifiability and model fidelity in situations where a model is not fully identifiable if all or even sometimes when any model parameters are estimated, given the available data. The method we develop here can facilitate both forecasting and phenotyping studies, and we evaluate this method in the context of modeling glucose dynamics using mechanistic models, machine learning and data assimilation.
The Houlihan, or the Houlihan throw, is a lasso throw used for roping livestock, e.g., a horse. It is used often under difficult circumstances such as picking out, from a substantial distance, a single horse from among a crowd of horses standing close together. It is a particularly flexible technique that can be used in a variety of circumstances. In this spirit we intuitively define the Houlihan method(s) as a collection of methods that use for selecting the most productive model parameters to estimate; specifically, the collection of methods uses machine learning techniques applied to simulated model output under parameter variation subject to a set of features, e.g., the mean of a state.
\section{Background}
The larger biomedical context of this work is the application of data science machinery used to personalize forecasts and phenotypes via a broadly defined regression. While there are many linear versions of regression that have been successfully applied to healthcare data (\cite{amia_matt_george_granger_like,full_lagged_regression_matt,george_lagged_correlation_jamia,jamia_hcpmodel13}), here we focus on a specific type of nonlinear regression---data assimilation---in an effort to take advantage of potentially important nonlinearities present in most biological systems. Nonlinear regression approaches such as deep learning and related methods (\cite{deep_survival_I,deep_survival_II,google_deep_pheno,lasko_plos}) have seen some success in a number of biomedical applications thanks to their ability to approximate arbitrary, non-linear functions. While the flexibility of universal approximator approaches (\cite{hor,hor2}) is particularly useful when little is known about the system and data are plentiful, this approach does not always work well when data are sparse and non-stationary, leading to problems such as poor generalization to new or unobserved individuals, problems with quickly changing health conditions, and difficulties with fast, accurate prediction with very few, e.g., $20$, data points. Unfortunately, many health data and healthcare situations fit one or more of these data pathologies (\cite{jamia_phys_ehr,measurement_dynamics_rimma}).
In order to exploit the complex yet rich quantity of available health data, it is natural to consider ways of constraining the search space for machine learning methods. One way to do this is to constrain the model search space in accordance with as much expert knowledge as possible. To achieve this here we turn to mechanistic models developed by mathematical biologists and physiologists \cite{keenerII}, which are typically formulated as dynamical systems (\cite{brin_ds_book,guck,arrowsmithandplace}), e.g., $x_{t+1} = f(x_t,\theta)$, or differential equations (\cite{arnoldode,arnoldgeo}), e.g., $\frac{dx}{dt} = f(x,\theta,t)$, where $x$ are the time-varying states of the system and $\theta$ are the physiologic parameters that govern the process. For example, in the case of phenotyping type 2 diabetes one way of constraining the search space of a regression is to regress the data onto a nonlinear physiologic model \cite{da_glucose_forecast_t2d,daJAMIA} instead of regressing the data onto a universal approximator \cite{hor,hor2} function space such as neural networks. The way this is done is using data assimilation.
Data assimilation (DA) is a collection of methods (\cite{filtering_jaz,data_assimilation_I,stuart_da,french_DA_asch,da_sebastian,bayesian_estimation_tracking,beyond_kalman,baysian_signal_processing,DA_aos_evensen,evensen_enkf_early}) concerned with performing the types of non-linear regressions we describe for dynamical systems, and centers itself around forecasting and inferring mechanistic states under available observations; it solves both forward and inverse problems (\cite{andrew_inverse_problems,clermont_inverse_problems,inverse_book_banks}). There have been many successful applications of mechanistic modeling and data assimilation in biomedicine (\cite{daJAMIA,hirata_prostate_model,hirata_prostate_cancer_chaos,schiff_neuro_control_theory,vanja_sir,SIAM_identifiability_bio_modeling,closed_loop_glucose_control,artificial_pancreas_I,artificial_pancreas_II,in_silico_glucose_model_fda,rubella_model,defib_nejm,cc_art_beta,closed_loop_glucose_control_ICU,corbelli_review,artificial_beta_cell,leon_court,dave_leon_3,christini_cardio_alternans,mackey_glass_equations,clermont_inverse_problems,parker_ICU_1,parker_doyle,pharmaco_2,pharmaco_1,pharmaco_3,pharmaco_4,albers_IEEE,selgrade_female_endo_data,bruce_sleep,chase_icu_2,chase_icu_1,da_glucose_forecast_t2d,online_offline_DA}). However, mechanistic models that are typically developed in biological laboratory settings are often not designed to interface with health data collected in the process of delivering care or in free-living situations---in particular, the physiologic models often model macroscopic states that \emph{are} observable from routinely collected data but are governed by a composition of \emph{unobservable} mechanisms. While these models capture the dynamics we are interested in and constrain the regression to a smaller class of functions, their high-fidelity creates issues of identifiability and ill-posedness, problems for which this paper develops a practical, machine-learning-based work-around.
To understand how identifiability works for these machines, consider a trivial case of identifiability for the model $\frac{dx}{dt} = abx$. If we assume that $a$ and $b$ are unknown parameters, they cannot both be identifiable without another equation that could uniquely determine one of them. This topic and the the associated methods for handling this situation are too old and wide ranging to give complete background (\cite{system_id_ljun,physio_uncertainty_book,physio_bayesian_identifiability,linear_id_nonlinear_setting}). We can, however, give a broad sketch of how identifiability has been traditionally approached. Identifiability analysis generally follows one of three pathways: \emph{analytical methods}, e.g., showing algebraically that all parameters can be uniquely solved for (\cite{cecelia_ogtt_ident,marissa_ident,marissa_2}); \emph{numerical methods} (\cite{linear_id_nonlinear_setting,physio_uncertainty_book,marissa_3}); and \emph{heuristic, knowledge-driven} sensitivity analyses where certain parameters are chosen based on computational experiments or knowledge of the system. In many complex, non-linear mechanistic physiologic models algebraic methods and linear computational methods are not tractable or applicable. In these situations nonlinear methods can be applied, but nonlinear methods usually have to be constructed for a particular situation (\cite{structural_id_hard}), and, much like nonlinear optimization, generally do not have clearcut or simple resolutions (\cite{structural_id_hard,physio_bayesian_identifiability}). \emph{These problems pose a significant roadblock to parameter inference in the context of DA.} Nevertheless, there exist methods for working to remain within a traditional identifiability framework, e.g., \cite{physio_bayesian_identifiability} uses Bayesian inference to determine when parameters can be made identifiable.
The usual way of addressing these issues focuses on making sure the model is identifiable or finding ways of making it more identifiable (\cite{physio_bayesian_identifiability,linear_id_nonlinear_setting,physio_uncertainty_book}). This work is often performed using substantial intuition about the important features encoded in the model, and parameterizing and grouping sub-processes. However, this creates silos of expertise and prevents wide-spread dissemination and evaluation of mechanistic models in potential application domains. Therefore, to progress toward understanding complex physiology via model refinement and selection, and to provide solutions in clinical situations that come with constraints of time-sensitive solutions, we must find a robust way of coping with brutally ill-posed problems and accept certain impurities and inaccuracies.
Here, we develop and evaluate a method for rank-ordering mechanistic parameters based on their "influence" on important dynamical features, in order to improve forecast accuracy and help determine which models most faithfully represent a given system. This provides a starting point from which to estimate parameters, prune the model, etc., that can be automated.
\section{Conceptual construction of the Houlihan approach}
\subsection{Conventional operational use of data assimilation with ill-posed problems}
The standard method of applying data assimilation (DA) or control in generic situations follows roughly the following steps: (i) select a model, (ii) work out identifiability, (iii) select a filter or inference method, (iv) find an optimal solution for states and parameters. This requires very careful experimental constructions, generally dense data streams, can be expensive, and requires relatively simple models, all situations that lie outside of what is possible in applications and even many basic science settings. The approach for applying DA in \emph{operational}, complex, high-dimensional settings where accurate \emph{real-time} forecasts are imperative is to: (i) select or develop a model, (ii) tune and fix parameters offline, often by hand or using a combination of by-hand and numeric tuning that allows the model to reconstruct or forecast states within some tolerance, (iii) select an inference scheme, and (iv) estimate states only and make a forecast. This is a tried and true method and is used in situations such as weather and climate forecasting (\cite{tom_enkf_review,DA_aos_evensen,evensen_enkf_early}). Neither of these approaches apply to biomedical situations that, by comparison, have a different set of constraints and problems, including: (i) the models are smaller, so they can be simulated faster and estimated faster, allowing for potentially many models to be used simultaneously; (ii) there are less data relative to the number of \emph{unknown} parameters, so while parameter estimation is necessary \cite{da_glucose_forecast_t2d} not all parameters can be estimated; (iii) models are not generated from first principles and their application to given individuals is potentially highly variable necessitating the use and potentially the averaging of many models; and (iv) tuning would have to be done for millions of people frequently, e.g., every patient in every ICU potentially every day, a process that is not likely to be practically possible. Because of these reasons, choosing which parameters to estimate is a significant barrier to the adoption and use of DA in biomedical situations.
\subsection{Houlihan approach to ill-posedness}
Here we are operating under a different situation from the more canonical DA application setting, one more heavily constrained by imperfections of data that will never disappear because the data are collected in the process of managing health instead of data collected in a controlled manner explicitly for the DA. In particular we assume: \emph{(a)} we do not know the right model but we have some models we can try, \emph{(b)} we do not know whether a given model is identifiable and that we do not have enough data to estimate all model parameters well anyway but that we have enough data to estimate at least one parameter, \emph{(c)} for a given model, we don't know what parameters are the most useful to estimate, given that we cannot estimate all of them. Given this situation we develop a method for rank ordering which parameters to estimate, subject to features we want to capture, when we have no idea how to choose which parameters to estimate or when we must choose parameters in a more high-throughput setting where we are using many models at once.
This solution involves stacking machine learning on top of DA: machine learning is applied to \emph{simulated} model output to select the important parameters to estimate to best synchronize the model with the data, and then we use DA restricted to estimation of the parameters chosen by machine learning. In this way, the method will scale to a high-throughput setting and can be applied to many different models with high dimensional parameter spaces more easily. And while we know that this method may not lead to a unique solution in function, parameter, or initial condition space, the set of solutions will be reduced to a workable set of solutions that allow forward progress to be made.
Conceptually, we are proposing to: \emph{(i)} assume a model, \emph{(ii)} simulate the model under discrete parameter variation creating a grid in parameter space for which at every point we have simulated data from the model (i.e., the instance of one attractor of the model for a given set of initial conditions at the parameter grid point), \emph{(iii)} select features, e.g., the mean, of the attractors that are important for estimating the physiologic system, and then \emph{(iv)} use a machine learning algorithm to identify the parameters that have the greatest impact on the features. While for the authors the geometric intuition of this method originates from bifurcation theory---we will discuss this in a later section \cite{kuzbook}---one useful way to think about the problem is in the inverse problems context. \emph{As was the case for the bifurcation theory context, this discussion is allegorical; we are not proposing a formal inverse problems regularization framework.} From a high level, given data, $Y$, and a model, $\mathcal{F}$ with a state space $x$, the task is to find a \emph{set} of parameter values, $\Theta_i$, of which there may be many if the system is not identifiable, that minimize:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:min}
|| Y - \mathcal{F}(x, \theta)||^p_{Y}
\end{equation}
for some $p$, $p=2$ being the commonly applied least squares minimization. The core of the identifiability issue is that, for complex models, and especially given sparse data, there may be many sets of parameters $\Theta_i$ that minimize the distance between the model and the data. In this case a goal might then be to balance the number of potential minimizing parameter sets, the number of $\Theta_i$'s, against the distance between the model and the data via an optimization algorithm, e.g.,
\begin{equation}
\min_{\Theta} (w_1( || Y - \mathcal{F}(x, \theta)||^p_{Y} )+ w_2( \# \{ \Theta_i \} ))
\end{equation}
where the $w_i$'s are continuous functions. This framework, a formal regularization methodology, has many advantages, but can induce many complexities that increase rather than decrease the barrier to using data assimilation in more data-poor environments. Moreover, this relatively complex methodology may not be applicable in more high-throughput situations where, e.g., many models are used in a model averaging context. Therefore, motivated by the goal of an imperfect but practical solution, we postulate that if we carefully select the right parameters that maximize the parameter subspaces that can be explored relative to a set of desired features, we can often, effectively but imperfectly, solve the optimization problem. Effectively but not rigorously, we are \emph{regularizing a priori}, by selecting and reducing the parameter set to be estimated before we go about estimating the parameters given data. Given the framework above, such a solution may be well handled by a tool from sparse machine learning such as lasso \cite{statistical_learning_sparsity} because it uniquely rank-orders parameters by their predictive power, but it is easy to imagine using other methods. But, it is important to be clear that we are hypothesizing that the parameter subspaces that allow maximal exploration of dynamics relative to a given feature, e.g., the mean, will contain sets of parameters, $\Theta_i$ that also find relatively good minima of Eq. \ref{eq:min}. In our evaluation we will see cases where this hypothesis fails, but we will also see that this hypothesis generally holds true in our data set, and this conclusion is the point of the paper.
In short, here we are assuming a problem is ill posed and a system that is likely not identifiable, and given this situation, we are trying to cope. Therefore, we are not really solving an identifiability task because we are not trying to find \emph{the} best or most representative model that admits \emph{unique} parameter estimates; rather we are solving a problem more akin to, but not literally, a regularization task. We are starting from a point where the problem is both brutally ill-posed and likely non-identifiable, and where investigating identifiability using analytic methods, or even many numeric-by-hand methods are intractable. In this case we are assuming there will be a few different parameter combinations that represent reasonable parameter estimates. In this situation each combination of parameter represents a hypothesis for how the system works. More importantly, the method we present here is a flexible entry-point for using data assimilation with a complex nonlinear model and data collected in an uncontrolled environment rather than directly solving an identifiability problem.
\section{Data cohort}
\begin{table}[!ht]
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{5}{|c|}{Data Summary} \\
\hline
Participant ID & P1 & P2 & P4 & P5 \\ \hline
Age & $40-50$ & $40-50$ & $40-50$ & $40-50$\\ \hline
Disease Status & T2D & T2D & No Diabetes & No Diabetes \\ \hline
Medications & metformin & metformin & --- & --- \\ \hline
Total $\#$ glucose measurements & $304$ & $211$ & $520$ & $322$ \\ \hline
Total $\#$ meals recorded & $124$ & $76$ & $370$ & $184$ \\ \hline
Total $\#$ days measured & $16$ & $16$ & $53$ & $52$ \\ \hline
Mean measured glucose & $113 \pm 25$ & $127 \pm 32$ & $92 \pm 17$ & $101 \pm 16$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Demographic information and summary statistics are reported for the four participants whose retrospectively collected data are included in the study. }
\label{table:participants}
\end{table}
We test and evaluate the Houlihan methodology in the context of modeling and forecasting blood glucose collected in a free-living setting --- via a type 2 diabetes self-management moblie application. The dlood glucose and nutrition data used here were collected retrospectively from four participants, two with type 2 diabetes and two without diabetes, using custom-designed mobile applications for capturing self-monitoring data (\cite{me_lena_1}). These data are summarized in Table~\ref{table:participants}.
We acquired two types of data: 1) fingerstick blood glucose measurements taken at the discretion of each of the 4 participants (roughly 3-10 times per day) and 2) estimates of carbohydrate consumption over time (roughly 1-5 meals per day) determined by a certified dietitian's analysis of the daily meal logs (with photos and descriptions) reported by each participant.The data are documented more completely in (\cite{da_glucose_forecast_t2d,online_offline_DA}) and are available on PhysioNet upon request.
\section{Methods}
\subsection{Glucose-insulin physiologic model}
The Houlihan method was conceived in the context of DA with a mechanistic model, and while it could be used in any nonlinear regression context, this paper will be restricted to the setting where we begin by projecting data onto a mechanistic dynamical system and then work to decide which parameters of that dynamical system we should estimate to represent the data. The mechanistic model is more formally either a dynamical system when time is discrete or a system of ODEs when time is continuous. Explicit versions of such systems form parameterized families of functions that are physically meaningful but generally do not satisfy nice function space properties such as completeness and are not universal approximators. The more general theory of dynamical systems can be found in many books (\cite{brin_ds_book,guck,arrowsmithandplace}), but here we will restrict our use of these details to an absolute minimum. We will assume that the systems we use have at least one invariant density; the invariant density is likely defined relative to a SRB-measure (\cite{youngSRB,ruelle_srb1,sinai_srb_1,bowen_srb1}) rather than Lebesque measure, but the point is that for a given set of parameter values and initial conditions, the states have a probability density function associated with them denoted $\Lambda$. \emph{This invariant density can potentially depend on both the parameters and the initial conditions for a set of parameters.}
As previously noted, we want to use DA to model the glucose-insulin system of a human being. We begin with a particular mechanistic glucose-insulin model, here the ultradian model that has been detailed in \cite{sturis_91,keenerII,pop_phys,dyn_pheno,da_glucose_forecast_t2d}, and has $6$ states and $21$ parameters; its details can be found in the appendix \ref{app:ultradian}. The model has unknown identifiability properties, especially when only glucose is measured, but we have strong evidence that at least some of the model parameters and states are not identifiable (\cite{online_offline_DA}). The Houlihan method rests on quantifying how the invariant densities of the \emph{synthetic data sets} and their properties vary as parameters of the mechanistic model(s) vary. Specifically, the Houlihan method decides which parameters to estimate by varying the parameters of the ultradian model, observing how the invariant densities and their properties vary, and then using this information to select parameters to estimate by ranking ordering their importance using statistical inference or machine learning. The synthetic data used to select parameters to estimate will be generated by solving the ultradian model using an adaptive version of Runga-Kutta, ode23 in Matlab and will consist of $10^5$ simulated data points.
\subsection{Stochastic filtering and inverse problems methods}
We use two previously documented data assimilation formulations, an unscented Kalman filter (\cite{ukf_review,ukf_o,wan_primary_ukf,dual_ukf,wan_dual_ukf_wins,kalman_nn_ukf}) (UKF) whose details can be found in \cite{da_glucose_forecast_t2d} and a Metropolis-within-Gibbs Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method whose details can be found in \cite{online_offline_DA,cotter_mcmc_faster}. As previously mentioned, these DA methods are used with the ultradian model (\cite{sturis_91}) for performing the DA tasks. We only use these methods over the course of evaluating the Houlihan methods; the exact implementation of the DA methods can be found in \cite{da_glucose_forecast_t2d,online_offline_DA}.
\subsection{Analytical construction and intuition for throwing the Houlihan around the right parameters}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.16]{h1.png}
\includegraphics[scale=0.16]{h2.png}
\includegraphics[scale=0.16]{h3.png}
\caption{Shown are three different Houlihan constructions: left shows equivalence class by coordinate---this is the construction we use in this paper; middle shows equivalence by subsets of coordinates but retains the non-joint parameter dependency assumption; right shows a fully joint equivalence where combinations of parameters can generate influence when individual parameters do not, similar to the notion of bifurcation sets.}
\label{fig:houlihan_fig}
\end{figure}
While the approach we are proposing is new, the \emph{allegorical} geometric intuition motivating this approach comes from bifurcation theory and in particular the bifurcation sets defined in the 1970's (\cite{soyomayorbifsets}) and the analytic geometry vision of bifurcation theory and singularities in parameter space \cite{arnoldgeo}. Bifurcation sets are the low-dimensional sets or manifolds that denote transition/bifurcation surfaces between topologically equivalent invariant sets, \emph{partitioning the parameter space into a set of equivalence classes.} It is this idea of partitioning the parameter space into equivalence classes that differently impact dynamical featuers we care about is they key motivational insight. In our context we want to partition the parameter space by influence on some feature or set of features, denoted the \emph{feature-metric}, of the dynamics. Feature-metrics are calculated from the time-series of the simulated model (dynamical system), e.g., a mean. We do not want to be as rigid as requiring topological equivalence as was defined in the bifurcation sets framework, or necessarily strict classes, but we do want to partition the parameter space according to how parameters influence a dynamical feature we care about. The over-arching idea is that the subsets of parameter space that have the highest influence on the feature-metric are the parameters that will be the most useful to estimate to minimize Eq. \ref{eq:min}. And, knowing the most useful parameters to estimate provides a systematic way of choosing the parameters to estimate until the system is either identifiable or identifiable enough to be serviceable; in practice serviceable might mean that the errors are within desired tolerances, that parameter estimates are unique, or that the parameter estimates have few enough equilibria or minima that they can be made useful. To make this more precise, begin with the following terms, which are functions of a parameter vector, $p$.
\noindent
\emph{Feature metric}: the feature of the dynamical system we wish to influence, denoted $g(p)$; feature metrics are estimated from the time-series of the simulated model output and vary with parameter variation.
\noindent
\emph{Influence}: the amount that a parameter influences the feature-metric, denoted $F_i(g(p))$ for the i-th parameter.
\noindent
\emph{Influence equivalence}: a rule that defines equivalence of influence, e.g, all parameters $i$ such that $a_j \leq F_i(g(p)) < a_{j+1}$. This allows for us to introduce a partition over influence, $\{a\}_{j \in J}$ called an \emph{impact set}, which represents the transitions or boundaries between influence equivalence classes.
\noindent
\emph{Parameter influence sets}: the sets of parameters with equivalent influence according to the influence equivalence rule.
\textbf{Demonstrative example:} Begin by defining the dynamical system $f$ with state variables $x_i$ and parameters $p_i$ assuming at least four parameters. Next define the \emph{feature-metric} as the mean of a single state variable $x_{*}$, $\mu_{x_{*}}$ (i.e. we are interested in how each parameter "influences" the state's mean). Set the \emph{influence function} to be the absolute linear correlation, $|\beta_i|$, between the feature-metric, $\mu_x$, and values of the parameter $p_i$. In this example, the influence function is a vector-valued function, with a scalar metric (linear correlation between parameter and the state's mean it induces) corresponding to each parameter. The influence per parameter defines a probability mass function (PMF) with support $[0, 1]$ with values $\frac{|\beta_i|}{\sum_j{|\beta_j|}}$. Finally, we define \emph{influence equivalence} as membership in a given quartile of the PMF defined by the influence function. Note that the \emph{impact set} is defined by the PMF quartiles, and the \emph{influence sets} are the parameters in respective quartiles of the PMF. Depending on the separation observed in the impact sets, we could ultimately choose to estimate parameters only from the upper equivalence class(es); i.e. the set of parameters with $|\beta_i|$ in the upper quartile. $\Box$
This example takes a narrow interpretation of the flexible construct we develop for identifying equivalence classes of parameter influence. However, even the above example allows for wild topological variation within a given equivalence class. For example, within a given equivalence class one would easily imagine there being many topologically distinct invariant sets due to \emph{both} parameter variation and initial condition variation. Presumably there are other similar equivalence class violations such as ergodicity properties (\cite{p-s-ergodic-attractors,burns_wilk_annals}), $k-LCE$ stability (\cite{hypviolation,dynamicsPRL}), etc. These issues can all be addressed by defining the various properties, e.g., the influence function, differently, or more restrictively such that we end up with increasingly more restrictive constructions such as the original notion of bifurcation sets. This flexibility in equivalencies is the point of this construction: we can, depending on our goals, data, etc., have substantial flexibility in how we set up how to choose what parameters to estimate all while explicitly acknowledging \emph{what we know we do not know we are preserving.} For example, if we define the feature-metric to be the mean, we know we are allowing the system to explore or have many different coexisting invariant densities as long as they have a mean that lies within a given equivalence class.
\textbf{Visual example:} Figure \ref{fig:houlihan_fig} shows three cases of the outcome of the Houlihan analysis. The left-most plot in fig. \ref{fig:houlihan_fig} shows the case where the rank-ordering of influence is on a by-coordinate basis; meaning, the equivalence classes were collections entire coordinates, here where each equivalence class has a single member. The middle plot in fig. \ref{fig:houlihan_fig} shows a case where the influence can be portions of different coordinates, but still there are is not joint dependence between variables. The right-most plot in fig. \ref{fig:houlihan_fig} demonstrates an example where the influence equivalence includes joint coordinate relationships. In this paper we will only address the first of these cases, leaving the more complex situations for later work.
\subsection{Computational moving parts for throwing the Houlihan around the right parameters}
The computational task of selecting parameters to estimate involves defining the equivalence-like classes, finding their boundaries, rank ordering the parameters by importance and has, broadly, five moving parts. \emph{First}, select the feature-metric(s), $g(p)$, e.g., mean. \emph{Second}, formulate the representation of the space of parameters and their variation, including (i) parameter grid resolution, (ii) parameter perturbation range, (iii) parameter variation type, e.g., joint versus individual by-parameter parameter variation. \emph{Third}, choose an influence function that defines how to model the parameterized variation of the feature-metric variation with parameter variation. \emph{Fourth}, choose a method for rank ordering these parameterizations by influence. Sometimes steps three and four can be done using a single method, e.g., linear regression with a $L_1$ regularization or by using lasso with cross validation, and sometimes it is done in two steps, e.g., linear regression with a threshold on the $\beta$'s, partitioning the $\beta$'s into equivalence classes. And \emph{fifth}, decide which parameters to keep or which equivalence classes, or which impact sets are important.
\paragraph{Feature metrics} We use two feature metrics, mean and standard deviation of the invariant density generated by mechanistic model with set parameter values and initial conditions.
\paragraph{Parameter grid} We begin with the nominal parameters (\cite{sturis_91,keenerII,da_glucose_forecast_t2d}), and then vary them in intervals of $\log_2$ over $10$ decades in both directions. For example, for parameter $i$ the parameter grid point for the $k^{th}$ decade was set as $p_i(nominal) 2^k$. We did not consider joint-variation of parameters, but varied parameters independently while holding all other parameters fixed at their nominal values.
\subsubsection{Parameter selection methods: Influence functions, impact sets, and ranking}
Given a feature metric as a covariate or input vector, e.g., the means of attractor densities for a set of parameter values, we use several methods for selecting the best set of parameters to estimate in a DA context. Some of these methods are stock---linear regression with lasso---some are standard practice---parameter selection using knowledge of the model---and some are modifications of existing methods---see PCA-lariat below. We will see that the method for selecting the parameters matters, although not as much as the feature metric, and it is clear that sophisticated machine learning methods could be useful in this context.
\paragraph{Covariates or input vectors} All of the methods below take a covariate matrix as input. The covariates correspond to vectors: one dimension of the covariate matrix corresponds to a feature metric calculated at every point along the parameter variation, e.g., the mean of a simulated attractor at every point along a one-dimensional parameter curve.
\paragraph{By hand selection parameter selection --- parameter selection using knowledge} In our previous work we selected parameters to estimate by hand as they were tied to certain dynamical features, physiologic knowledge want to fit something in particular to solve a problem, e.g., phenotyping. We selected $E$ and $V_p$ because they seemed to have an impact on the mean (\cite{dyn_pheno}) and $t_p$ because it was related to liver function; the results can be found in \cite{da_glucose_forecast_t2d}.
\paragraph{Automatic parameter selection using linear regression}
A basic method for determining influence is the linear dependence between the feature metric and parameter variation. In this setting we perform a linear regression between the feature metric and the parameters and we keep all $\beta$'s for which $\beta_i > (\beta_{1}) (\kappa_{LR})$. Here we set $\kappa_{LR} = 20 \%$ or $0.2$, meaning that we keep all the parameters that have a regression coefficient that explains at least $20 \%$ of the regression coefficient with the highest influence.
\paragraph{Automatic parameter selection using Lasso and cross validation}
A natural way of reducing the number of parameters in a model is to select parameters that have a lot of power explaining the feature metric while simultaneously being non-redundant. One way of achieving this is to use lasso, or $L_1$ regularization to enforce a sparse representation of the parameter system (\cite{statistical_learning_sparsity,lasso_1,lasso_2,elastic_nets}). We use the standard lasso formulation (\cite{statistical_learning_sparsity}) with cross validation to determine the rank-ordering of parameters; the optimal value of $\lambda$, or the optimal number of parameters, is set using a cutoff of one standard error. Lasso automatically and uniquely rank orders parameters. We keep the parameters within one standard error of the minimum mean squared error (MSE) ensuring a sparse representation of the model.
\paragraph{Automatic parameter selection using elastic net approximation of ridge regression}
In addition to lasso regularization, we also use ridge regression, or $L_2$ regularization (\cite{statistical_learning_sparsity,elastic_nets,elastic_nets_are_linear_svm_1}). We compute the ridge regression selected parameters using an elastic nets formulation with $\alpha$ set to $0.0001$ where elastic nets formulation approachs $L_2$ regularization, and select the number of parameters using cross validation in the same way as is done in the lasso setting. We keep the parameters within one standard error of the minimum mean squared error (MSE) ensuring a sparse representation of the model.
\paragraph{Automatic parameter selection using PCA-lariat with a single metric} To add diversity to the set of methods for selecting parameters beyond linear regression-based methods, we devised a principle component analysis (PCA) (\cite{pca_original,pca_original_2,pca_book}) based algorithm for computing an influence function, then implement a rank-ordering scheme for defining influence equivalence. The method we develop, \emph{PCA-lariat}, follows seven steps. \emph{First,} estimate the PCs for the feature-metric, $g(p)$, taking care to de-trend the summary. \emph{Second,} estimate the percentage of the variance captured by the $i-th$ PC, $\sigma_{PC}(i)$. \emph{Third,} identify the \emph{important PCs}, or the PCs that explain variance above a threshold, $\kappa_{PC}$; we use $5 \%$. \emph{Fourth,} for each important PC, rank-order the contribution of each parameter or coordinate to the PC. \emph{Fifth,} collect all the coordinates for all the important PCs that contribute proportionally to a given PC above a set threshold, $\kappa_{C}$, $PC_j(i)>\kappa_{C}$; we use $10 \%$. \emph{Sixth,} for the important parameters for the important PCs, estimate the contribution per parameter:
\begin{equation}
PCR(i) = \sum_j \sigma_{PC}(j) * PC_j(i).
\end{equation}
And \emph{seventh,} rank order the important parameters by $PCR$ and select the parameters above a given threshold, $\kappa_{I}$; we use $0.1$, or $10 \%$.
\paragraph{Multi-directional parameter wrangling} Combining models, or model averaging can be very useful for improving results (\cite{bayesian_model_average_mad,model_average_calibrate_aos,claeskens_model_selection,da_glucose_forecast_t2d}), especially when you either know you want to adjust to multiple feature-metrics, or you do not know what feature metrics are important. Here, we only consider using set operations over methods, and consider three cases. First, we take the union of: (number of rank-ordered parameters, feature-metric, influence function) using one parameter per influence function, two feature metrics, mean and standard deviation. Second and third, we take the union of: (number of rank ordered parameters, feature-metric, influence function) using one parameter per influence function and one feature metric, either mean or standard deviation.
\subsection{Evaluation scheme}
The evaluation of the Houlihan methods is done in four steps. \emph{First}, we apply the Houlihan methods to the ultradian model to select parameters to estimate and compare the parameter selections as the method is perturbed. \emph{Second}, we use both the UKF and the MCMC DA methods to estimate these Houlihan-selected parameters for the four people in our cohort and calculate the mean squared error (MSE) between the data and the model state estimates (MCMC methods) and forecasts (UKF methods). \emph{Third}, we use both the UKF and the MCMC DA methods to estimate parameters for \emph{both} parameters that were previously chosen by hand in previously published work (\cite{da_glucose_forecast_t2d}) and parameters that the Houlihan methods determined were low-influence parameters and again calculate the MSE between the data and model state estimates and forecasts. \emph{Fourth}, we compare the MSE for the variously selected parameter sets.
\section{Results}
The results come in two stages. \emph{First}, we present the rank-ordered parameters selected by different methods in order to demonstrate: (i) which parameters the methods selected, (ii) that the methods selected some but not all parameters, (iii) how the parameter selection varied across methods, and (iv) the rank-ordering of parameters by method. \emph{Second,} we evaluate the methods by using the parameters selected in each method to forecast glucose with the UKF and smooth glucose with MCMC; methods are compared via the MSE between measurements and predictions.
\subsection{Parameter selections by method}
\begin{table}
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{ |l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
\multicolumn{12}{|c|}{Rank-ordered parameters per selection method out of $21$ possible parameters} \\
\hline \hline
method & $1$ & $2$ & $3$ & $4$ & $5$ & $6$ & $7$ & $8$ & $9$ & $10$ & $11$ \\ \hline
LASSO $\mu$ & $a_1$ & $C_1$ & $V_p$ & $t_p$ & $R_m$ & $C_3$ & --- & --- & ---& ---& ---\\ \hline
LASSO $\sigma$ & $R_g$ & $C_3$ & $U_m$ & $a_1$ & $C_1$ & $t_p$ & $R_m$ & $V_p$ & -- & --- & --- \\ \hline
Linear regression $\mu$ & $a_1$ & $C_1$ & $C_3$ & $R_m$ & $t_p$ & $V_p$ & $U_m$ & $R_g$ & $C_4$ & $U_b$ & $U_0$ \\ \hline
Linear regression $\sigma$ & $R_g$ & $C_3$ & $U_m$ & $a_1$ & $C_1$ & $R_m$ & $V_p$ & $t_p$ & $k_{decay}$ & --- & --- \\ \hline
Ridge regression $\mu$ & $a_1$ & --- & --- & --- & --- & --- & --- & --- & --- & --- & --- \\ \hline
Ridget regression $\sigma$ & $R_g$ & --- & --- & --- & --- & --- & --- & --- & --- & --- & --- \\ \hline
PCA $\mu$ & $a_1$ & $C_1$ & $C_3$ & $R_m$ & $t_p$ & $V_p$ & $U_m$ & --- & --- & --- & --- \\ \hline
PCA $\sigma$ & $R_g$ & $C_3$ & $U_m$ & $a_1$ & $C_1$ & --- & --- & --- & --- & --- & ---\\ \hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The rank ordering choice of the four parameter selection methods for the feature-metrics mean, $\mu$, and standard deviation, $\sigma$.}
\label{table:whochosewhat}
\end{table}
Table \ref{table:whochosewhat} shows the rank-ordered parameters selected by each parameter selection method. The methods were sensitive to the feature metric; the mean and standard deviation-based methods did not select the same parameters as important.
For a given feature metric, all selection methods identified the same top two parameters --- all methods ranked $a_1$ and $C_1$ as the top influencers of the mean, and ranked $R_g$ and $C_3$ as the top influencers of the standard deviation. However, the entire influence sets differed substantially. This indicates that influence set structure, as defined (upper quartile of influence), is sensitive to choices of influence functions and influence equivalence definitions.
Interestingly, the equivalence classes of high and low parameter influence are preserved under perturbations to the influence function.
Fig. \ref{fig:rank_order} shows how the $l_1$, $l_2$ and PCA-based methods rank-order parameters according to how they influence the mean. While lasso is expected to preserve the ordering with different $\lambda$ (it fits one-at-a-time), ridge regression also remains robust to variations in the regularization term, $\lambda$, adding parameters one at a time.
Most methods find only $5-6$ influential parameters out of $21$, greatly reducing the dimension of the parameter space. In all cases, the methods gave an entry point for which parameters to begin estimating; the next question, then, is whether using the Houlihan approach helps to reduce forecasting errors and improve convergence of parameter estimates.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.2]{lasso_mean_rank_order.jpg}
\includegraphics[scale=0.2]{rr_mean_rank_order.jpg}
\includegraphics[scale=0.2]{pca_lariat_rank_order_mean.jpg}
\caption{The rank-ordered influence function with a feature-metric set to the mean for lasso, ridge regression, and PCA-lariat methods.}
\label{fig:rank_order}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.18]{high_impact_mean.jpg}
\includegraphics[scale=0.18]{high_impact_std.jpg}
\includegraphics[scale=0.18]{low_impact_mean.jpg}
\includegraphics[scale=0.18]{low_impact_std.jpg}
\caption{The influence for two feature metrics, mean and standard deviation, versus parameter variation for high impact and low impact parameters.}
\label{fig:impact}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Redundancy and influence} Our goal is to select parameters to estimate during forecasting and smoothing tasks. We aim to facilitate this goal by identifying small parameter sets that have significant, minimally redundant influence over important dynamical features. Accomplishing this can minimize problems in identifiability, multiple coexisting invariant sets, etc.
Fig. \ref{fig:impact} visualizes variation of the feature-metric, mean and standard deviation of the invariant density with parameter variation, as well as how the methods partitioned parameters into a high and low-influence equivalence class. It is clear that some variations in some parameters create large shifts in the mean and variance (e.g. $a_1$), whereas the mean and variance features are far less sensitive to other parameters, like $E$ and $t_d$.
While the mean and standard deviation are not always influenced by the same parameters, the methods select parameters that have both high influence and relatively orthogonal influence; e.g., in the case of the mean the methods generally select $a_1$ and $R_g$ first. The low influence parameters, by comparison, are not able to move the mean or standard deviation appreciably and are therefore not able to fully explore the space. Similarly, the low influence parameters are relatively redundant. Following this logic one might predict that estimating alpha and $C_2$ would lead to the most accurate model estimates while estimating $E$ and $t_d$ would lead to the least accurate model estimates.
\paragraph{Comparison with by-hand selection} In our previous work (\cite{da_glucose_forecast_t2d}) we selected parameters to estimate by hand based on our desire to estimate certain parameters related to physiologic function, e.g., $t_p$, and because of their obvious influence on parameters, e.g., $V_p$ as could be deduced from other previous work (\cite{dyn_pheno}) to influence the mean state. The automated methods selected $V_p$ and $t_p$ as high influence parameters, but not $E$, a parameter the methods determined was a low-influence parameter.
\subsection{Parameter selection method evaluation}
\begin{table}
\centering
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{ |l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|p{4cm}|}
\hline
\multicolumn{10}{|c|}{Rank-ordered parameters per selection method} \\
\hline \hline
& \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{MSE for MCMC} & \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{MSE for UKF} & \\ \hline \hline
parameter & P1 & P2 & P4 & P5 & P1 & P2 & P4 & P5 & method-feature-metric pairs \\ \hline
$a_1$ & $822$ & $1140$ & $338$ & $296$ & $809$ & $1270$ & $304$ & $356$ & LASSO($\mu)$, LR($\mu$), PCA($\mu$) \\ \hline
$R_g$ & $655$ & $1180$ & $475$ & $288$ & $672$ & $1490$ & $470$ & $401$ & LASSO($\sigma$), LR($\sigma$) , ridge($\sigma$), PCA($\sigma$) \\ \hline \hline
$t_p$ & $807$ & $1020$ & $448$ & $349$ & $788$ & $1050$ & $407$ & $420$ & by-hand, high-influence\\ \hline
$V_p$ & $820$ & $1120$ & $332$ & $320$ & $805$ & $1300$ & $313$ & $362$ & by-hand, high-influence\\ \hline
$E$ & $681$ & $1250$ & $655$ & $500$ & $721$ &$1380$ & $704$ & $724$ & by-hand, low-influence\\ \hline \hline
$\alpha$ & $501$ & $1250$ & $526$ & $346$ & $526$ & $1580$ & $528$ & $394$ & low-influence \\ \hline
$t_d$ & $530$ & $1080$ & $730$ & $674$ & NaN & $$1260 & NaN & $480$ & low-influence \\ \hline \hline
\multicolumn{10}{|c|}{Rank-ordered parameter pairs per selection method} \\
\hline \hline
$(a_1, C_1) $ & $570$ & $1080$ & $285$ & $276$ & $698$ & $1290$ & $258$ & $330$ & LASSO($\mu)$, LR($\mu$), PCA($\mu$) \\ \hline
$(R_g, C_3) $ & $593$ & $923$ & $210$ & $297$ & $613$ & $1260$ & $215$ & $385$ & LASSO($\sigma$), LR($\sigma$) , ridge($\sigma$), PCA($\sigma$)\\ \hline \hline
$(a_1, R_g) $ & $578$ & $1130$ & $292$ & $296$ & $614$ & $1400$ & $269$ & $343$ & Union of rank $1$ over methods \\ \hline \hline
$(\alpha, E)$ & $454$ & $1174$ & $518$ & $345$ & $483$ & $1310$ & $535$ & $520$ & low-influence \\ \hline
$(\alpha, t_d)$ & $432$ & $993$ & $525$ & $347$ & NaN & $1120$ & NaN & NaN & low-influence \\ \hline
$(E, t_d)$ & $462$ & $1030$ & $592$ & $487$ & $643$ & $1190$ & NaN & $490$ & low-influence \\ \hline \hline
\multicolumn{10}{|c|}{Rank-ordered parameter $3$-tuple per selection method} \\ \hline \hline
$(a_1, C_1, V_p) $ & $569$ & $1060$ & $284$ & $276$ & $663$ & $1310$ & $260$ & $329$ & LASSO($\mu$) ($1^{st}$) \\ \hline
$(a_1, C_1, t_p) $ & $518$ & $864$ &$247$ & $275$ & NaN & NaN & $234$ & $294$ & LASSO($\mu$) ($2^{nd}$) \\ \hline
$(R_g, C_3, U_m) $ & $590$ & $922$ & $190$ & $294$ & $618$ & $1140$ & $228$ & $391$ & LASSO($\sigma$), LR($\sigma$), PCA($\sigma$) \\ \hline
$(a_1, C_1, C_3) $ & $431$ & $1020$ & $261$ & $274$ & $1330$ & $1110$ & $251$ & $340$ & LR($\mu$) PCA($\mu$)\\ \hline
$(C_2, E, \alpha)$ & $442$ & $1020$ & $518$ & $346$ & $479$ & $1250$ & $535$ & $515$ & low-influence \\ \hline
$(t_d, C_2, \alpha)$ & $432$ & $894$ & $525$ & $347$ & NaN & $1190$ & NaN & NaN & low-influence \\ \hline
$(t_d, E, \alpha)$ & $398$ & $956$ & $479$ & $343$ & NaN & $1120$ & NaN & $520$ & low-influence \\ \hline
$(t_d, E, C_2)$ & $464$ & $941$ & $592$ & $489$ & $630$ & $1190$ & NaN & NaN & low-influence \\ \hline \hline
\multicolumn{8}{|c|}{Rank-ordered parameter $4$-tuple per selection method} \\ \hline \hline
$(a_1, R_g, C_1, C_3) $ & $398$ & $864$ & $182$ & $288$ & $649$ & $985$ & $265$ & $324$ & Union of rank $2$ over methods \\ \hline
\multicolumn{10}{|c|}{Full Houlihan for $\mu$ and $\sigma$ } \\ \hline \hline
$(a_1, C_1, V_p, t_p, R_m, C_3) $ & $414$ & $862$ & $217$ & $229$ & $661$ & NaN & $236$ & $291$ & Lasso($\mu$) \\ \hline
$(R_g, C_3, U_m, a_1, C_1, t_p, R_m, V_p) $ & $375$ & $863$ & $182$& $231$ & $632$ & $942$ & $224$ & $289$ & Lasso($\sigma$) \\ \hline
\multicolumn{10}{|c|}{Method with the lowest MSE } \\ \hline \hline
& Lasso & Lasso & Lasso/Union & Lasso & low-influence & Lasso & Lasso & Lasso & \\ \hline
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{The mean squared error (MSE) between forecast/smoothed and measured glucose. The machine-based methods, almost always selected the parameter set that achieved the MSE minimum, but for some individuals, certain hand-chosen parameters matter. }
\label{table:howwhopickedwhatdid}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{houlihan_mcmc_metrics.png}
\caption{The overall performance of each method in the smoothing setting.
The vertical axis indicates the $\%$-optimal MSE for a given method, averaged over the four patient data sets.
Note that methods are labeled as blue to red, where the minimally-performing methods are blue and the maximally-performing methods are red. The plots are estimated directly from the information in Table \ref{table:howwhopickedwhatdid}.}
\label{fig:compare_methods}
\end{figure}
To evaluate the effectiveness of the machine-selected parameters compared to low-influence parameters as characterized by their $\beta_i$'s, and the by-hand-selected parameters we used in our previous work, we compare the mean squared error (MSE) between the data and the forecasts for the various parameter combinations as shown in table \ref{table:howwhopickedwhatdid}. Fig \ref{fig:compare_methods} provides a visual summary of the results in table \ref{table:howwhopickedwhatdid}---the plots are calculated directly from table \ref{table:howwhopickedwhatdid}---for the MCMC smoothing setting, and demonstrates that all Houlihan-based parameter sets (of any size) noticeably out-performed the by-hand and low-influence parameter sets. Moreover, we see that most Houlihan-based methods achieve similar overall accuracy for parameter sets of cardinality $\leq 3$. In addition, Houlihan-based methods that selected parameter sets with 4 or more parameters achieved the best performance, and there is a general trend of improved fit with more parameters---this contrasts sharply with the by-hand parameter selections, whose performance tapered with more than 3 parameters (probably due to unforeseen issues of identifiability).
In particular, lasso chose parameters with the lowest MSE between forecasts and measurements in $7$ of $8$ cases. In one case, taking the union over methods shared the same MSE with lasso. And, in one case, the lowest MSE was observed with a pair of low-influence parameters. In this case it was the parameter-pair combination, $\alpha$ with $E$, that mattered. This result implies that generally low influence parameters may, for some people, be physiologically important and explore particular pathophysiology necessary to synchronize to the individual. We also know that as the number of parameters increased to $3 \geq$, some of the MCMC parameter estimates with the lowest MSE found multiple, competing equilibria, were not unique, and sometimes did not fully converge. For example, Fig. \ref{fig:mcmc_converence} shows parameter estimates of two different parameters---one that converges and one that does not---for two parameter sets for P1 with standard deviation as the feature-metric. When lasso-selected parameters are restricted to two parameters for P1, then both parameters, $R_g$ and $C_3$ converge producing a MSE of $600$; $C_3$ is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:mcmc_converence}. In contrast, lasso restricted to the one standard error minimum selects eight parameters, has a lower MSE of $375$ but at least one of the parameters, $t_p$, does not converge well as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:mcmc_converence}. This means that as we increased the flexibility, we lowered the MSEs but possibly came at the expense of physiology or convergent parameter estimates.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{C3_good.png}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{tp_bad.png}
\caption{The posterior densities, Markov chains, and MSE surfaces, for two parameters taken from two sets of parameters. The top set of plots shows $C_3$ estimates for P1 where lasso is allowed to select two parameters with standard deviation set as the feature metric; $C_3$ converges well. The bottom set of plots show $t_p$ estimates for P1 for lasso-selected parameters at one standard error minimum---eight parameters are selected in this case---with standard deviation set as the feature metric; $t_p$ does not converge to a unique minimum but has a lower MSE than cases where the parameters are uniquely identified..}
\label{fig:mcmc_converence}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion}
\textbf{Summary} Our most broad conclusion is that the machine-selected parameters work better than hand-selected parameters and that the Houlihan methods are a scalable method for selecting which parameters of a mechanistic model to estimate using DA methods. This means that stacking machine learning techniques on top of, or together with, DA is a helpful strategy, especially when models are complex and data are sparse, as in our glucose modeling example.
\textbf{Houlihan methods} We intuitively define the Houlihan method(s) as a collection of methods for selecting the most productive model parameters to estimate with machine learning techniques applied to simulated model output under parameter variation subject to a set of features, e.g., the mean of a state.
using machine learning to
\textbf{Feature metric selection matters}: For all methods, the feature metric (mean or standard deviation) was the first-order driver of differences in parameter rank orderings.
This choice is highly problem-dependent. In some biomedical applications, sensitivity of the mean to parameter perturbation is not especially important for a good fit; e.g., there are physiologic systems where variation in the mean across people is small, but excursions, peaks, number of peaks, location of peaks, etc., may be a more important types of features to capture.
\textbf{The cutoff matters}: The cutoff for influence has a substantial impact on the ability to estimate parameters. For example, lasso-selected parameters usually minimized MSE, but the induced MSE and MCMC convergence were both sensitive to the influence cutoff. All the methods had this sensitivity, and estimating optimal cutoffs automatically would be beneficial.
\textbf{The selection method sometimes matters:} For the high-ranked parameter choices, the feature-metric was the primary difference between selected parameter sets. However, as the number of parameters included was increased, the methods diverged. We suspect that as the complexity of feature metrics and ranking methods increases, e.g., using nonlinear regressions, there will be more sensitivity of the parameter selections to the methods.
\textbf{Physiology matters:} We know from carefully considering the convergence properties of the MCMC chains that some of the lowest MSEs for the runs with three or more parameters didn't converge well. Meaning, as we increased the flexibility, we lowered the MSE but possibly at the expense of physiologic fidelity or convergent parameter estimates. For pure forecasting applications this may or may not matter, but when we want the parameters to be meaningful, we need the parameter estimates to converge, not necessarily to \emph{a} unique set of parameters, but to distinctly different parameter estimates that can be treated as hypotheses. Another problem that can arise because of physiology is that different people with different physiology can be sensitive to different parameters. For example, the physiological feature that is important to personalize the model for a particular person may not be related to the properties captured by the feature metric, e.g., the mean, and in this circumstance parameters identified as low influence relative to the feature-metric will not be estimated. A potential example of this is P1, for whom estimating $\alpha$ and $E$ achieved the lowest MSE despite $E$ and $\alpha$ being low-influence parameters relative to both the mean and standard deviation.
\textbf{Effective parameter space exploration:} Abstractly, a mechanistic model is a parameterized family of functions whose parameters, depending on the model, have varying degrees of independence. From this perspective, the goal of the Houlihan methodology is to find a way to explore the maximal amount of the parameter space while minimizing the redundancy between parameters.
The feature-metrics and the influence functions define which subsets of the parameter space are most useful to open for exploration, which in turn defines which dynamics can be explored. For example, focusing on variations of the mean may close off other dynamical features such as amplitude variations or any feature that is not uniquely defined by the variation of the mean. We do not yet have a good method for understanding how a feature-metric may influence other, potentially valuable explorations. We acknowledge that understanding and quantifying how limited feature-metrics influence the effective parameter space of a model is an important, unexplored problem.
\textbf{Computational complexity:} We consider only the case here where we vary any one single parameter while leaving all other parameters fixed at their nominal values; this means that the dimension of the input for regression used to select the most useful parameters scales linearly in the number of parameters. If we were to co-vary parameters, meaning if varied all parameters at once, depending on how one choose to partition the parameter space, the computational complexity would explode. In this way, the framework we present here does not solve the computational complexity problem of exploring parameter space. Instead, the results in this paper show that even by only considering feature-metric variation along one-dimensional subspaces of the full parameter space we can gain substantial insight into which parameters have the most impact on the features we are interested in approximating. Moreover, we can also see the limitations of this approach --- we do observe synergy between parameters where combinations of some low-influence parameters for some people can end up having a high influence on the model fit.
\textbf{Obvious extensions}: In this paper, we stack machine learning on top of DA, which has many potential extensions. Feature-metrics could be generalized to be multi-dimensional both over states and over types of feature-metrics. Feature selection methods could be developed or employed to select feature metrics. The estimates of influence could be calculated to include jointly varying parameters---this would be computationally expensive and would require computational innovation in high-dimensional settings, cf the computational complexity discussion above. Moreover, this problem is not necessarily a simple extension because the parameter spaces of mechanistic models are not likely to form a basis for the model space, in contrast to the parameters of the space of polynomials which do form a basis. Of course this lack of a basis structure is part of the problem---parameters of mechanistic models and likely the physiology they represent are redundant, likely for biological reasons such as robustness. We use linear regression and PCA-based machine learning methods; it is likely that more sophisticated machine learning methods e.g., full elastic nets, support vector machines, deep learning, sparse machine learning (compressed sensing), Bayesian methods, model averaging and ensemble learning could all be used and would likely improve the parameter selections. Similarly, further stack of machine learning techniques on top of the Houlihan methods would likely be productive. For example, greedy, Gibbs-sampling-like rotation between sets of parameters that are identifiable and explore different subsets of the parameter space could minimize both model errors and identifiability issues. And finally, feature-metrics could be made substantially more sophisticated, insightful and tailored to circumstance or physiologic knowledge, such as preserving power in certain frequency bands. More sophisticated feature metrics could also be used to gain insight into potentially meaningful constraints on parameters for use in operational DA.
\section{Conclusion}
We devised a methodology for rank-ordering parameters of a mechanistic model and using this rank-ordering to select an effective subset of parameters to estimate when projecting biomedical data onto the model via data assimilation.
This methodology specifically targets parameter sets that avoid issues of model identifiability and parameter-estimation convergence problems, improving forecasting and phenotyping performance of data assimilation methods that use mechanistic biological models.
Using machine learning to select parameters to estimate worked: the machine-chosen parameters reduced the mean-squared error between estimates and forecasts and data in nearly all cases by factors as large as three. These results imply that combining mechanistic and non-mechanistic machine learning could be a particularly productive direction of future research and could greatly aid in our ability to use computational machinery to both help deepen our physiologic understanding and help clinicians achieve more positive outcomes in clinical settings.
|
\section*{Appendix}
\section{Relationship to Bayesian Neural Networks}
The MetaVAE is closely related to a fully Bayesian VAE where one would explicitly model a posterior distribution over parameters. More precisely, this involves the factorization of the joint, $p({\bm{x}},{\bm{z}},\theta) = p({\bm{x}}|{\bm{z}},\theta)p({\bm{z}})p(\theta)$. Then, the appropriate inference network would be $q_\phi({\bm{z}}|\theta, {\bm{x}})$ i.e. amortized over a family of generative models $\{p({\bm{x}},{\bm{z}},\theta), \theta \in \Theta\}$. If $\Theta$ is a finite set, then the fully Bayesian VAE is analogous to a MetaVAE. In practice, Bayesian neural networks are difficult to train. By discretizing $\Theta$ to a finite set, we make the problem tractable.
\section{Demo: Clustering Mixtures (Continued)}
We provide additional details for the experimental setup outlined in the main text. Formally, we let each distribution $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}}) \sim p_\mathcal{M}$ be a MoG, where $p_{\mathcal{D}}({\bm{x}}) = \frac{1}{2}\mathcal{N}(\mathbf{\mu}_1, 0.1) + \frac{1}{2}\mathcal{N}(\mathbf{\mu}_2, 0.1)$. Each equally-mixed Gaussian component has isotropic covariance of 0.1 and mean drawn from $U(-5, 5)$. We assign each mixture component a label of 0 or 1.
Therefore, we represent each $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})$ as a data set of samples $\mathcal{D}_i = \{{\bm{x}}_1, ..., {\bm{x}}_N\} \sim p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})$ in our inference procedure.
The meta-inference model $\hat{g}_\phi(\mathcal{D}_i, {\bm{x}})$ takes as input the data set as well as an observation ${\bm{x}} \sim p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics[ width=\linewidth]{figures/mixtures/generalization_schemes.png}
\caption{Thirty mixtures drawn from the meta-distribution $\mathcal{M}$. We plot (in color) 3 unseen distributions whose parameters are drawn from (left) $U(-5, 5)$; (middle) $U(3,7)$; (right) $U(10, 20)$, the first two begin in and close to $\mathcal{M}$ whereas the last mixture is clearly outside of $\mathcal{M}$.}
\label{fig:mnist:gen}
\end{figure}
Next, we investigate clustering ability of the meta-inference model on mixture distributions outside of $p_{\mathcal{M}}$ as we vary the amount of fine-tuning data (previously, we did not allow any fine-tuning -- inference was zero-shot). See Fig.~\ref{fig:mnist:gen} for different measures of generalizability. Specifically, we extract the pre-trained meta-inference model and train a new generative network on each of 3 unseen data distributions, evaluating the clustering performance. We only use \{5, 10, 15, 20\}\% of the test distribution for training. As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:extra:mnist}(a), the model is able weakly generalize across all levels of meta-training, outperforming the VAE baseline with the exception of the 100 GMM meta-encoder -- a phenomena consistent with the results shown in Table 1, i.e., overfitting to the meta-training set. However, Fig.~\ref{fig:extra:mnist}(b,c) shows that meta-training does not seem to provide significant gains in generalization performance on marginals far from $p_{\mathcal{M}}$, again consistent with other demonstrations.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\subfigure[$\mu \sim U(-5, 5)$]
{\label{fig:c}\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/mixtures/unseen_metadist_clustering.pdf}}
\subfigure[$\mu \sim U(3, 7)$]
{\label{fig:b}\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{figures/mixtures/unseen_3_7_clustering.pdf}}
\subfigure[$\mu \sim U(10, 20$)] {\label{fig:a}\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{figures/mixtures/unseen_10_20_clustering.pdf}}
\caption{Clustering performance after training on \{5,10,15,20\}\% of the unseen data distribution. In (a), meta-training on 10, 30, and 50 datasets allows for perfect clustering, outperforming the VAE. In (b), only the 50 GMM meta-trained model has successfully learned to cluster. In (c), the meta-clustering algorithm fails to generalize to an extremely out-of-sample distribution.}
\label{fig:extra:mnist}
\end{figure}
\section{Demo: Clustering Handwritten Digits}
Next, we construct a setup analogous to the mixtures of Gaussians experiment with MNIST digits \cite{lecun1998mnist}. Specifically, we hold out two digit classes for out-of-sample evaluation, and generate datasets comprised of pairs of the remaining digits. We select a subset of \{5, 10, 20\} combinations out of a total of 28 (8 choose 2) possibilities to train the MetaVAE. We then ask the model to cluster new digit pairs, either drawn from the eight unseen pairs in $\mathcal{M}$ or the digit pair (3s and 7s) that were held out completely in training. We use continuous 40-dimensional latent variables to better model the complexity of the data.
Like in MoG, we use MetaVAE representations to train a logistic regression model with the true labels (0/1 for each digit class).
To measure performance, we embed the test set and compare against true labels. Fig.~\ref{fig:mnist}(a,b) shows the clustering results for two levels of difficulty: digit pair (1,6) (visually easy) and (4,9) (visually hard). For the former, an MetaVAE outperforms the VAE trained on the \textit{full} dataset of 1's and 6's. For the more difficult task, adding more combinations improves clustering performance, and the MetaVAE outperforms a VAE trained on half of the target data. Fig.~\ref{fig:mnist}(c) shows MetaVAE performance on the out-of-sample digit pair (3,7). The MetaVAE obtains less than 2\% clustering error \textit{without additional gradient steps}. Further, surprisingly, it outperforms a VAE which has been trained on 100\% of the target dataset of 3's and 7's.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[Digit Pair (1,6)]{\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/mnist/weak_gen_clustering_err_vae_baseline_1_6.pdf}}
\subfigure[Digit Pair (4,9)]{\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{figures/mnist/weak_gen_clustering_err_vae_baseline_4_9.pdf}}
\subfigure[Digit Pair (3,7)]{\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{figures/mnist/strong_gen_clustering_err_vae_baseline.pdf}}
\caption{Clustering on MNIST digit pairs. We train a MetaVAE amortized over \{5, 10, 20\} pairs of digit classes and evaluate their performance on unseen pairs from and outside of $p_\mathcal{M}$. (a,b) shows that the MetaVAE achieves higher clustering accuracy compared to a VAE trained on 100\% and 50\% of the target distribution (within $p_\mathcal{M}$). (c) shows that the MetaVAE outperforms a VAE trained on 100\% of the out-of-sample distribution (not in $p_\mathcal{M}$).}
\label{fig:mnist}
\end{figure}
\section{Demo: Classical Mechanics (Continued)}
We include the derivation for the meta-compiled inference objective from the main text. Note that this is very similar to \cite{le2016inference}.
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{L}_\phi &= \mathbb{E}_{p_{\theta_i^*}({\bm{x}})}[D_{\text{KL}}(p_{\theta_i^*}({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}})) || g_\phi({\bm{z}}|p_{\theta_i^*}, {\bm{x}}))] \\
&= \int_{{\bm{x}}} p_{\theta_i^*}({\bm{x}}) \int_{{\bm{z}}} p_{\theta_i^*}({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}})\log \frac{p_{\theta_i^*}({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}})}{g_\phi({\bm{z}}|p_{\theta_i^*}, {\bm{x}})} d{\bm{z}} d{\bm{x}} \\
&\propto \mathbb{E}_{p_{\theta_i^*}({\bm{x}}, {\bm{z}})}[-\log g_\phi({\bm{z}}|p_{\theta_i^*}, {\bm{x}})]
\end{align*}
\section{Demo: Distribution Statistics Details}
As this experiment setup is slightly involved, we provide a more thorough explanation with details here.
Recall that a sufficient statistic is defined as a function $\phi(x)$ mapping realizations of a random variable to a vector in $\mathbb{R}^d$. We noted in the main text that for realizations of a ``random vector" (length $k$) whose entries each are a random variable distributed i.i.d. according to some exponential family, the sum $\sum_{i=1}^k \phi(x_i)$ of the sufficient statistics for realizations of each random variable in the vector. Finally, recall that the objective is: having seen many realizations of random vectors from different exponential family distributions, is it possible to learn a sufficient statistic for a new random vector that can be used to estimate the parameters of the (possibly unseen) underlying distribution that each random variable in the vector is distributed by?
If we treat an observation ${\bm{x}}$ as a realization of a random vector, then the meta-inference model $g_\phi(p_{\mathcal{D}}, {\bm{x}})$, as a function of ${\bm{x}}$, should act as a sufficient statistic for $p_{\mathcal{D}}$. A key distinction between the this experiment and the mixture of Gaussians (MoG) experiment is what an observation represents. In MoG, we represent the $i$-th observation ${\bm{x}}_i$ as a 2-D vector sampled from a mixture distribution; when doubly amortizing, the meta-inference model $g_\phi$ takes as input ${\bm{x}}_i$ and a marginal distribution, which we represent as a data set $\mathcal{D}_i = \{ {\bm{x}} \}_i$. In contrast, in this experiment, the $i$-th observation is interpreted as a \textit{realization of a random vector} ${\bm{x}}$. The meta-inference model $g_\phi$ still takes as input the observation and a marginal distribution.
In this case, the marginal is a distribution over random vectors, which we represent as a set of realizations (samples) of random vectors. We studied four different cases (meta-distributions): \textbf{1) First,} we perform inference for all two dimensional Gaussian distributions with spherical covariance of 0.1 and a mean between -5 and 5. This implies that every random vector will be composed of i.i.d samples from a 2-D Gaussian distribution. The inference objective is estimate the unknown parameters of a new unseen Gaussian distribution after training. \textbf{2) Second,} we consider all two dimensional Log Normal distributions with spherical covariance of 0.1 and a mean between -5 and 5. \textbf{3) Third,} we consider all two dimensional Exponential distributions with scale less than 5. \textbf{4) Fourth,} we consider the union of distributions in the previous three cases (this defines the largest meta-distribution of the four cases). Note that each distribution defined above only has one free (continuous) parameter, which will serve as the statistic that we infer.
In each case, we must construct a meta-training and meta-test set where the former is used to train the MetaVAE and the latter is used to measure generalization of inference. To create the meta-training set, we randomly sampled 30 parameters defining 30 distributions (for example, sample 30 means from a uniform distribution $U(-5, 5)$ to define 30 Gaussian distributions). For each of the 30 distributions, we sample 20 times, building a 20-D random vector ${\bm{x}}$. To represent the marginal distribution, we use a set of 10 random vectors, each sampled i.i.d. For the meta-test set, we consider an interpolation of unseen distributions across a range of parameters. For example, for the first case of only amortizing over Gaussian distributions, we meta-test on Gaussians with means from -10 to 10 by 0.1 increments. By also considering means outside of -5 and 5 (the meta-distribution), we measure how well the MetaVAE can do inference in and outside of the meta-distribution. A similar design is used for cases 2 through 4.
Next, we describe components of the MetaVAE. We place the full burden of learning onto the meta-inference model by making each generative model $p_{\theta_i}({\bm{x}}|{\bm{z}})$ parameter-free i.e. $g_\phi$ has no choice but to act as the sufficient statistic; Critically, this is possible since $p_{\theta_i}({\bm{x}}|{\bm{z}})$ is given the correct distributional family that $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})$ belongs to (so it knows how to use ${\bm{z}}$ to define a distribution). Knowing the correct distributional family also defines the loss function; for example, if we are given that $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})$ is Gaussian, then ${\bm{z}}$ represents the mean and we can use a Gaussian PDF in the lower bound computation. However, the meta-inference model $g_\phi(p_{\mathcal{D}_i}, {\bm{z}})$ is tasked with matching marginals with the correct families and must produce a latent variable ${\bm{z}}$ to capture the parameters of the true distribution, $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})$. Since the number (1) and dimensionality (2) of all sufficient statistics are identical, we can choose ${\bm{z}}$ to be a two dimensional continuous random variable. Future work can explore more complex designs such as distributions with different numbers of sufficient statistics. For some statistics, we add a Softplus function to ensure that it is greater than 0 (e.g. scale for exponential distributions). In terms of architectures, we chose a multilayer perceptron (MLP) that ingests a set $\{{\bm{x}}\}_i$ and outputs a set of hidden vectors that we average over into a single hidden vector. This network is used to reduce an observation (set of sample vectors from a distribution) into a single vector ${\bm{h}}_i$ as well as the representation of the marginal distribution into a set of vectors, $\{{\bm{h}}\}_i$. Together, ${\bm{h}}_i$ and $\{{\bm{h}}\}_i$ are ingested by a separate MLP to return variational parameters for the sufficient statistic.
At test time, no additional training is needed to do inference for unseen distributions. For an unseen distribution, we use the meta-inference model as a statistic to estimate the unknown parameter of the given distribution. We report the mean squared error against the true parameter of the underlying distribution, which is known when generating the dataset.
In each of the four cases, we compare our results to baseline models. When amortizing over a single family of distributions (e.g. cases 1 through 3), we compare an doubly-amortized inference procedure with a singly amortized one: we train a VAE on a distribution from the family with a randomly chosen statistic: $[-1.2, 1.1]$ mean for Gaussian, $[-0.5, 1.8]$ mean for Log Normal, $[1.4, 2.8]$ scale for Exponential. The goal of this baseline is to see how inference generalizes without amortizing over generative models (poorly as it turns out). For case 4, when considering multiple families from the Exponential families, we compare a MetaVAE amortized over 30 Gaussian, 30 Log Normal, and 30 Exponential distributions (for a total of 90 distributions) to three separate MetaVAEs, amortized over only 30 distributions of its family e.g. 30 Gaussians, 30 Log Normals, and 30 Exponentials respectively. Including these baselines again measures the effect of meta-amortization. Finally, in main text, we also tested how well inference works for other members of Exponential family that were not observed during training. To be specific, we included Weibull distributions with scale 1 and shapes from $[0,5]$, Laplace distributions with location 0 and scales in $[0,5]$, and ``symmetric" Beta distributions with two equal shape parameters from $[0,5]$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[ width=0.49\linewidth]{figures/toy_gaussian/gaussian_only_test_set_mu.png}}
\subfigure[]
{\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{figures/toy_gaussian/gaussian_only_out_of_sample_set_mu.png}}
\subfigure[Log Normal]{\includegraphics[ width=0.49\linewidth]{figures/toy_gaussian/lognormal_exapmle_good.png}}
\subfigure[Exponential]
{\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{figures/toy_gaussian/exponential_exapmle_good.png}}
\caption{Colored circles represent 30 different $p_{\mathcal{D}_i} \sim p_{\mathcal{M}}$; black dots represent the inferred Gaussian means from the meta-inference model. (a) Test Gaussian distributions within $\mathcal{M}$; (b) Test distributions outside of $\mathcal{M}$. (c,d) Samples from the an unseen Log Normal or Exponential distribution $p_{\mathcal{D}_i} \in p_{\mathcal{M}}$ (red) and the true corresponding distribution defined by the inferred statistic (blue).}
\label{fig:gaussian_plot}
\end{figure}
\section{Training Details}
\subsection{Architectures}
In the main text, recall that $g_\phi(p_{\mathcal{D}_i}, {\bm{x}})$ is a supervised doubly amortized regressor that takes as input a marginal distribution $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}$ and an observation ${\bm{x}}$ to return a posterior distribution. In practice, we need additional machinery to parameterize $g_\phi(p_{\mathcal{D}_i}, {\bm{x}})$ with neural networks. For some dataset $D_i$ and ${\bm{x}} \in \mathcal{X}$, we set $\hat{g}_\phi(D_i, {\bm{x}}) = r_{\psi}(\textsc{concat}(x, h_{\gamma}(D))$ where $\phi = \{ \psi, \gamma \}$, $h(\cdot)$ is \textit{summary} neural network that ingests the elements in $D$, and $r(\cdot)$ is an \textit{aggregation} neural network that ingests the input and the summary.
\paragraph{Mixture of Gaussians Experiment} The inference network for both the VAE and the MetaVAE is composed of 3 linear layers (hidden dimensions of 10) with ReLU nonlinearity in between each. The decoder networks share the same architecture as well. The summary network for the MetaVAE is also a MLP with three layers (hidden dimensions of 10) and Leaky ReLU nonlinearity.
\paragraph{Classical Mechanics Experiment} The inference model is identical to the MoG experiment except the latent variable is continuous (although still one-dimensional). No decoders are used as the simulators act as fixed generative models. The summary network is also as in MoG.
\paragraph{Exponential Family Experiment} The inference network is composed 3 linear layers (hidden dimensions of 400) with ReLU nonlinearity in between each. The summary network is also a MLP with three layers (hidden dimensions of 400) and Leaky ReLU nonlinearity. Results are not sensitive to choices of hidden dimension and nonlinearities.
\paragraph{MNIST and NORB Experiments} As many of the components as possible are shared between MetaVAE, NS, ad VHE. The latter two require additional sub-networks to ingest and decode a second (global) latent variables; thus, NS and VHE have more trainable parameters than MetaVAE. We use different designs for MNIST and NORB:
For MNIST, we use simpler architectures, flattening each image into a 784 dimensional vector. Specifically, we start with 3 linear layers with 400 hidden dimensions and ReLU nonlinearity for the encoder; 3 linear layers with 400 hidden dimensions and ReLU nonlinearity for each decoder; and 3 linear layers with 400 hidden dimensions and ReLU nonlinearity for the summary network. We used 40 latent dimensions (denoted ${\bm{z}}$). For NS and VHE, we used an additional global latent (denoted ${\bm{c}}$) of 300 dimensions and 3 linear layers with 400 hidden dimensions and ReLU nonlinearity to decode latent ${\bm{z}}$ from latent ${\bm{c}}$.
Since NORB is more difficult (being realistic instead of synthetic images), we trade linear layers for convolutional architectures. Specifically, for the decoder, the MetaVAE uses: a linear layer first to increase the input dimensionality to $256*4*4$, which will be reshaped into an image; followed by six convolutional layers with three transposed convolutional layers every two convolutions with batch normalization after every layer (slowly decreasing the filter size from 256 to 128 to 64 to 1 or 3). For inference, the MetaVAE uses three sub-components: first, we have a large convolutional network with 9 convolutional layers with batch normalization in between layer that ingests the input image and outputs a object of size 256 by 4 by 4. Every input image and every sample from the distribution is processed using this convolutional network. Then the summary network consists of 3 linear layers with 400 hidden dimensions and ReLU nonlinearity that injests the output of the convolutional network into a summary statistic over samples. The resulting summary is concatenated with the output of the convolutional network for the input image and fed into two linear layers (400 hidden dimensions) with residual connections that spit out parameters of a Gaussian distribution over latent $z$. Again, VHE and NS have a second global latent variable of 300 dimensions that requires a separate decoder network, which we now define with two linear layers with residual connections (400 hidden dimensions).
\subsection{Hyperparameters}
\paragraph{Mixture of Gaussians Experiment} For the MetaVAE, we used a batch size of 20, a learning rate of 2e-4, and trained for 500 epochs using the Adam optimizer. For the VAE, we used a batch size of 100, a learning rate of 1e-3, and trained for 200 epochs using the Adam optimizer. The dataset was generated by sampling the appropriate MoG, where we sampled means uniformly from the ranges such as $U(-5, 5)$. We doubly-amortize over \{10, 30, 50\} such datasets at one time. We trained the model by exact enumeration of the ELBO/MetaELBO to avoid high-variance gradient estimates induced by using a 1-D discrete latent variable ${\bm{z}}$.
\paragraph{Classical Mechanics Experiment} We use a batch size of 64, a learning rate of 2e-4, and trained for 10 epochs using Adam (for both VAE and MetaVAE). The dataset was created by running each simulator in the meta-train set 1000 times (similar for testing). For the VAE baseline we chose the ``center" simulator (a length of 10 in range 1 to 19 and an angle of 45 in range 5 to 85) which should give the best hope of generalization without doubly-amortizing.
\paragraph{Exponential Family Experiment} We used a batch size of 20, a learning rate of 2e-4, and trained for 100 epochs using the Adam optimizer. The dataset was generated by sampling 1000 times i.i.d. from a parameterized distribution in the exponential family. We doubly-amortize over 10 to 30 such datasets at one time. The latent dimension was chosen to match the number of sufficient statistics and 20 i.i.d. samples where given to the summary network.
\paragraph{MNIST and NORB Experiments} We used a batch size of 100, a learning rate of 2e-4, and trained for 100 epochs using the Adam optimizer. MNIST images were kept at 28 by 28 pixels whereas NORB images were resized and center cropped to 32 by 32 pixels. All generative models used a latent dimension of 40 and 10 i.i.d. samples from the dataset to represent the distribution as input to $\hat{g}_{\phi}$.
\section{Conclusion}
In summary, we considered constructing an algorithm that can do inference for a \textit{family} of probabilistic models. We introduced a meta-amortized inference paradigm and a new generative model, the MetaVAE.
Through experiments on MNIST and Small NORB, we showed that the MetaVAE learned transferable representations that generalize well across similar data distributions in downstream tasks.
Future work could consider new applications of meta-inference in video prediction \cite{ramanathan2015learning}.
\section{Demo: Learning Distribution Statistics}
Next, we explore whether the MetaVAE is capable of "meta-learning" the concept of a sufficient statistic for exponential families~\cite{wainwright2008graphical}.
Given a set of random samples, a sufficient statistic is a function that maps this set to a vector in $\mathbb{R}^d$. For the exponential families, where each family member has the form \(p(x) \propto \exp (\theta \cdot \phi(x))\) for some parameter \(\theta\), this vector can be used to estimate the parameters of the distribution.
In other words, the random samples (dataset) can be fully summarized by
the sufficient statistic, without any loss of information.
Now consider a \textit{vector} of random variables $(x_1, \cdots, x_k)$, each distributed i.i.d from the same distribution with sufficient statistic $\phi(x_i)$.
For exponential families, the sum $\sum_{i=1}^k \phi(x_i)$
is a sufficient statistic for the random vector.
As an example, the number of successes is a sufficient statistic for a vector of i.i.d. Bernoulli, and the sample mean and variance are for a vector of Gaussians.
With this intuition, we ask the following: having seen many realizations of random vectors from different exponential family distributions, can we learn a sufficient statistic for
a new random vector that will be sufficient for estimating the parameters of its unseen, underlying distribution?
We aim to use the MetaVAE's meta-inference network to learn this mapping.
More precisely, the meta inference model $g_\phi(p_{\mathcal{D}_i},{\bm{x}})$ should act (as a function of ${\bm{x}}$) as a sufficient statistic for an unseen distribution $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}$.
\subsection{Data and Model Setup}
In this experiment, we use
Gaussian (fixed variance), log-normal (fixed variance), exponential, symmetric beta, Laplace (fixed location), and Weibull (fixed scale)
as exponential families. We then construct a set $\mathcal{M}_{\mathcal{I}}$ of 20-D
vectors of random variables where each component is i.i.d. distributed according to the same distribution.
By construction, a random variable in this set will have only one free parameter, which can be found using the statistic learned by the meta-inference network.
We further restrict $\mathcal{M}_{\mathcal{I}}$ by bounding the free parameter to be within a range (e.g. Gaussians with mean between -5 and 5).
After training, we measure how well we can infer the distributional parameters using the meta-inference model as a learned statistic for observations from unseen distributions. We compute the mean squared error (MSE) between the inferred and true parameters. We refer the reader to the appendix for more details.
\subsection{Experiment Results}
\paragraph{Single Exponential Family}
Each $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}}) \in \mathcal{M}$ is Gaussian with a mean sampled from $U(-5, 5)$. At test time, we measure inference quality on (1) new random vectors from $\mathcal{M}$ whose entries are distributed as Gaussians with unseen means sampled from $U(-5, 5)$, and (2) a larger meta-distribution by sampling means from $U(-20, 20)$. We find the MetaVAE successfully learns the mean of the underlying Gaussians. Interestingly, in Fig.~\ref{fig:gaussian_plot}(a), we find that the inference quality only decays near the boundary of the meta-distribution.
We compare the MetaVAE to a VAE trained on one Gaussian distribution and find that doubly-amortizing increases the inference quality dramatically.
Then we move to two new exponential families: we similarly construct 30 log-normal random vectors with means from $U(-2, 2)$ and 30 Exponential random vectors with rates sampled from $U(0, 3)$. Like above, Fig.~\ref{fig:explognorm_plot} shows good performance of meta-inference over $\mathcal{M}$ in each case.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[Gaussian]{\includegraphics[width=0.34\linewidth]{figures/toy_gaussian/gaussian_timeseries_plot.pdf}}
\subfigure[Log-Normal]
{\includegraphics[width=0.31\linewidth]{figures/toy_gaussian/lognormal_timeseries_plot.pdf}}
\subfigure[Exponential]
{\includegraphics[width=0.31\linewidth]{figures/toy_gaussian/exponential_timeseries_plot.pdf}}
\caption{(a) MSE between the true and inferred mean as the true mean of $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}$ spans $[-10, 10]$. The green region shows the meta-distribution.
The orange (dashed) line shows a singly-amortized VAE trained on a single $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})$ with mean $[-1.2, 1.1]$ (randomly chosen) and the blue (solid) line shows the MetaVAE.
(b,c) show the MSE between the true and inferred parameters. The orange line is a singly-amortized VAE trained on a randomly chosen distribution ($[-0.5, 1.8]$ for log-normal; $[1.4, 2.8]$ for exponential).}
\label{fig:explognorm_plot}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Many Exponential Families}
Finally, we amortize over many types of distributional families simultaneously: we construct sets of 30 Gaussian, 30 log-normal, and 30 exponential random vectors (same bounds as above) to train a MetaVAE. This setup raises an interesting question: can we do inference for new random vectors comprised of \textit{unseen members of the exponential family} (e.g. Weibull)?
We compare the performance a MetaVAE amortized over the 90 random vectors to 3 different (baseline) MetaVAEs, each of which is amortized over only 30 random vectors from one family (e.g. Gaussian). Below, Fig.~\ref{fig:expfam_plot}(a-c) plot the MSE of inferred and true parameters for Gaussian, log-normal, and exponential (all of which are in $\mathcal{M}$). Due to the double-amortization gap, the best performing model is the MetaVAE amortized on random vectors only from that family. However, the 90-amortized MetaVAE only performs slightly worse, beating the remaining two baselines dramatically. Next, Fig.~\ref{fig:expfam_plot}(d-f) show MSEs for three distributions not in $\mathcal{M}$: Weibull, Laplace, and Beta. The 90-amortized MetaVAE consistently outperforms all baselines.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[ width=0.9\linewidth]{figures/toy_gaussian/legend.pdf}}
\subfigure[Gaussian]{\includegraphics[ width=0.32\linewidth]{figures/toy_gaussian/mixed_gaussian_timeseries_plot.pdf}}
\subfigure[Log Normal]{\includegraphics[ width=0.32\linewidth]{figures/toy_gaussian/mixed_lognormal_timeseries_plot.pdf}}
\subfigure[Exponential]{\includegraphics[ width=0.32\linewidth]{figures/toy_gaussian/mixed_exponential_timeseries_plot.pdf}}
\subfigure[Beta($\alpha$, $\alpha$)]{\includegraphics[ width=0.32\linewidth]{figures/toy_gaussian/beta.pdf}}
\subfigure[Weibull(scale=1)]{\includegraphics[ width=0.32\linewidth]{figures/toy_gaussian/weibull.pdf}}
\subfigure[Laplace(loc=0)]{\includegraphics[ width=0.32\linewidth]{figures/toy_gaussian/laplace_scale.pdf}}
\caption{Comparison of a MetaVAE amortized over three members of the exponential family to MetaVAEs amortized over only a single member. Each subplot shows an unseen distribution from either the meta-distribution (b,c,d) or another exponential family (e,f,g).}
\label{fig:expfam_plot}
\end{figure}
\section{Introduction}
A wide variety of problems in machine learning (ML) can be framed as probabilistic inference in generative models. In particular, latent variable models learn representations of data that capture salient characteristics of its underlying distribution, which can then be used for downstream tasks such as classification \cite{klingler2017efficient}. While traditional inference techniques can be slow or even computationally intractable, the advent of \textit{amortized (variational) inference} allowed such methods to scale to large datasets, bringing about significant progress in generative modeling applications such as image and audio synthesis \cite{brock2018large,oord2016wavenet}, molecule generation \cite{segler2017generating}, and more.
However, as the problem domains we face become increasingly more complex and multimodal, a technical challenge arises: generative models trained using traditional inference techniques struggle to adapt to new data distributions, even when these new distributions may be \textit{closely related} to distributions seen during training. For example, variational autoencoders (VAEs) trained on the original image distributions have difficulty generalizing to small visual transformations such as
changing the position or quantity of objects in the scene.
However, we would expect the true generative model, such as those of humans \cite{yildirim2014perception}, to be invariant to these slight modifications. Therefore, the question we aim to address is:
how do we design an amortized inference algorithm that
generalizes across
related distributions to learn \textit{transferable} representations? Such features would capture the salient characteristics necessary to allow for better generalization to related, but unseen distributions at test time.
To address this question, we propose a \textit{doubly-amortized} inference procedure that amortizes computation across not only a set of query inputs, but also a \textit{set} of different, related target probabilistic models.
More precisely, we derive a new objective called the MetaELBO which serves as a variational lower bound across multiple distributions, while also incorporating a prior regularization term encouraging each generative model to match its respective data marginal.
We note that this inference model is not intended to be universal, but rather tailored to a specific family where each probabilistic model is similar in structure.
Inspired by meta-learning, we denote this "doubly-amortized" inference problem as \textit{meta-inference} and let a \textit{meta-distribution} refer to the probability distribution over the family of probabilistic models.
As an instantiation of our method, we introduce the MetaVAE, a VAE trained with the MetaELBO.
Empirically, we first show three demonstrations to build intuition for meta-inference: 1) clustering, 2) compiled inference, and 3) learning sufficient statistics on exponential families. Then, we study image transformations (e.g. rotations, shearing) on MNIST digits where the MetaVAE learns representations that transfer to unseen transformations, outperforming baselines by 10-50\%. Finally, we showcase similar improvements of 10-35\% on real-world images (NORB).
While the representations learned from other generative models quickly decay in quality under more severe transformations, those of the MetaVAE preserve relevant information about the image while abstracting away unnecessary differences induced by visual manipulation.
\section{Transformation-Invariance Experiments}
To motivate the next set of experiments, imagine designing a scene understanding algorithm for a self-driving car. The video datasets used to train deep learning agents are typically collected in isolated settings, such as in large cities during favorable weather conditions.
However, an agent deployed in the real world may face a variety of new settings such as paved roads in poorly-lit suburban areas.
In such cases, we would hope the agent could abstract away unnecessary sources of variation, such as different lighting conditions, and act upon more salient characteristics in the scene (e.g. pedestrians) that it has seen previously during training.
Inference in this scenario would mean learning representations that are "transferable," or invariant to nuisance transformations such as time of day.
We take a step towards this goal as
we study the MetaVAE for image distributions with explicit transformations, such as rotations or lighting.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[Interleaved]{\includegraphics[ width=0.27\linewidth]{figures/datasets/split_interleaved.png}}
\hspace{1em}
\subfigure[Sparse]{\includegraphics[ width=0.27\linewidth]{figures/datasets/split_sparse.png}}
\hspace{1em}
\subfigure[Contiguous]{\includegraphics[ width=0.27\linewidth]{figures/datasets/split_disjoint.png}}
\subfigure[Meta-Inference Pipeline]{\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/datasets/model_image.pdf}}
\caption{(a-c) Three ways of defining the meta-training and meta-test splits; (b,c) pose a more difficult generalization challenge. (d) Overview of the doubly-amortized inference procedure. The meta-training set is used to train the MetaVAE (the test portion is to used to choose best parameters). The meta-test set is for evaluating the learned features, where the training portion is used to fit a linear classifier and the test portion is used to compute accuracy.}
\label{fig:splits}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Datasets} We study MNIST \cite{lecun1998mnist} and NORB \cite{lecun2004learning}, where we amortize over three axes of variation each (e.g. a range of camera angles or background lighting). Further, we vary how different variations are split into meta-training and meta-test sets, summarized in Fig.~\ref{fig:splits}(a-c). For instance, we may train the MetaVAE only on images with bright backgrounds and evaluate on darker images. We consider three meta-splits: \textit{interleaved}, where every other value in the range of possible transformations is selected; \textit{sparse}, where half the number of values are chosen as in interleaved; \textit{contiguous}, where we split the range in two ``contiguous" halves and train only over the first half. Each meta-split is a different measure of transfer-ability.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{figures/datasets/datasets_subset.png}
\caption{Examples of interpolating across three transformations each for MNIST and Small NORB. Notice that for NORB (unlike MNIST), other transformations are not held constant as we vary an individual axis.}
\label{fig:datasets}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{figures/results.pdf}
\caption{Classification Accuracy on Transformed MNIST and Small NORB for three different splits: interleaved, sparse, and contiguous. Each subfigure shows the prediction accuracy on the test set of held out transformations --- gaps represent the values used in training the amortized generative model. We compare the performance of MetaVAE (\textbf{black}), the homoencoder (\textcolor{blue}{blue}) and the statistician (\textcolor{red}{red}) and find appealing results for our proposed model.}
\label{fig:invariance:results}
\end{figure*}
\paragraph{Evaluation Metric} We evaluate the latent representations on a downstream classification task. Having trained the empirical meta-inference model $\hat{g}_\phi(\mathcal{D}, {\bm{x}})$ using the meta-train set, we then embed observations from a distribution in the meta-test set. Each time we ``embed" a test observation ${\bm{x}}$, we feed in a data set $\mathcal{D}$ of samples \emph{from the meta-test set}. This way we construct a data set of latent features.
This feature set is split into a training and test subset. For both MNIST and NORB, each image has a corresponding label (e.g. digit or object class).
Using the training portion (darker red in Fig.~\ref{fig:splits}d) , we fit a logistic regression classifier on the representations to predict the labels and compute accuracy on the test subset (lighter red in Fig.~\ref{fig:splits}d).
Critically, logistic regression seeks the best linear split between classes in the latent space. For it to achieve good accuracy, such a linear division must already exist.
Thus, we treat a higher classification accuracy as a more transferable, invariant representation, as in \cite{berthelot2018understanding}.
\paragraph{Baselines} We compare the performance of MetaVAE against two baselines: the Neural Statistician (NS), a hierarchical VAE which models sets of observations with a global latent variable; and the Variational HomoEncoder (VHE), a more computationally-efficient variant of NS. To ensure a fair comparison, we use the same hyperparameters and architectures across all models. See Appendix for details.
\subsection{Transformed MNIST}
\paragraph{Dataset Construction} We artificially impose three axes of variations on MNIST digits. We transform each image with 18 \textit{rotations} (-180 to 180 by 20 degrees), 15 \textit{scales} (50\% to 200\% original size by 10\%), and 18 \textit{skews} (-180 to 180 by 20 degrees).
See Fig.~\ref{fig:datasets}(a-c) for an example for a single digit. For each axes of variation, the other two are held constant e.g. skew and size are constant when varying rotation.
\paragraph{Results} We find consistent evidence that MetaVAE features outperform both VHE and NS features across all settings, often by a significant margin. In particular, VHE and NS have decaying performance as scale increases to 2.0. Similarly, for extreme shear values near -80 and 80 degrees where the image is nearly flat (see Fig.~\ref{fig:datasets}c), VHE and NS again suffer greatly in performance.
However, MetaVAE features transfer better: we do not notice a drop in accuracy as scale increases and the effect of significant shearing is more gradual.
This suggests that MetaVAE has learned some invariances to transformations that NS and VHE lack.
\subsection{Small NORB}
\paragraph{Dataset Construction} The NORB dataset contains grayscale images of real world toys belonging to five classes: animals, humans, airplanes, trucks, and cars. The objects were imaged under 6 \textit{lighting} conditions, 9 \textit{elevations} (30 to 70 degrees every 5 degrees), and 18 \textit{azimuths} (0 to 340 every 20 degrees). Unlike the MNIST dataset, extraneous transformations are \textit{not} held constant as one transformation is varied. For example, as Fig.~\ref{fig:datasets}(f) shows, the azimuth and elevation (randomly) change as we vary lighting. This design, while more difficult to amortize, is more realistic in real world datasets where it is too expensive to collect data holding all other variables constant.
\paragraph{Results}
The MetaVAE representations outperform those of VHE and NS by 10 to 35\% accuracy. Overall, we notice accuracies are much lower in NORB than in MNIST, which is likely due to the complexity of learning real world image distributions and randomness introduced by variations in extraneous transformations.
We note that the strong performance of the MetaVAE despite varying transformations is promising support for our approach to meta-amortization, suggesting that the MetaVAE is able to ignore irrelevant signals while capturing the principal axes of variation.
\subsection{Analysis}
We aim to quantitatively measure the intuition that amortizing over a family of transformations should yield representations that are invariant to that transformation.
For example, how much does the representation change as we alter the rotation in MNIST from -180 to 180, or interpolate the background from dark to light in NORB?
To investigate, we use a MetaVAE amortized over a family of transformations (e.g. interleaved rotations) and compare the average
L$_2$ distance between the learned representation of a base (default) image and those of every rotated image. As a baseline, we compare this distance to the average L$_2$ distance of a separate family of transformations (e.g. scale) that this MetaVAE was not amortized over (e.g. having only seen different rotations during training). Table~\ref{table:distance} shows the distances for MNIST and NORB. Consistently, the lowest distances belong to the class of transformations that the MetaVAE was amortized over, which supports the intuition about learning invariances.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{r|c|c|c}
\toprule
Model Dataset & Rotation & Scale & Skew \\
\midrule
Rotated MNIST & $\mathbf{1.65}$ & $4.44$ & $4.09$ \\
Scaled MNIST & $5.44$ & $\mathbf{2.16}$ & $4.92$ \\
Skewed MNIST & $3.79$ & $4.89$ & $\mathbf{1.47}$ \\
\toprule
Model Dataset & Elevation & Azimuth & Lighting \\
\midrule
NORB Elevation & $\mathbf{0.39}$ & $1.16$ & $1.27$ \\
NORB Azimuth & $1.42$ & $\mathbf{0.44}$ & $1.26$ \\
NORB Lighting & $1.69$ & $1.27$ & $\mathbf{0.26}$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{L$_2$ distances between MetaVAE representations. Each row indicates the datasets used for training; each column indicates the datasets used to compute representations.}
\label{table:distance}
\end{table}
\section{Meta-Amortized Variational Inference}
\label{sec:meta}
But in practice, physicians often work with several patient populations that vary across a wide range of socioeconomic factors. For a new population, clinicians draw on prior experience from patients with similar symptoms, lowering their chances of misdiagnosis.
We can similarly construct a generative model that captures this intuition.
Instead of training a VAE on a new population, which would be equivalent to the physician re-learning how to diagnose an illness, we aim to share statistical strength between different patient groups to infer latent features that transfer to similar, but previously unseen populations.
We formalize this idea into a new algorithm that we call \textit{meta-amortized inference}.
Recall a (singly)-amortized inference model for $p_\theta({\bm{x}},{\bm{z}})$
\begin{equation}
\max_{\phi}\mathbb{E}_{p_{\mathcal{D}}({\bm{x}})} \left[ \mathbb{E}_{f_\phi({\bm{x}})} \log \frac{p_\theta({\bm{x}},{\bm{z}})}{f_\phi({\bm{x}})({\bm{z}})} \right]
\end{equation}
which approximates $p_\theta({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}})$ for various choices of the observed variables, ${\bm{x}} \sim p_{\mathcal{D}}({\bm{x}})$. Unlike Eq.~\ref{eq:plainamortization}, we have written $q_\phi({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}})$ in its alternate form, $f_\phi({\bm{x}})({\bm{z}})$.
We are now interested in not one but a set of models,
$\mathcal{J}_\mathcal{I} = \{p_{\theta_i}({\bm{x}},{\bm{z}}), i \in \mathcal{I}\}$ where $\mathcal{I}$ is a finite set of indices.
Crucially, (like the example above) we make a few simplifying assumptions. First, we assume that the random variables in each model have the same domains (e.g. $\mathcal{X},\mathcal{Z}$), but the relationships between the random variables may be different.
Second, we assume that for each model, we care about the same inference query $p_{\theta_i}({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}})$. Finally, we assume to have some knowledge of typical values of the observed variables for each model in $\mathcal{J}_\mathcal{I}$: formally, we desire a set $\mathcal{M}_\mathcal{I} = \{ p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}}), i \in \mathcal{I} \} \subseteq \mathcal{M}$ of marginal distributions over the observed variables.
Here, $\mathcal{M}$ denotes the set of all possible marginal distributions over $\mathcal{X}$. Let $p_{\mathcal{M}}: \mathcal{M}_\mathcal{I} \rightarrow [0,1]$ denote a distribution over $\mathcal{M}_\mathcal{I}$. For example, $p_{\mathcal{M}}$ may be uniform over a finite number of marginals. As $p_{\mathcal{M}}$ is a distribution over distributions, we refer to it as a \textit{meta-distribution}.
The naive approach to amortize over a set of models is:
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E}_{p_{\mathcal{D}_i} \sim p_{\mathcal{M}}} \left[
\max_{\phi}\mathbb{E}_{p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})} \left[ \mathbb{E}_{f_\phi({\bm{x}})} \log \frac{p_{\theta_i}({\bm{x}},{\bm{z}})}{f_\phi({\bm{x}})({\bm{z}})} \right] \right]
\end{equation}
where we separately fit an amortized inference model for each $p_{\theta_i}({\bm{x}},{\bm{z}})$. However, this approach is prohibitively expensive as the size of $\mathcal{M}_{\mathcal{I}}$ increases, and training across models is decoupled.
We instead propose to doubly-amortize the inference procedure as follows (we move the $\max$ out once more):
\begin{equation}
\max_{\phi} \mathbb{E}_{p_{\mathcal{D}_i} \sim p_{\mathcal{M}}} \left[
\mathbb{E}_{p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})} \left[ \mathbb{E}_{g_\phi(p_{\mathcal{D}_i}, {\bm{x}})} \log \frac{p_{\theta_i}({\bm{x}},{\bm{z}})}{g_\phi(p_{\mathcal{D}_i},{\bm{x}})({\bm{z}})} \right] \right]
\label{eqn:meta1_obj}
\end{equation}
where the original regressor $f_\phi({\bm{x}})$ is replaced by a doubly-amortized regressor $g_\phi(p_{\mathcal{D}_i},{\bm{x}})$ that takes \textit{both} the marginal distribution $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})$ and an observation ${\bm{x}}$ to return a posterior distribution. Formally, we call such a mapping, $g_\phi: \mathcal{M} \times \mathcal{X} \rightarrow \mathcal{Q}$, a \textit{meta-inference model}. This doubly-amortized inference procedure must be robust across varying marginals and evidence, generalizing over $\mathcal{M}$: a large set of sufficiently similar, previously \textit{unseen} models.
We note that the choice of $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})$ as input to $g_\phi$ is critical in practice. As in Eq.~\ref{eqn:elbo_alt}, a successful learning algorithm will learn generative models such as $p_{\theta_i}({\bm{x}})$ or $p_{\theta_i}({\bm{x}}, {\bm{z}})$ that match $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})$.
But similarly to the recent progress in wake-sleep \cite{hinton1995wake,bornschein2014reweighted,le2018revisiting}, we found that using observations from the true marginal $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})$ led to significantly more stable training.
One may also consider alternate combinations of inputs for $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})$, which we leave as future work.
\paragraph{Meta-Amortized Variational Bayes and Learning}
In certain settings, we are given a set of generative models $\{p_{\theta_i^*}({\bm{x}}, {\bm{z}}), i \in \mathcal{I} \}$, where each model $p_{\theta_i^*}({\bm{x}}, {\bm{z}})$ with known parameters captures a marginal distribution, $p_i({\bm{x}}) \in \mathcal{M}_{\mathcal{I}}$.
We can then immediately optimize Eq.~\ref{eqn:meta1_obj} to obtain the optimal meta-inference model.
But in many cases the generative models are not known ahead of time, and therefore we must jointly learn $\{\theta_i, i \in \mathcal{I}\}$ along with the parameters of the meta-inference model, $\phi$. To do so, we consider the objective,
\begin{equation}
\max_{\phi} \mathbb{E}_{p_{\mathcal{D}_i} \sim p_\mathcal{M}} \left[ \max_{\theta_i}
\mathcal{L}_{\phi, \theta_i}(p_{\mathcal{D}_i})
\right]
\label{eqn:meta2_obj}
\end{equation}
where the inner loss function is defined as:
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{L}_{\phi, \theta_i}(p_{\mathcal{D}_i}) = -D_{\mathrm{KL}}(p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}}) g_\phi(p_{\mathcal{D}_i}, {\bm{x}}) || p({\bm{z}})p_{\theta_i}({\bm{x}}|{\bm{z}}))
\end{equation*}
and $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}}) g_\phi(p_{\mathcal{D}_i}, {\bm{x}})$ denotes the distribution defined implicitly by first sampling ${\bm{x}} \sim p_i({\bm{x}})$, then sampling ${\bm{z}} \sim g_\phi(p_{\mathcal{D}_i}, {\bm{x}})$. We refer to this lower bound as the MetaELBO, and a VAE trained with this objective as the MetaVAE.
Lastly, as we did in Eq.~\ref{eqn:elbo_alt}, we can rewrite the MetaELBO to a more interpretable form. Similar to $f_\phi({\bm{x}})$, our regressor $g_\phi(p_{\mathcal{D}_i}, {\bm{x}})$ can be represented as a conditional distribution, denoted $q_\phi({\bm{z}}|p_{\mathcal{D}_i}, {\bm{x}}) = g_\phi(p_{\mathcal{D}_i}, {\bm{x}})({\bm{z}})$.
Then,
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{L}_{\phi, \theta}(p_{\mathcal{D}_i}) &= -D_{\mathrm{KL}}(p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}}) q_\phi({\bm{z}}| p_{\mathcal{D}_i}, {\bm{x}}) || p({\bm{z}})p_{\theta_i}({\bm{x}}|{\bm{z}})) \\
&= -D_{\mathrm{KL}}(p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})||p_{\theta_i}({\bm{x}})) \\
& \qquad -\mathbb{E}_{{\bm{x}} \sim p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})}[D_{\mathrm{KL}}(q_\phi({\bm{z}}|p_{\mathcal{D}_i}, {\bm{x}})||p_{\theta_i}({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}}))].
\end{align*}
This form has a penalty term for each distribution $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})$, encouraging the meta-amortized inference model to perform well across $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})$ sampled from the meta-distribution $p_{\mathcal{M}}$. We note that if $\mathcal{M} = \{p_{\mathcal{D}}\}$, then $g_\phi(p_{\mathcal{D}_i}, {\bm{x}}) = f_\phi({\bm{x}})$, and the MetaELBO is equivalent to ELBO.
Interestingly, we find that the MetaVAE's learned representations transfer well to unseen downstream tasks at test time. We provide some intuition as to why this is the case. Samples from the corresponding marginal $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}$ help to lower the variance in the meta-inference network's inferred ${\bm{z}}$'s for each query point ${\bm{x}}$, regularizing the model's behavior to yield more robust representations.
\subsection{Representing the Meta-Distribution}
In Eq.~\ref{eqn:meta2_obj}, it is not clear how to represent a distribution $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})$ as input if we parameterize $g_\phi(p_{\mathcal{D}_i}, {\bm{x}})$ as a neural network. One of the main insights from this work is to represent the marginal distribution as a finite set of samples,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{D}_i = \{{\bm{x}}_j \sim p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}}) | j=1,...,N\}
\end{equation}
or a \textit{data set}.
We can then use $\mathcal{D}_i$ to define an empirical analogue to $g_\phi(p_i, {\bm{x}})$, denoted as $\hat{g}_\phi:\mathcal{X}^N \times \mathcal{X} \rightarrow \mathcal{Q}$, which maps a data set with $N$ samples and an observation to a posterior. Then, there is an equivalent analogue of Eq.~\ref{eqn:meta2_obj} where a marginal, $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}})$ is replaced by a data set, $\mathcal{D}_i$.
\section{Demo: Clustering Mixtures of Gaussians}
First, we present a simple clustering example to build intuition for meta-inference. Consider a standard VAE trained to capture a single mixture of two Gaussian (MoG) distributions $p_{\mathcal{D}}({\bm{x}})$. Each component has isotropic covariance of $0.1$ and mean drawn from the uniform distribution, $U(-5, 5)$. The two components are mixed evenly and assigned a label of 0 or 1.
Then, inference $q_\phi({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}})$ with ${\bm{z}} \in \{0, 1\}$ as a 1-D binary latent variable amounts to predicting which component ${\bm{x}}$ belongs to, of which the true cluster label is recoverable up to a permutation.
Now we introduce meta-inference for this task.
Given that an inference model $q_\phi({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}})$ of a VAE can learn to cluster data from a \emph{specific} MoG, a meta-inference model $g_\phi(p_{\mathcal{D}_i},{\bm{x}})$ should correspond to \textit{a general-purpose clustering algorithm} that can separate out the components of any related, but previously unseen mixture distribution $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}$.
Concretely, we let each distribution $p_{\mathcal{D}_i}({\bm{x}}) \sim p_\mathcal{M}$ be a MoG
and train a MetaVAE amortized over $N$ mixtures
to assess how well it can predict ${\bm{z}} \in \{0,1\}$ for a given ${\bm{x}}$ for an \emph{unseen test distribution}.
We measure this clustering accuracy on 1000 unseen but related MoGs
sampled from the same meta-train distribution.
While the VAE has a clustering error of $27.9$\% due to cases where there is extreme overlap in mixture components,
the MetaVAE has an error of 9.9\% when $N = 50$.
Moreover, larger $N$ improved the model's performance ($21.2$\% error with $N=10$ and $15.8$\% error with $N=20$) as expected.
We include more details and a second study on clustering MNIST digits in the Appendix.
\section{Demo: Inference for Classical Mechanics}
For a second demonstration, we consider an introductory problem in classical mechanics: objects sliding down inclined planes. Here, we are given a physics simulator that models a box that faces friction with the plane.
Each time the simulator runs, we see a new box with a different friction coefficient. The simulator then records the time it takes for the box to descend to the bottom of the plane.
Each simulator has a different incline plane of length $L$ and incline angle $A$, and our task is to infer the coefficient of friction (${\bm{z}}$) from the observed descent time $({\bm{x}})$ given a new simulator.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{figures/physics/planes.pdf}
\caption{(a,b) Examples of planes with two lengths and angles. MSE between true and inferred friction for 304 simulators (lighter is better) using (c) MetaVAE and (d) VAE.}
\label{fig:physics}
\end{figure}
Building on \cite{le2016inference}, we tackle this problem with ``meta-compiled inference" and optimize:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{\phi} = \mathbb{E}_{p_{\theta_i^*} \sim p_{\mathcal{M}}} \mathbb{E}_{{\bm{x}} \sim p_{\theta_i^*}({\bm{x}})}\left[-g_\phi({\bm{z}}| p_{\theta_i^*}, {\bm{x}}) \right]
\end{equation}
The meta-distribution $\mathcal{M}$ represents all possible simulators of planes with $L \in [1,20]$ and $A \in [5,85]$ degrees, and $p_{\theta_i^*}({\bm{x}}, {\bm{z}})$ represents a fixed simulator. The marginal distribution, $p_{\theta_i^*}({\bm{x}})$ is obtained by repeatedly simulating to build a data set $\mathcal{D}_i = \{ {\bm{x}} \}$. Thus the empirical meta-inference model $\hat{g}_\phi(\mathcal{D}_i, {\bm{x}})$ takes the data set and the output of a single simulation ${\bm{x}}$ as input. We amortize over 25 simulators with $L \in \{2,4,6,8,10\}$ and $A \in \{20,30,40,50,60\}$, and model ${\bm{z}}$ as a continuous 1-D random variable (interpreted as friction). After training the MetaVAE, we measure the mean squared error between the true and inferred friction for unseen simulators from $\mathcal{M}$.
Despite seeing only 25 out of 304 simulators, the MetaVAE transfers well: we get less than 0.001 MSE for $A \in [20,70]$ and $L \in [2,20]$. A standard VAE trained on a single simulator ($L=10$, $A=45$) exhibits both much worse generalization performance and greater error overall (notice the scale in the legends).
\section{Preliminaries}
\subsection{Exact and Approximate Inference}
Let $p({\bm{x}}, {\bm{z}})$ be a joint distribution
over a set of latent variables ${\bm{z}} \in \mathcal{Z}$ and observed variables ${\bm{x}} \in \mathcal{X}$. An \textit{inference query} involves computing posterior beliefs after incorporating evidence into the prior: $p({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}}) = p({\bm{x}}, {\bm{z}})/p({\bm{x}})$. This quantity is often intractable to compute as the marginal likelihood $p({\bm{x}}) = \int_{{\bm{z}}} p({\bm{x}}, {\bm{z}}) d{\bm{z}}$ requires integrating or summing over a potentially exponential number of configurations for ${\bm{z}}$. Thus, we are forced to seek approximations.
Approximate inference techniques such as Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampling \cite{hastings1970monte,gelfand1990sampling} and variational inference (VI)
\cite{jordan1999introduction,wainwright2008graphical,blei2017variational} are widely used to approximate the posterior $p({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}})$. In VI, we introduce a family of tractable distributions $\mathcal{Q}$ parameterized by $\psi$ over the latent variables and find the member (called the approximate posterior), $q_{\psi^*} \in \mathcal{Q}$ that minimizes the Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence between itself and the exact posterior:
\begin{equation}
q_{\psi^*}({\bm{z}}) = \arg \min_{q_{\psi}} D_{\mathrm{KL}}(q_{\psi}({\bm{z}})||p ({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}}))
\end{equation}
This $q_{\psi^*}({\bm{z}})$ can serve as a proxy for the true posterior distribution. We note that the solution depends on the specific value of the observed (evidence) variables ${\bm{x}}$ we are conditioning on. For notational clarity, we rewrite the variational parameters as $\psi_{{\bm{x}}}$ to make explicit their dependence on ${\bm{x}}$.
One commonly needs to solve multiple inference queries of the same kind, conditioning on different values of the observed variables ${\bm{x}}$ (evidence).
Let $p_{\mathcal{D}}({\bm{x}})$ be an empirical distribution over the observed variables ${\bm{x}} \in \mathcal{X}$. Note $p_{\mathcal{D}}({\bm{x}})$ can be different from the marginal $p({\bm{x}})$ when the model is mis-specified.
The average quality of the variational approximations can then be quantified by:
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E}_{p_{\mathcal{D}}({\bm{x}})}\left[\max_{\psi_{{\bm{x}}}} \mathbb{E}_{q_{\psi_{{\bm{x}}}}({\bm{z}})} \log \frac{p({\bm{x}}, {\bm{z}})}{q_{\psi_{{\bm{x}}}}({\bm{z}})} \right]
\label{elbo:vi:first}
\end{equation}
where $q_{\phi_{{\bm{x}}}}({\bm{z}})$ can be viewed as an importance distribution.
In practice, $p_{\mathcal{D}}({\bm{x}})$ is unknown but we assume access to
a training dataset $\mathcal{D}$ of examples i.i.d. sampled from $p_{\mathcal{D}}({\bm{x}})$ that can be used to evaluate Eq.~\ref{elbo:vi:first}.
\subsection{Amortized Variational Inference}
An alternative formulation leverages a technique known as \textit{amortization} \cite{gershman2014amortized}, which reduces the computational cost of Eq.~\ref{elbo:vi:first} by casting the per-sample optimization process as a supervised \textit{regression} task. Rather than solving for an optimal $q_{\psi^*_{{\bm{x}}}}({\bm{z}})$ for every ${\bm{x}}$, we learn a single deterministic mapping $f_\phi:\mathcal{X} \rightarrow \mathcal{Q}$ to \textit{predict}
$\psi^*_{{\bm{x}}}$, or equivalently $q_{\psi^*_{{\bm{x}}}}({\bm{z}}) \in \mathcal{Q}$,
as a function of ${\bm{x}}$. Often, we choose to represent $f_\phi$ as a conditional distribution, denoted by $q_\phi({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}})$ = $f_\phi({\bm{x}})({\bm{z}})$ when scoring a value ${\bm{z}}$.
This procedure introduces an \textit{amortization gap}, in which the less flexible parameterization of the inference model replaces the objective in Eq.~\ref{elbo:vi:first} with the following lower bound:
\begin{align}
\max_{\phi}\mathbb{E}_{p_{\mathcal{D}}({\bm{x}})} \left[ \mathbb{E}_{q_\phi({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}})} \log \frac{p({\bm{x}},{\bm{z}})}{q_\phi({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}})} \right]
\label{eq:plainamortization}
\end{align}
This gap refers to the suboptimality caused by amortizing the variational parameters over the entire training set, as opposed to optimizing for each example individually (pulling the $\max$ out of the expectation in Eq.~\ref{elbo:vi:first}).
This tradeoff in expressiveness, however, enables significant speedups.
\subsection{Learning Latent Variable Models}
So far, we have assumed that the true generative model $p({\bm{x}},{\bm{z}})$ is given. However, we often only possess a family of possible models, $p_\theta({\bm{x}},{\bm{z}})$ parameterized by $\theta$ and the data set of observations, $\mathcal{D}$. The challenge then, is to choose $\theta$ whose model best explains the evidence.
To do so, we maximize the log marginal likelihood of the data:
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E}_{p_{\mathcal{D}}({\bm{x}})} \left[\log p_\theta({\bm{x}}) \right] = \mathbb{E}_{p_{\mathcal{D}}({\bm{x}})} \left[\log \int_{{\bm{z}}}
p_\theta({\bm{x}},{\bm{z}})d{\bm{z}} \right]
\label{eqn:marginal}
\end{equation}
As mentioned, Eq.~\ref{eqn:marginal} is intractable to evaluate. Instead, we derive the Evidence Lower Bound (ELBO) to Eq.~\ref{eqn:marginal} using $q_\phi({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}})$ as a tractable amortized inference model:
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}_{p_{\mathcal{D}}}[\log p_\theta({\bm{x}})] &\geq \mathbb{E}_{p_{\mathcal{D}}({\bm{x}})} \left[\mathbb{E}_{q_\phi({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}})} \left[\log \frac{ p_\theta({\bm{x}},{\bm{z}})}{q_\phi({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}})} \right] \right]
\label{eqn:elbo}
\end{align}
With Eq.~\ref{eqn:elbo} as an objective, we jointly optimize the parameters of the inference and generative models: $\phi$ and $\theta$.
We may derive an alternative formulation of Eq.~\ref{eqn:elbo}:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}(\phi, \theta) &= -D_{\mathrm{KL}}(q_\phi({\bm{x}}, {\bm{z}}) \Vert p_\theta({\bm{x}}, {\bm{z}})) \\
&= -D_{\mathrm{KL}}(p_{\mathcal{D}}({\bm{x}}) \Vert p_\theta({\bm{x}})) \nonumber \\
& \qquad-\mathbb{E}_{p_{\mathcal{D}}}[D_{\mathrm{KL}}(q_\phi({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}}) \Vert p_\theta({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}})) ] \label{eqn:elbo_alt}
\end{align}
where $q_\phi({\bm{x}}, {\bm{z}}) = f_\phi({\bm{x}})({\bm{z}})p_{\mathcal{D}}({\bm{x}})$. Eq.~\ref{eqn:elbo_alt} is comprised of a maximum likelihood term with a regularization penalty that encourages the generative model to have posteriors that can be easily approximated by the inference model. We will revisit this intuition once we introduce meta-amortization.
Often, $p_\theta({\bm{x}}|{\bm{z}})$ and $q_\phi({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}})$ are parameterized by deep neural networks, which is known as a variational autoencoder, or VAE \cite{kingma2013auto}.
The latent variables ${\bm{z}}$ are learned ``features" inferred by $q_\phi({\bm{z}}|{\bm{x}})$ that can be used in downstream tasks, such as clustering or classification. The VAE is popular in many real-world domains: in medical diagnosis, for example, one can infer the identity of a disease (${\bm{z}}$) from observed symptoms (${\bm{x}}$). Given a set of symptoms from a population of patients, we can fit a VAE tailored to a disease, e.g. thoracic disease \cite{mao2018deep}.
\section{Related work}
\paragraph{Rapid Adaptation through Meta-Learning.} Among the rich body of work on meta-learning \cite{vinyals2016matching,snell2017prototypical,gordon2018decision}, a common goal is to train models such that they will rapidly adapt to new, unseen classification tasks. Although the Neural Process (NP) \cite{garnelo2018neural,kim2019attentive} is similar to our work in that it derives predictions for new targets by conditioning the encoder network on a relevant \textit{context set}, it models uncertainty over a distribution of \textit{functions}.
Another line of research formulates proper initialization as the workhorse of successful meta-learning \cite{finn2017model,grant2018recasting}. In many ways, our meta-amortized inference procedure can be thought of as learning a good initialization for an inference model on a new target distribution. However, these approaches are not directly comparable to ours because of their supervised nature.
\paragraph{Few-shot Generative Modeling.} This branch of research aims to train generative models such that they will generalize to unseen distributions at test time given only a few examples. The focus has been on few-shot density estimation, with approaches ranging from the use of
conditioning \cite{bartunov2016fast} to nested optimization \cite{reed2017few}. Meta-inference however is not few-shot, and instead aims to learn transferable \textit{representations} for downstream tasks rather than density estimation alone.
The most relevant prior works include the Neural Statistician \cite{edwards2016towards} (NS) and the Variational Homoencoder \cite{hewitt2018variational} (VHE), two very similar models that study inference over sets of observations. The VHE optimizes the following objective,
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E}_{{\bm{x}},\mathcal{D} \sim p_{\mathcal{D}}}[\mathbb{E}_{q_\phi({\bm{c}}|\mathcal{D})}[\log p_\theta({\bm{x}}|{\bm{c}})] - \frac{1}{N}D_{\mathrm{KL}}(q_\phi({\bm{c}}|\mathcal{D})||p({\bm{c}}))]
\label{eqn:homoencoder}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{D} = \{{\bm{x}}_1, ..., {\bm{x}}_N\}$ is a set of $N$ samples and ${\bm{c}}$ is a global latent variable.
We note that if we view $\mathcal{D}$ as an approximation for a marginal distribution, then NS and VHE also serve as baselines that can perform doubly-amortized inference. Like our proposed inference model $\hat{g}_\phi(\mathcal{D}, {\bm{x}})$, the distribution $q({\bm{c}}|\mathcal{D})$ in Eq.~\ref{eqn:homoencoder} ingests a data set.
However, both the VHE and NS utilize a global variable ${\bm{c}}$ (isotropic Gaussian).
We believe this constraint is \textit{overly restrictive} in settings which require transferring to a diverse set of distributions, hurting generalization performance. Instead, the MetaVAE does not impose a distributional assumption on the different generative models, and we find that this non-parametric approach yields consistently better performance.
|
\section{Introduction}
Coresets are subsets of points that approximate a measure of the point set.
A method of computing coresets on big data sets is composable coresets.
Composable coresets \cite{composable} provide a framework for adapting constant factor approximation algorithms to streaming and MapReduce models.
Composable coresets summarize distributed data so that the scalability is increased while keeping the desirable approximation factor and time complexity.
There is a general algorithm for solving problems using coresets which known by different names in different settings: mergeable summaries \cite{mergeable} and merging in a tree-like structure \cite{logarithmic} for streaming $(1+\epsilon)$-approximation algorithms, small space (divide and conquer) for constant factor approximations in streaming \cite{guha}, and composable coresets in MapReduce \cite{composable}. A consequence of using constant factor approximations instead of $(1+\epsilon)$-approximations with the same merging method is that it can add a $O(\log n)$ factor to the approximation factor of the algorithm on an input of size $n$.
Composable coresets \cite{composable} require only a single round and sublinear communications in the MapReduce model, and the partitioning is done arbitrarily.
\begin{definition}[Composable Coreset]
A composable coreset on a set of sets $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^L$ is a set of subsets
$C(S_i) \subset S_i$ whose union gives an approximation solution for
an objective function $f:(\cup_{i=1}^L S_i)\rightarrow \mathbf{R}$.
Formally, a composable coreset of a minimization problem is an $\alpha$-approximation if
\[
f(\cup_i S_i) \leq f(\cup_i C(S_i) ) \leq \alpha.f(\cup_i S_i),
\]
for a minimization problem. The maximization version is similarly defined.
\end{definition}
A \textit{partitioned composable coreset} is a composable coreset in which the initial sets are a partitioning, i.e. sets $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^L$ are disjoint.
Using Gonzalez's algorithm for $k$-center \cite{gonzalez}, Indyk, et al. designed a composable coreset for a similar problem known as the diversity maximization problem \cite{composable}.
Other variations of composable coresets are randomized composable coresets and mapping coresets.
Randomized composable coresets \cite{randomizedcomposable} share the same divide and conquer approach as other composable coresets and differ from composable coresets only in the way they partition the data.
More specifically, randomized composable coresets, randomly partitioning the input, as opposed to other composable coresets which make use of arbitrary partitioning.
Mapping coresets \cite{mapping} extend composable coresets by adding a mapping between coreset points and other points to their coresets and keep almost the same amount of data in all machines. Algorithms for clustering in $\ell^p$ norms using mapping coresets are known \cite{mapping}.
Further improvements of composable coresets for diversity
maximization \cite{composable} include lower bounds \cite{mine} and multi-round composable coresets in metrics with bounded doubling dimension~\cite{ediversity}.
\textit{Metric $k$-center} is an NP-hard problem for which $2$-approximation algorithms that match the lower bound for the approximation factor of this problem are known~\cite{vazirani,gonzalez}.
Among approximation algorithms for $k$-center is a parametric pruning algorithm, based on the minimum dominating set~\cite{vazirani}. In this algorithm, an approximate dominating set is computed on the disk graph of the input points. The running time of the algorithm is $O(n^3)$.
The greedy algorithm for $k$-center requires only $O(nk)$ time \cite{gonzalez} and unlike the algorithm based on the minimum dominating set\cite{vazirani}, uses $r$-nets \cite{rnet}.
A $(1+\epsilon)$-approximation coreset exists for $k$-center \cite{ptas} with size exponentially dependent on $\frac{1}{\epsilon}$.
Let the optimal radius of $k$-center for a point set $P$ be $r$. The problem of finding the smallest set of points that cover $P$ using radius $r$ is known as the \textit{dual clustering problem} \cite{charikar}.
Metric dual clustering (of $k$-center) has an unbounded approximation factor \cite{charikar}. In Euclidean metric, there exists a streaming $O(2^d d \log d)$-approximation algorithm for this problem~\cite{charikar}.
Also, any $\alpha$-approximation algorithm for the minimum disk/ball cover problem gives a $2$-approximation coreset of size $\alpha k$ for $k$-center, so $2$-approximation coresets of size $(1+\epsilon)k$ exist for this problem \cite{mdc}.
A greedy algorithm for dual clustering of $k$-center has also been used as a preprocessing step of density-based clustering~(DBSCAN)~\cite{dbscan}. Implementing DBSCAN efficiently in MapReduce is an important problem~\cite{mrdbscan,mrdbscan2,mrdbscan3,mrdbscan4,mrdbscan5}.
Randomized algorithms for metric $k$-center and $k$-median in MapReduce \cite{ene2011fast} exist. These algorithms take $\alpha$-approximation offline algorithms and return $(4\alpha+2)$-approximation and $(10\alpha+3)$-approximation algorithms for $k$-center and $k$-median in MapReduce, respectively. The round complexity of these algorithms depends on the probability of the algorithm for finding a good approximation.
Current best results on metric $k$-center in MapReduce have $2$ rounds and give the approximation factor $4$ \cite{kcenter1}. However, a $2$-approximation algorithm exists if the cost of the optimal solution is known~\cite{brief}. Experiments in \cite{kcenter2} suggest that running Gonzalez's algorithm on a random partitioning and an arbitrary partitioning results in the same approximation factor.
In doubling metrics, a $(2+\epsilon)$-approximation algorithm exists that is based on Gonzalez's greedy algorithm \cite{other}. The version with outliers has also been discussed \cite{other,ding}.
\subsection*{Warm-Up}
Increasing the size of coresets in the first step of computing composable coresets can improve the approximation factor of some problems.
The approximation factor of $k$-median algorithm of \cite{guha} is $2c(1+2b)+2b$, where $b$ and $c$ are the approximation factors of $k$-median and weighted $k$-median, respectively. This algorithm computes a composable coreset, where a coreset for $k$-median is the set of $k$ medians weighted by the number of points assigned to each median.
A pseudo-approximation for $k$-median finds $k+O(1)$ median and has approximation factor $1+\sqrt{3}+\epsilon$ \cite{pseudo}.
Using a pseudo-approximation algorithm in place of $k$-median algorithms in the first step of \cite{guha}, it is possible to achieve a better approximation factor for $k$-median using the same proof as \cite{guha}. Since any pseudo-approximation has a cost less than or equal to the optimal solution; replacing them will not increase the cost of clustering.
The approximation factor using \cite{weighted} as weighted $k$-median coresets is $91.66$, while the best $k$-median algorithm would give a $99.33$ factor using the same algorithm ($b=1+\sqrt{3}$). The lower bound on the approximation factor of this algorithm using the same weighted $k$-median algorithm but without pseudo-approximation is $63.09$ ($b=1+\frac{2}{e}$).
\subsection*{Contributions}
We give a $(1+\epsilon)$-approximation coreset of size $(\frac{4}{\epsilon})^{1+2b}k$ for $k$-center in metric spaces with doubling dimension $b$.
Using composable coresets, our algorithm generalizes to MapReduce setting, where it becomes a $(1+\epsilon)$-approximation coreset of size $(\frac{4}{\epsilon})^{1+2b}\frac{n}{m}k$, given memory $m$, which is sublinear in the input size $n$.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|l|}
\hline
Conditions & Approx. & Reference\\
\hline
Metric $k$-center: &&\\
$O(1)$-rounds & $4$ & \cite{kcenter1} (greedy), \Cref{theorem:gkcenter} (parametric pruning)\\
$O(\log_{1+\epsilon}^{\Delta})$ rounds & $2+\epsilon$ & \cite{brief} (parametric pruning)\\
Lower bound & $2$ & offline \cite{vazirani}\\
\hline
Doubling metrics: &&\\
$O(1)$-rounds & $2+\epsilon$ & \cite{other} (greedy), \Cref{theorem:kcenter}~(parametric pruning)\\
Lower bound & $1.822$ & \cite{lowerbound}\\
\hline
\hline
Dual clustering: &&\\
General metrics & $O(\log n)$ & min dominating set \cite{vazirani}, composable coreset \cite{composable}\\
Doubling metrics & $O(1)$ & \Cref{theorem:dual}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Summary of results for $k$-center and dual clustering in MapReduce. $\Delta$ is the diameter of the point-set.}
\label{table:kcenter}
\end{table}
Using the composable coreset for dual clustering, we find a $(2+\epsilon)$-approximation composable coreset for $k$-center, which has a sublinear size in metric spaces with constant doubling dimension. More specifically, if an $\alpha$-approximation exists for doubling metrics, our algorithm provides $(\alpha+\epsilon)$-approximation factor.
It empirically improves previous metric $k$-center algorithms \cite{kcenter1,kcenter2} in MapReduce.
A summary of results on $k$-center is shown in \Cref{table:kcenter}. Note that for the MapReduce model, each round can take a polynomial amount of time, however, the space available to each machine is sublinear.
Our algorithm achieves a trade-off between the approximation factor and the size of coreset (see \cref{fig:plot}). The approximation factor of our algorithm and the size of the resulting composable coreset for $L$ input sets are $\alpha=2+\epsilon$ and $kL\beta$, respectively. This trade-off is the main idea of our algorithm.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{plot}
\caption{Space-approximation factor trade-off of our $\alpha$-approx. coreset of size $\beta kL$ for $k$-center in Euclidean plane.}
\label{fig:plot}
\end{figure}
Our composable coresets give single-pass streaming algorithms and $1$-round approximation algorithms in MapReduce with sublinear communication, since each coreset is communicated once, and the size of the coreset is constant.
\section{Preliminaries}
First, we review some basic definitions, models and algorithms in computational geometry and MapReduce.
\subsection{Definitions}
Some geometric definitions and notations are reviewed here, which have been used in the rest of the paper.
\begin{definition}[Metric Space]
A (possibly infinite) set of points $P$ and a distance function $d(.,.)$ create a \textit{metric space} if the following three conditions hold:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\forall p,q\in P \quad d(p,q)=0 \Leftrightarrow p=q$
\item $\forall p,q\in P \quad d(p,q) = d(q,p)$
\item $\forall p,q,t \in P \quad d(p,q)+d(q,t) \geq d(p,t)$, known as triangle inequality
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
Metrics with bounded doubling dimension are called \textit{doubling metrics}. Constant dimension Euclidean spaces under $\ell^p$ norms and Manhattan distance are examples of doubling metrics.
Doubling constant \cite{doublingdef} of a metric space is the number of balls of radius $r$ that lie inside a ball of radius $2r$. The logarithm of doubling constant in base $2$ is called \textit{doubling dimension}. Many algorithms have better approximation factors in doubling metrics compared to general metric spaces. The doubling dimension of Euclidean plane is $\log_2 7$.
\begin{definition}[Doubling Dimension \cite{doublingdef}]\label{def:doubling}
For any point $x$ in a metric space and any $r\geq 0$, if the ball of radius $2r$
centered at $x$ can be covered with at most $2^b$ balls of radius $r$, we say
the doubling dimension of the metric space is $b$.
\end{definition}
$k$-Center is an NP-hard clustering problem with clusters in shapes of $d$-dimensional balls.
\begin{definition}[Metric $k$-Center \cite{vazirani}]
Given a set $P$ of points in a metric space, find a subset of $k$ points as cluster centers $C$ such that
\[
\forall p\in P, \min_{c\in C} d(p,c) \leq r
\]
and $r$ is minimized.
\end{definition}
The best possible approximation factor of metric $k$-center is $2$ \cite{vazirani}.
Geometric intersection graphs represent intersections between a set of shapes. For a set of disks, their intersection graph is called a disk graph.
\begin{definition}[Disk Graph]
For a set of points $P$ in a metric space with distance function $d(.,.)$ and a radius $r$, the disk graph of $P$ is a graph whose vertices are $P$, and whose edges connect points with distance at most $2r$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}[Dominating Set]
Given a graph $G=(V,E)$, the smallest subset $Q\subset V$ is a minimum dominating set, if $\forall v\in V, v\in Q \vee \exists u\in Q : (v,u)\in E$.
\end{definition}
We define the following problem as a generalization of the dual clustering of \cite{charikar} by removing the following two conditions: the radius of balls is $1$, and the set of points are in $\mathbf{R}^d$.
\begin{definition}[Dual Clustering]
Given a set of points $P$ and a radius $r$, the dual clustering problem finds the smallest subset of points as centers $(C), C\subset P$ such that the distance from each point to its closest center is at most $r$.
\end{definition}
\subsection{An Approximation Algorithm for Metric $k$-Center}
Here, we review the parametric pruning algorithm of~\cite{vazirani} for metric $k$-center.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{Parametric Pruning for $k$-Center \cite{vazirani}}
\label{alg:parametric}
\begin{algorithmic}
\Require{A metric graph $G=(V,E)$, an integer $k$}
\Ensure{A subset $C\subset V, |C|\leq k$}
\State{Sort $E$ such that $e_1 \leq e_2 \leq \cdots \leq e_{|E|}$.}
\State{$G'=(V,E')\gets (V,\emptyset)$}
\For{$i=1,\ldots,|E|$}
\State{$E'\gets E'\cup \{e_i\}$}
\State{Run \cref{alg:cbc} on $G'$.}
\If{$|IS|\leq k$}
\Return {$IS$}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
Using this algorithm on a metric graph $G$, a $2$-approximation for the optimal radius $r$ can be determined.
In \cref{alg:parametric}, edges are added by increasing order of their length until reaching $r$.
Given this radius, another graph $(G')$ is built, where edges exist between points within distance at most $r$ of each other.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{Approximate dominating set of $G$ \cite{vazirani}}
\label{alg:cbc}
\begin{algorithmic}
\Require{A metric graph $G'=(V,E)$}
\Ensure{A subset $C\subset V$}
\State{$G'^2 \gets G'$}
\For{$\forall (u,t),(t,v) \in E$}
\State{Add $(u,v)$ to $G'^2$.}
\EndFor
\State{Find a maximal independent set $IS$ of $G'^2$}\\
\Return $IS$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
Hence, by definition, a minimum dominating set of $G'$ is an optimal $k$-center of $G$.
Every cluster is a star in $G'$ which turns into a clique in $G'^2$. Therefore, a maximal independent set of $G'^2$ chooses at most one point from each cluster. \Cref{alg:cbc} computes $G'^2$ and returns a maximal independent set of $G'^2$.
Computing a maximal independent set takes $O(|E|)$ time. The graph $G'^2$ in \Cref{alg:cbc} only changes in each iteration of \Cref{alg:parametric} around the newly added edge, so, updating the previous graph and $IS$ takes $O(n)$ time. Therefore, the time complexity of \Cref{alg:parametric} is $O(|E|\cdot n)=O(n^3)$.
\section{A Coreset for Dual Clustering in Doubling Metrics}
In this section, we prove a better approximation offline coreset for the dual clustering problem. Our method is based on \Cref{alg:parametric} which first builds the disk graph with radius $r$, then covers this graph using a set of stars. We prove the maximum degree of those stars is $D^2$, where $D$ is the doubling constant. The result is an approximation algorithm for dual clustering in doubling metrics.
\subsection{Algorithm}
We add a preprocessing step to \Cref{alg:parametric} to find a better approximation factor for $k$-center and dual clustering problems.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{A Coreset for $k$-Center}
\label{alg:offline}
\begin{algorithmic}
\Require{A set of points $P$, an integer $k$ or a radius $r$}
\Ensure{A subset $C\subset P, |C|\leq k$}
\If{$k$ is given in the input}
\State{Compute a $2$-approximation solution for $k$-center (radius $r$).}
\EndIf
\State{$E\gets$ all pairs of points with distance at most $r/2$.}
\State{Run \cref{alg:cbc} on $G=(P,E)$ to compute $IS$.}\\
\Return {$IS$}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Analysis}
Unlike in general metric spaces, $k$-center in doubling metrics admits a space-approximation factor trade-off.
More specifically, doubling or halving the radius of $k$-center changes the number of points in the coreset by a constant factor since the degrees of vertices in the minimum dominating set are bounded in those metric spaces.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:kissing0}
For each cluster $C_i$ of \Cref{alg:offline} with radius $r'$, the maximum number of points $(\Delta+1)$ from $C_i$ that are required to cover all points inside $C_i$ with radius $r'/2$ is at most $D^2$, i.e.
\[
(\Delta+1) \leq D^2,
\]
where $D$ is the doubling constant of the metric space.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assume a point $p\in IS$ returned by \Cref{alg:offline}.
By the definition of doubling metrics, there are $D$ balls of radius $r'/2$ centered at $b_1,\ldots,b_{D}$ called $B_1,\ldots,B_D$ that cover the ball of radius $r'$ centered at $p$, called $B$.
\[
\forall q\in B, \exists B_i, i=1,\ldots,D : d(p,b_i)\leq r'/2
\]
Repeating this process for each ball $B_i$ results in a set of at most $D$ balls $(B'_{i,1},\ldots,B'_{i,D})$ of radius $r'/4$ centered at $b'_{i,1},\ldots,b'_{i,D}$.
\[
\forall q\in B'_{i,j}, d(b'_{i,j},q)\leq r'/4
\]
Choose a point $p_{i,j}\in P\cap B'_{i,j}$. Using triangle inequality,
\begin{align*}
\forall q\in B'_{i,j}, d(p_{i,j},q) &\leq d(p_{i,j},b'_{i,j})+d(b'_{i,j},q)\\
&\leq r'/4+r'/4=r'/2.\*
\end{align*}
We claim any minimal solution needs at most one point from each ball $B'_{i,j}$. By contradiction, assume there are two point $p_{i,j},q'$ in the minimal solution that lie inside a ball $B'_{i,j}$. After removing $q'$, the ball with radius $r'/2$ centered at $p_{i,j}$ still covers $B'_{i,j}$, since:
\begin{align*}
\forall q\in P, \exists B_i ,B'_{i,j}\ni q,p_{i,j}&\\
d(q,p_{i,j}) &\leq d(q,b'_{i,j})+d(b'_{i,j},p_{i,j})\\
&\leq r'/4+r'/4=r/2'.\*
\end{align*}
Then we have found a point $(q')$ whose removal decreases the size of the solution, which means the solution was not minimal. So, the size of any minimal set of points covering $B$ is at most $D^2$.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{kissing0}
\caption{Applying the doubling dimension bound twice (Lemma~\ref{lemma:kissing0}).}
\label{fig:kissing}
\end{figure}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:kissing}
In a metric space with doubling constant $D$, if a dual clustering with radius $r$ has $k$ points, then a dual clustering with radius $r/2$ exists which has $D^2 k$ points.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $p$ be a center in the $k$-center problem. Based on the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma:kissing0}, there are $\Delta$ vertices adjacent to $p$ that cover the points inside the ball of radius $r$ centered at $p$, using balls of radius $r/2$ and a ball of radius $r/2$ centered at $p$. By choosing all these vertices as centers, it is possible to cover all input points $P$ with radius $r/2$. Using the same reasoning for all clusters, it is possible to cover all points using $(\Delta+1) k$ centers. Using the bound in Lemma~\ref{lemma:kissing0}, these are $D^2 k$ centers.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:dual}
The approximation factor of \Cref{alg:offline} is $D^2$ for the dual clustering.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Since the radius of balls in Lemma~\ref{lemma:kissing} is at most the optimal radius for $k$-center, the approximation factor of dual clustering is the number of points chosen as centers divided by $k$, which is $D^2$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:krcenter}
The approximation factor of the coreset for $k$-center in \Cref{alg:offline} is $2^{-R}$ and its size is $D^{2(R+1)}k$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Applying Lemma~\ref{lemma:kissing} halves the radius and multiplies the number of points by $D^2$. So, applying this lemma $R$ times gives $(D^2)^{R+1}k$ points since it might be the case that in the first step of the algorithm the optimal radius was found, and we divided it by $2$. The radius remains $\frac{r}{2^R}$ because of the case where we had found a $2$-approximation.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:kcenter0}
\Cref{alg:offline} given $(\frac{4}{\epsilon})^{2\log_2 D}k$ as input, is a $(1+\epsilon)$-approximation coreset of size $(\frac{4}{\epsilon})^{2\log_2 D}k$ for the $k$-center problem.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
For $R=\lceil \log_2 \frac{2}{\epsilon} \rceil$, the proof of \Cref{theorem:krcenter} gives $(\frac{4}{\epsilon})^{2\log_2 D}$ points and radius $r\epsilon$.
Assume $O$ is the set of $k$ centers returned by the optimal algorithm for point-set $P$, and $C$ is the set of centers returned by running the optimal algorithm on the coreset of $P$. For any point $p\in P$, let $o$ be the center that covers $p$ and $c$ be the point that represents $o$ in the coreset.
Using triangle inequality:
\[
d(p,c) \leq d(p,o)+d(o,c) \leq r+r\epsilon=(1+\epsilon)r
\]
So, computing a $k$-center on this coreset gives a $(1+\epsilon)$-approximation.
\end{proof}
\section{A Composable Core-Set for $k$-Center in Doubling Metrics}
Our general algorithm for constructing coresets based on dual clustering has the following steps:
\begin{itemize}
\item Compute the cost of an approximate solution $(X)$.
\item Find a composable coreset for dual clustering with cost $X$.
\item Compute a clustering on the coreset.
\end{itemize}
In this section, we use this general algorithm for solving $k$-center.
\subsection{Algorithm}
Knowing the exact or approximate value of $r$, we can find a single-round $(2+\epsilon)$-approximation for metric $k$-center in MapReduce.
Although the algorithm achieves the aforementioned approximation factor, the size of the coreset and the communication complexity of the algorithm depend highly on the doubling dimension.
\begin{algorithm}[h]
\caption{$k$-Center}
\label{alg:kcenter}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require{A set of sets of points $\cup_{i=1}^L S_i$, a $k$-center algorithm}
\Ensure{A set of $k$ centers}
\State{Run a $k$-center algorithm on each $S_i$ to find the radius $r_i$.}
\State{Run \Cref{alg:cbc} on the disk graph of each set $S_i$ with radius $\frac{\epsilon r_i}{2}$ locally to find $C(S_i)$.}
\State{Send $C(S_i)$ to set $1$ to find the union $\cup_i C(S_i)$.}
\State{Run a $2$-approximation $k$-center algorithm on $\cup_{i=1}^L C(S_i)$ to find the set of centers $C$.}\\
\Return{$C$.}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
Based on the running time of \Cref{alg:cbc} and Gonzalez's algorithm, the running time of \Cref{alg:kcenter} is $\sum_i [O(k\cdot |S_i|)+O(|S_i|^2)]+O(k\sum_i |C(S_i)|)=O(kn)$. Since the sum of running times of machines is of the same order as the best sequential algorithm, \Cref{alg:kcenter} is a work-efficient parallel algorithm.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{proof}
\caption{The dominating set on $\cup_i C(S_i)$ covers $\cup_i S_i$ with radius $(2+\epsilon)$(Theorem \ref{theorem:kcenter}).}
\label{fig:kcenter}
\end{figure}
We review the following well-known lemma:
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:kcenter}
For a subset $S\subset P$, the optimal radius of the $k$-center of $S$ is at most twice the radius of the $k$-center of $P$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider the set of clusters $O_i$ in the optimal $k$-center of $P$ centered at $c_i,i=1,\ldots,k$ with radius $r$. If $c_i\in S$, then the points of $O_i\cap S$ are covered by $c_i$ with radius $r$, as before. Otherwise, select an arbitrary point in $O_i\cap S$ as the new center $c'_i$. Using the triangle inequality on $c_i,c'_i$ and any point $p\in O_i\cap S$:
\[
d(p,c'_i) \leq d(p,c_i)+d(c_i,c'_i) \leq r+r=2r
\]
Since $c'_i$ was covered using $c_i$ with radius $r$. So, the set $S\cap O_i$ can be covered with radius $2r$. Note that since we choose at most one point from each set, the number of new centers is at most $k$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:kcenter}
The approximation factor of \Cref{alg:kcenter} is $2+\epsilon$ for metric $k$-center.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $r$ be the optimal radius of $k$-center for $\cup_i S_i$.
Since $\cup_i C(S_i) \subset \cup_i S_i$, using Lemma~\ref{lemma:kcenter}, the radius of $k$-center for $\cup_i C(S_i)$ is at most $2r$. The radius of $k$-center inside each set $S_i$ is at most $2r$ for the same reason.
The algorithm computes a covering $S_i$ with balls of radius $r_i \epsilon /2$.
Based on the fact that offline $k$-center has $2$-approximation algorithms and the triangle inequality, the approximation factor of the algorithm proves to be $(2+\epsilon)$-approximation (\Cref{fig:kcenter}). Let $p=\arg \min_{p\in \cup_i C(S_i)} dist(s,p)$, then
\begin{align*}
\forall s \in S_i \exists c \in C, d(s,c) &\leq d(s,p)+d(p,c) \leq r'+r_i\epsilon/2 \\
&\leq 2r+2r\epsilon/2 =(2+\epsilon)r\*
\end{align*}
where $r'$ is the radius of the offline $k$-center algorithm on $C$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Analysis}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:kissing2}
In a metric space with doubling constant $D$, the union of dual clusterings of radius $r$ computed on sets $S_1,\ldots,S_L$ is a $(L\times D^{2\log_2 \frac{8}{\epsilon}})$-approximation for the dual clustering of radius $r(1+\epsilon)$ of their union $(\cup_{i=1}^L S_i)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Each center in the dual clustering with radius $r$ of $P=(\cup_{i=1}^L S_i)$ has at most $\Delta$ adjacent vertices covered by this center.
Consider a point $p\in P$ covered by center $c$ in a solution for $P$. If $p$ and $c$ belong to the same set $S_i$, assign $p$ to $c$. Otherwise, pick any point that was previously covered by $c$ as the center that covers $p$.
While this might increase the radius by a factor $2$, it does not increase the number of centers in each set. Since the algorithm uses radius $\epsilon .r /2$, it increases the number of centers to $D^{2\log_2 \frac{8}{\epsilon}}k$ (based on \Cref{theorem:krcenter} for $R=\frac{4r}{\epsilon r/2}$) but keeps the approximation factor of the radius to $1+\epsilon$.
There are $L$ such sets, so the size of the coreset is $L\times D^{2\log_2 \frac{8}{\epsilon}}k$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:mrdbscan}
\Cref{alg:kcenter} returns a coreset of size $O(kL)$ for $k$-center in metric spaces with fixed doubling dimension.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The coreset of each set $S_i$ has a radius $r_i$ varying from the optimal radius $(r=r_i)$ to $2\beta.r$, where $\beta$ is the approximation factor of the offline algorithm for $k$-center.
Clearly, the lower bound holds because any radius is at least as much as the optimal (minimum) radius, which means $r\leq r_i$; and Lemma~\ref{lemma:kcenter} when applied to $S_i \subset \cup_i S_i$, yields the upper bound.
\[
r\leq r_i \leq 2\beta.r \Rightarrow \frac{r\epsilon}{4\beta} \leq \frac{r_i\epsilon}{4\beta} \leq \frac{\epsilon r}{2}
\]
Reaching value $r\epsilon$ requires applying \Cref{theorem:kcenter} at most $\log_2 \frac{4\beta}{\epsilon}$ times.
The size of the resulting coreset is therefore at most
\[
(4^{\log_2 D})^{\log_{2} \frac{4\beta}{\epsilon}}kL = (\frac{4\beta}{\epsilon})^{2(\log_2 D)}kL.
\]
Here, we use the best approximation factor for metric $k$-center $(\beta=2)$, which gives a coreset of size $(\frac{8}{\epsilon})^{2(\log_2 D)}kL=O(kL)$ for fixed $\epsilon$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Generalized Approximation Factor}
We prove that any $2$-approximation algorithm that does not choose a center from the points of another center can be used instead of Gonzalez's algorithm in the MapReduce algorithm of \cite{kcenter1}, and a similar proof will give the approximation factor $4$.
\Cref{alg:gkcenter} shows the generalized algorithm.
\begin{algorithm}[h]
\caption{Generalized Metric $k$-Center in MapReduce}
\label{alg:gkcenter}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require{A set of sets of points $\cup_{i=1}^L S_i$}
\Ensure{A set of $k$ centers}
\State{Run a $k$-center algorithm on each $S_i$ to find the radius $r_i$ and the set of centers $C(S_i)$.}
\State{Send $C(S_i)$ to set $1$ to find the union $\cup_i C(S_i)$.}
\State{Run a $2$-approximation $k$-center algorithm on $\cup_{i=1}^L C(S_i)$ to find the set of centers $C$.}\\
\Return{$C$.}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:gkcenter}
\Cref{alg:gkcenter} given an $\alpha$-approximation metric $k$-center algorithm with $\alpha \geq 2$ which does not choose a center from the points of another cluster, finds a $2\alpha$-approximation solution.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Assume $r^*$ is the optimal $k$-center radius of $\cup_{i=1}^L S_i$. We prove that $C(S_i)$ covers $S_i$ with radius at most $\alpha \cdot r^*$. Suppose there is a point $p\in S_i$ whose distance to its nearest point from $C(S_i)$ is more than $\alpha r^*$, so $r_i\geq \alpha r^*$. The distance between each pair of points from $C(S_i)$ is at least $r_i$, since the algorithm never chooses a point as a center if it is within distance $r_i$ of another center. Therefore, the set $\{p\} \cup C(S_i)$ has $k+1$ points with distance at least $r_i$ from each other. There are at most $k$ optimal clusters, so at least two of these points must lie inside a cluster, which means their distance is at most $2r^*$. This means that $r_i \leq 2 r^*$, which contradicts the previous bound $r_i \geq \alpha r^*$.
A similar proof follows for $\cup_{i=1}^L C(S_i)$ and $C$. Using triangle inequality, the distance from any point $p$ to its local center $c(p)$ and its final center $c'(c(p))$ is bounded by:
\[
d(p,c(p))+d(c(p),c'(c(p))) \leq \alpha r^*+\alpha r^*=2\alpha r^*.
\]
\end{proof}
Note that the parametric pruning algorithm finds a dominating set by computing a maximal independent set, so the centers returned by this algorithm do not lie inside each others' clusters.
\subsection{A $(1+\epsilon)$-Composable Core-Set}
The composable coreset for $k$-center in doubling metrics can be used to obtain a $(1+\epsilon)$-approximation for constant $\epsilon$ and $k$. All these results also hold for dual clustering, as a result of the proven trade-off between $r$ and $k$.
\begin{algorithm}[h]
\caption{$k$-Center for Fixed $k$}
\label{alg:ikcenter}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require{A set of sets of points $\cup_{i=1}^L S_i$}
\Ensure{A set of $k$ centers}
\State{Run a $k$-center algorithm locally to find $r_i$.}
\State{Run \Cref{alg:cbc} on the disk graph of each set $S_i$ with radius $\frac{\epsilon r_i}{2}$ locally to find $C(S_i)$.}
\State{Send $C(S_i)$ to set $1$ to find the union $\cup_i C(S_i)$.}
\State{Run \Cref{alg:offline} on $\cup_i C(S_i)$, and let $C'$ be its output.}
\State{Run the optimal $k$-center of $C'$ by checking all $\binom{|C'|}{k}$ possible subsets, and let $T$ be its output.}\\
\Return{$T$}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{theorem}
\Cref{alg:ikcenter} gives a $(1+\epsilon)$-approximation for $k$-center in doubling metrics, for fixed $k$ and $\epsilon$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The approximation factor of $C$ is $1+\epsilon$ and its size is $(\frac{8}{\epsilon})^{2\log_2 D}kL$, based on \Cref{theorem:mrdbscan}.
Repeating the core-set computation gives the approximation factor $(1+\epsilon)^2 \approx 1+2\epsilon$, and has size $(\frac{4}{\epsilon})^{2\log_2 D}k$ as proved in \Cref{theorem:kcenter0}.
Checking all possible choices for $k$ centers from $C'$ takes polynomial time, for fixed $k$ and $\epsilon$, since:
\[
\binom{(\frac{4}{\epsilon})^{2\log_2 D}k}{k}\leq (\frac{e(\frac{4}{\epsilon})^{2\log_2 D}k}{k})^k=(\frac{4}{\epsilon})^{2k\log_2 D}.
\]
Since the last step was optimal, the approximation factor of $T$ for $k$-center is $1+\epsilon$.
\end{proof}
\section{The Exponential Nature of The Trade-off Between $r$ and $k$}
The same constructive algorithm yields an exponential lower bound on the trade-off between $r$ and $k$ of $k$-center.
We build the following example by placing a point at the center of each ball from ball covering problem using balls of radius $r/2$ to cover a ball of radius $r$, and repeating this process recursively.
\begin{example}\label{example}
Cover the ball of radius $r$ with $D$ balls of radius $r/2$, where $D$ is the doubling constant of the metric space. Repeat this process with each of the balls of radius $r/2$.
The number of balls in the $t$-th iteration of this process is $D^t$ and their radius is $\frac{r}{2^t}$.
\end{example}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:circlepacking}
A circle packing of radius $R$ with circles of radius $r/2$ is an upper bound for the ball cover using circles of radius $r$, and the circle packing using circles of radius $r$ is a lower bound for the ball cover of radius $r$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The circle packing has the maximum number of circles, so there is no room for more circles in the empty spaces between those circles. Therefore, increasing the radius of circles to twice the previous radius will cover the circle of radius $R$.
So, the circle packing for circles of radius $r$ gives an upper bound on the minimum number of circles required to cover a circle of radius $R$.
On the other hand, circle packing for circles of radius $r/2$ is a lower bound for the minimum number of circles required to cover the circle of radius $R$, since all those circles are disjoint.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:tradeoff}
The optimal trade-off between $k$ and $r$ is exponential.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Based on \Cref{lemma:circlepacking}, \Cref{theorem:krcenter} gives both a lower bound and an upper bound on the trade-off between $k$ and $r$ for $O(k)$ points and radius $r/2$, within a constant factor for doubling metrics.
\Cref{lemma:kissing} gives the upper bound $D^2$ for each step, and the lower bound in \Cref{example} is $D$.
Substituting this bound in the trade-off of \Cref{theorem:krcenter} gives the ratio between the upper bound and the lower bound of $k$ in this trade-off which is $(\frac{4}{\epsilon})^{\log_2 D}k$,
where $\epsilon$ is the radius of the balls used for covering the points.
\end{proof}
Better trade-offs in $\mathbb{R}^2$ and $\mathbb{R}^3$ can be achieved by replacing $D^2$ with the square of the bound from circle/sphere covering for radius $\frac{r}{\epsilon}$ in \Cref{theorem:tradeoff} instead.
\section{A Comparison of The Algorithms for Metric $k$-Center}\label{sec:compare}
We consider variations of Gonzalez's greedy algorithm and the parametric pruning algorithm in which arbitrary choices are replaced by random ones. In the worst case, even the randomized version of these algorithms cannot achieve an approximation factor better than $2$.
We also prove the solutions of Gonzalez's algorithm are a subset of the solutions of the parametric pruning algorithm.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:rg}
There are instances in which randomized Gonzalez's algorithm cannot do better than $2$-approximation in the best case.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We prove this lemma by the counterexample of \Cref{fig:gonzalez}.
The measures of the example are as follows:
\[
d(P_i,P_{i+1})=\frac{1}{2},\quad i=1,\cdots,4
\]
The farthest neighbor computation prevents the algorithm from choosing the optimal solution $\{P_2,P_4\}$ with cost $\frac{1}{2}$, since it chooses at least one of the endpoints $P_1,P_5$. Therefore, the cost of the solution computed by randomized Gonzalez's algorithm is $1$. So, the approximation factor is $\frac{1}{1/2}=2$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{rand_gonz.pdf}
\caption{Gonzalez's algorithm never finds $P'_1,P'_2,P'_3$ as the solution.}
\label{fig:gonzalez}
\end{figure}
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:gp}
The solutions of Gonzalez's algorithm are a subset of the solutions of the parametric pruning algorithm.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $r$ be the radius and $C$ be the set of centers computed by Gonzalez's algorithm, after removing the last centers if they do not decrease the cluster radius.
Consider the graph $G=(P,E)$ such that $P$ is the set of input points and $E$ is the set of all pairs of points with distance at most $r$.
By the anti-cover property of Gonzalez's algorithm, $C$ is an independent set of $G^2$.
Since the maximal independent set algorithm visits vertices in an arbitrary order, use the order of visiting used in Gonzalez's algorithm.
Consider an instance of the parametric pruning algorithm that at the $i$-th step, visits the points of $P$ in the order of Gonzalez's algorithm after it has chosen $i$ centers.
In such an instance, all the edges between the points of $C$ and their corresponding members from $P$ have already appeared in the sorted list of edges, since they have a lower edge weight than $r$. Also, there are no edges between the points of $C$, since Gonzalez's algorithm chooses the farthest point from previous points, so the distance between the centers is more than $r$.
Therefore, $C$ is a maximal independent set of the disk graph of radius $r$.
All the radii less than $r$ that are checked by the parametric pruning algorithm will fail since $r$ is the minimum radius that covers $P$ using points of $C$.
For radius $r$, the parametric pruning algorithm finds the solution with $C$ as centers.
We proved that there is an execution of the maximal independent set algorithm on the square of $G$ that finds $C$ as the set of centers.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:po}
There are examples in which randomized parametric pruning algorithm for $k$-center cannot do better than a $2$-approximation in the best case.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Any solution in the form of a dominating set of the unit disk graph that is not also an independent set is a solution that the parametric pruning algorithm cannot find.
See \Cref{fig:parametric} for an example. In this example, $\{p_1,p_2\}$ are an optimal solution, but the parametric pruning algorithm does not find them. $\{p_1,q\}$ is a solution that the parametric pruning algorithm can find, because it is an independent set.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics{parametric.pdf}
\caption{$\{p_1,p_2\}$ is a dominating set which is not also an independent set.}
\label{fig:parametric}
\end{figure}
\end{proof}
\Cref{lemma:rg,lemma:gp,lemma:po} show the relation between the $2$-approximation solutions of $k$-center, as stated in the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:venn}
The solutions of randomized Gonzalez's algorithm are a proper subset of the solutions of the randomized parametric pruning algorithm which are a proper subset of the $2$-approximation solutions for metric $k$-center. Also, the optimal solutions are not a subset of the solutions of the randomized parametric pruning algorithm.
\end{theorem}
The Venn diagram of sets in \Cref{theorem:venn} is shown in \Cref{fig:venn}, where the sets $2 \cdot OPT$ denote the set of $2$-approximation solutions and $OPT$ is the set of optimal solutions.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{venn.pdf}
\caption{The Venn diagram of worst-case solutions of randomized Gonzalez's algorithm (Gonz.), randomized parametric pruning algorithm (Param.), $2$-approximation ($2\cdot OPT$) and exact solutions ($OPT$) for $k$-ceneter.}
\label{fig:venn}
\end{figure}
\section{Efficient Parametric Pruning Algorithm}
We need to keep the time and space complexity of the coreset computation algorithm near linear. Since the time complexity of parametric pruning in general metrics is $O(n^3)$ and its space complexity is $O(n^2)$, we give a $(2+\epsilon)$-approximation algorithm with $O(\frac{nk}{\epsilon})$ time and $O(n)$ space.
Later, we use this algorithm to find a $(2+\epsilon)$-approximation algorithm for general metrics.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{Efficient Parametric Pruning}
\label{alg:memory}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require{A point set $P$, an integer $k$}
\Ensure{A set of centers $C$}
\State{$R=$ the radius of Gonzalez's $k$-center.}
\For{$r=R/2$, $k' < k$ and $r \leq 2(1+\epsilon)R$ ,$R\gets R(1+\epsilon)$}
\State{$k'=0$}
\State{$mark[1,\ldots,|P|]=false$}
\For{$i \in \{1,\ldots,|P|\}$}
\If{$mark[i]=false$}
\State{$mark[i]=true$}
\State{$C\gets C\cup \{P[i]\}$}
\State{$k'\gets k'+1$}
\For{$j \in \{1,\ldots,|P|\}$}
\If{$mark[j]=false$ and $dist(P[i],P[j])\leq R$}
\State{$mark[j]=true$}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\EndIf
\EndFor
\EndFor
\\ \Return{$C$}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{theorem}
The time complexity of \Cref{alg:memory} is $O(\frac{nk}{\epsilon})$ and its memory complexity is $O(n)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
For each point, if it has been visited before, the algorithm ignores it, otherwise the algorithm chooses it as the next center, in which case it checks at most $n$ other points. Since there are at most $k$ centers, using aggregate method for amortized analysis, the running time of the algorithm is $nk+n$ for each $r$. The number of values $r$ that are checked by the algorithm is $1+\log_{1+\epsilon} 8$. Using taylor series $\ln (1+x) =x-\frac{x^2}{2}+...\geq x , x\rightarrow 0$, the overall time complexity is $O(\frac{nk}{\epsilon})$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:memory}
The approximation factor of \Cref{alg:memory} is $2+\epsilon$ for metric $k$-center.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Consider the disk graph of points with radius $2r^*$, where $r^*$ is the optimal radius. Using this radius, each cluster turns into a clique, so the maximal independent set subroutine of parametric pruning algorithm chooses at most one point from each cluster.
\Cref{alg:memory} computes a maximal independent set of the disk graph of radius $r$ at each step. For $r\geq 2r^*$, at most $k$ points are marked as centers by the algorithm. The algorithm starts from a lower bound on the radius and multiplies it by $(1+\epsilon)$. So, in the worst case the first radius that the algorithm checks which exceeds $2r^*$ is $r\leq 2(1+\epsilon)r^*$.
\end{proof}
\section{Connectivity Preservation and Applications to DBSCAN}
Computing the connected components of a graph is harder than testing the connectivity between two vertices $s,t$ of the graph.
It has been conjectured that sparse $st$-connectivity in $o(\log n)$ rounds and single-linkage clustering in high dimensions cannot be solved using a constant number of MapReduce rounds, by reduction from connectivity problem \cite{grigory}.
In DBSCAN, a point that has at least $f$ other points within distance $\epsilon$ from it is called a \textit{core point}. A cluster is a connected component of the intersection graph of balls of radius $\epsilon$ centered at core points. Any point that is not within distance $\epsilon$ of a core point is an \textit{outlier}.
Therefore, the algorithm can be seen as two main steps: simultaneous range counting queries, and computing the connected components of the disk graph. Both of these problems are challenging in the MapReduce model.
We use dual clustering to solve a non-convex clustering problem in MapReduce.
Several MapReduce algorithms for \textit{density-based spatial clustering of applications with noise (DBSCAN)} has been presented~\cite{mrdbscan,mrdbscan2,mrdbscan3,mrdbscan4,mrdbscan5}.
However, they lack theoretical guarantees.
We use the abstract DBSCAN algorithm \cite{dbscan2017}, which only differs from the original DBSCAN algorithm \cite{dbscan} in its time complexity \cite{dbscanhardness}, but computes the range counting queries prior to computing the connected components of the disk graph.
Several algorithms for range counting queries exist in MapReduce, but it is not possible in the $MRC$ model to run $n$ instances of single-query range search \cite{rangempc} simultaneously, since the data from one machine could be used in the solution of points from $n^{\delta}$ machines, for a constant $\delta>0$.
Mergeable summaries for range counting queries are randomized approximation algorithms which are also composable \cite{mergeable}.
Note that range queries for unit disks in $\mathbb{R}^d$ can be converted into rectangular range queries in $\mathbb{R}^{d+1}$, via linearization \cite{handbook}, therefore, any algorithm for rectangular range counting also solves the problem for disk range counting.
Our core-set for dual clustering of radius $\epsilon/2$, approximately preserves the connectivity of edges of weight at most $\epsilon$ between clusters.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:connectivity}
For two cluster centers $c_i,c_j$ of clusters $C_i,C_j$ of radius $\epsilon$, they are said to be connected if there is a point $p,d(p,c_i)\leq \epsilon, d(p,c_j)\leq \epsilon$. \Cref{alg:offline} with radius $\frac{\epsilon}{2}$ detects if such two cluster centers are connected or not.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By definition of clustering, the distances from each point to its cluster center is at most $\epsilon/2$, so
\[
d(p,c_i)\leq \epsilon/2, d(q,c_j)\leq \epsilon/2.
\]
If $d(p,q)\leq \epsilon$, then using triangle inequality twice gives the following results:
\[
d(c_i,c_j) \leq d(c_i,p)+d(p,c_j) \leq \epsilon/2+\epsilon/2 = \epsilon.
\]
\end{proof}
\Cref{alg:dbscan} with the minimum number of points of each cluster set to one, and then using the dual clustering, can be used to solve the DBSCAN problem in doubling metrics.
\begin{algorithm}[h]
\caption{A Coreset for DBSCAN of Core Points}
\label{alg:dbscan}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require{A set of sets of core points $\cup_{i=1}^L S_i$, a radius $\epsilon$}
\Ensure{A non-convex clustering of $\cup_{i=1}^L S_i$}
\State{$C_i$=The output of \Cref{alg:offline} with radius $\frac{\epsilon}{2}$ on set $S_i$.}
\State{Send centers from each machine to the first machine to form the set $C=\cup_i C_i$.}
\State{$T=$The connected components of the disk graph of radius $\epsilon$ on $C$.}
\State{Send $T$ to all machines.}
\State{Connect each point to its nearest neighbor in $T$.}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{theorem}
\Cref{alg:dbscan} solves DBSCAN using $O(1)$ rounds of MapReduce, given that $L=o(n), m =o(n),kL=O(m)$, where $k$ is the size of the output.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Using \Cref{lemma:connectivity}, $T$ has the same connected components for the points of $C$ as the optimal solution. Therefore, connecting each point to its nearest neighbor in $T$ gives an exact DBSCAN clustering.
Let $k$ be the number of points required to represent the clusters. Based on \Cref{theorem:dual}, the number of points returned by the algorithm is at most $D^2k=O(k)$.
Sending $O(k)$ data from $L$ machines to one machine requires $kL=O(m)$.
Running \Cref{alg:offline} takes $O(1)$ rounds, computing the union and sending the clusters to all machines each take one round. So, the total number of rounds is $O(1)$.
\end{proof}
Note that in \Cref{alg:dbscan}, even without sending the points to a single machine, the set $C$ in \Cref{alg:dbscan} is still a composable core-set for DBSCAN.
\section{Experimental Results}
Description of data sets used in our experiments is depicted in \Cref{table:datasets}. Euclidean distance is used for all data sets. Note that DEXTER data set is not doubling, since it has a higher dimension than the number of its instances.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|p{4cm}|}
\hline
Data Set & \# of Instances & \# of Dimensions & Preprocessing\\
\hline
Parkinson \cite{parkinson} & 5875 & 26 & - \\
DEXTER \cite{dexter} & 2600 & 20000 & - \\
\hline
Power & 2049280 & 7 & No missing values, numerical attributes only\\
Higgs \cite{higgs} & 11000000 & 7 & $7$ high-level attributes only\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Properties of data sets used in our experiments, obtained from \cite{datasets}.}
\label{table:datasets}
\end{table}
The size of data chunks used for partitioning the data is $m=10000$.
\subsection{Randomized Gonzalez vs. Randomized Parametric Pruning}
In \Cref{sec:compare}, we proved that the solutions of Gonzalez's algorithm are a subset of the solutions of the parametric pruning algorithm.
We compare the randomized version of these algorithms, where arbitrary choices in these algorithms are replaced by randomized ones. Then, we empirically compare the approximation factor of the resulting algorithms.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6,trim={2cm 8.5cm 2cm 8.5cm},clip]{Processed.pdf}
\caption{A comparison of Gonzalez's greedy algorithm and the parametric pruning algorithm on Parkinson data-set.}
\label{fig:parkinson}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6,trim={2cm 8.8cm 2cm 8.8cm},clip]{dexter.pdf}
\caption{A comparison of Gonzalez's greedy algorithm and the parametric pruning algorithm on Dexter data-set.}
\label{fig:dexter}
\end{figure}
The experiments show that the effect of randomization when choosing the points is slight, however, the differences between the approximation factor of the algorithms are more significant. In \Cref{fig:parkinson}, the results of the algorithm for a data-set in low dimensional Euclidean space, which is a doubling metric are given. \Cref{fig:dexter} shows the results for a high-dimensional Euclidean space, which is not necessarily a doubling metric.
\subsection{A Comparison in MapReduce}
In this experiment, we compared the approximation factor of the efficient parametric pruning algorithm (\Cref{alg:memory}) using $\epsilon=0.01$ with the greedy algorithm of Gonzalez extended to MapReduce \cite{gonzalez}.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7,trim={2cm 9.5cm 2cm 10.9cm},clip]{higgs.pdf}
\caption{A comparison of Gonzalez's greedy algorithm and the parametric pruning algorithm on Higgs data-set.}
\label{fig:higgs}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7,trim={2cm 9.5cm 2cm 11cm},clip]{power.pdf}
\caption{A comparison of Gonzalez's greedy algorithm and the parametric pruning algorithm on Power data-set.}
\label{fig:power}
\end{figure}
The radii of Gonzalez's greedy algorithm in MapReduce are $1.3$ times the radii of parametric pruning algorithm on average on Higgs (\Cref{fig:higgs}) and Power (\Cref{fig:power}) data-sets.
\section{Conclusions}
Gonzalez's algorithm \cite{gonzalez} is a special case of parametric pruning algorithm \cite{vazirani} in which the greedy maximal independent set computation prioritizes the points with the maximum distance from the currently chosen points.
Our algorithm and trade-off partially answers the open question of \cite{kcenter2} about comparing and improving these two algorithms in MapReduce. We propose a modified parametric pruning algorithm with running time $O(\frac{nk}{\epsilon})$ that achieves a better approximation factor in practice. Finding algorithms with provable approximation factor $2$ in the worst-case and better approximation factors on average remains open.
We also proved that the best possible trade-off between the approximation factor and the number of centers of $k$-center in doubling metrics is exponential.
Our composable coreset for dual clustering gives constant factor approximation for minimizing the size of DBSCAN cluster representatives given that the neighbor-counting is done prior to computing the coreset and the connected components. Finding a summarization technique that can preserve both the number of near neighbors and the connectivity between clusters in general metrics remains open. Note that in doubling metrics, keeping the number of points assigned to each center approximately solves this problem.
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
|
\section{Introduction}
\IEEEPARstart{R}ecently, with {\color{black}a significant} improvement of drone {\color{black}technologies},
such as increased payload capacity, prolonged flight endurance{\color{black}, etc}, the
application of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) has attracted extensive attentions
in both academia and industry \cite{valavanis2015future,asadpour2014micro}.
One promising application is the use of UAV as flying base stations (BSs), which aims to
boost the capabilities of the existing terrestrial cellular networks \cite{zeng2016wireless,xiao2016enabling,menouar2017uav,chen2018multiple}.
One key feature of UAVs is their agility and mobility. For example, UAVs can be deployed
in a very short time with {\color{black}a} fairly low cost compared to the deployment of
traditional terrestrial BSs.
Moreover, UAVs have the ability to intelligently adjust their positions in real-time to
efficiently provide {\color{black}large coverage and improve quality of} certain links.
Another feature which makes UAVs appealing is the higher opportunity to provide line-of-sight
(LoS) links, which can potentially provide more reliable links for certain users and hence
provide better quality of service (QoS), {\color{black}compared to traditional terrestrial BSs} .
Due to the above advantages, UAVs can be applied to various particular scenarios
for future communication networks.
One application scenario is to address temporary events such as concerts and sporting events,
where excessive connectivity and rate requirements are demanded by a large number of
audience.
Besides, in some unexpected scenarios such as disasters and emergency accidents,
terrestrial networks may be {\color{black}broken down} due to equipment damage or power failure, UAVs can
play an important role to help to reconstruct communication quickly and efficiently \cite{merwaday2016improved,kandeepan2014aerial,chandrasekharan2016designing}.
Other potential application scenarios include Internet of Things (IoT) \cite{mozaffari2017mobile}, public safety networks \cite{merwaday2015uav}, mobile edge computing \cite{jeong2018mobile} etc.
\subsection{Related works and Motivation}
To realize the application and reap the benefit of UAVs {\color{black}in} future communication networks,
researchers have done great efforts to address various technical challenges
including but not limited to channel modeling, deployment problems, trajectory design,
resource management and performance analysis, {\color{black}as illustrated in the following}.
Air-to-ground channel modeling is an important part of the existing work on UAV technologies.
In \cite{matolak2015unmanned}, simulation and measurement results for path loss, delay spread
and fading in air-to-ground channels were presented.
It has been shown in \cite{feng2006path} and \cite{holis2008elevation} that the characteristics
of the air-to-ground channel are dependent on the height of the aerial BSs, because of path loss and
shadowing.
In \cite{al2014conf} and \cite{al2014letter}, the authors studied the impact of
environment parameters on air-ground channel path loss and then proposed {\color{black}an} elevation angle
dependent function to characterize the probabilities of LoS and NLoS links between a low
altitude platform and a ground device.
The second {\color{black}important} research direction of UAV is to solve optimization problems which {\color{black}are}
relevant to UAV parameters, such as deployment \cite{mozaffari2017mobile}, cellular network planing with UAVs \cite{sharma2016uav},
trajectory optimization \cite{xu2018uav,pang2018uav} and resource management \cite{lyu2016cyclical}.
Another important research direction, which is complementary to the above two kinds of work,
is to {\color{black}carry out the} system-level performance {\color{black}evaluation} by utilizing tools from stochastic geometry \cite{haenggi2012stochastic}.
This kind of work usually aims to evaluate the impact of main design parameters on the
system performance and reveal the hidden tradeoffs when designing UAV assisted networks
\cite{mozaffari2016unmanned,zhang2017spectrum,ye2018secure,chetlur2017downlink,turgut2018downlink
,wang2018modeling,wang2018modeling2}. For example, the authors in \cite{mozaffari2016unmanned} studied
the downlink coverage and rate performance of a single UAV that co-exists with a device-to-device
(D2D) communication network. The authors in \cite{zhang2017spectrum} used 3D Poisson point process (PPP) to
analyze the performance of a network composed by UAVs and underlaid conventional cellular networks.
In \cite{chetlur2017downlink}, the authors studied the performance achieved by ground users served
by multiple UAVs in a finite area, by using {\color{black}the binomial} Poisson process (BPP) model. Later, the
authors in \cite{wang2018modeling} extended the work in\cite{chetlur2017downlink} by taking
PPP modeled ground BSs into consideration.
In \cite{turgut2018downlink}, the authors provided {\color{black}an} analytical framework to analyze the
performance of UAV assisted cellular networks with clustered user equipments (UEs).
Different from the existing work in the literature for performance analysis, the authors
in \cite{wang2018modeling2} considered a scenario where a UAV hovers over the center of a
malfunction area (modeled as a {\color{black}circular disc}) to provide service to the UEs {\color{black}within the disc}.
Specifically, all ground BSs within the malfunction area break down, while {\color{black} those outside ground BSs}
work well {\color{black}and can be} modeled as points of a PPP removing the circular malfunction area.
{\color{black}It is important to point out that the work in \cite{wang2018modeling2} requires an assumption that} all UEs in the malfunction area are served by the UAV, which is not practical for UEs
locate {\color{black}in} the middle and edge areas of the malfunction area.
Intuitively, it is better to serve a UE {\color{black}in} the edge area by a ground BS outside the malfunction area
{\color{black}instead of the UAV in order to avoid strong path loss}. Besides, a UE locates {\color{black}in} the middle area is better to be
cooperatively served by the UAV and a ground BS, because the UE is relatively far from both
the UAV and ground BSs. The above observations reveal the importance of introducing cooperative
transmission schemes for the considered scenario, which motivates the work {\color{black}in} this paper.
\subsection{Contributions}
The main contributions of this paper are listed as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item By considering the same system model as used in \cite{wang2018modeling2}, this paper
proposes a novel user-centric cooperative transmission scheme.
In the proposed scheme, {\color{black}a} UE chooses to be served by the UAV only, the nearest ground BS only,
or both the UAV and the nearest ground BS, depending on the relationship between
the average received power from the UAV and the nearest ground BS.
Hence there are three kind of {\color{black}UEs}.
The proportion of each kind of {\color{black}UEs} in the malfunction area can be tuned by a
cooperation parameter $\delta$, ranging from zero to one.
The significance of the proposed scheme is that it not only improves the coverage performance
achieved by the UE compared to the scheme in \cite{wang2018modeling2}, but also {\color{black}takes the number of serving BSs into consideration}.
\item It is necessary to point out that the proposed scheme in this paper is inspired
by the work in \cite{feng2018tunable}, where {\color{black}a} tunable cooperation scheme {\color{black}was} proposed for a
PPP based cellular network.
However, {\color{black}the scenario considered in \cite{feng2018tunable} is different from the one
in this paper}, which complicates the design of the transmission scheme.
For example, in this paper, the probabilistic LoS/NLoS propagation model is used to characterize the air-to-ground
channel which is different from traditional ground-to-ground channels.
Since the propagation features of {\color{black}an} LoS link and {\color{black}an} NLoS link are different, the corresponding
transmission strategies {\color{black}also become} different. Thus this paper uses the average received
power as the measure, instead of the distance as used in \cite{feng2018tunable},
to decide which transmission strategy should be used.
\item Coverage probability achieved by a random UE in the malfunction area is used as one of the metrics to evaluate the performance of
the proposed scheme.
There are two main difficulties to evaluate the
coverage probability, which makes the analytical development challenging.
The first is to
derive the distribution for the distance from the UE to the nearest ground BS.
The derivation here is not as easy as that in typical 2D PPP based models, due to
the constraint that the ground BSs reside outside the malfunction area.
{\color{black}The second is to obtain the Laplace transform of the aggregated interference from the ground BSs which are farther than the nearest ground BS, and the corresponding derivatives of the Laplace transform.}
The difficulty here is that, the Laplace transform which {\color{black}is} to derive is dependent
on the relationship {\color{black}between} the distance to the origin, the distance to the nearest ground BS
and the radius of the circular malfunction area, which significantly complicates the geometric
manipulation.
Normalized spectral efficiency is also used as a metric to evaluate
the performance, which takes both the system throughput and {\color{black}the} number of serving {\color{black}the} BSs
into consideration.
\item Analytical results are verified by computer simulations. To get insight into the proposed scheme, the impact of system parameters, such as UAV altitude, cooperation parameter $\delta$ and ground BS density etc, is discussed. Two benchmark schemes are considered to facilitate comparison.
One is the scheme used in \cite{wang2018modeling2}, where the UE in the malfunction area is served by the UAV only. The other is the {\color{black}case where} there's no UAV deployed in the area and the UE is only served by the nearest ground BS outside the area. {\color{black}The provided comparison} results demonstrate the superiority of the proposed scheme over the above two benchmarks.
\end{itemize}
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section II illustrates the considered system model and
presents the transmission scheme.
Section III develops the analysis for the coverage probability achieved by a UE.
Section IV provides numerical results to demonstrate the performance of the proposed scheme
and also verify the accuracy of the developed analytical results.
Section V concludes the paper.
Finally, {\color{black}appendixes} collect the proofs of the obtained analytical results.
\section{System Model}
\subsection{Location description}
Consider a downlink cellular network, where the ground BSs are randomly distributed in the plane.
Particularly, the locations of the ground BSs are modeled as a PPP, which is denoted by $\Phi$ with intensity $\lambda$.
There is an isolated region which is modeled as a disc $\mathcal{D}$ with radius $R_c$. Without loss of generality,
the center of the disc is set at the origin. It is assumed that, {\color{black}because of natural disaster or regional power failure}, all the ground BSs in disc $\mathcal{D}$ break down and are disabled to serve.
The locations of the remaining ground base stations outside disc $\mathcal{D}$ are denoted by $y_i$, forming a new point process $\Phi_o$, where $\Phi_o=\Phi \backslash \mathcal{D}$.
As in \cite{wang2018modeling2}, a UAV is employed to address the emergency, which hovers at altitude $H$ at the center of disc $\mathcal{D}$.
This paper focuses on the performance of the UEs in the malfunction area $\mathcal{D}$.
Particularly, consider a UE, as shown in Fig. \ref{system_model},
the horizontal distance between the UAV to the UE is denoted by $r_0$.
Without loss of generality, the coordination of the UE is denoted by $x_0=(r_0,0)$.
The distance between the $i$-th ground base station to the UE is denoted by $r_i$, i.e.,
$r_i=||y_i-x_0||$.
Note that, the ground BSs are ordered according to their {\color{black}distances} to the UE,
i.e., $r_i\leq r_j$ ($0<i\leq j$).
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{system_model1.eps}
\caption{An illustration of the system model.}
\label{system_model}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Channel model}
Note that, there are two kinds of channels in the considered scenario.
The first is the channel between the UAV and the UE, namely the air-to-ground channel.
The second is the channel between a ground BS and the UE,
namely the ground-to-ground channel.
To model the air-to-ground channel, the following two observations {\color{black}are worth being}
noticed.
On the one hand, note that an appealing feature of deploying UAV the increased
possibility of serving a UE through {\color{black}an} LoS link, which experiences lower propagation attenuation
than an NLoS link.
On the other hand, it is usually inevitable that the link between the UAV and the UE
is an NLoS link, due to the blockage effect caused by building, trees, etc.
To take the above two observations into consideration, this paper adopts a commonly
used model {\color{black}originally} proposed in \cite{al2014letter}, where the air-to-ground channel can either be {\color{black}an} LoS link
or be an NLoS link. The probabilities of {\color{black}an} LoS and {\color{black}an} NLoS link are denoted by $P_L(\phi)$
and $P_N(\phi)$ and are given by
\begin{align}\label{P_lOS}
&P_{L}(r_0)=\frac{1}{1+C\exp{(-B(\phi(r_0,H)-C))}},\\\notag
&P_{N}(r_0)=1-P_{L}(\phi(r_0,H)),
\end{align}
where $\phi(r_0,H)=\arctan{\frac{H}{r_0}}$ is the elevation angle from the UE to the UAV,
B and C are constant parameters determined
by the environment. As can be seen in (\ref{P_lOS}), with a larger elevation angle,
the link is more likely to be {\color{black}an} LoS link.
Furthermore, the air-to-ground channel gain is modeled as
\begin{align}
h_0=\frac{|g_{0s}|^2}{(\sqrt{H^2+r_0^2})^{\alpha_s}},
\end{align}
where $s \in \{L,N\}$, $L$ denotes {\color{black}an} LoS link and $N$ denotes an NLoS link,
$g_{0s}$ is the small scale fading {\color{black}channel gain} and obeys Nakagami-m fading with parameter $m_s$,
and $\alpha_s$ is the large scale path loss exponent. Particularly, Rayleigh fading is
assumed for NLoS links, i.e., $m_N=1$.
The ground-to-ground channel between the $i$-th ground BS and the UE is modeled as an
NLoS link. The channel gain is
$h_i=\frac{|g_i|^2}{r_i^{\alpha_N}}$, where $g_i$ is the {\color{black}small scale Rayleigh fading}
and $\alpha_N$ is the large scale path loss exponent.
\subsection{Transmission Scheme}
This paper proposes a {\color{black}user-centric cooperative} scheme, which means that the UE in disc $\mathcal{D}$ can be served either by the UAV only,
the nearest ground BS only, or both the UAV and the nearest ground BS,
depending on {\color{black}the user's connections to the UAV and the nearest ground BS}.
Thus, there are three types of UEs in disc $\mathcal{D}$, denoted by $\mathcal{A}_1$ (nearest ground BS only), $\mathcal{A}_2$ (both the UAV
and the nearest ground BS) and $\mathcal{A}_3$ (UAV only).
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6in]{region.eps}
\caption{Illustration of the user region. $R_c=500$ m , $H=300$ m, $\alpha_L=2.5$,
$\alpha_N=3$, $\lambda=2\times10^{-5}/m^2$. Black circles denote ground BSs generated
from a realization of $\Phi_o$. Red, blue and green regions denote the region of
$\mathcal{A}_1$, $\mathcal{A}_2$ and $\mathcal{A}_3$, respectively. (a)-(d) are the
cases where the air-to-ground links are LoS only and (e)-(f) are the cases where the
air-to-ground links are NLoS only.}
\label{region}
\end{figure}
Mathematically, the UE belongs to which type is determined as follows:
{\color{black}\begin{align}\label{scheme}
\begin{cases}
\text{UE}\in\mathcal{A}_1,&\text{if } r_1^{\alpha_N} \leq \delta(\sqrt{H^2+r_0^2})^{\alpha_s},\\
\text{UE}\in\mathcal{A}_2,&\text{if }
\delta(\sqrt{H^2+r_0^2})^{\alpha_s} < r_1^{\alpha_N} \leq
\frac{1}{\delta}(\sqrt{H^2+r_0^2})^{\alpha_s},\\
\text{UE}\in\mathcal{A}_3,&\text{if }
r_1^{\alpha_N} > \frac{1}{\delta}(\sqrt{H^2+r_0^2})^{\alpha_s}.
\end{cases}.
\end{align}}
Note that, the parameter $\delta$ ($0\leq\delta\leq1$) is {\color{black}termed} the {\color{black}cooperation indication} parameter,
which determines the cooperation level between the UAV and the nearest BS.
For example, when $\delta=0$, all the UEs in disc $\mathcal{D}$ belong to
$\mathcal{A}_2$, which means that the UEs are served cooperatively by the UAV and the nearest ground BS;
when $\delta=1$, a UE may possibly belong to $\mathcal{A}_1$ or $\mathcal{A}_3$,
and there is no UE belonging to $\mathcal{A}_3$. As shown in
Fig. \ref{region}, the cooperation region $\mathcal{A}_3$ decreases with $\delta$.
Another observation from Fig. \ref{region} is that, the region of $\mathcal{A}_3$ is
much smaller when the air-to-ground links are NLoS, which reveals the importance of
the application of the proposed scheme.
This paper only considers {\color{black}the} interference-limited scenario, where the noise {\color{black}are}
omitted compared to the aggregated interference.
When the $\text{UE}\in \mathcal{A}_1$, the UE is served by the nearest ground BS only {\color{black}and} the SIR to decode the UE's message {\color{black}is given by}
\begin{align}
\text{SIR}_1=\frac{h_1}{h_0+\sum\limits_{x_i\in\Phi_o\backslash x_1}h_i}.
\end{align}
When the $\text{UE}\in \mathcal{A}_2$, the UE is served by both the UAV and the nearest ground BS.
Particularly, this paper considers distributed transmit beamforming at the UAV and the
nearest BS. Consequently, the SIR to decode the UE's message {\color{black}is given by}
\begin{align}
\text{SIR}_2=\frac{(h_0+h_1)}{\sum\limits_{x_i\in\Phi_o\backslash x_1}h_i}.
\end{align}
When the $\text{UE}\in \mathcal{A}_3$, the UE is served by the UAV only, the SIR to
decode the UE's message {\color{black}is given by}
\begin{align}
\text{SIR}_3=\frac{h_0}{\sum\limits_{x_i\in\Phi_o}h_i}.
\end{align}
\section{Performance Analysis}
In this section, we will use the coverage probability
as the criterion to evaluate the performance of the proposed
scheme. The coverage probability is defined as the probability of the event that the
SIR is higher than a threshold $\epsilon$.
The NSE will also be given to reveal the trade off between the system throughput and {\color{black}the number of serving BSs}.
To evaluate the coverage probability and NSE achieved by the
UE, it is necessary to first obtain the following preliminary results.
\subsection{Distance distribution of the nearest ground BS}
The distribution of the distance from a typical UE to its nearest BS in a standard HPPP model
can be easily obtained and briefly represented {\color{black}\cite{haenggi2012stochastic}}. However, it is much more complicate in the considered
scenario in this paper. The main difficulty in our considered scenario
is caused by the constraint that the ground
BSs should locate outside disc $\mathcal{D}$.
Through rigorous derivations , the following lemma is obtained.
\begin{Lemma}
The conditional pdf of $r_1$ given $r_0$ is given by:
\begin{align}
f_{r_1|r_0}(r)=\begin{cases}0, &r \leq R_c-r_0\\
\lambda\zeta_1(r)e^{-\lambda\zeta_2(r)},& R_c-r_0<r<R_c+r_0\\
2\pi\lambda r e^{-\lambda\left(\pi r^2-\pi R_c^2\right)},&\text{otherwise}
\end{cases},
\end{align}
and the conditional CDF of $r_1$ given $r_0$ is given by:
\begin{align}\label{r1_CDF}
F_{r_1|r_0}(r)=\begin{cases}0, &r \leq R_c-r_0\\
1-e^{-\lambda \zeta_2(r)},& R_c-r_0<r<R_c+r_0\\
1-e^{-\lambda\left(\pi r^2-\pi R_c^2\right)},&\text{otherwise}
\end{cases},
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
\zeta_1(r)=&2\pi r+
\frac{r}{r_0}\sqrt{-\frac{(r-r_0-R_c)(r+r_0-R_c)(r-r_0+R_c)(r+r_0+R_c)}{r_0^2}}\\\notag
&-\frac{r}{r_0}\sqrt{-\frac{(-r+r_0-R_c)(r+r_0-R_c)(-r+r_0+R_c)(r+r_0+R_c)}{r_0^2}}\\\notag
&-2r\sec^{-1}\frac{2rr_0}{r^2+r_0^2-R_c^2},
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\zeta_2(r)=\pi r^2-\theta_1(r)R_c^2+R_c^2\sin\theta_1(r)\cos\theta_1(r)-\theta_2(r)r^2
+r^2\sin\theta_2(r)\cos\theta_2(r),
\end{align}
$\theta_1(r)=\arccos\frac{R_c^2+r_0^2-r^2}{2R_c r_0}$ and
$\theta_2(r)=\arccos\frac{r_0^2+r^2-R_c^2}{2 r_0 r}$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{IEEEproof}
Please refer to Appendix A.
\end{IEEEproof}
\subsection{Laplace transform of the interference}
Define $I_2=\sum\limits_{x_i\in\Phi_o\backslash x_1}h_i$, which is the aggregated
interference from the ground BSs farther than the nearest ground BS.
This subsection will focus on calculating the Laplace transform of $I_2$, when $r_0$ and $r_1$ are {\color{black}are assumed to be fixed}. There are conditions
need to be considered which complicate the calculation. One is that the distance from
the UE to each interfering ground BS which contributes to $I_2$ should {\color{black}be larger} than the
distance from the UE to the nearest ground BS, i.e, $r_i>r_1, i\geq2$.
The other is that each interfering ground BS should {\color{black}locate} outside disc $\mathcal{D}$.
By noting that the calculation will be different for the two cases:
i) $R_c-r_0<r_1<R_c+r_0$, ii) $r_1 \geq R_c+r_0$, the following two lemmas are obtained.
\begin{Lemma}
Define the conditional Laplace transform of $I_2$ when $r_0$ and $r_1$ are fixed
as $\mathcal{L}_{I_2|r_0,r_1}(s)=\mathbb{E}\{\text{exp}(-sI_2)\}$, then
$\mathcal{L}_{I_2|r_0,r_1}(s)$ is given by:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{I_2|r_0,r_1}(s)=\exp(\eta(s)),
\end{align}
where $\eta(s)$ can be expressed as the following two cases:
\begin{itemize}
\item when $R_c-r_0<r_1<R_c+r_0$,
\begin{align}
\eta(s)\approx&-\frac{2\lambda(\pi-\Theta)s^{\frac{2}{\alpha_N}}}{\alpha_N}
\bar{B}\left(\frac{1}{1+sr_1^{-\alpha_N}};\frac{2}{\alpha_N},1-\frac{2}{\alpha_N}\right)
\\\notag
&-\frac{\lambda\Theta\pi s^{\frac{2}{\alpha_N}}}{N\alpha_N}\sum_{n=1}^{N}
\sqrt{1-\theta_n^2}\bar{B}\left(\frac{1}{1+s(z(c_n))^{-\alpha_N}};\frac{2}{\alpha_N},1-\frac{2}{\alpha_N}\right),
\end{align}
\item when $r_1 \geq R_c+r_0$,
\begin{align}
\eta(s)=&-\frac{2\lambda\pi s^{\frac{2}{\alpha_N}}}{\alpha_N}
\bar{B}\left(\frac{1}{1+sr_1^{-\alpha_N}};\frac{2}{\alpha_N},1-\frac{2}{\alpha_N}\right),
\end{align}
\end{itemize}
where $\bar{B}(x;a,b)$ is the upper incomplete beta function given by $\bar{B}=\int_x^1 t^{a-1}(1-t)^{b-1}\,dt$,
$\Theta=\arccos{\frac{r_0^2+r_1^2-R_c^2}{2r_0r_1}}$,
$z(\theta)=\sqrt{R_c^2-r_0^2\sin^2\theta}-r_0\cos{\theta}$,
$N$ denotes the parameter for Chebyshev-Gauss quadrature,
$\theta_n=\cos{\frac{(2n-1)\pi}{2N}}$ and $c_n=\frac{\Theta}{2}(\theta_n-1)+\pi$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{IEEEproof}
Please refer to Appendix B.
\end{IEEEproof}
\begin{Lemma}
The $k$-th ($k \geq 1$) derivative of the Laplace transform $\mathcal{L}_{I_2|r_0,r_1}(s)$ can be
calculated recursively as follows:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{I_2|r_0,r_1}^{(k)}(s)=\sum_{l=0}^{k-1} { {k-1}\choose{l}} \eta^{(k-l)}(s)
\mathcal{L}_{I_2|r_0,r_1}^{(l)}(s),
\end{align}
where $\eta^{(t)}(s)$ is the $t$-th ($t \geq 1 $) derivative of $\eta(s)$, which can be evaluated as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item when $R_c-r_0<r_1<R_c+r_0$,
\begin{align}\label{Lap_d1}
\eta^{(t)}(s)\approx&t!(-1)^t\lambda\left(\frac{2(\pi-\Theta)s^{\frac{2}{\alpha_N}-t}}{\alpha_N}
\bar{B}\left(\frac{1}{1+sr_1^{-\alpha_N}};\frac{2}{\alpha_N}+1,t-\frac{2}{\alpha_N}\right)
\right.\\\notag
&\left.+\frac{\Theta\pi s^{\frac{2}{\alpha_N}-t}}{N\alpha_N}\sum_{n=1}^{N}
\sqrt{1-\theta_n^2}\bar{B}\left(\frac{1}{1+s(z(c_n))^{-\alpha_N}};\frac{2}{\alpha_N}+1,t-\frac{2}{\alpha_N}\right)\right),
\end{align}
\item when $r_1 \geq R_c+r_0$,
\begin{align}\label{Lap_d2}
\eta^{(t)}(s)=&\frac{t!(-1)^t\lambda2\pi s^{\frac{2}{\alpha_N}-t}}{\alpha_N}
\bar{B}\left(\frac{1}{1+sr_1^{-\alpha_N}};\frac{2}{\alpha_N}+1,t-\frac{2}{\alpha_N}\right).
\end{align}
\end{itemize}
\end{Lemma}
\begin{IEEEproof}
Please refer to Appendix B.
\end{IEEEproof}
\subsection{Area fraction and coverage probabilities}
An interesting problem is that
what fraction of users in disc $\mathcal{D}$ are served
by different transmission strategies.
To answer this question, the following proposition which provides the
expected area of $\mathcal{A}_1$, $\mathcal{A}_2$ and $\mathcal{A}_3$ in disc $D$ is
first highlighted as follows.
\begin{Proposition}
The expected area of $\mathcal{A}_1$, $\mathcal{A}_2$ and $\mathcal{A}_3$ in disc $D$ can be expressed respectively
as follows:
\begin{align}\label{C_A1}
C_{\mathcal{A}_1}=2\pi\sum_{s\in\{L,N\}}\int_0^{R_c}
P_s(r_0)F_{r_1|r_0}(A_s(r_0))r_0\,dr_0,
\end{align}
\begin{align}
C_{\mathcal{A}_2}=2\pi\sum_{s\in\{L,N\}}\int_0^{R_c}
P_s(r_0)\left(F_{r_1|r_0}(B_s(r_0))-F_{r_0|r_1}(A_s(r_0))\right)r_0\,dr_0,
\end{align}
\begin{align}
C_{\mathcal{A}_3}=2\pi\sum_{s\in\{L,N\}}\int_0^{R_c}
P_s(r_0)\left(1-F_{r_1|r_0}(B_s(r_0))\right)r_0\,dr_0,
\end{align}
where $A_s(r_0)=\left(\delta(\sqrt{H^2+r_0^2})^{\alpha_s}\right)^{\frac{1}{\alpha_N}}$ and
$B_s(r_0)=\left(\frac{1}{\delta}(\sqrt{H^2+r_0^2})^{\alpha_s}\right)^{\frac{1}{\alpha_N}}$,
$s\in\{L,N\}$.
\end{Proposition}
\begin{IEEEproof}
Please refer to Appendix C.
\end{IEEEproof}
With Proposition 1, the area fraction can be defined as:
\begin{align}\label{E_area_fraction}
\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_i}=\frac{C_{\mathcal{A}_i}}{\pi R_c^2},i\in \{1,2,3\},
\end{align}
which is the expected area of $C_{\mathcal{A}_i}$ normalized by the area of disc $\mathcal{D}$.
Note that, the area fraction is affected by many parameters, such as $\delta$,
$\lambda$, etc. Unfortunately, the impact of these parameters cannot be captured straightforwardly
due to the complex expression of $C_{\mathcal{A}_i}$. Even so, with the help of the proof
as shown in Appendix C, some insights are obtained as highlighted in
the following corollaries.
\begin{Corollary}
With $0<\delta<1$, $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_1}$ and $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_3}$
{\color{black}increase} with $\delta$, while $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_2}$ decreases with $\delta$ .
\end{Corollary}
\begin{Corollary}
With $0<\delta<1$, $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_1}$ increases with $\lambda$
and $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_3}$ decreases with $\lambda$.
\end{Corollary}
\begin{Remark}
The impact of $R_c$ and $H$ on $C_{\mathcal{A}_i}$ is {\color{black}difficult} to be obtained.
For example, when $H$ increases, it can be seen from
(\ref{P_lOS}) that the probability $P_L(r_0)$ increases while $P_N(r_0)$ shows the
opposite trend. Besides, both $A_s(r_0)$ and $B_s(r_0)$ {\color{black}increase} with H. Thus,
it is not easy to evaluate the impact of $H$ when considering all these factors. The impact
of $R_c$ and $H$ will {\color{black}evaluated by using} numerical results.
\end{Remark}
With the help of Lemma $2$ and Lemma $3$, we have the following three lemmas
which characterize the conditional coverage probability
given $r_0$ and $r_1$ achieved by the UE, when the UE belongs to $\mathcal{A}_1$,
$\mathcal{A}_2$ and $\mathcal{A}_3$, respectively.
\begin{Lemma}\label{P_case1}
When $\text{UE} \in \mathcal{A}_1$, the conditional coverage probability achieved by the UE
given $r_0$ and $r_1$ can be expressed as follows:
\begin{align}
P^1(r_0,r_1)=\frac{\mathcal{L}_{I_2|r_0,r_1}(r_1^{\alpha_N}\epsilon)}{\left(1+\frac{r_1^{\alpha_N}\epsilon}{(H^2+r_0^2)^{\frac{\alpha_L}{2}}m_L}\right)^{m_L}}
.
\end{align}
\end{Lemma}
\begin{IEEEproof}
Please refer to Appendix D.
\end{IEEEproof}
Consider a special case when there's no UAV employed in disc $D$ to address
the emergency and the UEs in disc $\mathcal{D}$ are only served by the nearest BS
outside the disc. In this case, the performance of the UE can {\color{black}be} easily obtained from the
proof of Proposition \ref{P_case1}, which is highlighted as follows.
\begin{Corollary}
When there is no UAV and the UE is only served by the nearest BS, the conditional coverage probability achieved by the UE
given $r_0$ and $r_1$ can be expressed as follows:
\begin{align}
\tilde{P}^1(r_0,r_1)=\mathcal{L}_{I_2|r_0,r_1}(r_1^{\alpha_N}\epsilon).
\end{align}
\end{Corollary}
\begin{Lemma}
When $\text{UE} \in \mathcal{A}_2$, the conditional coverage probability achieved by the UE
given $r_0$ and $r_1$ can be expressed as follows:
\begin{align}
P^2(r_0,r_1)=\sum_{j=0}^{1}\sum_{k=1}^{\alpha_j}\frac{A_{jk}}{\beta_j^k}\sum_{l=0}^{k-1}
\frac{(-u_j)^l}{l!}\mathcal{L}_{I_2|r_0,r_1}^{(l)}(u_j)
,\end{align}
\end{Lemma}
where $\alpha_0=m_L$, $\beta_0=m_L(H^2+r_0^2)^{\frac{\alpha_L}{2}}$,
$\alpha_1=1$, $\beta_1=r_1^{\alpha_N}$,
$u_j=\beta_j\epsilon$, and
\begin{align}
A_{jk}=(-1)^{\alpha_j-k}\frac{\beta_0^{\alpha_0}\beta_1^{\alpha_1}
(\alpha_{1-j}+\alpha_j-k-1)!}{(\alpha_j-k)!(\alpha_{1-j}-1)!}
(\beta_{1-j}-\beta_j)^{-\alpha_{1-j}-\alpha_j+k} .
\end{align}
\begin{IEEEproof}
Please refer to Appendix D.
\end{IEEEproof}
\begin{Lemma}
When $\text{UE} \in \mathcal{A}_3$, the conditional coverage probability achieved by the UE
given $r_0$ and $r_1$ can be expressed as follows:
\begin{align}
P^3(r_0,r_1)=\sum_{l=0}^{m_L-1}\frac{(-u)^l}{l!}\mathcal{L}_{h_1+I_2|r_0,r_1}^{(l)}(u),
\end{align}
where $u=m_L (H^2+r_0^2)^{\frac{\alpha_L}{2}}\epsilon$, $\mathcal{L}_{h_1+I_2|r_0,r_1}^{(l)}(u)$ is the
$l$-th derivative of the Laplace transform for $h_1+I_2$, which is given by:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{h_1+I_2|r_0,r_1}^{(l)}(u)=\sum_{p=0}^{l} {l \choose p}
\mathcal{L}_{I_2|r_0,r_1}^{(p)}(u)\mathcal{L}_{h_1|r_0,r_1}^{(l-p)}(u),
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{h_1|r_0,r_1}^{(l-p)}(u)=\frac{r_1^{\alpha_N}t!(-1)^t}{\left(u+r_1^{\alpha_N}\right)^{t+1}}.
\end{align}
\end{Lemma}
\begin{IEEEproof}
Please refer to Appendix D.
\end{IEEEproof}
Based on Lemma $1$ and Lemmas $4$-$6$, by taking expectation with respect to $r_1$,
the conditional probability given $r_0$ can be obtained as shown in the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem_r0}
The conditional coverage probability achieved by the UE given $r_0$ can be calculated as follows:
\begin{align}
P(r_0)=\sum_{i=1}^{3}Pc_{i}(r_0).
\end{align}
where $Pc_{i}(r_0)$ is the conditional probability given $r_0$ for the event that the UE belongs to
$\mathcal{A}_i$ and the QoS is satisfied, $Pc_{i}(r_0)$ can be expressed as follows:
\begin{align}
Pc_{1}(r_0)&=\int_0^{A(r_0)}P^1(r_0,r_1)f_{r_1|r_0}(r_1)\,dr_1,\\\notag
Pc_{2}(r_0)&=\int_{A(r_0)}^{B(r_0)}P^2(r_0,r_1)f_{r_1|r_0}(r_1)\,dr_1,\\\notag
Pc_{3}(r_0)&=\int_{B(r_0)}^{\infty}P^3(r_0,r_1)f_{r_1|r_0}(r_1)\,dr_1.
\end{align}
\end{theorem}
\subsection{Normalized spectral efficiency}
{\color{black}For the sake of the system throughput, it is better to let all UEs reside in $\mathcal{A}_2$.
However, this is at the expense of occupying more BSs (both the UAV and the nearest ground BS is occupied), compared to serving UEs by the UAV only or the nearest ground BS only. In order to consider the trade-off between the system throughput and the number of serving BSs,} the
normalized spectral efficiency (NSE) of the malfunction area is used in this paper which is defined as follows:
\begin{align}
\text{NSE}=\sum_{i=1}^{3}\frac{Pc_{i}\log(1+\epsilon)}{N_i},
\end{align}
where $Pc_i$ is the probability of the event that the UE belongs to $\mathcal{A}_i$ and the
rate is guaranteed and is given by $Pc_i=\int_{0}^{R_c}Pc_i(r_0)\frac{2r_0}{R_c^2}\,dr_0$, and
$N_i$ is the number of BSs used in the transmission scheme for UEs in $\mathcal{A}_i$, i.e.,
$N_1=1$, $N_2=2$, and $N_3=1$.
\section{Numerical Results}
In this section, numerical results are presented to demonstrate the performance of the proposed
scheme and also verify the developed analytical results. Unless {\color{black}stated otherwise}, the parameters
are set as follows: $B=0.136$, $C=11.95$, $R_c=500$ m, $H=300$ m, $\alpha_L=3=2.5$, $\alpha_N=3$,
$m_L=4$.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfloat[Area fraction vs. $H$, $R_c=500$ m]{\includegraphics[width=3.2in]{area_fraction_H.eps
\label{compare1}}
\hfil
\subfloat[Area fraction vs. $R_c$, $H=300$ m]{\includegraphics[width=3.2in]{area_fraction_Rc.eps
\label{compare2}}
\caption{Impact of $R_c$ and $H$ on $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_i}$, $i=1,2,3$. }
\label{Area_fraction}
\end{figure*}
Fig. \ref{Area_fraction}(a) and Fig. \ref{Area_fraction}(b) {\color{black}show} how the area fraction of $\mathcal{A}_1$, $\mathcal{A}_2$ and $\mathcal{A}_3$ varies with the UAV altitude $H$ and the malfunction area $R_c$, respectively.
In both the figures, simulation results perfectly match the theoretic results based in
(\ref{E_area_fraction}), which verifies the developed analytical results.
{\color{black}From both Fig. \ref{Area_fraction}(a) and Fig. \ref{Area_fraction}(b), it is observed that $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_1}$ and $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_3}$ with $\delta=0.2$ are smaller than that with $\delta=0.8$. In the contrary,
$\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_2}$ shows the opposite trend. These observations are consistent with the conclusion as highlighted in Corollary 1.}
Fig. \ref{Area_fraction}(a) shows that: when $H$ varies from $0$ to $1000$ m, a) $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_1}$ and $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_2}$
first decrease with $H$ and then increase; b) $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_3}$ first increases with $H$ and then decreases.
Fig. \ref{Area_fraction}(b) shows that: when $R_c$ varies from $100$ to $1000$ m,
a) $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_1}$ first slightly decreases with $R_c$ and then increases;
b) $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_2}$ decreases with $R_c$;
c) $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_3}$ first increases with $R_c$ and then decreases.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{accuracy.eps}
\caption{Coverage probability $P(r_0)$ vs. SIR threshold $\epsilon$ in dB. $r_0=200$ m, $\delta=0.2$.}
\label{accuracy}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{accuracy} shows the coverage probabilities achieved by a UE which locates at {\color{black}a} fixed distance from the origin in the proposed scheme.
The analytical results are based on Theorem \ref{theorem_r0}.
The simulation results are obtained by using Monte Carlo simulations. Specifically, we do $20000$ independent drops of points in a large circular simulation area with radius $40$ km, for each point shown in Fig. \ref{accuracy}.
It is shown in Fig. \ref{accuracy} that the simulation results perfectly match the theoretical results, which verifies the accuracy of the developed analysis.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{impact_H.eps}
\caption{Coverage probability $P(r_0)$ vs. UAV altitude $H$ in m. $\delta=0.2$, $\epsilon=0.5$.}
\label{impact_H}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{impact_H} shows the coverage probabilities versus UAV altitude $H$, achieved by UEs with different locations. Note that, the UAV altitude $H$ has dual effects on the air-to-ground channel.
On the one side, as $H$ increases, the elevation angle from the UE to the UAV also increases. {\color{black}As} a result, the probability for an LoS link is enlarged, which {\color{black}has a} positive effect on the propagation gain.
{\color{black}On the other hand}, as $H$ increases, the distance from the UE to the UAV also {\color{black}increases}, which {\color{black}has a} negative effect on the propagation gain due to large scale path losses.
{\color{black}Furthermore}, it is obvious that $H$ also affects the transmission strategy for the UE.
Interestingly, as shown in Fig. \ref{impact_H}, the UAV altitude $H$ has a different impact on coverage probabilities for different UE locations.
For example, when the UE locates at the origin, i.e., $r_0=0$ m, the coverage probability {\color{black}decreases} with $H$. The reason for this phenomenon is that when $r_0=0$, the elevation angle from the UE to the UAV is constantly $90$ degrees and will not change with $H$. {\color{black}Thus} $H$ has no effect on the probability of an LoS link and only impact the large-scale path loss.
When $r_0=125$ m, $r_0=250$ m, and $r_0=375$ m, the coverage probability first increases with $H$, then decreases, and finally maintains at a pretty low level. Because in {\color{black}at} low altitude, increasing $H$ results in {\color{black}a} rapid increase in LoS probability, which will dramatically improve the air-to-ground link.
While {\color{black}at high altitude}, the link from the UE to the UAV is almost sure to be an LoS link and $H$
only {\color{black}affects} the distance as well as the transmission strategy for the UE.
When the UE locates at the edge of the circular, i.e., $r_0=500$ m, the impact of $H$ can be neglected. For the reason that the UE is almost sure to be served by the nearest ground BS and the interference
from the UAV is fairly small due to the large distance.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfloat[Coverage probability]{\includegraphics[width=3.2in]{impact_lambda1.eps
\label{impact_lambda1}}
\hfil
\subfloat[Probabilities of different strategies]{\includegraphics[width=3.2in]{impact_lambda2.eps
\label{impact_lambda2}}
\caption{Impact of ground BS density $\lambda$ on coverage probability. $\delta=0.2$, $\epsilon=0.5$.}
\label{impact_lambda}
\end{figure*}
Fig. \ref{impact_lambda} studies the impact of the ground BS density $\lambda$ on the performance of the proposed scheme. Fig. \ref{impact_lambda}(a) shows the coverage probability versus $\lambda$ for UEs with different locations, {\color{black}and} Fig. \ref{impact_lambda}(b) shows the probabilities of the events that the UE
belongs to $\mathcal{A}_1$, $\mathcal{A}_2$ and $\mathcal{A}_3$.
As shown in the figure, when $r_0=100$ m, the UE is {\color{black}almost always} served by the UAV only, thus the coverage probability deceases with $\lambda$ due to the increased interference from ground BSs.
It can also be seen from Fig. \ref{impact_lambda}, when $r_0=500$ m, the coverage probability first decreases with $\lambda$ and then maintains at about 0.5. This can be explained as follows. As shown in Fig. \ref{impact_lambda}(b), {\color{black}at low $\lambda$}, the UE belongs to $\mathcal{A}_2$ and $\mathcal{A}_3$ with high probability, {\color{black}in this case, the increasing interference from other ground BSs dominates the impact.}
While {\color{black} at high $\lambda$}, the UE is only served by the nearest ground BS due to {\color{black}the} very small distance. {\color{black}In this case, on the one hand, increasing $\lambda$ results in decreasing the distance from the UE to the nearest ground BS which is positive to the coverage. On the other hand, increasing $\lambda$ also results in increasing the interference from other ground BSs which is negative to the coverage. Consequently, the above two kinds of effect cancel each other and hence the coverage probability stays at a steady level.}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfloat[Coverage probability]{\includegraphics[width=3.2in]{impact_delta1.eps
\label{impact_delta1}}
\hfil
\subfloat[Probabilities of different strategies]{\includegraphics[width=3.2in]{impact_delta2.eps
\label{impact_delta2}}
\caption{Impact of cooperation parameter $\delta$ on coverage probability. $\epsilon=0.5$.}
\label{impact_delta}
\end{figure*}
Fig. \ref{impact_delta} studies the impact of the cooperation parameter $\delta$ on the performance achieved by the proposed cooperative scheme and the benchmark scheme in \cite{wang2018modeling2} where UEs in the considered scenario are served by the mounted UAV only. From Fig. \ref{impact_delta}, we have the following observations.
When $r_0=100$ m, the cooperation parameter $\delta$ has no effect on the coverage probability of the proposed scheme. Because the UE is almost sure to be served by the UAV only as shown in Fig. \ref{impact_delta}(b). This also explains the fact that the proposed scheme has the same performance
as the benchmark scheme as shown in Fig. \ref{impact_delta}(a).
When $r_0=400$ m and $r_0=500$ m, the coverage probabilities decrease with $\delta$. For example, with $r_0=400$ m, $P(r_0)$ decreases from $0.6$ to $0.3$. This can be explained from Fig. \ref{impact_delta}(b) that as $\delta$ increases, the probability of the event that the UE belongs to $\mathcal{A}_2$ decreases. {\color{black}As a result, it is more likely that the UE is served by the UAV only or the nearest ground BS only}.
It can also be seen from the figure that the proposed cooperative scheme always outperforms the benchmark scheme in terms of {\color{black}the} coverage probability, even when $\delta=1$ which means the UE can only
be served by a UAV or a nearest ground BS. This is because BS association is {\color{black}carried out} when $\delta=1$ which is ignored in the benchmark scheme.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfloat[Coverage probability]{\includegraphics[width=3.2in]{compare_r0.eps
\label{compare1}}
\hfil
\subfloat[NSE]{\includegraphics[width=3.2in]{compare_NSE.eps
\label{compare2}}
\caption{Comparisons between the proposed cooperative scheme and the ``UAV only'' and the ``ground BS only'' scheme. $\epsilon=0.5$.}
\label{compare}
\end{figure*}
Fig. \ref{compare} shows the comparison between the proposed cooperative scheme and two benchmarks.
In the benchmark scheme {\color{black}termed ``UAV only''}, the UE is served by the UAV, while in the scheme {\color{black}termed ``ground BS only''}, it is assumed that there is no UAV employed {\color{black}in} the malfunction area and the UE is served by the nearest ground BS only.
Fig. \ref{compare}(a) shows the coverage probabilities versus the UE location $r_0$. It is shown that
when $r_0$ is small, the proposed scheme achieves similar performances compared to the ``UAV only'' scheme. While as $r_0$ increases, the proposed scheme outperforms the ``UAV only'' scheme.
This can be explained as follows. When $r_0$ is small, the proposed scheme assigns the UE to $\mathcal{A}_3$ with high probability, due to the very {\color{black}small} distance to the UAV and the high probability of an LoS link. However, as $r_0$ increases, the channel between the UAV and the UE becomes
weaker, after realizing this change, the proposed scheme automatically {\color{black}switches} the transmission strategy
according to expression (\ref{scheme}) by assigning the UE to $\mathcal{A}_2$ or $\mathcal{A}_3$, in order to provide better service compared to the ``UAV only'' scheme.
It is also observed in Fig. \ref{compare}(a) that the proposed scheme significantly outperforms the ``ground BS only'' scheme for most of $r_0$. However, when $r_0$ approaches to $R_c$, i.e., the UE locates at the edge of the malfunction area, the ``ground BS only'' achieves similar performance compared to the proposed scheme.
Fig. \ref{compare}(b) shows the NSE versus the radius of the circular malfunction area $R_c$.
From Fig. \ref{compare}(b), is is shown that the proposed scheme outperforms the ``UAV only'' and
the ``ground BS only'' scheme in terms of NSE. It is also observed that as $R_c$ increases, the NSEs
achieved by the proposed scheme for different $\delta$ are the same.
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper, a {\color{black}user-centric} cooperative scheme has been proposed for a UAV assisted malfunction area which is surrounded by PPP modeled ground BSs.
{\color{black}The} probabilistic LoS/NLoS channel model has been taken into consideration to model the air-to-ground {\color{black}channels}.
Average received power has been used as a criterion to determine which transmission strategy should be
applied to serve the UE, i.e., the UAV only, the nearest ground BS only, or both of them.
A parameter $\delta$ has been introduced to tune the cooperation level of the proposed scheme.
Analytical framework has been developed to evaluate the performance by {\color{black}developing} the expressions for the coverage probability and NSE, which has been verified by computer simulations.
Extensive numerical results have been presented to demonstrate the impact of different parameters on the performance achieved the proposed scheme. It has been shown that the proposed scheme has superior
performance over the {\color{black}``UAV only''} scheme in \cite{wang2018modeling2} and the {\color{black}``ground BS only''} scheme.
Although the superiority of the proposed scheme has been {\color{black}demonstrated} in this paper, {\color{black}there are still some important topics for future research about the application of UAVs to the considered malfunction area.}
For example, whether moving UAVs can provide better performance to such a scenario is still unknown.
{\color{black}Besides, as the size of the malfunction area increases, it is not enough to utilize only one UAV in the malfunction area and it is necessary to deploy multiple UAVs.}
\appendices
\section{Proof for Lemma 1}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfloat[Case I: $R_c-r_0<r<R_c+r_0$]{\includegraphics[width=3.2in]{proof_pdf_r11.eps}}
\hfil
\subfloat[Case II: $r>R_c+r_0$]{\includegraphics[width=2.8in]{proof_pdf_r12.eps}
\caption{Illustration of the cases when $R_c-r_0<r<R_c+r_0$ and $r>R_c+r_0$.}
\label{proof_lemma1}
\end{figure*}
Note that, since there's no BS in disc $\mathcal{D}$, the value range of $r_1$ {\color{black}has}
to satisfy $r_1>R_c-r_0$. To obtain the conditional pdf of $r_1$, we need to first calculate the
conditional CDF of $r_1$, which is given by:
\begin{align}{\label{S_r}}
F_{r_1|r_0}(r)&=1-\text{Pr}\left(r_1>r | r_0\right)\\\notag
&=1-e^{-\lambda S(r)},
\end{align}
where the last step follows from the fact that the BSs are HPPP distributed outside disc
$\mathcal{D}$. Denote the disc centered at the UE with radius $r_1=r$ by $\mathcal{D}_1$,
then $S(r)$ in (\ref{S_r}) is the area of the region which can be represented by $\mathcal{D}_1-\mathcal{D}_1\cap \mathcal{D}$.
Note that, as shown in Fig. \ref{proof_lemma1}(a) and Fig. \ref{proof_lemma1}(b), the calculations for $S(r)$ when $R_c-r_0<r<R_c+r_0$ and
when $r>R_c+r_0$ are different.
\begin{enumerate}
\item When $R_c-r_0<r<R_c+r_0$, to calculate $S(r)$, we need to first calculate
$S_0(r)$ and $S_1(r)$. With the help of Fig. \ref{proof_lemma1}, it is obtained that $S_0(r)$ can be expressed
as follows:
\begin{align}
S_0(r)=\theta_1(r)R_c^2-R_c^2\sin{\theta_1(r)}\cos{\theta_1(r)},
\end{align}
where $\theta_1(r)=\arccos\frac{R_c^2+r_0^2-r^2}{2R_c r_0}$. It is worth pointing out
that, when $r$ changes, the value range of $\theta_1(r)$ is $(0,\pi]$.
Similarly, $S_1(r)$ can be expressed as follows:
\begin{align}
S_1(r)=\theta_2(r)r^2-r^2\sin{\theta_2(r)}\cos{\theta_2(r)},
\end{align}
where $\theta_2(r)=\arccos\frac{r_0^2+r^2-R_c^2}{2 r_0 r}$, and when $r$ changes,
the value range of $\theta_1(r)$ is also $(0,\pi]$.
Then $S_(r)$ can be expressed as
\begin{align}
S(r)=\pi r^2-S_0(r)-S_1(r).
\end{align}
\item When $r>R_c+r_0$, $S(r)$ can be easily obtained as follows:
\begin{align}
S(r)=\pi r^2-\pi R_c^2.
\end{align}
\end{enumerate}
Until now, we have obtained the conditional CDF of $r_1$. By taking the
derivative of $F_{r_1|r_0}(r)$, the conditional pdf of $r_1$ given $r_0$ can be
obtained and the proof for Lemma 1 is complete.
\section{Proof for Lemma 2 and Lemma 3}
\subsection{Proof for Lemma 2}
The Laplace transform of $I_2$ can be calculated as follows:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{I_2|r_0,r_1}(s)=&\mathbb{E}\left\{\text{exp}(-sI_2)\right\}\\\notag
=&\mathbb{E}\left\{\text{exp}\left(-s\sum\limits_{i=2}^{\infty}h_i\right)\right\}\\\notag
=&\mathbb{E}_{y_i,g_i}\left\{\prod_{i=2}^{\infty}\text{exp}\left(-s\frac{|g_i|^2}{||y_i-x_0||^{\alpha_N}}\right)
\right\}\\\notag
{=}&\mathbb{E}_{y_i}\left\{\prod_{i=2}^{\infty} \frac{1}{1+\frac{s}{||y_i-x_0||^{\alpha_N}}}
\right\},
\end{align}
where the last step follows from {\color{black}the fact that} the small scale fading gains $|g_i|^2$ are independently exponential variables with parameter $1$.
By applying the probability generating functional (PGFL) of the {\color{black}HPPP},
$\mathcal{L}_{I_2|r_0,r_1}(s)$ can be further expressed as follows:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{I_2|r_0,r_1}(s)=\exp\left(-\lambda
\underset{\mathcal{R}(r_0,r_1)}{\int}\left(1-\frac{1}{1+\frac{s}{||y-x_0||^{\alpha_N}}}\right)\,dy
\right)
\end{align}
where $\mathcal{R}(r_0,r_1)$ denotes the integration region which can be determined by
both $r_0$ and $r_1$. Note that, $\mathcal{R}(r_0,r_1)$ can be written as
\begin{align}
\mathcal{R}(r_0,r_1)=\left\{ y \big| ||y-x_0||>r_1, ||y||>R_c \right\},
\end{align}
where $||y-x_0||>r_1$ means that the distance from the UE to the interfering BS should
be larger than {\color{black}that of} the nearest BS, and $||y||>R_c$ means that the interfering BS should locate
outside disc D.
Define
\begin{align}
Q=\int_{\mathcal{R}(r_0,r_1)}\left(1-\frac{1}{1+\frac{s}{||y-x_0||^{\alpha_N}}}\right)\,dy,
\end{align}
then the remaining task is to evaluate $Q$.
By treating $x_0$ as the origin and changing to polar coordinates, $Q$ can be expressed as follows:
\begin{align}
Q=\iint_{\hat{\mathcal{R}}(r_0,r_1)}\left(1-\frac{1}{1+\frac{s}{r^{\alpha_N}}}\right)r\,drd\theta,
\end{align}
where $\hat{\mathcal{R}}(r_0,r_1)$ can be easily derived from ${\mathcal{R}}(r_0,r_1)$ and can be expressed
as:
\begin{align}
\hat{\mathcal{R}}(r_0,r_1)=\left\{ (r,\theta) \big| r>r_1, r>z(\theta) \right\},
\end{align}
where $z(\theta)$ is the length of $\overline{AB}$ as shown in Fig. \ref{Proof_Lap_case1}, which can be easily
obtained by the law of cosine. It is worth pointing
out that the counterpart of the constraint $r>z(\theta)$ in (22) is $||y||>R_c$ in (19).
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{proof_Lap1.eps}
\caption{Illustration of the system model when $R_c-r_0<r_1<R_c+r_0$}
\label{Proof_Lap_case1}
\end{figure}
According to the relevant relationship of $r_0$ and $r_1$, the calculation of $Q$ can be divided
into the following two cases.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Case I: $R_c-r_0<r_1<R_c+r_0$. In this case, the integration region
$\hat{\mathcal{R}}(r_0,r_1)$ can
be divided into two parts $\mathcal{R}_1$ and $\mathcal{R}_2$, i.e.,
$\hat{\mathcal{R}}(r_0,r_1)=\mathcal{R}_1 \cup \mathcal{R}_2$, as shown in
Fig. \ref{Proof_Lap_case1}. Mathematically, $\mathcal{R}_1=\left\{ (r,\theta)\big| r>r_1, |\theta|<\pi-\Theta\right\}$,
and $\mathcal{R}_2=\left\{ (r,\theta)\big| r>z(\theta), \pi-\Theta<|\theta|<\pi \right\}$.
Then $Q$ can be evaluated as follows:
\begin{align}\label{AE1}
Q&=2\int_{0}^{\pi-\Theta}\int_{r_1}^{\infty}\left(
1-\frac{1}{1+\frac{s}{r^{\alpha_N}}}\right)r\,drd\theta
+2\int_{\pi-\Theta}^{\pi}\int_{z(\theta)}^{\infty}\left(
1-\frac{1}{1+\frac{s}{r^{\alpha_N}}}\right)r\,drd\theta\\\notag
&\overset{(a)}{=}2(\pi-\Theta)\frac{s^{\frac{2}{\alpha_N}}}{\alpha_N}
\int_{\frac{1}{1+\frac{s}{r_1^{\alpha_N}}}}^{1}
t^{\frac{2}{\alpha_N}-1}(1-t)^{-\frac{2}{\alpha_N}}\,dt\\\notag
&\quad+2\int_{\pi-\Theta}^{\pi}\frac{s^{\frac{2}{\alpha_N}}}{\alpha_N}
\int_{\frac{1}{1+\frac{s}{z^{\alpha_N}(\theta)}}}^{1}
t^{\frac{2}{\alpha_N}-1}(1-t)^{-\frac{2}{\alpha_N}}\,dtd\theta\\\notag
&\overset{(b)}{=}\frac{2(\pi-\Theta)s^{\frac{2}{\alpha_N}}}{\alpha_N}
\bar{B}\left(\frac{1}{1+sr_1^{-\alpha_N}};\frac{2}{\alpha_N},1-\frac{2}{\alpha_N}\right)
\\\notag
&\quad+\frac{\Theta\pi s^{\frac{2}{\alpha_N}}}{N\alpha_N}\sum_{n=1}^{N}
\sqrt{1-\theta_n^2}\bar{B}\left(\frac{1}{1+s(z(c_n))^{-\alpha_N}};\frac{2}{\alpha_N},1-\frac{2}{\alpha_N}\right),
\end{align}
where (a) follows from {\color{black}the step by using} $t=\frac{1}{1+\frac{s}{r^{\alpha_N}}}$, and (b) follows from
{\color{black}the application of} Chebyshev-Gauss approximation.
\item Case II: $r_1\geq R_c+r_0$. In this case, as shown in Fig. \ref{Proof_Lap_case2}, the integration region
$\hat{\mathcal{R}}(r_0,r_1)$ degrades to the following format
$\hat{\mathcal{R}}(r_0,r_1)=\left\{ (r,\theta)\big| r>r_1, |\theta|<\pi\right\}$.
Then $Q$ can be evaluated by following the similar steps as in Case I and the
following expression for $Q$ in Case II is obtained:
\begin{align}\label{AE2}
Q=\frac{2\pi s^{\frac{2}{\alpha_N}}}{\alpha_N}\bar{B}\left(\frac{1}{1+sr_1^{-\alpha_N}};\frac{2}{\alpha_N},1-\frac{2}{\alpha_N}\right).
\end{align}
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{proof_Lap2.eps}
\caption{Illustration of the system model when $r_1\geq R_c+r_0$}
\label{Proof_Lap_case2}
\end{figure}
Now the proof for Lemma 2 is complete.
\subsection{Proof for Lemma 3}
From the proof for Lemma 2, we know that $\eta(s)$ can be expressed by the following integration:
\begin{align}
\eta(s)=-\lambda\iint_{\hat{\mathcal{R}}(r_0,r_1)}\left(1-\frac{1}{1+\frac{s}{r^{\alpha_N}}}\right)r\,drd\theta.
\end{align}
Then exchanging the order of the derivative and integration, the $t$-th derivative can be
expressed as follows:
\begin{align}
\eta^{(t)}(s)=t!(-1)^t\lambda\iint_{\hat{\mathcal{R}}(r_0,r_1)}
\frac{r^{\alpha_N+1}}{(u+r^{\alpha_N})^{t+1}}\,drd\theta.
\end{align}
By dividing the calculation into the two cases as in the proof for Lemma 2 and following the similar steps as in (\ref{AE1}) and (\ref{AE2}), the expressions in (\ref{Lap_d1}) and (\ref{Lap_d2})
are obtained and the proof for Lemma 3 is complete.
\section{}
\subsection{Proof for Proposition 1}
$C_{\mathcal{A}_1}$ can be evaluated as follows:
\begin{align}
C_{\mathcal{A}_1}&\overset{(a)}{=}\mathbb{E}_{\Phi}\left\{\int_{x\in \mathcal{D}}
\mathbb{E}_s\left\{\mathbf{1}\left(x\in\mathcal{A}_1 | \Phi,x,s\right)\right\}\,dx\right\}\\\notag
&=\mathbb{E}_{\Phi}\left\{\int_{x\in \mathcal{D}}
\mathbb{E}_s\left\{\mathbf{1}\left(r_1<A_s(||x||)| \Phi,x,s\right)\right\}\,dx\right\}\\\notag
&\overset{(b)}{=}\int_{0}^{2\pi}\int_0^{R_c}\mathbb{E}_{\Phi,s}\left\{
\mathbf{1}(r_1<A_s(r_0)|\Phi,r_0,s)\right\}r_0\,dr_0d\theta\\\notag
&\overset{(c)}{=}\int_{0}^{2\pi}\int_0^{R_c}\mathbb{E}_s\left\{\text{Pr}\left(
r_1<A_s(r_0)|r_0,s\right)\right\}r_0\,dr_0d\theta\\\notag
&\overset{(d)}{=}2\pi\int_0^{R_c}
\sum_{s\in\{L,N\}}P_s(r_0)F_{r_0|r_1}(A_s(r_0))r_0\,dr_0,
\end{align}
where in (a), $s\in\{L,N\}$ is a random variable which
{\color{black}indicate whether} the link from the UE to the UAV is an LoS or an NLoS link, and the probability
of s is defined in (\ref{P_lOS}),
(b) follows {\color{black}by} changing the order of {\color{black}the} expectation and integration and then changing
to polar coordinates,
(c) and (d) {\color{black}follow by} taking expectation with respect to $\Phi$ and $s$ in sequence.
By following the same method, the expression for $C_{\mathcal{A}_2}$ and $C_{\mathcal{A}_3}$
can be obtained and the proof is complete.
\subsection{Proof for Corollary 1}
Here, only the proof for the conclusion that $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_1}$ increases with $\delta$
is provided. The other two conclusions can be proved by {\color{black}following similar steps}.
To prove $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_1}$ {\color{black}increasing} with $\delta$ is equivalent {\color{black}to prove that}
$C_{\mathcal{A}_1}$ increases with $\delta$.
Note that, when $A_s(r_0) \leq R_c-r_0$, $F_{r_1|r_0}(A_s(r_0))=0$, which has no contribution
to $C_{\mathcal{A}_1}$. Thus it is necessary to rewrite the integration constraint in (\ref{C_A1}) as
follows:
\begin{align}\label{C_A12}
C_{\mathcal{A}_1}=2\pi\sum_{s\in\{L,N\}}\int_{r_s(\delta)}^{R_c}
P_s(r_0)F_{r_0|r_1}(A_s(r_0))r_0\,dr_0,
\end{align}
where $r_s(\delta)=0$ when $\delta^{\frac{1}{\alpha_N}}H^{\frac{\alpha_s}{\alpha_N}}>R_c$,
otherwise $r_s(\delta)$ is the root of the equation:
$
A_s(r_0)=R_c-r_0
$.
{\color{black}Note that} it is easy to prove that the root always exists in $[0,R_c)$.
Now in (\ref{C_A12}), the integral function $F_{r_1|r_0}(A_s(r_0))$ is always {\color{black}positive}
and hence is an increasing function with $A_s(r_0)$. In this cases, it can be concluded that
$F_{r_1|r_0}(A_s(r_0))$ increases with $\delta$, since $A_s(r_0)$ increasing with
$\delta$.
Further by noting that, for any $0<\delta_1<\delta_2<\delta$, $r_s(\delta_1)\geq r_s(\delta_2)$,
the proof for $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_1}$ {\color{black}increasing} with $\delta$ is complete.
\subsection{Proof for Corollary 2}
We only prove that $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_1}$ increases with $\lambda$
{\color{black}where the case that}
$\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_3}$ decreases with $\lambda$ can be proved similarly.
From (\ref{r1_CDF}), it is obvious that $F_{r_1|r_0}(r)$ increases with $\lambda$ when
$F_{r_1|r_0}(r)>0$. Besides, from the last subsection, $C_{\mathcal{A}_1}$ can be expressed
as shown in (\ref{C_A12}), where $F_{r_1|r_0}(A_s(r_0))$ is always {\color{black}positive} in the
integration region. Based on the above two observations, it is proved that $C_{\mathcal{A}_1}$
increases with $\lambda$ and hence $\bar{C}_{\mathcal{A}_1}$ increases with $\lambda$.
\section{Proof for Lemmas $4$-$6$}
\begin{enumerate}
\item When $\text{UE}\in \mathcal{A}_1$, the conditional coverage probability can be calculated as follows:
\begin{align}
P^{1}(r_0,r_1)&=\text{Pr}\left(\text{SIR}_1>\epsilon\right)\\\notag
&=\text{Pr}\left(|g_1|^2 > r_1^{\alpha_N}\epsilon(h_0+I_2)\right)\\\notag
&\overset{(a)}{=}\mathbb{E}\left\{\text{exp}(-r_1^{\alpha_N}\epsilon(h_0+I_2))\right\}\\\notag
&\overset{(b)}{=}\mathbb{E}_{g_0}\left\{\text{exp}\left(-\frac{r_1^{\alpha_N}\epsilon|g_0|^2}{(H^2+r_0^2)^{\alpha_L/2}}\right)\right\}
\mathbb{E}_{I_2}\left\{\text{exp}(-r_1^{\alpha_N}\epsilon I_2)\right\},
\end{align}
where (a) follows from {\color{black}the fact that} $g_1$ is Rayleigh distributed and (b) follows from {\color{black}the fact that} $h_0$ and
$I_2$ are independent random variables. Finally, note that $|g_0|^2$ is a normalized
Gamma distribution with parameter $m_L$. {\color{black}Therefor, by applying} the Laplace transform of $I_2$ given in Lemma 1,
Lemma 4 is proved.
\item When $\text{UE}\in \mathcal{A}_2$, the conditional coverage probability can be
expressed as follows:
\begin{align}
P^{2}(r_0,r_1)&=\text{Pr}\left(\text{SIR}_2>\epsilon\right)\\\notag
&=\text{Pr}\left(h_0+h_1> \epsilon I_2\right).
\end{align}
To calculate $P^{2}(r_0,r_1)$, we need to obtain the CDF for $h\overset{\Delta}{=}h_0+h_1$.
Note that, $|g_0|^2 \sim \text{Gamma}(m_L,m_L)$, it is easily obtained that
\begin{align}
h_0 \sim \text{Gamma}(m_L,m_L(H^2+r_0^2)^{{\alpha_L}/2})\overset{\Delta}{=}
\text{Gmama}(\alpha_0,\beta_0).
\end{align}
Similarly, we have
\begin{align}
h_1 \sim \text{Gamma}(1,r_1^{\alpha_N})\overset{\Delta}{=}
\text{Gamma}(\alpha_1,\beta_1).
\end{align}
Then the Laplace transform for $h$ can be expressed as follows:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_h(s)&=\mathcal{L}_{h_0}(s)\mathcal{L}_{h_1}(s) \\\notag
&=\frac{\beta_0^2\beta_1^2}
{(s+\beta_0)^{\alpha_0}(s+\beta_1)^{\alpha_1}}\\\notag
&=\sum_{j=0}^1\sum_{k=1}^{\alpha_j} \frac{A_{jk}}{(s+\beta_j)^k},
\end{align}
where the last step follows from partial fraction decomposition. By taking the inverse
Laplace transform, the CCDF for $h$ can be obtained as follows:
\begin{align}
\bar{F}_h(x)=\sum_{j=0}^1\sum_{k=1}^{\alpha_j}\frac{A_{jk}}{\beta_j^k}
\sum_{l=0}^{k-1}\frac{(\beta_jx)^l}{l!}e^{-\beta_jx}.
\end{align}
Now the coverage probability can be expressed as follows:
\begin{align}
P^2(r_0,r_1)=\mathbb{E}_{I_2}\left\{
\sum_{j=0}^1\sum_{k=1}^{\alpha_j}\frac{A_{jk}}{\beta_j^k}
\sum_{l=0}^{k-1}\frac{(\beta_j\epsilon I_2)^l}{l!}e^{-\beta_j \epsilon I_2}
\right\}.
\end{align}
By further noting that $\mathbb{E}_{I_2}\{I_2^l e^{-uI_2}\}=(-1)^l\mathcal{L}^{(l)}_
{I_2|r_0,r_1}(u)$, Lemma 5
is proved.
\item When $\text{UE}\in \mathcal{A}_3$, the conditional coverage probability can be calculated as follows:
\begin{align}
P^{3}(r_0,r_1)&=\text{Pr}\left(\text{SIR}_3>\epsilon\right)\\\notag
&=\text{Pr}\left(|g_0|^2 > (H^2+r_0^2)^{\alpha_L/2}\epsilon(h_1+I_2)\right)\\\notag
&=\mathbb{E}\left\{
\sum_{l=0}^{m_L-1}\frac{\left[u(h_1+I_2)\right]^l}
{l!}e^{-u(h+I_2)}
\right\},
\end{align}
where $u=m_L(H^2+r_0^2)^{\alpha_L/2}\epsilon$ and the last step follows from that
$|g_0|^2 \sim \text{Gamma}(m_L,m_L)$. By further noting that
$\mathbb{E}_{g_1,I_2}\{(h_1+I_2)^l e^{-u(h_1+I_2)}\}=(-1)^l\mathcal{L}^{(l)}_{h_1+I_2|r_0,r_1}(u)$,
Lemma 6 is proved.
\end{enumerate}
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:introduction}}
\else
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
\fi
\IEEEPARstart{T}{his} demo file is intended to serve as a ``starter file''
for IEEE Computer Society journal papers produced under \LaTeX\ using
IEEEtran.cls version 1.8b and later.
I wish you the best of success.
\hfill mds
\hfill August 26, 2015
\subsection{Subsection Heading Here}
Subsection text here.
\subsubsection{Subsubsection Heading Here}
Subsubsection text here.
\section{Conclusion}
The conclusion goes here.
\appendices
\section{Proof of the First Zonklar Equation}
Appendix one text goes here.
\section{}
Appendix two text goes here.
\ifCLASSOPTIONcompsoc
\section*{Acknowledgments}
\else
\section*{Acknowledgment}
\fi
The authors would like to thank...
\ifCLASSOPTIONcaptionsoff
\newpage
\fi
\section{Introduction}
This demo file is intended to serve as a ``starter file''
for IEEE Computer Society conference papers produced under \LaTeX\ using
IEEEtran.cls version 1.8b and later.
I wish you the best of success.
\hfill mds
\hfill August 26, 2015
\subsection{Subsection Heading Here}
Subsection text here.
\subsubsection{Subsubsection Heading Here}
Subsubsection text here.
\section{Conclusion}
The conclusion goes here.
\ifCLASSOPTIONcompsoc
\section*{Acknowledgments}
\else
\section*{Acknowledgment}
\fi
The authors would like to thank...
\section{Introduction}
This demo file is intended to serve as a ``starter file''
for IEEE conference papers produced under \LaTeX\ using
IEEEtran.cls version 1.8b and later.
I wish you the best of success.
\hfill mds
\hfill August 26, 2015
\subsection{Subsection Heading Here}
Subsection text here.
\subsubsection{Subsubsection Heading Here}
Subsubsection text here.
\section{Conclusion}
The conclusion goes here.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
The authors would like to thank...
\section{Introduction}
\IEEEPARstart{T}{his} demo file is intended to serve as a ``starter file''
for IEEE Communications Society journal papers produced under \LaTeX\ using
IEEEtran.cls version 1.8b and later.
I wish you the best of success.
\hfill mds
\hfill August 26, 2015
\subsection{Subsection Heading Here}
Subsection text here.
\subsubsection{Subsubsection Heading Here}
Subsubsection text here.
\section{Conclusion}
The conclusion goes here.
\appendices
\section{Proof of the First Zonklar Equation}
Appendix one text goes here.
\section{}
Appendix two text goes here.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
The authors would like to thank...
\ifCLASSOPTIONcaptionsoff
\newpage
\fi
\section{Introduction}
\IEEEPARstart{T}{his} demo file is intended to serve as a ``starter file''
for IEEE journal papers produced under \LaTeX\ using
IEEEtran.cls version 1.8b and later.
I wish you the best of success.
\hfill mds
\hfill August 26, 2015
\subsection{Subsection Heading Here}
Subsection text here.
\subsubsection{Subsubsection Heading Here}
Subsubsection text here.
\section{Conclusion}
The conclusion goes here.
\appendices
\section{Proof of the First Zonklar Equation}
Appendix one text goes here.
\section{}
Appendix two text goes here.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
The authors would like to thank...
\ifCLASSOPTIONcaptionsoff
\newpage
\fi
\section{Introduction}
\IEEEPARstart{T}{his} demo file is intended to serve as a ``starter file''
for IEEE \textsc{Transactions on Magnetics} journal papers produced under \LaTeX\ using
IEEEtran.cls version 1.8b and later.
I wish you the best of success.
\hfill mds
\hfill August 26, 2015
\subsection{Subsection Heading Here}
Subsection text here.
\subsubsection{Subsubsection Heading Here}
Subsubsection text here.
\section{Conclusion}
The conclusion goes here.
\appendices
\section{Proof of the First Zonklar Equation}
Appendix one text goes here.
\section{}
Appendix two text goes here.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
The authors would like to thank...
\ifCLASSOPTIONcaptionsoff
\newpage
\fi
\section{Introduction}
The growing interest for reliable wireless networks compels researchers to explore new techniques that exploit network information theory and telecommunications principles, such as the widely investigated network coding and cooperation. This strategy, since its proposal \cite{b1}, attracts a great attention because of its proven efficiency and is already the subject of many research papers including those considering the use of non-binary modulations and joint channel-network coding and decoding. In contrast to traditional communication networks where the nodes can only forward messages individually from different sources, network coding technique allows nodes to process the incoming independent information flows. Namely, a simple linear combination of incoming messages forms a unique message called network coded (NC) message to be forwarded to one or several destinations. This action provides an optimization in network throughput, resources usage and security. With the addition of cooperative communication concept, and thanks to the broadcast nature of wireless networks, a gain in diversity can be achieved as well.
Exploiting network coding and cooperation principle, the authors in \cite{b2} investigated the use of low density lattice codes (LDLC) in a multiple access relay channel (MARC) network formed by two source nodes communicating with one destination via one relay. In two time slots, the two sources broadcast their LDLC coded messages to both the relay and the destination then the relay decodes them and forwards, in the third time slot, their XOR combination to the destination where a joint iterative decoding is performed. With a simulation, using $4-$PAM (Pulse Amplitude Modulation) constellation, they showed that the modulo-addition LDLC outperforms the superposition LDLC and their proposed method provides more diversity and coding gains. In \cite{b3}, channel coded physical layer network coding in a two-way relay scenario was investigated. The authors adopted non-binary $M-$PSK modulation where $M\in\{2,3,4,5\}$. The channel coding schemes used were concatenated RS and convolutional code for $M-$PSK where $M \in \{3,4,5\}$ and LDPC code for BPSK (Binary PSK $i.e.~M=2$). They confirmed by simulation how non-binary constellations $(i.e.$ finite fields $GF(M))$ outperform the binary case in terms of frame error rate (FER) versus signal-to-noise ratio (SNR).
\begin{figure}[!b]
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{Imag3.png}}
\caption{Wireless network topologies considered: (a) X-structure, (b) Extended X-structure, (c) Butterfly network and (d) Extended butterfly network.}
\label{fig}
\end{figure}
The system model used in \cite{b4} contains two source nodes communicating with one sink via one relay and over direct links for cooperation. The authors combined linear network coding with bit interleaved coded modulation (BICM) scheme using LDPC codes for the time-division 2 users MARC with orthogonal quasi-static fading channels. After simulations with $2^q-ary$ PAM modulation for $q\in\{1,2,3\}$ and $GF(2^q)$ LDPC channel codes, they showed that non-binary LDPC codes outperform the binary case. The authors in \cite{b5} proposed a practical scheme called non-binary joint network-channel decoding (NB-JNCD). In their simulation, they used block fading Rayleigh channels $i.e.$ a constant fading coefficient for each transmitted packet of 1000 LDPC coded symbols (coding rate of $0.8$) over $GF(2^4)$ with $16-$QAM (Quadrature AM) modulation.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section II describes the system model and the equations handling the different scenarios in the wireless network configurations considered. In Section III, we first present the assumptions and parameters of our simulations and then we expose the numerical results in graphs showing the evolution of SER versus SNR for all scenarios and all network topologies. Finally, we conclude our work in Section IV.
\section{System Model}
In this paper, we aim to highlight the advantages of combining NC and cooperation (NCC) with RS channel codes on some widely used wireless topologies for higher orders of PSK constellations. In \cite{b6}, the authors exposed in details many sophisticated channel coding schemes such as RS codes, LDPC codes and Turbo codes. We opt for Reed-Solomon codes because they are well-suited for non-binary symbols transmission over wireless channels. RS codes are non-binary cyclic codes with symbols made up of $q-$bit sequences, where $q$ is any positive integer having a value greater than 2 which makes them suitable for coding symbols in a finite field $GF(M)=GF(2^q)$, $i.e.$, taking values in $\{0,1,...,M-1\}$. The RS coded values of elements in $GF(M)$ are themselves elements of the same field, $i.e.$, if for instance $M=8$ then we have: $\forall s \in GF(8), \Gamma(s) \in GF(8)$ where $\Gamma$ represents the RS coding operator. In the studied networks, the MAC phase, where $N$ source nodes transmit to the relay, lasts $N$ time slots (straightforward network coding). The broadcast phase, where the relay broadcasts only one network coded symbol instead of $N$, is the key to reducing the amount of information transmitted through the network and hence to throughput increase. Furthermore, the use of high order modulation provides high bandwidth efficiency. In this work, we modulate symbols in $GF(8)$, $GF(16)$ and $GF(32)$ using $8-ary$, $16-ary$ and $32-ary$ PSK constellations respectively. All channels are independent (correlation coefficient $\rho=0$) and subject to AWGN and fast Rayleigh attenuation. Perfect channel state information (CSI) is assumed available at each receiver node from its direct transmitter node. All source nodes have channel coding/decoding capabilities, all relays in charge of NC procedure can also perform channel coding/decoding and finally all destination nodes are equipped with channel and network decoders. We first show the advantages of NCC scheme in comparison with the direct path with and without channel coding in terms of throughput, transmit power and diversity gains, then demonstrate how RS codes can reduce considerably the SER and finally we compare the performance of the two following schemes combining RS channel coding and NCC:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textbf{Scheme 1}: The relay receiving the RS coded symbols from the sources performs the network coding on them without channel decoding. The destinations apply network decoding before RS decoding. In other words, the relays in charge of network coding are not equipped with channel coders and decoders.
\item \textbf{Scheme 2}: The relay receiving the RS coded symbols from the sources first decodes each one of them before applying network coding and then re-encodes the NC symbol resulting. The destinations apply RS channel decoding before network decoding . In other words, the relays in charge of network coding can also execute channel coding/decoding.
\end{enumerate}
Our simulation results show clearly how scheme 2 outperforms scheme 1.
The network coding operation is performed by the use of a bit-level XOR operator denoted $\oplus$ on the symbols. For example, in $GF(16)$ with 4 bits symbols, $5 \oplus 12 = 9$ and $3 \oplus 5 = 6$. The XOR operation is applied bit per bit in the binary representation of symbols.
RS codes are non-binary cyclic codes with symbols made up of $q-$bit sequences, where $q$ is any positive integer having a value greater than 2. RS($n, k$) codes on $q-$bit symbols exist for all $n$ and $k$ for which
$0 < k < n < 2^q + 2$ where $k$ is the number of data symbols being encoded, and $n$ is the total number of code symbols in the encoded block. For the most conventional RS($n, k$) code,
$(n, k) = (2^q - 1, 2^q - 1 - 2t)$ where $t$ is the symbol-error correcting capability of the code, and $n - k = 2t$ is the number of parity symbols. An extended RS code can be made up with $n = 2^q$ or $n = 2^q + 1$, but not any further \cite{b7}.
Hence, the choice of RS code parameters $n$ and $k$ is not random. Similarly to an optimization problem with constraints, we need to maximize the difference $n-k=2t$, $i.e.$ maximize the number $t$ of corrected symbols while respecting some conditions on $n$ and $k$. These constraints are: $n$ and $k$ must satisfy $0<k<n<2^q+2$ and for our simulations, $k$ must be divisor of the number of symbols in the test sequence.
Our contribution in this paper, in contrast to the previous works dealing with the application of NCC in combination with channel codes to a small network, is the generalization to a wide panoply of larger wireless network topologies using one or two relays and a higher number of source-destination pairs. We also confirm the efficiency of RS channel codes application on finite fields elements $GF(M)$ and the superiority of scheme 2 over scheme 1 in providing best network reliability and performance in terms of symbol error probability.
The wireless network topologies studied in this paper are divided in two categories. The first one uses one relay and the second one uses two in series. In the first one, we simulated the $X-$structure configuration and proposed an extended version containing four sources and four corresponding destinations. With two relays in series, we considered the butterfly network topology and proposed an extended version with four source nodes communicating with four respective destination nodes. All these topologies are illustrated for one source communicating with its destination while the remaining nodes are cooperating and hence increasing the spatial diversity and the overall throughput of the wireless network. We assume that the radio range of each source $S_i$ ($i=1, ..., N$) can reach the relay $R$ and the destinations $D_j$
($j=1, ..., N, j \neq i$).
\subsection{X-structure network}
The first wireless network configuration studied is the well known $X-$topology illustrated in Fig. 1a. In this network, two sources are transmitting messages towards two respective destinations where each source is cooperating to ensure the reliable reception of the other source's message. On the other hand, the relay handles the network coding procedure and broadcasts the result (combination of both messages) to both destinations. This is achieved in 3 time slots while in the same network but without NCC these transmissions would take 4 time slots which lead to a throughput gain of 4/3. The diversity order of the NCC scheme is 2 which can be proved by the following system outage probability calculation. For this network, system outage occurs when the data from source 1 and source 2 cannot both be correctly recovered at their respective destinations \cite{b8}. Let $P_S$ be the system outage probability and let $p_1$, $p_2$ and $p_R$ be the error rates of uplink channels of $S_1$, $S_2$ and the relay R respectively. The expression of $P_S$ is given by
\begin{align*}
P_S&=p_1p_R(1-p_2)+p_2p_R(1-p_1)+p_1p_2(1-p_R)\\
& +p_1p_2p_R\\
& =p_1p_2+p_1p_R+p_2p_R-2p_1p_2p_R.
\end{align*}
If we assume similar uplink error rates for all channels transmissions, $i.e.$ $p_1=p_2=p_R=p<<1$, then we have
\begin{equation}\label{}
P_S=3p^2-2p^3 \sim p^2 \sim O\left(\frac{1}{SNR}\right)^2
\end{equation}
Let us first define some useful applications:
\begin{itemize}
\item Let $\mathbb{F}_M$ be the finite field $GF(M)$ to which belong the symbols to transmit. The application $\Gamma : \mathbb{F}_M^k \rightarrow \mathbb{F}_M^n$ that maps $k$ symbols $s_i$ from $\mathbb{F}_M$ into $n$ symbols $x_i$ from $\mathbb{F}_M$ represents our channel encoder RS($n,k$).
\item The application $\Phi : \mathbb{F}_M \rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ that maps a symbol $s$ or $x$ from $\mathbb{F}_M$ into a complex value representing a constellation is our $M-$PSK modulation.
\item The application $\psi : \mathbb{F}_M^N \rightarrow \mathbb{F}_M$ that maps $N$ symbols from $\mathbb{F}_M$ into one is our network coding operation performed in practice by a bit-level XOR between the $N$ symbols, $i.e$, $\psi(x_1,x_2,...,x_N) = x_1\oplus x_2\oplus ... \oplus x_N=\bigoplus_{i=1}^{N} x_i.$
\item The application $\xi : \mathbb{C} \rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ that maps a complex value into another one represents the equalization process at each receiver which consists of multiplying the received signal by the conjugate of the channel fading coefficient.
\end{itemize}
In the absence of NC, we consider two scenarios.
In the first scenario (without RS coding), the message from $S_1$ to $D_1$ is processed as follows:
The symbol $s_1$ is mapped into the $M-$PSK constellation using the application $\Phi$ (PSK modulation) before its transmission to the relay $R$ through a complex AWGN channel with complex fast Rayleigh attenuation. The received symbol at $R$ is $y_{S_1R}=\sqrt{P_1}\Phi(s_1)h_{S_1R}+n_{S_1R}$ where $P_1$ is the transmit power of source 1, $n_{S_1R}$ is the additive white Gaussian noise of the link ($S_1 \rightarrow R$) and $h_{S_1R}$ is the fast fading Rayleigh coefficient (the value of $h_{S_1R}$ varies with each symbol). After reception, the relay first equalizes $y_{S_1R}$ (as we already assumed perfect CSI available) using the equalization operator $\xi$ then simply amplifies and forwards (AF relay) the result. The amplification factor used at the relay is $\beta_{S_1R}$ given by \cite{b9}:
\begin{equation}\label{}
\beta_{S_1R}=\sqrt\frac{P_R}{P_1|h_{S_1R}|^2+\sigma_{S_1R}^2}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_{S_1R}^2$ is the variance of noise $n_{S_1R}$ on the link ($S_1 \rightarrow R$).
That is, the forwarded symbol from relay $R$ to destination $D_1$ is $y_{RD_1}=\sqrt{P_R}\beta_{S_1R}\xi(y_{S_1R})h_{RD_1}+n_{RD_1}$ where $P_R$ is the relay transmit power, $h_{RD_1}$ and $n_{RD_1}$ are the Rayleigh coefficient and noise component of the link ($R~\rightarrow~D_1$). At destination node $D_1$, the symbol $s_1$ is recovered using the operations $\xi$ and $\Phi$ as follows: $\tilde{s}_1=\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{RD_1}))$.
In the second scenario (with RS coding), the symbol received at relay R from $S_1$ is
\begin{equation}\label{}
y_{S_1R}=\sqrt{P_1}\Phi(\Gamma(s_1))h_{S_1R}+n_{S_1R}.
\end{equation}
The symbol received at destination $D_1$ has the same form as in the first scenario (assuming the relay unable to perform channel coding/decoding) but, of course, with a different value of $y_{S_1R}$, $i.e.$,
\begin{equation}\label{}
y_{RD_1}=\sqrt{P_R}\beta_{S_1R}\xi(y_{S_1R})h_{RD_1}+n_{RD_1}.
\end{equation}
The destination (now equipped with RS decoder) recovers the transmitted symbol $s_1$ by evaluating
\begin{equation}\label{}
\tilde{s}_1=\Gamma^{-1}(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{RD_1}))).
\end{equation}
The scenarios above (without NCC) serve as reference to show the improvements in network reliability provided by the application of NCC procedure described below.
When NCC is applied in the \textit{X}-topology (without channel coding application $\Gamma$), both relay $R$ and destination $D_2$ receive the message broadcast from $S_1$ in time slot 1 over the links ($S_1 \rightarrow R$) and ($S_1 \rightarrow D_2$). At $R$, the received signal is $y_{S_1R}=\sqrt{P_1}\Phi(s_1)h_{S_1R}+n_{S_1R}$ and at $D_2$ $y_{S_1D_2}=\sqrt{P_1}\Phi(s_1)h_{S_1D_2}+n_{S_1D_2}$. In time slot 2, $S_2$ sends $s_2$ through both channels ($S_2 \rightarrow R$) and ($S_2 \rightarrow D_1$) and the received signals are, respectively, $y_{S_2R}=\sqrt{P_2}\Phi(s_2)h_{S_2R}+n_{S_2R}$ and $y_{S_2D_1}=\sqrt{P_2}\Phi(s_2)h_{S_2D_1}+n_{S_2D_1}$. The relay demodulates the received symbols using $\Phi^{-1}$ then encodes them using $\psi$, remodulates the result with $\Phi$ and broadcasts the coded symbol to both $D_1$ and $D_2$. Each destination node uses its received symbols to recover its intended message. At $D_1$ for instance, $s_1$ is recovered by
\begin{equation}\label{}
\tilde{s}_1=\psi^{-1}(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{RD_1})), \Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_2D_1})))
\end{equation}
where
\begin{align}
y_{RD_1}& =\sqrt{P_R}\Phi(\psi(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_1R})),\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_2R}))))\nonumber\\
& .h_{RD_1}+n_{RD_1}
\end{align}
and $y_{S_2D_1}=\sqrt{P_2}\Phi(s_2)h_{S_2D_1}+n_{S_2D_1}$.
From now on, we use only $\psi$ for both encoding and decoding operations since we have $\psi^{-1} = \psi$ (the attractive property of XOR).
When we add RS coding/decoding to the scenario above and using scheme 1, (6) becomes
\begin{equation}\label{}
\tilde{s}_1=\Gamma^{-1}(\psi(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{RD_1})), \Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_2D_1}))))
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{}
y_{S_2D_1}=\sqrt{P_2}\Phi(\Gamma(s_2))h_{S_2D_1}+n_{S_2D_1}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{align}
y_{RD_1} & = \sqrt{P_R}\Phi(\psi(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_1R})),\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_2R}))))\nonumber\\
& .h_{RD_1}+n_{RD_1}.
\end{align}
Now, using scheme 2 instead of scheme 1 for the combination of NCC and RS codes, (8) becomes
\begin{equation}\label{}
\tilde{s}_1=\psi(\Gamma^{-1}(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{RD_1}))),\Gamma^{-1}(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_2D_1}))))
\end{equation}
where $y_{S_2D_1}$ is described in (9) and
\begin{align}
y_{RD_1} & =\sqrt{P_R}\Phi(\Gamma(\psi(\Gamma^{-1}(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_1R}))),\nonumber\\
& \Gamma^{-1}(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_2R}))))))h_{RD_1}+n_{RD_1}
\end{align}
In the next subsection, we propose an extended version of the \textit{X}-structure dealing with four source-destination pairs instead of two.
\subsection{Extended $X-$structure network}
Fig. 1b shows the proposed extended wireless $X-$network where 4 $(S-D)$ pairs are communicating via one relay. Here, each source $S_i$ broadcasts in the MAC phase the message $s_i$ to the relay $R$ and all destinations $D_j$ ($j\neq i$), $i,j\in \{1,2,3,4\}$. In Fig. 2, we have $i=1$ and the relations obtained in the previous section are extended as follows:
Without NCC, the same relations hold for both scenarios (with and without RS channel coding). When NCC is applied without RS code, 4 time slots are needed to broadcast the 4 signals $s_i$ to the relay and the destinations $D_j$ ($j\neq i$). The received signals at $R$ have the same form
\begin{equation}
y_{S_iR}=\sqrt{P_i}\Phi(s_i)h_{S_iR}+n_{S_iR}, (i=1,\cdots,4)
\end{equation}
The received signal at $D_1$ is the extended version of (6), $i.e.$
\begin{align}
\tilde{s}_1 & =\psi(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{RD_1})), \Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_2D_1})),\nonumber\\
& \Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_3D_1})),\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_4D_1})))
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
y_{RD_1}& =\sqrt{P_R}\Phi(\psi(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_1R})),\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_2R})),\nonumber\\
& \Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_3R})),\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_4R}))))h_{RD_1}+n_{RD_1}
\end{align}
that we can write as
\begin{equation*}
y_{RD_1} =\sqrt{P_R}\Phi(\bigoplus_{i=1}^{4}\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_iR})))h_{RD_1}+n_{RD_1}.
\end{equation*}
Likewise, (14) can be expressed as
\begin{equation*}
\tilde{s}_1 =\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{RD_1}))\oplus\bigoplus_{i=2}^{4}\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_iD_1})).
\end{equation*}
For all scenarios, the results are the same but with 4 $(S-D)$ pairs instead of 2. For instance, with NCC and RS codes in scheme 2, (11) becomes
\begin{align}
\tilde{s}_1&=\psi(\Gamma^{-1}(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{RD_1}))),\Gamma^{-1}(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_2D_1}))),\nonumber\\
& \Gamma^{-1}(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_3D_1}))),\Gamma^{-1}(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_4D_1}))))
\end{align}
\subsection{Butterfly network}
In the butterfly wireless network of Fig. 1c, there are two source-destination ($S-D$) pairs communicating via 2 relays in series. The first relay $R_1$ is the one in charge of network coding and channel coding/decoding while the second $R_2$ simply forwards (AF protocol) the received signal from $R_1$. Then, destinations $D_1$ and $D_2$ receive the broadcast message from $R_2$.
In the conventional scenario (without NCC), a transmission between both $(S-D)$ pairs requires 6 time slots while with NCC, we need only 4 which leads to a throughput gain of $3/2$.
In the direct path scenario with no NCC and no RS codes, the symbol received at $R_1$ is $y_{S_1R_1}=\sqrt{P_1}\Phi(s_1)h_{S_1R_1}+n_{S_1R_1}$. Relay $R_2$ receives $y_{R_1R_2}=\sqrt{P_{R_1}}\beta_{S_1R_1}\xi(y_{S_1R_1})h_{R_1R_2}+n_{R_1R_2}$ from $R_1$ where
\begin{equation}
\beta_{S_1R_1}=\sqrt\frac{P_{R_1}}{P_1|h_{S_1R_1}|^2+\sigma_{S_1R_1}^2}
\end{equation}
and finally, destination $D_1$ receives $y_{R_2D_1}=\sqrt{P_{R_2}}\beta_{R_1R_2}\xi(y_{R_1R_2})h_{R_2D_1}+n_{R_2D_1}$ from relay $R_2$ where
\begin{equation}
\beta_{R_1R_2}=\sqrt\frac{P_{R_2}}{P_{R_1}|h_{R_1R_2}|^2+\sigma_{R_1R_2}^2}
\end{equation}
and retrieves its intended symbol $\tilde{s}_1=\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{R_2D_1}))$.
Considering the application of channel coding at both sources and channel decoding at their respective destinations for the previous scenario, we have $y_{S_1R_1}=\sqrt{P_1}\Phi(\Gamma(s_1))h_{S_1R_1}+n_{S_1R_1}$
and $\tilde{s}_1=\Gamma^{-1}(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{R_2D_1})))$.
When NCC is performed without RS channel coding, the relay $R_2$ receives from $R_1$ the signal
\begin{equation}
y_{R_1R_2}=\sqrt{P_{R_1}}\Phi(\bigoplus_{i=1}^{2}\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_iR_1})))h_{R_1R_2}+n_{R_1R_2}.
\end{equation}
The retrieved symbol at $D_1$ is
\begin{equation}
\tilde{s}_1 =\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{R_2D_1}))\oplus\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_2D_1})).
\end{equation}
Combining RS codes with NCC respecting scheme 1 leads to the following relations:
$y_{R_1R_2}$ is given by (19) with the difference that received symbols at $R_1$ are now RS coded and have the form
\begin{equation*}
y_{S_iR_1}=\sqrt{P_i}\Phi(\Gamma(s_i))h_{S_iR_1}+n_{S_iR_1}.
\end{equation*}
In this case, destination $D_1$ recovers the symbol $s_1$ with the operation
\begin{align}
\tilde{s}_1&=\Gamma^{-1}(\psi(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{R_2D_1})), \Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_2D_1}))))\nonumber\\
&=\Gamma^{-1}(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{R_2D_1}))\oplus\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_2D_1}))).
\end{align}
Now, combining RS codes with NCC respecting scheme 2, we have
\begin{align}
y_{R_1R_2} & =\sqrt{P_{R_1}}\Phi(\Gamma(\psi(\Gamma^{-1}(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_1R_1}))),\nonumber\\
& \Gamma^{-1}(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_2R_1}))))))h_{R_1R_2}+n_{R_1R_2}.
\end{align}
After equalization of $y_{R_1R_2}$, the relay $R_2$ amplifies it using $\beta_{R_1R_2}$ and broadcasts it to $D_1$ and $D_2$. Hence, $D_1$ decodes the symbol $s_1$ as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{}
\tilde{s}_1=\psi(\Gamma^{-1}(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{R_2D_1}))),\Gamma^{-1}(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_2D_1})))).
\end{equation}
\subsection{Extended Butterfly network}
In this subsection, we propose to extend the number of $(S-D)$ pairs to 4 as illustrated in Fig. 1d. The results found for the butterfly network hold for its extended version with the addition of sources $S_3$ and $S_4$ and destinations $D_3$ and $D_4$. In the scenario of scheme 1 for example, (21) becomes
\begin{align}
\tilde{s}_1&=\Gamma^{-1}(\psi(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{R_2D_1})), \Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_2D_1})),\nonumber\\
&\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_3D_1})), \Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_4D_1})))).
\end{align}
that can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
\tilde{s}_1=\Gamma^{-1}(\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{R_2D_1})) \oplus \bigoplus_{i=2}^{4}\Phi^{-1}(\xi(y_{S_iD_1}))).
\end{equation}
Application of NCC on the extended butterfly network allows a throughput gain of $2$ with the diversity order 4. These values become $3N/(N+2)$ and $N$ for the general case of $N$ $(S-D)$ pairs.
In the next section, we get the results that confirm the efficiency of combining NCC with RS channel codes by conducting simulations of all the scenarios above.
\section{Simulation Results}
The scenarios detailed in the wireless topologies presented in the previous section are simulated using MATLAB. We generate a set of 14 SNR values from $0 dB$ to $26 dB$ with a step of $2 dB$. For each $M-$PSK constellation, we generate (at each source node) a sequence of 1000 random integer values in the corresponding finite field $GF(M)$. Depending on the coding rate $k/n$ of our RS coder, these values are coded into a set of $\frac{1000n}{k}$ values in the same finite field. We assume equal transmit power at all nodes. All channels are independent and each one is defined by its complex AWGN components $n \sim CN(0, \sigma_n^2)$ and complex Rayleigh fading coefficients $h \sim CN(0, \sigma_h^2)$. Each simulation is the average of 1000 iterations to ensure accurate reliable results.
To derive the values of SER, we compare the received sequence of symbols $\tilde{s_1}$ evaluated using the corresponding scenario equation to the original one $s_1$ generated at source node $S_1$.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{Figure2.png}}
\caption{SER vs. SNR obtained for $X$-structure with 16-PSK and RS(15,5).}
\label{fig}
\end{figure}
Due to the large number of scenarios in our work, we gathered the main relevant results in one SER versus SNR graph for each topology in addition to one graph ($X-$structure with $16-$PSK modulation and RS(15,5)) to illustrate the advantage of NCC application with and without Reed-Solomon channel coding. In Fig. 2, we can notice how the application of cooperative network coding, at the cost of a small degradation of SER values, produces an important improvement of the overall system throughput and diversity order \cite{b10} in addition to transmit power reduction. Table I shows the values of throughput gain and diversity orders attained by exploiting NCC technique on the general cases of the networks studied in this paper. Also, RS channel coding (we used scheme 2) allows considerable reductions of symbol error probability. At $SNR=14.35dB$, the SER with RS code is equal to $10^{-3}$ while its value is $10^{-0.9}$ without RS code. For all the four wireless network configurations, the graphs on Figs. 3 and 4 show clearly how scheme 2 outperforms scheme 1 in terms of symbol error probability for the three PSK constellations adopted. For instance, in the extended butterfly network using $32-$PSK and RS(31,10), the SER decreases from $10^{-1}$ in scheme 1 to $10^{-3}$ in scheme 2 at $SNR=16.65dB$. Furthermore, with a small extra computation at the relay in scheme 2 to perform $RS(n,k)$ codes of the received messages and re-encoding of the resulting network coded message, we can save a large amount of system transmit energy \cite{b11,b12,b13}, since, in scheme 1, the number of NC symbols to transmit is $\frac{n}{k}$ times greater than the number in scheme 2.
\begin{table}[!t]
\label{}
\caption{Throughput gain and Diversity Order.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| c | c | c | c | c |}
\hline
\textbf{} & \multicolumn{4}{ c |}{\textbf{Network Configuration}} \\
\cline{2-5}
& \textbf{X-net.} & \textbf{Extended-X} & \textbf{Butter.} & \textbf{Ext. Butter.} \\
\hline
Throughput Gain & $\frac{4}{3}$ & $\frac{2N}{N+1}$ & $\frac{3}{2}$ & $\frac{3N}{N+2}$ \\ \hline
Diversity Order & $2$ & $N$ & $2$ & $N$\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.34]{Figure3.png}}
\caption{Results of scheme 1 and scheme 2 on X-structure and extended X-structure networks with RS(7,2), RS(15,5) and RS(31,10) for 8-PSK, 16-PSK and 32-PSK respectively.}
\label{fig}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.34]{Figure4.png}}
\caption{Results of scheme 1 and scheme 2 on butterfly and extended butterfly networks with RS(7,2), RS(15,5) and RS(31,10) for 8-PSK, 16-PSK and 32-PSK respectively.}
\label{fig}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we put the light on the advantage of using Reed-Solomon codes jointly with cooperative network coding in wireless network architectures for non-binary PSK constellations. Besides the optimizations achieved in terms of system throughput, diversity order and network transmit power by NCC strategy, we showed how RS channel codes can improve considerably the symbol error rate. RS codes give high performance with non-binary constellations since they deal with Galois fields $GF(M)$ elements. We also proved that scheme 2, where the relay operates RS decoding before network coding and then RS re-encoding, decreases the symbol error probability in comparison with scheme 1 where the relay executes network coding directly on channel coded symbols. As a future work, we will investigate the application of random linear network coding (RLNC) at the NC relay.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
A/B tests or online controlled experiments are used by a large number of software and technology companies \cite{hohnhold2015focusing,kharitonov2017learning}
to evaluate changes to web services, desktop and mobile applications, and operating systems.
In a typical online controlled experiment that is evaluating a new feature, users are randomly assigned to the treatment group (exposed to the new feature) or the control group (not exposed to the new feature) as they come online to use the software product or service. The assignment remains consistent throughout the experiment. During the experiment period, we collect telemetry from all users and compute metric for both groups. We conduct statistical tests to detect differences in metrics values between the treatment and control groups which are unlikely to be observed due to random chance. This establishes a causal relationship between the feature being tested and the measured changes in user behavior \cite{rubin2008objective,imbens2015causal}.
One key touchstone of trustworthiness of experimentation is external validity
\cite{Campbell1957,campbell2015experimental,cook2002experimental,sabbaghi2018model} -- can results observed during an experiment period still hold when the new feature being tested is rolled out to the entire user population in the future? There can be multiple factors that affect external validity, such as the novelty effect and the weekday/weekend effect. While such factors are well recognized, there could be other neglected yet common effects that play an important role in determining external validity. In this paper, we highlight \emph{heavy-user bias}, which describes the phenomenon that frequent users are more likely to be included in an experiment than infrequent ones, rendering the estimated average treatment effect biased. To our best knowledge, it has not been formally discussed in the existing data mining literature, and we hope that this paper can raise the community's awareness on this important issue.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section \ref{sec:framework} discusses the concepts of external validity and heavy user bias in more depth and introduces necessary notations and assumptions. Section \ref{sec:methodology} derives the closed-form expression of the heavy-user bias, proposes a bias-adjusted estimator based on jackknife \cite{Quenouille56,Tukey1958,Rao1965AMethod,Miller74,Kunsch1989}, and illustrates the performance of the bias-adjusted estimator via simulated examples. Section \ref{sec:conclusion} concludes the paper by summarizing the progresses made in this on-going project, and discussing practical challenges and future research directions.
\section{Preliminaries}
\label{sec:framework}
\subsection{External validity and heavy user bias}
External validity, also known as generalizability \cite{Stuart11}, refers to the problem generalizing the findings from the sample units included in the experiment to a larger inference population. External validity is an important problem in causal inference and several papers studied the external validity under a variety of different scenarios such as politics \cite{Stuart11} and education \cite{Tipton14a}.
In the context of A/B tests, the external validity of A/B tests could be affected by a variety of factors, such as novelty/primacy effects \cite{Sheinin11} or weekday/weekend effects.
Heavy user bias is another important yet often overlooked factor that affects the external validity of A/B tests. To illustrate what is heavy user bias, let us consider a simple example. Suppose a website has two hundred users, half are heavy users who use the website every day, and the other half are light users who use the website with 50\% probability each day. However, if an online experiment is run for just one day, there would be around 150 users using the website. The proportion of heavy users in the experiment sample will be 2/3. In other words, the proportion of heavy users for any A/B test is usually higher than that for the whole population. One simple way to mitigate heavy user bias would be to run the experiment long enough so that the proportion of heavy users and light users remain stable. However, under mild conditions, we show that the heavy user bias is usually inversely proportional to the length of the experiment $k$. This means when the experiment duration doubles, the heavy user bias is only reduced by half. Furthermore, long-term experiments are known to be prone to other critical issues \cite{pitfalls-long-term-online-experiments}. Therefore, running experiments for longer periods might not be practical.
\subsection{Notations and assumptions}
\begin{table}[!h]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ll}
\hline
Notation & Explanation \\
\hline
\(Y_u(t)\) & the observed outcome of user \(u\) at day \(t\).\\
\(\mathbf I_{trt}{u}\) & whether the user \(u\) is in the treatment group.\\
\(R_u(t)\) & whether the user \(u\) used the product at day \(t\).\\
\(t_u^0\) & the first time user $u$ shows up, i.e. $\min\{t \mid R_u(t) = 1\}$\\
\(\tau_u(t)\) & the treatment effect for user \(u\) at day \(t\).\\
\(c_u(t)\) & the control outcome for user \(u\) at day \(t\).\\
\(k\) & duration of the experiment (day 1 to day \(k\)).\\
\(N_\t,N_\c\)& number of users in the treatment/control group.\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The table below describes the notation we will use for the rest of the paper.
To derive our theoretical result, we need to make the following assumptions. We will briefly comment why the introduced assumptions are reasonable in our application scenarios, and in Section \ref{sec:conclusion} we will discuss how to further relax the assumptions.
\begin{assumption}
[stable unit treatment value assumption]
\label{assum:sutva}
One user's outcome is unaffected by other users' treatment assignments. In other words, different users do not interfere with each other.
\end{assumption}
\begin{assumption}[super population] For each user, its behavior can be characterized as a series of triplets $\{R_u(t), \tau_u(t), c_u(t)\}_{t=1}^k$. We assume that this series for each user is an i.i.d. sample from a super population with a probability distribution $\Psi$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:dgp}
P\{R_u(t)=a_t, \tau_u(t)\leq b_t, c_u(t)\leq c_t;t=1,\ldots,k\},
\end{equation}
where $a_t\in \{0, 1\}$, $b_t, c_t\in \mathbb R$ for $t\in \{1,\ldots, k\}$.
\end{assumption}
\begin{assumption}[incremental experiment assumption]
\label{assum:user-activity-unchanged}
We assume that for each user $u$, the activity indicator $R_u(t)$ is independent of the treatment assignment $\mathbf I_{trt} u$.
\end{assumption}
\begin{remark}
Under Assumption \ref{assum:sutva}, the outcome of any user depends only on its own treatment assignment but not other users' treatment assignment. This assumption is reasonable when users do not interact with each other, e.g., users of search engines and operating systems. However, it could break for users that can interact and communicate, such as users of social media. The latter scenarios are beyond the scope of this paper.
Assumption \ref{assum:user-activity-unchanged} implies that user's visit \(R_u(t)\) is not affected by whether a user is treated. In other words, we assume our experiment is incremental such that it does not change the frequency of users' visits. This assumption could bring issues if a treatment significantly moves the number of days a user is active (i.e. uses the product). Therefore,
it is important to test this assumption before analyzing the data using this framework.
One plausible way would be to test whether the average active days per user is the same across treatment and control group. Based on our experience, most experiments do not affect the frequency of users' visits significantly \cite{Kohavi2014}.
Under Assumptions \ref{assum:sutva}--\ref{assum:user-activity-unchanged}, we can express the observed outcomes of the experimental units as
$$
Y_u(t)
= R_u(t)
\{
\mathbf I_{trt}{u} \tau_u(t) + c_u(t)
\},
$$
which greatly facilitates the theoretical derivations going forward.
\end{remark}
\section{Methodology}
\label{sec:methodology}
\subsection{Metric and point estimation}
At the end of an A/B test, we compute metrics to estimate the impact of the treatment on user behavior and make ship decisions. For example, click-through rate (CTR) is a common metric for search engines to measure the effectiveness of online advertisements. In this paper, we focus on the \emph{scaled single average}
$$
\frac{1}{k}
\mathbb E
\left\{
\sum_{t=1}^\wholeY_u(t)\Big| \mathbf I_{trt} u = z
\right\}
\quad
(z=1, 0)
$$
which are arguably the most common metric type in A/B testing\footnote{We will discuss other types of metrics in Section \ref{sec:conclusion}}. Note that the expectation is calculated with respect to the data generating mechanism in \eqref{eq:dgp}, which means it is the average over all the users of the product. For this metric, the average treatment effect (ATE) is the difference between the metric for the treatment group and that for the control group:
\begin{equation}
\label{Eq:estimand_delta}
\Delta_\textrm{scaled}
=
\mathbb E \left\{\frac{1}{k}\sum_{t=1}^\wholeR_u(t)\tau_u(t)\right\}.
\end{equation}
We can estimate $\Delta_\textrm{scaled}$ by the corresponding difference-in-sample-means derived from the observed data:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:naive-estmator}
\widehat {\Delta}_\textrm{scaled}
=
\frac{
\sum_{u:\mathbf I_{trt}{u}=1} \sum_{t=1}^\wholeY_u(t)
}
{
kN_\t
}
-
\frac{
\sum_{u:\mathbf I_{trt}{u}=0} \sum_{t=1}^\wholeY_u(t)
}
{
kN_\c
}.
\end{equation}
Note that, in this equation, we only include $N_\t + N_\c$ users that appear during the experiment.
\subsection{Heavy-user bias}
We define the \emph{heavy-user bias} of the estimator $\widehat {\Delta}_\textrm{scaled}$ estimating $\Delta_\textrm{scaled}$ as the difference between the expected value of the estimator and the estimand:
$
\mathbb E (\widehat {\Delta}_{\textrm{scaled}})
-
\Delta_\textrm{scaled}$.
Because only users who appear between day 1--$k$ are included in the experiment, the expectation of the point estimate of $\widehat {\Delta}_\textrm{scaled}$ is:
\begin{equation}
\label{Eq:expected_ATE_c}
\mathbb E
\left(
\widehat {\Delta}_\textrm{scaled}
\right)
=
\mathbb E
\left\{
\frac{1}{k}\sum_{t=1}^k \tau_u(t)R_u(t)\Big| t_u^0 \leq k
\right\},
\end{equation}
The \emph{heavy-user bias} is a (potentially complex) function of the data generating process in \eqref{eq:dgp}. To make the problem somewhat tractable and concrete, we propose a straightforward yet practical user behavior model, under which we derive the closed-form expressions of the heavy-user bias.
We assume a fixed population, within which there exists user heterogeneity for both heavy and low activity frequencies and outcomes.
\begin{model}[Fixed population with user heterogeneity]
\label{model:1}
We use the following model to reflect the heterogeneity on both user activity frequencies and outcomes:
\begin{itemize}
\item $R_u(t)$ for a user $u$ on day $t$ is i.i.d. from a Bernoulli random variable with success probability $p\sim f(\cdot)$.
\item The expectation of the treatment effect for user $u$ is $\mathbb E \tau_u(t) = \tau(p)$. It implies that the treatment effect could be different for users with different activity parameter $p$ but remains the same across all days.
\item Similarly, the expected control outcome of a user is $\mathbb E c_u(t) = c(p)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{model}
As demonstrated in the following lemma, Model \ref{model:1} allows us to derive the closed-form expressions for both $\Delta_\textrm{scaled}$ and $\mathbb E(\widehat {\Delta}_{\textrm{scaled}}),$ and therefore rigorously quantify the heavy-user bias.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:1}
Under Assumptions \ref{assum:sutva}--\ref{assum:user-activity-unchanged} and Model \ref{model:1},
\begin{align}
\label{Eq:ATE_model_1}
\Delta_\textrm{scaled} = &\int_{0}^1\tau(p) p f(p)dp,
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\label{Eq:3}
\mathbb E\left(\widehat {\Delta}_{\textrm{scaled}}\right)
=& \dfrac{
\int_{0}^1\tau(p) p f(p)
dp
}
{
\int_{0}^1f(p)
\left\{
1 - (1 - p)^{k}
\right\}
dp
}.
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, \eqref{Eq:ATE_model_1} holds by the definition of Model \ref{model:1}. Second, based on \eqref{Eq:expected_ATE_c},
\begin{align}
\mathbb E
\left(
\widehat {\Delta}_{\textrm{scaled}}
\right)
= &\mathbb E\left\{\tau_u(1)R_u(1)\Big| t_u^0 \leq k\right\}\\
= &\int_0^1\tau(p)\frac{p}{1 - (1-p)^k}f(p| t_u^0 \leq k)dp, \label{Eq:1}
\end{align}
where $f(p|t_u^0\leq k)$ is the density of the user activity probability $p$ conditioned on $t_u^0\leq k$. Using the Bayes' formula, we have
\begin{align}
f(p|t_u^0\leq k) = & \frac{f(p) P(t_u^0\leq k|p)}{\int_0^1f(p) P(t_u^0\leq k|p)dp}
= \frac{f(p) (1 - (1 - p)^k)}{\int_0^1f(p) (1 - (1 - p)^k)dp}. \label{Eq:2}
\end{align}
By \eqref{Eq:1} and \eqref{Eq:2}, we complete the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Intuitively, the heavy-user bias arises because light users are less likely to show up during the experiment and therefore are under-represented. If we run the experiment long enough ($k\to\infty$), then
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{k\to\infty}
\mathbb E
\left(
\widehat {\Delta}_{\textrm{scaled}}
\right)
=
\int_{0}^1\tau(p) p f(p)dp
=
\Delta_\textrm{scaled}.
\end{equation*}
However, for a finite period $k$, a user with activity probability $p$ has probability
$
1 - (1 - p)^k
$
to show up during the experiment. That shows the proportion of heavy-users during the experiment are higher than that in the whole population.
\end{remark}
With the help of Lemma \ref{lemma:1}, we can now present the main result of this paper.
\begin{prop}
\label{Prop:model1_single_average} Under Assumptions \ref{assum:sutva}--\ref{assum:user-activity-unchanged} and Model \ref{model:1}, if $f(\cdot), \tau(\cdot)$ has gradient and their gradients are continuous, then
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb E
\left(
\widehat {\Delta}_{\textrm{scaled}}
\right)
- \Delta_\textrm{scaled}
=
\Delta_\textrm{scaled} f(0)\cdotk^{-1} + O(k^{-2}).
\end{equation*}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Denote $f^\prime$ to be $f$'s gradient. Because $f^\prime$ is continuous on the compact set $[0, 1],$ $f^\prime$ must be uniformly bounded on that set. That implies there exists a positive constant $C > 0$ such that
$
|f(p) - f(0)|\leq C\cdot p
$
for all $p \in [0,1].$ Therefore
\begin{equation*}
\left|\int_{0}^1f(p)(1 - p)^{k}dp - \int_{0}^1f(0)(1 - p)^{k}dp\right|
\leq
\int_{0}^1C\cdot p(1 - p)^{k}dp,
\end{equation*}
which implies that
\begin{align}
\left|\int_{0}^1f(p)(1 - p)^{k}dp - \frac{f(0)}{k+1}\right| \leq \frac{1}{(k+1)(k+2)} = O(k^{-2}).
\label{Eq:proof_sim1_bias_1}
\end{align}
By \eqref{Eq:3} in Lemma \ref{lemma:1} and \eqref{Eq:proof_sim1_bias_1},
$
\mathbb E\left\{\widehat {\Delta}_{\textrm{scaled}}\right\}
=
\Delta_\textrm{scaled} + f(0) \Delta_\textrm{scaled} k^{-1} + O(k^{-2}),
$
which completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
When there is no extremely light users $f(0) = 0$, it can be seen from the proposition that the first order bias of continuous analysis would be zero. Note that if a user has probability zero of showing up, it will never appear in the experiment. $f(0)$ should be thought of as the limit $\lim_{q\rightarrow 0} P(p\leq q)/q,$ which approximately represents users with very light activity. Based on our experience, for many online websites, the proportion of extremely light users is quite significant.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Bias-adjusted estimator}
Having derived the heavy-user bias in Proposition \ref{Prop:model1_single_average}, we next propose a bias-adjusted estimator to replace the difference-in-means estimator in \eqref{eq:naive-estmator}. Our proposal is inspired by jackknife in classical literature\cite{Tukey1958, Kunsch1989, Miller74}, which usually serves as a generic tool to correct first-order biases.
For any fixed experiment duration $k$, let $a$ be the true value of the outcome/metric of interest and $h(k)$ be an estimator of $a$. Assume the the \emph{heavy user bias} of the estimator can be approximated by a function of $k$:
$
h(k) - a = b / k + O(k^{-2}),
$
where $b$ is a parameter. The key insight here is that we can use two points $h(k-1)$ and $h(k)$ to get a better estimate of $a$ with almost no bias of order $O(k^{-1})$:
$$
\hat a = k \cdot h(k) - (k - 1) \cdot h(k-1).
$$
For the scaled single average metric, the natural choice for $h(k)$ is the un-adjusted estimator
$
\widehat {\Delta}_{\textrm{scaled}}.
$
To obtain $h(k-1)$, we can similarly calculate
$
\widehat {\Delta}_{\textrm{scaled}}
$
using the data of first $k - 1$ days. Although this estimate is unbiased, it does not use all the data at hand and can suffer from a large variance. To reduce its variance, we repeat the above procedure by excluding data from day $j=1, \ldots, k,$ and average the results. We summarize the above procedure in Algorithm \ref{Alg:jack_cont_period}.
\begin{algorithm}[htb]
\small
\caption{Bias-adjusted estimator}
\label{Alg:jack_cont_period}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require Data $= \{(R_u(t), Y_u(t), \mathbf I_{trt}{u})\}_{u}$ for days $j=1, \ldots, k$.
\State $\widehat {\Delta} \gets \mathrm{Calculate} \; \widehat {\Delta}_{\textrm{scaled}}$
\For{$j = 1,\ldots, k$}
\State Get new data-set by excluding data on day $j:$
\State $\mathrm{Calculate} \; \widehat {\Delta}_{\textrm{scaled}}$ on new data-set
\EndFor
\State $\bar \Delta \gets \frac{1}{k}\sum_{j} \widehat \Delta_{(j)}$.
\State $\widehat \Delta_{\textrm{jack}} \gets k \widehat \Delta - (k - 1)\bar \Delta$.
\State \textbf{return} estimated mean $\widehat \Delta_{\textrm{jack}}$ and its variance $\frac{k}{k - 1} \sum_{j=1}^k (\widehat \Delta_{(j)} - \bar \Delta)^2$.
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{prop}\label{Prop:jack_1}
Under Assumptions \ref{assum:sutva}--\ref{assum:user-activity-unchanged} and Model \ref{model:1}, the heavy-user bias of the bias-adjusted estimator in Algorithm \ref{Alg:jack_cont_period} is
$$
\mathbb E \widehat \Delta_\textrm{jack} - \Delta_\textrm{scaled}
=
O(k^{-2}).
$$
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
After excluding day $j,$ the remaining data can be viewed as from a $k - 1$ day experiment. Thus we apply Proposition \ref{Prop:model1_single_average} to obtain the expectation of
$
\widehat \Delta_{(j)},
$
the difference-in-means estimator on data excluding day $j:$
$
\mathbb E \widehat \Delta_{(j)} = \Delta_{\textrm{scaled}} + \frac{1}{k - 1}\Delta_{\textrm{scaled}} f(0) + O(k^{-2}).
$
Therefore, the expectation of the bias-adjusted estimator is
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb E \widehat \Delta_\textrm{jack}
= k\mathbb E \widehat \Delta_\textrm{scaled} - \frac{(k - 1)}{k}\sum_j \mathbb E \widehat \Delta_{(j)} = \Delta_{\textrm{scaled}} + O(k^{-2}).
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
\subsection{Simulated examples}
\label{subsec:simu}
To demonstrate the advantages of the bias-adjusted estimator
$
\widehat \Delta_\textrm{jack}
$
in Proposition \ref{Prop:jack_1}, we present two simulated examples mimicking real-life A/B testing scenarios\footnote{We provide the source code of the simulations in \url{https://github.com/shifwang/On-Heavy-user-Bias-in-AB-Testing}}. For both examples, the experiment lasts for 14 days, the treatment and control groups each contains 1000 units, and each unit uses the product with probability $p$ for day $t=1, \ldots, k$, where $p$ is generated from $\mathrm{Uniform}(0, 1)$. The difference is how we generate the outcomes. To be specific, if user $u$ uses the product on day $t,$ for Example 1 we let
$$
Y_u(t) =
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
1 + p + N(0, 0.01^2) & \text{if treated}\\
1 + N(0, 0.01^2) & \text{otherwise}
\end{array}
\right. ,
$$
and for Example 2 we let
$$
Y_u(t) =
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
1 + (1 + \frac{1}{10\cdot U_u(t)})\cdot p + N(0, 0.01^2) & \text{if treated}\\
1 + N(0, 0.01^2) & \text{otherwise}
\end{array}
\right.,
$$
where $U_u(t)$ is the number of days the user $u$ used the product. For both examples, the ground truth
$
\Delta_\textrm{scaled} = 1/3.
$
While Example 1 is strictly under Model \ref{model:1}, Example 2 contains the novelty effect, which violates the assumptions in Model \ref{model:1}. By leveraging the two examples, we aim to examine both the accuracy and the robustness of the proposed bias-adjusted estimator.
For both examples, we repeat the data generation process 100 times. For each simulated data-set, we compute the original difference-in-means estimator
$
\widehat {\Delta}_{\textrm{scaled}},
$
the bias-adjusted estimator
$
\widehat {\Delta}_\textrm{jack},
$
and the block bootstrap estimator\cite{Kunsch1989}. We report the biases and the standard deviations of the three estimators in Table \ref{Tab:sim_result}. The bias-adjusted estimator produces the smallest bias in both examples. Unfortunately, we do not have an answer why jackknife adjustment works better than bootstrap under our simulated settings.
\begin{table}[tb]
\centering
\footnotesize
\caption{Average biases and their standard errors}
\label{Tab:sim_result}
\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{tabular}{@{}lcc@{}}
\toprule
& Example 1 & Example 2 \\
\hline
Bias of original estimator & 0.0220 (0.0023) & 0.0373 (0.0020) \\
Bias of bias-adjusted estimator & -0.0022 (0.0026) & 0.0132 (0.0023) \\
Bias of block-bootstrap estimator & 0.0080 (0.0025) & 0.0232 (0.0022) \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Concluding Remarks}
\label{sec:conclusion}
In this paper, we highlighted that the heavy-user bias could affect external validity significantly, and would like to raise the awareness of the data mining community on this issue. To be more specific, we demonstrated that the heavy-user bias exists in A/B testing due to the limited length of an experiment, and proposed a bias-adjusted estimator based on jackknife. Under the fixed population user heterogeneity model, we showed that jackknife estimators could correct the first order heavy-user bias. We conducted simulation studies to illustrate the advantages of the proposed methodology.
We summarize two lines of active research we have been conducting on this on-going project. First, besides \eqref{Eq:estimand_delta} there are other types of metrics. For example, double average:
$
\Delta_\textrm{double}
=\mathbb E
\left\{
\frac{\sum_{t=1}^\wholeR_u(t)\tau_u(t)}{\sum_{t=1}^\wholeR_u(t)}
\right\}.
$
Fortunately, we can leverage the same techniques to derive the heavy-user bias. Second, we applied the bias-adjusted estimator to several empirical data-sets and we found that, comparing with short term A/B testing results, our new estimator is closer to the long term A/B testing results.
To conclude the paper, we outline several future research directions to achieve the holy grail of ensuring external validity. First, it is important to understand the joint effect of multiple factors that affect external validity. The simulated examples showed that our proposed estimator provided a more accurate estimate in the presence of both the heavy user bias and the novelty effect. However, we might need to consider other possible effects in practice. Second, we can generalize the current methodology to study fairness in A/B testing, an important topic in machine learning and artificial intelligence \cite{Corbett2017}. Third, it would be interesting to extend the current study to the network setting with user interference.
\section{Acknowledgement}
The major work is done during Yu's summer internship at ExP team at Microsoft Inc. in 2018. Partial supports are gratefully acknowledged from ARO grant
W911NF1710005, ONR grant N00014-16-1-2664, NSF grants
DMS-1613002, IIS 1741340, and CSoI under grant agreement CCF-0939370.
\bibliographystyle{ACM-Reference-Format}
\nocite{}
\tiny
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
The applications of pedestrian trajectory prediction cover a broad range from autonomous driving, robot navigation, smart video surveillance to object tracking. Traditionally, the task of object motion prediction is done by using a Bayesian formulation in approaches such as the Kalman filter \cite{kalman1960}, or nonparametric methods, such as particle filters \cite{Arulampalam_SP_2002}. Driven by the success of recurrent neural networks (RNNs) in modeling temporal dependencies in a variety of sequence processing tasks, such as speech recognition \cite{Graves_ICASSP_2013,chung2015recurrent} and caption generation \cite{Donahue_CVPR_2015,Xu_MLR_2015}, RNNs are increasingly utilized for object motion prediction \cite{alahi2016social,alahi2017learning,Hug_RFMI_2017,Hug_ITSC_2018,Becker_ECCVW_2018}. When relying on traditional approaches, the challenge of varying dynamics over time is commonly addressed with the Interacting Multiple Model (IMM) filter \cite{Blom_AC_1988}. The IMM filter is a well established approach to elegantly combine a set of candidate models into a single context by weighting each individual model. Each model corresponds to a specific motion pattern and contributes to the final state estimation depending on its current weight. According to the IMM filter solution, in this paper an RNN-based IMM filter surrogate is presented. On the one hand, the presented RNN-based model is able to also provide a confidence value for the performed dynamic and on the other hand can overcome some limitations of the classic IMM filter. The suggested RNN-encoder-decoder model generates the probability distribution over future pedestrian paths conditioned on a dynamic class. The model is based on the work of Deo and Trivedi \cite{Deo_IV_2018}. For the case study of freeway traffic, they used an two branch RNN-encoder-decoder network for vehicle maneuver and trajectory prediction. Since for vehicle applications an on-board lane estimation algorithm is mostly available, a stationary frame of reference, with the origin fixed at the vehicle being predicted, is used in their work. Although this makes the model independent of road curvature and independent of how vehicle tracks are obtained, it can not be applied without adjustments for pedestrian motion prediction. Thus, our RNN-based model infers like classical filters the current position and uses only a single RNN branch for encoding the maneuver class, the filtered position and the trajectory information. In the context of vehicle motion prediction, maneuver or rather dynamic classes can be better defined than for pedestrians. For example by changing or keeping the lane. Due to the dynamic behavior of pedestrians, the maneuver classes are here defined based on the deviation from a straight walking pedestrian. The presented network also extends the maneuver network of Deo and Trivedi \cite{Deo_IV_2018} with insights from the work of Becker et al. \cite{Becker_ECCVW_2018} to better adapt to pedestrian motions.\\
Moreover, this paper aims to highlight some relations between traditional multiple model approaches such as the IMM filter and the suggested RNN-based IMM filter surrogate. By combining the different views on maneuver predictions, this work contributes to an exploration of the connections between both problem formulations. The decoder uses the de-noised position estimate and a context vector, encoding the dynamic classes, to predict future positions. The analysis is done on synthetic data reflecting prototypical scenarios capturing pedestrians maneuvers.\\
In the following, a brief formalization of the problem and a description of the RNN-based model are provided. The achieved results are presented in section \ref{sec:eval}. Finally, a conclusion is given in section \ref{sec:conclusion}.
\section{RNN-based IMM Filter Surrogate}
\label{sec:model}
The goal is to devise a model that can successfully predict future paths of pedestrians and represent alternating pedestrian dynamics, e.g. dynamics that can transition from a straight walking to a turning maneuver or stopping. Here, trajectory prediction is formally stated as the problem of predicting the future trajectories of a pedestrian, conditioned on its track history. Given an input sequence $\mathcal{Z} = \{ (x^{t},y^{t}) \in \mathbb{R}^2 | t = 1,\ldots,t_{obs} \}$ of $T_{obs}$ consecutive observed pedestrian positions $\vec{z}^t=(x^t,y^t)$ at time $t$ along a trajectory, the task is to generate a multi-modal prediction for the next $T_{pred}$ positions $\{ \vec{x}^{t+1}, \vec{x}^{t+2},\ldots, \vec{x}^{t+T_{pred}} \} $ and to filter the current position $\vec{x}^t=(x^t,y^t)$. One insight from the work Becker et al. \cite{Becker_ECCVW_2018} is that motion continuity is easier to express in offsets or velocities, because it takes considerably more modeling effort to represent all possible conditioning positions. In order to exploit scene-specific knowledge for trajectory prediction, additional use of the position information is required. When sufficient training samples from a particular scene are available, Hug et al.\cite{Hug_RFMI_2017} showed that RNN-based trajectory prediction models are able to capture spatially dependent behavior changes only from motion data. However, here the offsets are additionally used for conditioning the network $\mathcal{Z} = \{(x^{t},y^{t}, \delta^{t}_{x},\delta^{t}_{y}) \in \mathbb{R}^4 | t= 2,\ldots,t_{obs} \}$. Apart from the smaller modeling effort to represent conditioned offsets, the shift to offsets helps to prevent undefined states due to a limited data range \cite{Becker_ECCVW_2018} and it is easier to make better generalizations across datasets. Since, we analyze the model capabilities on synthetic data reflecting prototypical pedestrian maneuvers for a fixed scenario, the amount of training samples is not restricted. Thus, in order to localize in the reference system position information is used to estimate the true position. The future trajectory is denoted with $\mathcal{Y} = \{ (x^{t},y^{t}) \in \mathbb{R}^2 | t = t_{obs}+1,\ldots,t_{pred} \}$. The model estimates the conditional distribution $P(\mathcal{Y},\vec{x}^{t}|\mathcal{Z})$.
In order to identify specific dynamics under $M$ desired maneuver classes (e.g. turning maneuvers, stopping and straight walking), this term can be given by:
\begin{equation}
P(\mathcal{Y},\vec{x}^t|\mathcal{Z}) = \sum^{M}_{i=1} P_{\Theta}(\mathcal{Y},\vec{x}^t|m_{i},\mathcal{Z})P(m_{i}|\mathcal{Z})
\label{eq:equation_01}
\end{equation}
Here, $\Theta=\{\Theta^{t_{obs}+1},\ldots, \Theta^{t_{pred}} \}$ are the parameters of a $L$ component Gaussian mixture model $\Theta^{t} = (\vec{\mu}^{t}_{l}, \Sigma^{t}_{l}, w^{t}_{l})_{l=1,\ldots, L}$. By adding the maneuver context in form of the posterior mode probability, $P(m_{i}|\mathcal{Z}) \overset{\wedge}{=} \alpha_{i}$ the analogy to the classic IMM filter becomes apparent. For an IMM filter, the mode probability is used to calculate the mixing probabilities to combine the set of chosen candidate models into a merged estimate. The time behavior of the basic filter set is modeled as a homogeneous (time invariant) Markov chain with a fixed transition probability matrix (TPM) $m_{ij} \overset{\wedge}{=} P(m^{t}_{i}|m^{t-1}_{j})$. Under the assumption that $M$ models describe the variation of the dynamics, the posterior density of the IMM filter can be written as follows:
\begin{equation}
P(\vec{x}^t|\mathcal{Z}) = \sum^{M}_{i=1} P_{\Theta_{IMM}}(\vec{x}^t|m_{i},\mathcal{Z})P(m_{i}|\mathcal{Z})
\label{eq:equation_02}
\end{equation}
Here, $P_{\Theta_{IMM}}(\vec{x}^t|m_{i},\mathcal{Z})$ is in the context of an IMM filter a Gaussian distribution and $P(m_{i}|\mathcal{Z}) \overset{\wedge}{=} \alpha_{i}$ is the posterior mode probability for the IMM filter. As mentioned above, the transition between different dynamics is modeled as a first order Markov chain for an IMM filter. The law of total probability allows to compute new mode probabilities based on the transition probabilities.
Given the current mode probabilities and transition probabilities, the mixing probabilities $\alpha_{i|j}$ for the mixing step of the IMM filter can be calculated. For each model $M_{i}$ and $M_{j}$, they are calculated as $\alpha^{t-1}_{i|j} = \frac{1}{\bar{c}_{j}} m_{ij} \alpha^{t-1}_{i}$ with a normalization factor $\bar{c}_{j} = \sum^{M}_{i=1} m_{ij} \alpha^{t-1}_{i}$. Then, in the prediction stage, each filter is applied independently using the calculated mixed initial condition. Subsequently, the model probabilities are adapted according to the likelihood of each filter.\\
\textbf{RNN-IMM:} Whereas an explicit modeling of the switching behavior and the object dynamics of the IMM filter stands in contrast to an implicit dynamic encoding of an RNN-based approach. In order to provide an IMM filter surrogate, the proposed model also estimates mode probabilities and filters or rather de-noises the current position based on noisy observations $\mathcal{Z}$. By writing the conditional distribution $P(\mathcal{Y},\vec{x}|\mathcal{Z})$ of the RNN-based approach in form of equation \ref{eq:equation_01}, the desired estimates can be inferred from the hidden states of the RNN $\vec{h}$. This formulations does not require to set the parameters of the TPM matrix manually, which is commonly done based on the mean sojourn time (the mean time an object stays in a motion type \cite{Schneider_GCPR_2013,BarShalom_book_2002}) or as stated in the work of Bar-Shalom \cite{BarShalom_book_2002}, an ad-hoc approach to fill the diagonals with values close to one. For the proposed RNN-based IMM filter surrogate (RNN-IMM), the basic architecture is a recurrent encoder-decoder model. The encoder takes the frame by frame input sequence $\mathcal{Z}$. The hidden state vector of the encoder is updated at each time step based on the previous hidden state and the current observation. The generated internal representation is used to predict mode probabilities ${\vec{\alpha}}^t$ at the current time step and ${\vec{x}}^t$.
With embedding of the current observations, the encoder can be defined as follows:
\begin{gather*}
\vec{e}^{t}_{encoder} = \text{EMB}(\vec{z}^{t}; W_{ee} ) \\
\vec{h}^{t}_{encoder} = \text{RNN}(\vec{h}^{t-1}_{encoder},\vec{e}^{t}_{encoder}; W_{encoder} ) \\
\hat{\vec{x}}^t,\vec{\alpha}^t_{logits} = \text{MLP}(\vec{h}^{t}_{encoder}; W_{en})\\
\hat{\vec{\alpha}}^t = \frac{\exp{(\vec{\alpha}^t_{logits}})}{\sum^{M}_{j=1} \exp{(\alpha^t_{logits, j}}) }\\
\label{eq:encoder}
\end{gather*}
Here, $\text{RNN}(\cdot)$ is the recurrent network, $\vec{h}$ the hidden state of the RNN, $\text{MLP}(\cdot)$ the multilayer perceptron, and $\text{EMB}(\cdot)$ an embedding layer. $W$ represents the weights and biases of the MLP, EMB or respectively RNN. The final state of the encoder can be expected to encode information about the track histories. For generating a trajectory distribution over dynamic modes, the encoder hidden state is appended to a one-hot encoded vector corresponding to specific maneuvers and the filtered current position. Instead of only filtering the position, the encoder could also be used to parametrize a mixture density output layer (MDL). The decoder of the model can be defined as follows:
\begin{gather*}
\vec{h}^{t}_{decoder} = \text{RNN}(\vec{h}^{t-1}_{decoder}[\vec{h}^{t}_{encoder}], \hat{\vec{x}}^t ,\vec{\alpha}^t ; W_{decoder} )\\
\hat{\mathcal{Y}} = \{ (\hat{\vec{\mu}}^{t}_{l}+ \hat{\vec{x}}^{t_{obs}}, \hat{\Sigma}^{t}_{l}, \hat{w}^{t}_{l}) | t= t_{obs}+1,\ldots,t_{pred} \} = \text{MLP}(\vec{h}^{t}_{decoder}; W_{de})
\label{eq:dencoder}
\end{gather*}
The decoder is used to parametrize a mixture density output layer (MDL) or rather $\Theta$ directly for several positions in the future (one distribution for every time step). Nevertheless, the overall RNN-IMM uses the trajectory prediction and dynamic classification jointly, the loss function for training is split into three parts.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node (image1) at (0,0.) {\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{LSTM_encoder-decoder.pdf}};
\node (image2) at (-1.12,1.85) { \includegraphics[width=0.1\textwidth]{man_stopping_2.png}};
\node[align=center] (note0) at (1.45,0.7){\small filtering $\vec{x}^{t}$};
\node[align=left] (note1) at (1.45,.){\small trajectory \\ encoding};
\node[align=left] (note2) at (1.45,-2.5){\small maneuver \\ encoding};
\node[align=left] (note0) at (-1.1,-2.6){\small $\vec{z}^{t}$};
\node[align=left] (note0) at (-2.3,-2.6){\small $\vec{z}^{t-1}$};
\node[align=left] (note0) at (-3.65,-2.6){\small $\vec{z}^{t-2}$};
\node[align=left] (note0) at (3.2,2.4){\small $\Theta_{m,1}$};
\node[align=left] (note0) at (4.3,2.1){\small $\Theta_{m,2}$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:red} Visualization of the RNN-based IMM filter surrogate (RNN-encoder-decoder network) for jointly predicting specific dynamic probabilities and corresponding future distributions of trajectory positions. The encoder predicts the dynamic probabilities and the filtered position for the current time step. The decoder uses the context vector and the position estimate to predict future pedestrian locations.}
\end{figure}
Dynamic classification is trained to mimimize the sum of cross-entropy losses of the different $M$ motion model classes:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z} )_{maneuver} = -\sum^{M}_{j=1} \alpha^t_{j,GT} \log ( \hat{\alpha}^t_{j} )
\label{eq:loss_funtion_maneuver}
\end{equation}
Additionally, the encoder is trained by minimizing the filtering loss $\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z})_{filter}$ in form of the mean squared error to the ground truth current pedestrian locations. In case the encoder should generate the parameter of a mixture of Gaussian or single Gaussian distribution, the negative log likelihood for the ground truth pedestrian locations can be minimized. Finally, the complete encoder-decoder is trained by minimizing the negative log likelihood for the ground truth future pedestrian locations conditioned under the performed maneuver class. The context vector is appended with the ground truth values of the dynamic model or maneuver classes for each training trajectory. This results in the following loss function:
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z})_{pred} &= - \log ( P_{\Theta}( \hat{\mathcal{Y}}|m_{GT},\mathcal{Z})P(m_{GT}|\mathcal{Z}))\\
\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{Z})_{pred} &= \sum_{t=t_{obs}+1}^{t_{pred}} -\log ( \sum^{L}_{l=1} \hat{w}_{l}^t \mathcal{N}( \vec{x}^{t} | \hat{\vec{\mu}}^{t}_{l}+ \vec{x}^{t_{obs}}, \hat{\Sigma}^{t}_{l}; m_{GT}) ) \\
\end{split}
\end{align}
The overall architecture is visualized in figure \ref{fig:red}. The context vector combines the encoding of the track history with the encoding of the alternating dynamic classes. Together with the filtered position, it is used as input for the decoder.
\section{Data Generation and Evaluation}
\label{sec:eval}
\vspace{-1.cm}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\vspace{-1.cm}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[fill=gray] (0,0) -- (0,2) -- (4,2) -- (4,0) -- cycle;
\draw[fill=gray!50] (4,0) -- (4,2) -- (5.45,2) -- (5.45,0) -- cycle;
\draw[ultra thick,loosely dashed,white] (2,0) -- (2,4);
\draw[thick,white] (4,0) -- (4,3);
\guy{(2.2, 0.5)}{90};
\draw (5.,1.0) [->, ultra thick, manred] to [out=180,in=0] (2.7,1.0);
\person{(4.5,0.5)}{90};
\end{tikzpicture} &
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[fill=gray] (0,0) -- (0,2) -- (4,2) -- (4,0) -- cycle;
\draw[fill=gray!50] (4,0) -- (4,2) -- (5.45,2) -- (5.45,0) -- cycle;
\draw[ultra thick,loosely dashed,white] (2,0) -- (2,4);
\draw[thick,white] (4,0) -- (4,3);
\guy{(3.7, 0.5)}{90};
\draw (5.,1.0) [->, ultra thick,mycyan] to [out=180,in=0] (4.2,1.0);
\person{(4.5,0.5)}{90};
\end{tikzpicture}
\\
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node (image1) at (0,0.) { \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{crossing_full.png}};
\draw [->, ultra thick, manred] (2.2,-0.1) to [out=180, in=0] (.15,0.2);
\draw[manred,rounded corners] (.0,0.52) rectangle (.3,-0.1);
\end{tikzpicture}&
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node (image2) at (0,0.0) {\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{stopping_full.png}};
\draw [->, ultra thick, mycyan] (2.2,0.) to [out=180, in=0] (1.1,0.2);
\draw[mycyan,rounded corners] (.9,0.7) rectangle (1.3,-0.3);
\end{tikzpicture}
\\
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node (image1) at (0,0.) { \includegraphics[height=0.23\textwidth,width=0.45\textwidth]{crossing_cut.png}};
\draw[manred,ultra thick,rounded corners] (1.4,0.6) rectangle (2.,-0.8);
\draw[manred,ultra thick,rounded corners] (.35,0.5) rectangle (1.,-0.7);
\draw[manred,ultra thick,rounded corners] (-.55,0.5) rectangle (-0.15,-0.6);
\draw[manred,ultra thick,rounded corners] (-2.,0.5) rectangle (-1.4,-0.55);
\end{tikzpicture}&
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node (image2) at (0,0.0) {\includegraphics[height=0.23\textwidth,width=0.45\textwidth]{stopping_combi_cut.png}};
\draw[mycyan,ultra thick,rounded corners] (1.7,1.1) rectangle (2.25,-1.2);
\draw[mycyan,ultra thick,rounded corners] (.25,0.9) rectangle (1.,-0.8);
\draw[mycyan,ultra thick,rounded corners] (-1.0,0.8) rectangle (-0.45,-0.6);
\draw[mycyan,ultra thick,rounded corners] (-2.2,0.8) rectangle (-1.65,-0.55);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:crossing_stopping} Illustration of typical pedestrian motions. The above images depict the two chosen maneuver classes of straight walking or rather crossing and stopping. The images on the left show a person crossing the street. The images on the right show a person changing from walking to standing at the curbside of the street. In particular changing from straight walking to stopping \cite{Schneider_GCPR_2013}.}
\end{figure}
This section consists of a brief evaluation of the proposed RNN-IMM. The evaluation is concerned with verifying the overall viability of the approach in maneuver situations. For initial results, a synthetic test condition is used in order to gain insight into the model behavior in different typical pedestrian motion types. A prototypical maneuver performed by a pedestrian, which has important implications for the field of intelligent vehicles and video surveillance is a stopping or deceleration maneuver.\\
\textbf{Data Generation and Reference Methods:} For the first mentioned context of intelligent vehicles, Schneider et al. \cite{Schneider_GCPR_2013} performed a comparative study on recursive Bayesian filters for pedestrian path prediction at short time horizons (below $2$ seconds). They applied different filters on typical pedestrian motion types. Although, the comparison was done on the Daimler path prediction dataset, we evaluate on synthetic data but make use of the provided real data to capture a similar condition.
Firstly, the Daimler path prediction dataset provides only a maximum amount of $23$ sequences for single motion types. As mentioned before, in order to avoid problems such as a limited number of training samples and to gain some insights into a controlled setup, synthetic data is used. Secondly, the location information is biased in the dataset. Since recursive Bayesian filters make in their standard formulation no use of the spatial context of a scene, this does not harm their mutual comparison. However, RNN-based prediction networks are able to capture spatially dependent behavior changes \cite{Hug_RFMI_2017}, thus a fair comparison is difficult to achieve. The evaluation on the Daimler dataset is done in an ego-motion compensated reference system. The frame rate of the camera system inside the recording vehicle is $16$ fps and it is taken over accordingly for our experiments. The pedestrians change their behavior abruptly. Therefore, the sensible time horizons are short. Here, $8$ ($0.5$ seconds) consecutive positions are observed, before predicting the next $8$ ($0.5s$ seconds), $12$ ($0.75$ seconds) and $16$ ($1$ second).\\
For generating synthetic trajectories of a basic maneuvering pedestrian, random agents are sampled from a Gaussian distribution according to a preferred pedestrian walking speed \cite{Teknomo_2016} ($\mathcal{N}(1,38 m,0.37m)$) from the distribution of starting positions of the corresponding Daimler dataset sequences. During a single trajectory simulation the agents can perform a stopping maneuver or cross the street. Figure \ref{fig:crossing_stopping} illustrates such maneuvers with example images from the Daimler dataset \cite{Schneider_GCPR_2013}. For mapping the pedestrian detections to a vehicle-motion compensated ground plane, Schneider et al. used on-board sensors for velocity and yaw rate and a stereo camera system to compute the median disparity. Due to the non-linear observation model based on a perceptive camera model, an inevitable linearized extension for the Kalman and IMM filter observation models are required. Here, the observation uncertainty of the position sensor is assumed to be Gaussian distributed $r^{t} \sim \mathcal{N}(0, 0.01m)$ in the compensated reference system. Thus, the standard formulation of the Bayesian filters are well suited for this task. For the stopping maneuver or rather the event of deceleration till standing, a mean sojourn time of $1$ second with a standard deviation of 0.1 seconds is used. As long as a person moves in a straight line at a reasonably constant speed, their dynamics can be captured with a Kalman filter using a constant velocity model. During the maneuver, the relation to one fixed process model describing the dynamics fails due to an additional deceleration. Similar to Schneider et al. \cite{Schneider_GCPR_2013} or Kooij et al. \cite{Kooij_ECCV_2014}, the reference IMM filter is set up by combining two basic models, in particular, the constant velocity (CV) and the constant acceleration (CA) model. For avoiding side effects due to independent motions in different directions, see for example \cite{Becker_JMTA_2018}, only the crossing direction, from the vehicle perspective, the lateral motion is considered.
Following the aforementioned explanations, the IMM-RNN is compared to an IMM filter with two motion models (CV, CA), a Kalman filter with a single CV model, a Kalman filter with a single CA model, and as baseline to a linear interpolation. Also correspondingly to Schneider et al., the process noise $q$ is determined by $Q(t) = Q_{0}(t)q$, where $q \in \{\sigma_{CV}, \sigma_{CA} \}$ are spectral densities (continuous time variances) of the process noise, describing the changes in velocity or respectively in acceleration over a sampling period $\Delta t$ (CV: $\sqrt{Q_{22}}=\sqrt{\Delta t \cdot q} $; CA: $\sqrt{Q_{33}}=\sqrt{\Delta t \cdot q} $, see for example \cite{saerkkae_2013}). Based on this process noise model, the optimal process noise parameters for the different chosen filters (IMM filter (CV, CA), Kalman filter CV, CA) on the Daimler dataset are for the two IMM filter models $\sigma_{IMM, CV}=0.70,\sigma_{IMM, CA}=0.80$ and for the single Kalman filters $\sigma_{CV}=0.77$ and $\sigma_{CA}=0.44$ \cite{Schneider_GCPR_2013}. These parameters are consistent with the suggested practical setting in Bar-Shalom \cite{BarShalom_book_2002} and the chosen sojourn time for the simulation.\\
As mentioned above, a definition of maneuver classes for pedestrians is harder to establish than for vehicles. Hence, the main interest is here to detect the deviation from a standard behavior, and whether the pedestrian is in a \emph{normal} mode. A set of deviation in velocity, deceleration, along with the tangential ground truth trajectory is used to assign a maneuver label to a time step of a single trajectory. Thus, the RNN-IMM and IMM filter have a similar basic dynamic model set description. As the distribution over the trajectories for the RNN-IMM is captured with a Gaussian mixture model, the maneuver description for a single model can still be multi-modal. Since the IMM filter predicts a multi-modal distribution in form of a combination of the uni-modal model specific prediction, in the presented results the RNN-IMM is set to also only predict conditioned on a single maneuver class a uni-modal Gaussian distribution.\\
\begin{figure}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node (image1) at (0,0) { \includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{Cross_Heat_01.png}};
\node [below of = image1,node distance=1.5cm] (x){$x$ in meters};
\node [left of = image1, node distance=2.8cm,rotate=90] (Y) {$y$ in meters};
\end{tikzpicture} &
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node (image2) at (0,0) { \includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{Stop_Heat_01.png}};
\node [below of = image1,node distance=1.5cm] (x){$x$ in meters};
\node [left of = image1, node distance=2.8cm,rotate=90] (Y) {$y$ in meters};
\end{tikzpicture}
\\
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node (image3) at (0,0) { \includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{Cross_Heat_02.png}};
\node [below of = image1,node distance=1.5cm] (x){$x$ in meters};
\node [left of = image1, node distance=2.8cm,rotate=90] (Y) {$y$ in meters};
\end{tikzpicture} &
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node (image4) at (0,0) { \includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{Stop_Heat_02.png}};
\node [below of = image1,node distance=1.5cm] (x){$x$ in meters};
\node [left of = image1, node distance=2.8cm,rotate=90] (Y) {$y$ in meters};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:rnn_man_results} Visualization of the predicted multi-modal distributions of future position as heatmap. (Left) Density plots for crossing or rather straight walking examples. (Right) Density plots for stopping examples in which the maximum of the predicted distribution is visible close to the last observation.}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Implementation Details:} The model has been implemented using \emph{Tensorflow} \cite{tensorflow} and is trained for $2000$ epochs using ADAM optimizer \cite{Kingma_ICLR_2015} with a decreasing learning rate, starting from $0.01$ with a learning rate decay of $0.95$ and a delay factor of $1/10$. During the learning rate adaption, the number of epochs is multiplied by the delay factor. For the experiments, the RNN variant Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) \cite{Hochreiter_NC_1997} is used.\\
\textbf{Results \& Analysis:} In figure \ref{fig:rnn_man_results}, predictions for two different preformed motion types are depicted for $8$ future positions weighted by the predicted maneuver probability. In the shown images the positions are normalized to start at the origin. The resulting multi-modal prediction is visualized as a heatmap. On the left, it can be seen that for a crossing sequence with straight walking the RNN-IMM mainly uses the corresponding straight walking model. On the right, where the deceleration started, the straight walking probability is visibly lower and the predicted distribution maximum is very close to the last observation.
For the quantitative evaluation, $1000$ noisy trajectories have been synthetically generated, where $80$ percent are used for training and $20$ percent for the comparison to the recursive Bayesian filters. The results are summarized in table \ref{tab:RNN_IMM_results}.\\
The performance is compared with the final displacement error (FDE) (see for example \cite{Pellegrini_ICCV_2009}) of the lateral motion (from the vehicle perspective) for three different time horizons, in particular $8$ steps ($0.5s$), $12$ steps ($0.75s$) and $16$ steps ($1s$). These results show that the presented RNN-IMM is able to faster capture the change in dynamic for the synthetically generated data. In terms of the single motion models (CV vs. CA), one can observe the benefits for the CA in capturing the deceleration. The IMM filter combines both and shows an improvement. Hence, the aim of this paper is more on highlighting the relation between traditional multiple model approaches and the suggested RNN-based IMM filter surrogate, it should be mentioned that RNN-based approaches are designed to receive input data for every time step, whereas Bayesian filters are well suited for handling missing observations. Especially with such a short initialization time, this can be crucial. One argument towards a learning based RNN-IMM is that we only choose the maneuver definition based on deviation of standard straight walking. The engineering task of finding the best model set up for IMM filters and their extensions can lead to an improved behavior (see for example Keller et al. \cite{Keller_TITS_2014}) in specific maneuver situations, but is also very tedious to find a good setting. It should also be mentioned that recent work like the approaches of Kooij et al. \cite{Kooij_JCV_2018} show options how to further improve the prediction performance by including scene context and using more cues than pedestrian point kinematics (e.g. head orientation, gaze, body tilt, articulated body information).\\
\begin{table}[h!]
\caption{Results for the comparison between the proposed RNN-IMM and an IMM filter with two motion models (CV, CA), a Kalman filter with a single CV model, a Kalman filter with a single CA model, and using linear interpolation on the simulated maneuver situations. The prediction is done for $8$, $12$, and $16$ time steps conditioned on $8$ observations for a frame rate of $16$ fps.}
\label{tab:RNN_IMM_results}
\rowcolors{2}{blue!5}{gray!10}
\def1.1{1.1}
\hspace*{-0cm}\begin{tabular}{ |c| c c | c c | c c|}
\hline
\rowcolor{white!10}
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{8/8} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{8/12} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{8/16 } \\
\rowcolor{white!10}
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{Approach} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{FDE [m]} & $\sigma_{\text{FDE}}$ [m] & \multicolumn{1}{c}{FDE [m]} & $\sigma_{\text{FDE}}$ [m] & FDE [m] & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\sigma_{\text{FDE}}$ [m] }\\
\hline
\rowcolor{red!10}
RNN-IMM & 0.0309 & 0.0404 & 0.0427 & 0.0817 & 0.0517 & 0.0941\\
\rowcolor{blue!10}
IMM filter (CV,CA) & 0.0674 & 0.0602 & 0.1188 & 0.1255 & 0.1862 & 0.1915\\
\rowcolor{blue!10}
Kalman filter (CA) & 0.0796 & 0.0638 & 0.1575 & 0.1137 & 0.2386 & 0.1696\\
\rowcolor{blue!10}
Kalman filter (CV) & 0.1578 & 0.1601 & 0.2890 & 0.2965 & 0.4701 & 0.4700\\
\rowcolor{blue!10}
Linear interpolation & 0.1587 & 0.1610 & 0.2903 & 0.2978 & 0.4724 & 0.4718\\
\hline
\end{tabular}\\
\centering
\end{table}
In summary, the presented RNN-IMM is able to also provide a confidence value $P(m_{i}|\mathcal{Z}) \overset{\wedge}{=} \alpha_{i}$ for the performed dynamic, but avoids modeling the dynamic transitions with a fixed transition probability matrix $P(m^{t}_{i}|m^{t-1}_{j})$. Similar to the provided mode probabilities of IMM filters, this can be used for further processing steps or rather applications (see for example \cite{Stierlin_ITSC_2012,Becker_SPIE_2015}). Further, instead of choosing the basic filter set, the prediction model is learned. In case there exists some well known model for describing the standard dynamic of the desired target, only deviations from the known dynamic can be used to define additional maneuver classes. This study on synthetically generated data shows, that by exploiting the connections between different views on maneuver prediction some perspectives on overcoming respective limitations can be gained.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
In this paper, an RNN-encoder-decoder model, which can be interpreted as an IMM filter surrogate, has been presented. The RNN-IMM is able to jointly predict specific motion probabilities and corresponding distributions of future pedestrian trajectory. The model capabilities were shown on synthetic data that were reflecting typical pedestrian maneuvers. By conditioning on specific dynamic models or rather deviation from standard behavior, the model makes it possible to generate additional information in terms of an assigned maneuver probability similar to an IMM filter, but reduces the amount of explicit modeling of filter parameters (e.g. the dynamic transitions matrix). Thus, the presented RNN-IMM helps to reduce the amount of hard-coded engineering of traditional multiple model filter such as the IMM filter.
\bibliographystyle{splncs04}
|
\chapter*{\centering \begin{normalsize}Abstract\end{normalsize}}
\thispagestyle{empty}
\begin{quotation}
\noindent
Finite energy pluripotential theory accommodates the variational theory of equations of complex Monge--Amp\`ere type arising in K\"ahler geometry. Recently it has been discovered that many of the potential spaces involved have a rich metric geometry, effectively turning the variational problems in question into problems of infinite dimensional convex optimization, yielding existence results for solutions of the underlying complex Monge--Amp\`ere equations. The purpose of this survey is to describe these developments from basic principles.
\end{quotation}
\clearpage
\tableofcontents
\setcounter{page}{1}
\chapter*{Preface}
\addcontentsline{toc}{chapter}{Preface}
A circle of problems, going back to Calabi \cite{clb}, asks to find K\"ahler metrics with special curvature properties on a compact K\"ahler manifold $(X,\omega)$. Of special interest are the \emph{K\"ahler--Einstein} (KE) metrics $\tilde \omega$, that are cohomologous to $\omega$, and whose Ricci curvature is proportional to the metric tensor, i.e.,
$$\Ric \tilde \omega = \lambda \tilde \omega.$$
Existence of such metrics on $(X,\omega)$ is only possible under cohomological restrictions, in particular the first Chern class needs to be a scalar multiple of the K\"ahler class $[\omega]$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: coh_cond}\tag{$\star$}
c_1(X) = \lambda [\omega].
\end{equation}
When $\lambda \leq 0$, by the work of Aubin and Yau it is always possible to find a unique KE metric on $(X,\omega)$ \cite{A,Y}. The case of Fano manifolds, structures that satisfy \eqref{eq: coh_cond} with $\lambda >0$, is much more intricate. In particular, the problem of finding KE metrics in this case is equivalent with solving the following global scalar equation of complex Monge--Amp\`ere type on $X$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: intr_KEeq}\tag{$\star\star$}
(\omega + i\del\dbar u)^n = e^{-\lambda u + f_0}\omega^n,
\end{equation}
where $f_0$ is a fixed smooth function on $X$.
The solution $u$ belongs to $\mathcal H_\omega$, the set of smooth functions (potentials) that satisfy $\omega + i\del\dbar u >0$, which is an open subset of $C^\infty(X)$. As is well known, this equation does not always admit a solution, and our desire is to characterize Fano manifolds that admit KE metrics.
Switching point of view, the KE problem has a very rich \emph{variational} theory as well. Indeed, Mabuchi and Ding \cite{m, ding} introduced functionals
$$\mathcal K: \mathcal H_\omega \to \Bbb R \ \textup{ and } \ \mathcal F: \mathcal H_\omega \to \Bbb R$$ whose minimizers are exactly the KE potentials, the solutions of \eqref{eq: intr_KEeq} (see \eqref{eq: F_def} and \eqref{eq: Ken_def} for precise definition of these functionals). As a result, KE metrics exist if and only if the minimizer set of $\mathcal K$ (or $\mathcal F$) is non--empty. Along these lines we ask ourselves: what conditions guarantee existence/uniqueness of minimizers? Our source of inspiration will be the following elementary finite--dimensional result, which will allow to turn the variational approach into a problem of infinite--dimensional \emph{convex optimization}:
\begin{theorem*} Suppose $F:\Bbb R^n \to \Bbb R$ is a strictly convex functional. If $F$ has a minimizer it has to be unique. Regarding the existence, the following are equivalent:\vspace{0.1cm}\\
(i) $F$ has a (unique) minimizer $x_0 \in \Bbb R$.\\
(ii) $F$ is proper, in the sense that there exists $C,D>0$ such that $F(x) \geq C|x| -D, \ x \in \Bbb R$.
\end{theorem*}
We give a sketch of the elementary proof. Uniqueness of minimizers is a consequence of strict convexity. That properness of $F$ implies existence of a minimizer follows from the fact that a bounded $F$--minimizing sequence subconverges to some $x_0 \in \Bbb R$, and that convex functions are continuous. That existence of a (unique) minimizer $x_0 \in \Bbb R$ implies properness of $F$ follows from the fact that the unit sphere $\Bbb S^{n-1}(x_0, 1)$ is compact, hence $C:=\inf_{\Bbb S^{n-1}(x_0, 1)}(F(x) - F(x_0))=F(y)-F(x_0)$ for some $y \in \Bbb S^{n-1}(x_0, 1)$. Uniqueness of minimizers implies that $C>0$. Using convexity of $F$, one concludes that $F(x) \geq C|x|-D$ for some $D>0$.
The above simple argument already sheds light on what needs to be accomplished in our infinite dimensional setting to obtain an analogous result for existence/uniqueness of KE metrics. First, we need to understand the convexity of $\mathcal K$ and $\mathcal F$. Second, even in the above short argument we have used twice that $\Bbb R^n$ is complete. Consequently, an adequate metric structure needs to be chosen on $\mathcal H_\omega$, and its completion needs to be understood. Third, (pre)compactness of spheres/balls in this new metric geometry needs to be explored.
Regarding convexity, unfortunately $\mathcal K$ and $\mathcal F$ are not convex along the straight line segments of $\mathcal H_\omega$. In order to address this, Mabuchi, Semmes and Donaldson independently introduced a non-positively curved Riemannian $L^2$ type metric on $\mathcal H_\omega$ that produces geodesics along which $\mathcal K$ and $\mathcal F$ are indeed convex \cite{m,s,do}. Inspired from this, a careful analysis of infinite dimensional spaces led Bando--Mabuchi to prove uniqueness of KE metrics \cite{bm}, and later Berman--Berndtsson to discover even more general uniqueness results \cite{bb}.
On the other hand, there is strong evidence to suggest that the $L^2$ geometry of Mabuchi--Semmes--Donaldson alluded to above does not have the right compactness properties to allow for a characterization of existence of KE metrics. In order to address this, one needs to introduce more general $L^p$ type Finsler metrics on $\mathcal H_\omega$ and compute the metric completion of the related path length metric spaces $(\mathcal H_\omega,d_p)$ \cite{da1,da2}.
After sufficient metric theory is developed, it is apparent that the $L^1$ geometry of $\mathcal H_\omega$ will be the one we should focus on. Indeed, sublevel sets of $\mathcal K$ restricted to spheres/balls are $d_1$--precompact, allowing to establish an equivalence between existence of KE metrics and $d_1$--properness of $\mathcal K$ and $\mathcal F$. Lastly, $d_1$--properness can be expressed using simple analytic means. This allowed the author and Y.A. Rubinstein to verify numerous related conjectures of Tian \cite{dr2} going back to the nineties \cite{t1,t3}.
\vspace{-0.3cm}\paragraph{Structure of the survey.} The aim of this work is to give a self contained introduction to special K\"ahler metrics using pluripotential theory/infinite--dimensional geometry.
In Chapter 1, we give a very brief introduction to Orlicz spaces that are generalizations of the classical $L^p$ spaces. Our treatment will be rather minimalistic and we refer to \cite{rr} for a complete treatment.
In Chapter 2, we develop some background in finite energy pluripotential theory, necessary for later developments, closely following the original treatises of Guedj--Zeriahi and collaborators \cite{gz05,gz,BBGZ,BBEGZ}, that were inspired by work of Cegrell \cite{Ce} in the local case. We refer to these works for a comprehensive treatment, as well as the recent excellent textbook \cite{gzbook}.
Chapter 3 contains the main technical machinery presented in this work. Here we introduce the $L^p$ Finsler geometry of the space of K\"ahler potentials $\mathcal H_\omega$, and compute the metric completion of this space with respect to the corresponding path length metrics $d_p$. The $d_p$--completions of $\mathcal H_\omega$ will be identified with $\mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$, the finite energy spaces of Guedj--Zeriahi described in the previous chapter (Theorem \ref{thm: EpComplete}). In particular, we can endow these spaces with a rich \emph{metric geometry}, inspiring the title of this work.
In Chapter 4 we discuss applications to existence/uniqueness of KE metrics on Fano manifolds. First we describe an abstract properness/existence principle (Theorem \ref{thm: ExistencePrinc}) that adapts the above finite--dimensional Theorem to our infinite--dimensional setting. As we verify the assumptions of this principle, we will present self contained proofs of the Bando--Mabuchi uniqueness theorem (Theorem \ref{thm: BMuniqueness}) \cite{bm} and the Matsushima theorem about reductivity of the automorphism group of a KE manifold (Proposition \ref{prop: Matsushima_thm}) \cite{mat}. After this, in Theorem \ref{thm: F_func_properness} and Theorem \ref{thm: K-energy_properness} we resolve different versions of Tian's conjectures \cite{t1,t3} characterizing existence of KE metrics in terms of energy properness, following \cite{dr2}.
\vspace{-0.3cm}\paragraph{Prerequisites.} An effort has been made to keep prerequisites at a minimum. However due to size constraints, such requirements on part of the reader are inevitable. We assume that our reader is familiar with the basics of Bedford--Taylor theory of the complex Monge--Amp\`ere operator. Mastery of \cite[Chapters I-III]{bl3} or \cite[Chapter I and Chapter III.1-3]{De} is more then sufficient, and for a thorough treatment we highly recommend the recent textbook \cite{gzbook}. We also assume that our reader is familiar with the basics of K\"ahler geometry, though we devote a section in the appendix to introduce our terminology, and recall some of the essentials. For a comprehensive introduction into K\"ahler geometry we refer the reader to the recent textbook \cite{sze}, as well as \cite{De,we}.
Though our main focus is the pluripotential theoretic point of view, some results in this survey rest on important regularity theorems regarding equations of complex Monge--Amp\`ere type. Due to space constraints we cannot present a detailed proof of these theorems, but we will isolate their statements and keep them at a minimum, while providing precise references at all times.
\vspace{-0.3cm}\paragraph{Relation to other works.} As stressed above, our focus in this work is on self--contained treatment of the chosen topics. On the down side, we could not devote enough space to the vast historical developments of the subject, and for such a treatment we refer to the survey \cite{r2}, that discusses similar topics using a more chronological approach.
Without a doubt the choice of topics represent our bias and limitations, and many important recent developments could not be surveyed. In particular, recent breakthroughs on K--stability (the work of Chen--Donaldson--Sun \cite{cds}, Tian \cite{t2}, Chen--Wang--Sun \cite{cws}, Berman--Boucksom--Jonsson \cite{bbj}) could not be presented, and we refer to \cite{do2,t5} for recent surveys on this topic. For results about the quantization of the geometry of the space of K\"ahler metrics, we refer to the original papers \cite{br2,CS12,do1,PS06,PS07,dlr}, as well as the survey \cite{PS09} along with references therein.
Geometric flows could not be discussed either, and we refer to \cite{beg,BBEGZ,bdl1,dh, st1,st2} for work on the Ricci and Calabi flows that uses the theoretical machinery described in this survey.
The relation with constant scalar curvature K\"ahler (csck) metrics is also not elaborated. A preliminary version of this memoir appeared on the website of the author in the early months of 2017. Since then a number of important works have appeared building on the topics presented in this work: Chen--Cheng cracked the PDE theory of the csck equation \cite{cc2,cc3}, allowing to fully prove a converse of a theorem by Berman--Darvas--Lu \cite{bdl2}. Very recently He--Li pointed out that the contents of this survey generalize to Sasakian manifolds \cite{hl18}, paving the way to existence theorems for canonical metrics in that context as well.
\vspace{-0.3cm}\paragraph{Acknowledgments.} I thank W. He, L. Lempert, J. Li, C.H. Lu, Y.A. Rubinstein, K. Smith, V. Tosatti and the anonymous referees for their suggested corrections, careful remarks, and precisions. Also, I thank the students of MATH868D at the University of Maryland for their intriguing questions and relentless interest throughout the Fall of 2016. Chapter 3 is partly based on work done as a graduate student at Purdue University, and I am indebted to L. Lempert for encouragement and guidance. Chapter 4 surveys to some extent joint work with Y. Rubinstein, and I am grateful for his mentorship over the years. This research was partially supported by
NSF grant DMS-1610202 and BSF grant 2012236.
\chapter{A primer on Orlicz spaces}
Plainly speaking, Orlicz spaces are generalizations of $L^p$ Banach spaces. As we will see in our later study, we will prefer working with Orlicz norms over $L^p$ norms, since a careful choice of weight makes Orlicz norms smooth away from the origin. The same cannot be said about $L^p$ norms. We give here a brief and self-contained introduction, only touching on aspects that will be needed later. For a more thorough treatment we refer to \cite{rr}.
Suppose $(\Omega,\Sigma, \mu)$ is a measure space with $\mu(\Omega)=1$ and $(\chi,\chi^*)$ is a complementary pair of {Young weights}. This means that $\chi:\Bbb R \to \Bbb R^+ \cup \{ \infty \}$ is convex, even, lower semi-continuous (lsc) and satisfies the normalizing conditions
$$\chi(0)=0, \ \ 1 \in \partial \chi(1).$$
Recall that $\partial \chi(l) \subset \Bbb R$ is the set of subgradients to $\chi$ at $l$, i.e., $v \in \partial \chi(l)$ if and only if $\chi(l) + v h \leq \chi(l+h), \ h \in \Bbb R$. As described, $\chi$ is simply a \emph{normalized Young weight}. The complement $\chi^*$ is the Legendre transform of $\chi$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Legendre_trans_def}
\chi^*(h) = \sup_{l \in \Bbb R} (lh - \chi(l)).
\end{equation}
Using convexity of $\chi$ and the above identity, one can verify that $\chi^*$ is also a normalized Young weight. Additionally $(\chi,\chi^*)$ satisfies the \emph{Young identity} and \emph{inequality}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: YoungIdIneq}
\chi(a) + \chi^*(\chi'(a))=a\chi'(a), \ \chi(a) + \chi^*(b) \geq ab, \ a,b \in \Bbb R, \ \chi'(a) \in \partial \chi(a),
\end{equation}
in particular, due to our normalization: $\chi(1) + \chi^*(1)=1$.
The most typical example to keep in mind is the pair $\chi_p(l)=|l|^p/p$ and $\chi^*_p(l)=|l|^q/q$, where $p,q > 1$ and $1/p + 1/q = 1$.
Let $L^\chi(\mu)$ be the following space of measurable functions:
$$L^\chi(\mu)=\Big\{ f:\Omega \to \Bbb R \cup \{ \infty,-\infty\}: \ \exists r >0 \textup{ s.t. } \int_\Omega \chi(rf) d\mu < \infty\Big\}.$$
One can introduce the following norm on $L^\chi(\mu)$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: OrliczNormDef}
\|f\|_{\chi,\mu}=\inf \Big\{ r > 0 : \ \int_\Omega \chi\Big(\frac{f}{r}\Big) d\mu \leq \chi(1) \Big\}.
\end{equation}
The set $\{f \in L^\chi(\mu): \int_\Omega \chi(f) d\mu \leq \chi(1)\}$ is convex and symmetric in $L^\chi(\mu)$, hence $\|\cdot\|_{\chi,\mu}$ is nothing but the Minkowski seminorm of this set. This is the content of the following lemma:
\begin{lemma} Suppose $f,g \in L^\chi(\mu)$. Then $\| f+ g\|_{\chi,\mu} \leq \| f\|_{\chi,\mu} + \| g\|_{\chi,\mu}.$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}Suppose $\int_\Omega \chi(f/r_1)d\mu\leq \chi(1), \ \int_\Omega \chi(g/r_2)d\mu \leq \chi(1)$ for some $r_1,r_2 > 0$. Convexity of $\chi$ implies that
\begin{flalign}
\int_\Omega \chi\Big(\frac{f+g}{r_1 + r_2}\Big) d\mu \leq \frac{r_1}{r_1 + r_2}\int_\Omega \chi\Big(\frac{f}{r_1}\Big) d\mu + \frac{r_2}{r_1 + r_2}\int_\Omega \chi\Big(\frac{g}{r_2}\Big) d\mu \leq \chi(1).
\end{flalign}
Hence $\|f+g \|_{\chi,\mu} \leq r_1 + r_2$, finishing the argument.
\end{proof}
\noindent Together with the previous one, the next lemma implies that $(L^\chi(\mu),\| \cdot \|_{\chi,\mu})$ is a normed space:
\begin{lemma} Suppose $f \in L^\chi(\mu)$. Then $\| f\|_{\chi,\mu} =0$ implies that $f=0$ a.e. with respect to $\mu$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} As $1 \in \partial \chi(1)$ and $\chi \geq 0$, it follows that
\begin{equation}
l \leq \chi(1) + l \leq \chi(1 + l) \textup{ for all } l \geq 0.\label{eq: chi_ineq}
\end{equation}
As a consequence of this inequality, $L^\chi(\mu) \subset L^1(\mu)$. Also, since $\|f \|_{\chi,\mu}=0$, it follows that $\int_\Omega \chi(n f) d\mu \leq \chi(1)$ for all $n \in \Bbb N$. By \eqref{eq: chi_ineq} we can write:
$$ \int_{\{ n|f| >1 \}} \Big(|f| - \frac{1}{n}\Big)d\mu \leq \int_{\{ n|f| >1\}} \frac{\chi(n |f|)}{n} d\mu \leq \int_\Omega \frac{\chi(n f)}{n} d\mu \leq \frac{\chi(1)}{n}.$$
Applying the dominated convergence theorem to this inequality gives $\int_{|f| > 0}|f|d\mu =0$, finishing the proof.
\end{proof}
Though we will not make use of it, one can also show that $(L^\chi(\mu),\| \cdot \|_{\chi,\mu})$ is complete, hence it is a Banach space (see \cite[Theorem 3.3.10]{rr}). The reason we work with a complementary pair of Young weights is because in this setting the H\"older inequality holds:
\begin{proposition}\label{prop: Holder} For $f \in L^\chi(\mu)$ and $g \in L^{\chi^*}(\mu)$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq: HolderIneq}
\int_\Omega fg d\mu \leq \|f\|_{\chi,\mu} \|g\|_{\chi^*,\mu}, \ f \in L^\chi(\mu), \ g \in L^{\chi^*}(\mu).
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} Let $r_1 > \|f\|_{\chi,\mu}$ and $r_2 > \|g\|_{\chi^*,\mu}$. Using both the Young inequality and the identity \eqref{eq: YoungIdIneq}, \eqref{eq: HolderIneq} follows in the following manner:
$$\int_\Omega \frac{fg}{r_1r_2} d\mu \leq \int_\Omega \chi\Big(\frac{f}{r_1}\Big) d\mu + \int_\Omega \chi^*\Big(\frac{g}{r_2}\Big) d\mu \leq \chi(1) + \chi^*(1)=1. \vspace{-0.2in}$$
\end{proof}
\noindent Orlicz spaces can be quite general and in our study we will be interested in spaces whose normalized Young weight is finite and satisfies the growth estimate
\begin{equation}\label{eq: GrowthEst}
l\chi'(l) \leq p\chi(l), \ l >0,
\end{equation}
for some $p \geq 1$. To clarify, $\chi'(l)$ is just an arbitrary subgradient of $\chi$ at $l$. For such weights we write $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p$, following the notation of \cite{gz}. As it turns out, weights $\chi$ that satisfy \eqref{eq: GrowthEst} can be thought of as distant cousins of the homogeneous $L^p$ weight $|l|^p/p \in \mathcal W^+_p$:
\begin{proposition} For $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p, \ p \geq 1$ and $0 < \varepsilon < 1$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq: GrowthControl}
\varepsilon^p \chi(l) \leq \chi(\varepsilon l) \leq \varepsilon \chi(l), \ l > 0.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The second estimate follows from convexity of $\chi$. For the first estimate we notice that for any $\delta >0$ the weight $\chi_\delta(l) := \chi(l) + \delta|l|$ also satisfies \eqref{eq: GrowthEst}. As $\chi_{\delta}(h) >0$ for $h >0$, we can integrate $\chi'_\delta(h)/\chi_\delta(h) \leq p/h$ from $\varepsilon l$ to $l$ to obtain:
$$\varepsilon^p \chi_\delta(l) \leq \chi_\delta(\varepsilon l).$$
Letting $\delta \to 0$ the desired estimate follows.
\end{proof}
Estimate \eqref{eq: GrowthControl} immediately implies that for $f \in L^\chi(\mu)$ the function $l \to \int_\Omega \chi(l f)d\mu$ is continuous, hence we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq: OrliczNormId}
\|f\|_{\chi,\mu}=\alpha>0 \textup{ if and only if } \int_\Omega \chi\Big( \frac{f}{\alpha}\Big)d\mu=\chi(1).
\end{equation}
To simplify future notation, we introduce the increasing functions
$$M_p(l) = \max\{l,l^p\}, \ \ m_p(l) = \min\{l,l^p\},$$ for $p >0, l \geq 0$. Observe that $M_p \circ m_{1/p}(l) = m_p \circ M_{1/p}(l)=l$. As a consequence of \eqref{eq: GrowthControl} and \eqref{eq: OrliczNormId}, we immediately obtain the following estimates, characterizing Orlicz norm convergence:
\begin{proposition} \label{prop: NormIntegralEst} If $\chi \in \mathcal W_p^+$ and $f \in L^\chi(\mu)$ then
\begin{equation}
m_p(\|f\|_{\chi,\mu}) \leq \frac{\int_\Omega \chi(f)d\mu}{\chi(1)} \leq M_p(\|f\|_{\chi,\mu}).
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
m_{1/p}\Big(\frac{\int_\Omega \chi(f)d\mu}{\chi(1)}\Big) \leq \|f\|_{\chi,\mu} \leq M_{1/p}\Big(\frac{\int_\Omega \chi(f)d\mu}{\chi(1)}\Big).
\end{equation}
As a result, for a sequence $\{ f_j\}_{j \in \Bbb N}$ we have $\|f_j\|_{\chi,\mu} \to 0$ if and only if $\int_\Omega \chi(f_j)d\mu \to 0$. Also, $\|f_j\|_{\chi,\mu} \to N$ for $N > 0$ if and only if $\int_\Omega \chi(f_j/N)d\mu \to \chi(1)$.
\end{proposition}
Later in this survey we will need to approximate certain Orlicz norms with Orlicz norms having \emph{smooth} $\mathcal W^+_p$-weights. The following two approximation results, which are by no means optimal, will be useful in our treatment:
\begin{proposition} \label{prop: approx_lemma}Suppose $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p$ and $\{\chi_k \}_{k \in \Bbb N}$ is a sequence of normalized Young weights that converges uniformly on compacts to $\chi.$ Let $f$ be a bounded $\mu$--measurable function on $X$. Then $f \in L^\chi(\mu),L^{\chi_k}(\mu), \ k \in \Bbb N$ and we have that
$$\lim_{k \to +\infty}\| f\|_{\chi_k,\mu} = \| f\|_{\chi,\mu}.$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} Suppose $N=\| f\|_{\chi,\mu}$. If $N=0$, then $f=0$ a.e. with respect to $\mu$ implying that $\| f\|_{\chi_k,\mu} = \| f\|_{\chi,\mu}=0$. So we assume that $N >0$. As $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p$, by \eqref{eq: OrliczNormId}, for any $\varepsilon >0$ there exists $\delta >0$ such that
$$\int_X \chi\Big(\frac{f}{(1+\varepsilon)N}\Big) d\mu<\chi(1)-2\delta< \chi(1) <\chi(1)+2\delta<\int_X \chi\Big(\frac{f}{(1-\varepsilon)N}\Big) d\mu.$$
As $\chi_k$ tends uniformly on compacts to $\chi$, $f$ is bounded and $\mu(X)=1$, it follows from the dominated convergence theorem that for $k$ big enough we have
$$\int_X \chi_k\Big(\frac{f}{(1+\varepsilon)N}\Big) d\mu<\chi_k(1)-\delta< \chi_k(1) <\chi_k(1)+\delta<\int_X \chi_k\Big(\frac{f}{(1-\varepsilon)N}\Big) d\mu.$$
This implies that $(1-\varepsilon)N \leq \| f\|_{\chi_k,\mu} \leq (1+\varepsilon)N$, from which the conclusion follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition} \label{prop: approx_lemma2}Given $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p$, there exists $\chi_k \in \mathcal W^+_{p_k} \cap C^\infty(\Bbb R),$ $k \in \Bbb N$, with $\{p_k\}_k$ possibly unbounded, such that $\chi_k \to \chi$ uniformly on compacts.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} There is great freedom in constructing the sequence $\chi_k$. First we smoothen and normalize $\chi$, introducing the sequence $\tilde \chi_k$ in the process:
$$\tilde \chi_k(l) = (\delta_{k} \star \chi)(h_k l) - (\delta_{k} \star \chi)(0), \ l \in \Bbb R, k \in \Bbb N^*.$$
Here $\delta$ is a typical choice of bump function that is smooth, even, has support in $(-1,1)$, and $\int_\Bbb R \delta(t)dt =1$. Accordingly, $\delta_k(\cdot):=k \delta(k(\cdot))$, and $h_k >0$ is chosen in such a way that $\tilde \chi_k$ becomes normalized ($\tilde \chi_k(0)=0$ and $\tilde \chi_k'(1)=1$). As $\chi$ is normalized it follows that $\tilde \chi'_k(1 - \frac{1}{k}) \leq 1 \leq \tilde \chi'_k(1 + \frac{1}{k})$. In particular,
$1-1/k \leq h_k \leq 1 +1/k$, hence the $\tilde \chi_k$ are normalized Young weights that converge to $\chi$ uniformly on compacts.
As $\chi$ is strictly increasing on $\Bbb R^+$, so is each $\tilde \chi_k$, but
our construction does not seem to guarantee that $\tilde \chi_k \in \mathcal W^+_{p_k}$ for some $p_k \geq 1$. This can be fixed by changing smoothly the values of $\tilde \chi_k$ on the sets $|x| < 1/k$ and $|x| > k$ in such a manner that the altered weights $\chi_k$ satisfy the estimate
$$l \chi'_k(l) \leq p_k \chi_k(l), \ l >0,$$
for some $p_k \geq 1$. Since $\tilde \chi_k'(t)>0, \ t >0$ and $\tilde \chi'_k(0)=0$, this can be done easily.
The sequence $\{\chi_k\}_k$ thus obtained satisfies the required properties.
\end{proof}
\chapter{Finite energy pluripotential theory on K\"ahler manifolds}
In this section we introduce the basics of finite energy pluripotential theory on K\"ahler manifolds. Our treatment is by no means comprehensive and we refer the readers to \cite[Chapter 8-10]{gzbook} for a more elaborate study. Our short introduction closely follows \cite{gz} and \cite{da1}. More precisely, Sections 2.1--2.3 are based on \cite{gz}, and Section 2.4 is based on \cite{da1}.
The \emph{plurifine} topology of an open set $U \subset \Bbb C^n$ is the coarsest topology making all plurisubharmonic (psh) functions on $U$ continuous. Clearly, the resulting topology on $U$ is finer then the Euclidean one. The motivating result behind this notion is that of Bedford--Taylor \cite{BT1}, according to which the complex Monge--Amp\`ere operator is local with respect to the plurifine topology, i.e., if $\phi,\psi \in \textup{PSH}\cap L^\infty_{\textup{loc}}(U)$ and $V \subset U$ is plurifine open such that $\phi|_V=\psi|_V$, then
\begin{equation}\label{eq: GZ_MP_local}
\mathbbm{1}_{V}(i\del\dbar \phi)^n=\mathbbm{1}_{V}(i\del\dbar \psi)^n.
\end{equation}
When dealing with a $n$ dimensional K\"ahler manifold $(X,\omega)$, the largest class of potentials one can consider is that of $\omega$-\emph{psh} functions:
$$\textup{PSH}(X,\omega)=\{ u \in L^1(X), \ u \textup{ is usc and } \omega_u := \omega + i\del\dbar u \geq 0 \textup { as currents} \}.$$
In practical terms, $u \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ means that $g + u|_U \in \textup{PSH}(U)$, for all open sets $U \subset X$ on which the metric $\omega$ can be written as $\omega = i\del\dbar g, \ g \in C^\infty(U)$.
Given the local nature of \eqref{eq: GZ_MP_local}, it generalizes to K\"ahler manifolds in a straightforward manner, and in particular we have the following identity for $u,v \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \cap L^\infty$ that we will use numerous times below:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: GZ_MP}
\mathbbm{1}_{\{u>v\}}\omega_{\max(u,v)}^n=\mathbbm{1}_{\{u>v\}}\omega_u^n.
\end{equation}
\section{Full mass $\omega$-psh functions}
One of the cornerstones of Bedford--Taylor theory is associating a complex Monge--Amp\`ere measure to bounded psh functions. Their construction generalizes to elements of $\textup{PSH}(X,\omega)\cap L^\infty$ in a straightforward manner.
As it turns out, it is possible to generalize the Bedford--Taylor construction to all elements of $\textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$, as we describe now. Let $v \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ and by $v_h = \max (v,-h) \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \cap L^\infty, \ h \in \Bbb R$ we denote the \emph{canonical cutoffs} of $v$. If $h_1 < h_2$ then \eqref{eq: GZ_MP} implies that
$$\mathbbm{1}_{\{v>-h_1\}}\omega_{v_{h_1}}^n=\mathbbm{1}_{\{v>-h_1\}}\omega_{v_{h_2}}^n \leq \mathbbm{1}_{\{v>-h_2\}}\omega_{ v_{h_2}}^n,
$$
hence $\{ \mathbbm{1}_{\{v>-h\}} \omega_{v_h}^n\}_h$ is an increasing sequence of Borel measures on $X$. This leads to the following natural defintion of $\omega_v^n$, that generalizes the Bedford--Taylor construction:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: CMA_general_def}
\omega_v^n := \lim_{h \to \infty} \mathbbm{1}_{\{v>-h\}} \omega_{v_h}^n.
\end{equation}
This definition means that $\int_B \omega_v^n = \lim_{h \to \infty} \int_B \mathbbm{1}_{\{v>-h\}} \omega_{v_h}^n$ for all Borel sets $B \subset X$, hence it is stronger then simply saying that $\omega_v^n$ is the weak limit of $\mathbbm{1}_{\{v>-h\}} \omega_{v_h}^n$.
Before we examine this construction more closely, let us recall a few facts about smooth elements of $\textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$. Of great importance in this work is the set of smooth \emph{K\"ahler potentials}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: H_o_def}
\mathcal H_\omega = \{u \in C^\infty(X), \ \omega + i\del\dbar u >0 \}.
\end{equation}
Clearly, $\mathcal H_\omega \subset \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ and in fact any element of $\textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ can be approximated by a decreasing sequence in $\mathcal H_\omega$:
\begin{theorem}[\cite{bk}] \label{thm: BK_approx} Given $u \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$, there exists a decreasing sequence $\{u_k\}_k \subset \mathcal H_\omega$ such that $u_k \searrow u$.
\end{theorem}
We give a proof of this result in Appendix A.2. Among other things, this theorem implies that the total volume of $X$ is the same for all currents $\omega_u$ with bounded potential:
\begin{lemma} \label{lem: const_volume_lem} if $v \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \cap L^\infty$, then $\int_X \omega_v^n = \int_X \omega^n =: \textup{Vol}(X)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} By an application of Stokes theorem, the statement holds for $v \in \mathcal H_\omega$. The general result follows after we approximate $v \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \cap L^\infty$ with a decreasing sequence $v_k \in \mathcal H_\omega$ (Theorem \ref{thm: BK_approx}), and we use Bedford--Taylor theory (\cite[Theorem 2.2.5]{bl3}) to conclude that $\omega_{v_k}^n \to \omega_v^n$ weakly.
\end{proof}
In contrast with the above, given our definition \eqref{eq: CMA_general_def}, it is clear that we only have $\int_X\omega_v^n \leq \textup{Vol}(X)$ for $v \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$. This leads to the natural definition of $\omega$-psh functions of \emph{full mass}:
$$\mathcal E(X,\omega) := \{v \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \textup{ s.t. } \int_X \omega_v^n = \textup{Vol}(X) \}.$$
Though $\textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \cap L^\infty \subsetneq \mathcal E(X,\omega)$ (see the examples of Section 2.3), many of the properties that hold for bounded $\omega$-psh functions, still hold for (unbounded) elements of $\mathcal E(X,\omega)$ as well, like the \emph{comparison principle}:
\begin{proposition}\textup{\cite[Theorem 1.5]{gz}}\label{prop: comp_princ_E} Suppose $u,v \in \mathcal E(X,\omega)$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{eq: comp_princ_E}
\int_{\{v < u\}}\omega_u^n \leq \int_{\{v < u\}}\omega_v^n.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} First we show \eqref{eq: comp_princ_E} for $u,v$ bounded. Using \eqref{eq: GZ_MP} we can write:
\begin{flalign*}
\int_{\{v < u\}}\omega_u^n =& \int_{\{v < u\}}\omega_{\max(u,v)}^n=\int_X \omega_{\max(u,v)}^n - \int_{\{ u \leq v\}} \omega_{\max(u,v)}^n \\
\leq& \int_X \omega_{\max(u,v)}^n - \int_{\{ u < v\}} \omega_{\max(u,v)}^n.
\end{flalign*}
Using Lemma \ref{lem: const_volume_lem} and \eqref{eq: GZ_MP} we can continue to write:
$$\int_{\{v<u\}}\omega_u^n \leq \int_X \omega_{v}^n - \int_{\{ u < v\}} \omega_{v}^n = \int_{\{v\leq u\}}\omega_v^n.$$
Noticing that $\{ v < u\} = \cup_{\varepsilon > 0} \{v + \varepsilon < u\}=\cup_{\varepsilon > 0} \{v + \varepsilon \leq u\}$, we can replace $v$ with $v + \varepsilon$ in the above inequality and let $\varepsilon \to 0$ to obtain \eqref{eq: comp_princ_E} for bounded potentials.
In general, let $u_l = \max(u,-l), v_k=\max(u,-k), \ l,k \in \Bbb N$ be the canonical cutoffs of $u,v$. For these, by the above we have
$\int_{\{v_l < u_k\}} \omega_{u_k}^n \leq \int_{\{v_l < u_k\}} \omega_{v_l}^n$. This inequality together with the inclusions $\{ v_l < u \} \subset \{v_l < u_k \} \subset \{v < u_k \}$ gives
$$\int_{\{v_l < u\}} \omega_{u_k}^n \leq \int_{\{v < u_k\}} \omega_{v_l}^n.$$
We can let $l \to \infty$, and using the definition of $\omega_{v_l}^n$ from \eqref{eq: CMA_general_def} it follows that $\int_{\{v < u\}} \omega_{u_k}^n \leq \int_{\{v < u_k\}} \omega_{v}^n.$ Now letting $k \to \infty$ and using again \eqref{eq: CMA_general_def} we obtain
$$\int_{\{v < u\}} \omega_{u}^n \leq \int_{\{v \leq u\}} \omega_{v}^n.$$
As in the bounded case, replacing $v$ with $v + \varepsilon$ in the above inequality, and then taking the limit $\varepsilon \to 0$ yields \eqref{eq: comp_princ_E}.
\end{proof}
Of great importance in what follows will be the \emph{monotonicity property} of $\mathcal E(X,\omega)$:
\begin{proposition}\textup{\cite[Proposition 1.6]{gz}} \label{prop: monotonicity_E} Suppose $u \in \mathcal E(X,\omega)$ and $v \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$. If $u \leq v$ then $v \in \mathcal E(X,\omega)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} Set $\psi := v/2$. We can assume without loss of generality that $u \leq v < -2$, hence $\psi < -1$. This choice of normalization allows to write the following inclusions for the canonical cutoffs $u_j,v_j,\psi_j$:
$$\{\psi \leq -j \}=\{\psi_j \leq -j \} \subset \{u_{2j} < \psi_j -j +1\} \subset \{u_{2j} \leq -j \}.$$
Using these inclusions and the comparison principle (Proposition \ref{prop: comp_princ_E}) we conclude:
$$\int_{\{\psi_j \leq -j\}}\omega_{\psi_j}^n \leq \int_{\{u_{2j} < \psi_j -j +1\}}\omega_{\psi_j}^n \leq \int_{\{u_{2j} < \psi_j -j +1\}}\omega_{u_{2j}}^n \leq \int_{\{u_{2j} \leq -j\}}\omega_{u_{2j}}^n.$$
Using Lemma \ref{lem: const_volume_lem} and \eqref{eq: GZ_MP} we get $\int_{\{u_{2j} \leq -j\}}\omega_{u_{2j}}^n = \int_{\{u_{j} \leq -j\}}\omega_{u_{j}}^n=\int_{\{u \leq -j\}}\omega_{u_{j}}^n$, hence $\int_{\{\psi_j \leq -j\}}\omega_{\psi_j}^n \to 0$ as $j \to \infty$, implying that $\psi=v/2 \in \mathcal E(X,\omega)$.
Now we argue that in fact $v \in \mathcal E(X,\omega)$. For the canonical cutoffs we have the identity $v_{2j}/2 = \psi_j, \ j \in \Bbb N$, hence we get the estimate $\omega_{\psi_j} = \omega/2 + \omega_{v_{2j}}/2 \geq \omega_{v_{2j}}/2$. This allows to conclude that
$$\int_{\{v \leq -2j\}}\omega_{v_{2j}}^n \leq 2^n \int_{\{v \leq -2j\}}\omega_{\psi_{j}}^n = 2^n \int_{\{\psi \leq -j\}}\omega_{\psi_{j}}^n,$$
hence the left hand integral converges to zero as $j \to \infty$, since $\psi \in \mathcal E(X,\omega)$. Using \eqref{eq: CMA_general_def}, this implies that $\int_X \omega_v^n = \textup{Vol}(X)$, i.e., $v \in \mathcal E(X,\omega)$ as desired.
\end{proof}
Lastly we note that formula \eqref{eq: GZ_MP} generalizes to full mass $\omega$-psh functions as well:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: MP_forE} For $u,v \in \mathcal E(X,\omega)$ we have $ \mathbbm{1}_{\{u>v\}}\omega_{\max(u,v)}^n=\mathbbm{1}_{\{u>v\}}\omega_u^n$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}Proposition \ref{prop: monotonicity_E} implies that $\alpha:= \max(u,v) \in \mathcal E(X,\omega)$. For the canonical cutoffs we observe that $\max(u_j,v_{j+1}) = \max(u,v, -j) = \alpha_j$.
As the cutoffs are bounded we have
\begin{equation} \label{eq: MP_intermediate}
\mathbbm{1}_{\{u_j>v_{j+1}\}}\omega_{\alpha_j}^n=\mathbbm{1}_{\{u_j>v_{j+1}\}}\omega_{u_j}^n.
\end{equation}
The definition of $\omega_{u}^n$ and $\omega_\alpha^n$ \eqref{eq: CMA_general_def} implies that $\mathbbm{1}_{\{u>v\}}\omega_{u_j}^n \to \mathbbm{1}_{\{u>v\}}\omega_{u}^n$ and $\mathbbm{1}_{\{u>v\}}\omega_{\alpha_j}^n \to \mathbbm{1}_{\{u>v\}}\omega_{\alpha}^n$. Since $\{u > v \} \subset \{u_j > v_{j+1} \}$
and $ \{u_j > v_{j+1}\} \setminus \{u > v \} \subset \{ u \leq -j\}$, it follows that
$$0 \leq (\mathbbm{1}_{\{u>v\}}-\mathbbm{1}_{\{u_j>v_{j+1}\}})\omega_{u_j}^n \leq \mathbbm{1}_{\{u \leq -j\}}\omega_{u_j}^n \to 0.$$
Since $ \{u_j > v_{j+1}\} \setminus \{u > v \} \subset \{\max(u,v) \leq -j\}$ we also obtain that $0 \leq (\mathbbm{1}_{\{u>v\}}-\mathbbm{1}_{\{u_j>v_{j+1}\}})\omega_{\alpha_j}^n \leq \mathbbm{1}_{\{\alpha \leq -j\}}\omega_{\alpha_j}^n \to 0.$
Combining these last facts with \eqref{eq: MP_intermediate}, and taking the limit, we arrive at the desired result.
\end{proof}
\section{Finite energy classes}
By considering weights $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p$, one can introduce various finite energy subclasses of $\mathcal E(X,\omega)$, important in our later geometric study:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq: E_chi_def}
\mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega) := \{u \in \mathcal E(X,\omega) \textup{ s.t. } E_\chi(u) < \infty \},
\end{equation}
where $E_\chi$ is the $\chi$\emph{--energy} defined by the expression:
$$E_\chi(u) := \int_X \chi(u) \omega_u^n.$$
Recall from Chapter 1 that the condition $E_\chi(u) < \infty$ is equivalent to $u \in L^\chi(\omega_u^n)$. Of special importance are the weights $\chi_p(t):=|t|^p/p$ and the associated finite energy classes
\begin{equation}\label{eq: E_p_def}
\mathcal E_p(X,\omega):= \mathcal E_{\chi_p}(X,\omega).
\end{equation}
By the next result, to test membership in $\mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$ it is enough to test the finiteness condition $E_\chi(u) < \infty$ on the canonical cutoffs:
\begin{proposition}\textup{\cite[Proposition 1.4]{gz}}\label{prop: cutoff_aprox} Suppose $u \in \mathcal E(X,\omega)$ with canonical cutoffs $\{u_k\}_{k \in \Bbb N}$. If $h: \Bbb R^+ \to \Bbb R^+$ is continuous and increasing
then
$$\int_X h(|u|) \omega_u^n< \infty \textup{ if and only if } \limsup_{k}\int_X h(|u_k|)\omega_{u_k}^{n}<\infty.$$
Additionally, if the above conditions hold, then $\int_X h(|u|) \omega_u^n= \lim_{k \to \infty}\int_X h(|u_k|)\omega_{u_k}^{n}.$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} We can assume without loss of generality that $u \leq 0$. If $\limsup_{k}\int_X h(|u_k|)\omega_{u_k}^{n}<C \in \Bbb R^+$ then the family of Borel measures $\{h(|u_k|)\omega_{u_k}^n\}_k$ is precompact, hence one can extract a weakly converging subsequence $\{h(|u_{k_j}|)\omega_{u_{k_j}}^n\}_{k_j} \to \mu$ with $\mu(X) < C$. By the definition of $\omega_u^n$ \eqref{eq: CMA_general_def} it follows that $\omega_{u_{k_j}}^n \to \omega_u^n$. Since $\{h(|u_{k_j}|) \}_{k_j}$ is a sequence of lsc functions increasing to $h(|u|)$, a standard measure theoretic lemma implies that $ \int_X h(|u|) \omega_u^n \leq \mu(X)$ (see \cite[Lemma A2.2]{bl3}).
Now assume that $\int_X h(|u|)\omega_u^n \leq C$. By \eqref{eq: GZ_MP} and the definition of $\omega_u^n$ it follows that $\mathbbm{1}_{\{u>-k\}}\omega_{u}^n=\mathbbm{1}_{\{u>-k\}}\omega_{u_k}^n$, implying that $\int_{\{u \leq -k\}}\omega_{u_k}^n=\int_{\{u \leq -k\}}\omega_{u}^n$. As a consequence, we can write the following:
\begin{flalign*}
\Big|\int_X h (|u_k|)\omega_{u_k}^n - \int_X h (|u|)\omega_{u}^n\Big| &\leq \int_{\{u \leq -k\}} h(k) \omega_{u_k}^n + \int_{\{u \leq -k\}} h(|u|) \omega_{u}^n\\
&= h(k)\int_{\{u \leq -k\}} \omega_{u}^n + \int_{\{u \leq -k\}} h(|u|) \omega_{u}^n\\
&\leq 2\int_{\{u \leq -k\}} h(|u|) \omega_{u}^n.
\end{flalign*}
Since $\int_{\{u=-\infty \}} h(|u|)\omega_u^n=0$, it follows that $\int_X h (|u_k|)\omega_{u_k}^n$ is bounded above and moreover $\int_X h (|u_k|)\omega_{u_k}^n \to \int_X h (|u|)\omega_{u}^n$.
\end{proof}
With the aid of the previous proposition, we can prove our next result, sometimes called the \emph{``fundamental estimate"}:
\begin{proposition} \textup{\cite[Lemma 3.5]{gz}}\label{prop: Energy_est} Suppose $\chi\in \mathcal W^+_p$ and $u,v \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$ satisfies $u\leq v \leq 0$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Fund_Est}
E_\chi(v) \leq (p+1)^n E_\chi(u).
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} First assume that $u,v \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \cap L^\infty$. We first show the following estimate:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Fund_Est_intermediate}
\int_{X} \chi(u) \omega_v^{j+1} \wedge \omega_u^{n-j-1} \leq (p+1)\int_{X} \chi(u) \omega_v^{j} \wedge \omega_u^{n-j}.
\end{equation}
To show this estimate, integration by parts gives
\begin{equation}\label{eq: integ_parts}
\int_X \chi(u)\omega_v^{j+1} \wedge \omega_u^{n-j-1} = \int_X \chi(u)\omega \wedge \omega_v^{j} \wedge \omega_u^{n-j-1} + \int_X v i\del\dbar \chi(u) \wedge \omega_v^{j} \wedge \omega_u^{n-j-1}.
\end{equation}
The first integral on the right hand side is bounded above by $\int_X \chi(u)\omega_v^{j} \wedge \omega_u^{n-j}$. Indeed, as $u \leq 0$ we have $\int_X i\chi'(u)\partial u \wedge \bar\partial u \wedge \omega_{v}^{j} \wedge \omega_u^{n-j-1} \leq 0$.
Concerning the second integral on the right hand side of \eqref{eq: integ_parts} we notice that $i\del\dbar \chi(u) = i\chi''(u)\partial u \wedge \bar\partial u + \chi'(u)i\del\dbar u \geq \chi'(u) \omega_u.$ Since $v \leq 0$ we can write
\begin{flalign*}\int_X v i\del\dbar \chi(u) \wedge \omega_v^{j} \wedge \omega_u^{n-j-1} &\leq \int_X v \chi'(u) \omega_v^{j} \wedge \omega_u^{n-j} = \int_X |v| \chi'(|u|) \omega_v^{j} \wedge \omega_u^{n-j}\\
& \leq \int_X |u| \chi'(|u|) \omega_v^{j} \wedge \omega_u^{n-j} \leq p \int_X \chi(u) \omega_v^{j} \wedge \omega_u^{n-j},
\end{flalign*}
where in the last inequality we have used that $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p$. Combining the above with \eqref{eq: integ_parts} yields \eqref{eq: Fund_Est_intermediate}. Iterating \eqref{eq: Fund_Est_intermediate} $n$ times and using the fact that $u \leq v$ gives \eqref{eq: Fund_Est} for bounded potentials.
In case $u,v \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$, we know that $E_\chi(u_k) \leq (p+1)^n E_\chi(v_k)$ for the canonical cutoffs $u_k,v_k$. Proposition \ref{prop: cutoff_aprox} allows to take the limit $k \to \infty$, to obtain \eqref{eq: Fund_Est}.
\end{proof}
As a corollary of this result, we obtain the \emph{monotonicity property} for $\mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$:
\begin{corollary}\label{cor: monotonicity_E_chi} Suppose $u \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$ and $v \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$. If $u \leq v$ then $v \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}We can assume without loss of generality that $u \leq v \leq 0$. Proposition \ref{prop: monotonicity_E} implies that $v \in \mathcal E(X,\omega)$. Also for the canonical cutoffs $v_k$ we have $u \leq v_k$, hence $E_\chi(v_k) \leq (p+1)^n E_\chi(u)$ for all $k \in \Bbb N$. Proposition \ref{prop: cutoff_aprox} now gives that $E_\chi(v) \leq (p+1)^n E_\chi(u)$, finishing the proof.
\end{proof}
\noindent The next result says that if $u,v \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$, then in fact $u \in L^\chi(\omega_v^n)$:
\begin{proposition}\textup{\cite[Proposition 3.6]{gz}}\label{prop: mixed_finite_prop: Energy_est} Suppose $u,v \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega), \ \chi \in \mathcal W^+_p$. If $u,v \leq 0$ then
$$\int_X \chi(u) \omega_v^n \leq p2^{p}\big(E_\chi(u) + E_\chi(v)\big)$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} We first show that $\chi'(2t) \leq p 2^{p-1} \chi'(t), \ t >0$. For this, after possibly adding $\delta |t|$ to $\chi(t)$, we can momentarily assume that $\chi'(t),\chi(t)>0$ for any $t > 0$.
By convexity we have $\chi(t)/t \leq \chi'(t)$, and \eqref{eq: GrowthControl} gives $\chi(2t)/\chi(t)\leq 2^p$, hence we can write:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: chi'_ineq}
\frac{\chi'(2t)}{\chi'(t)}=\frac{2t\chi'(2t)}{\chi(2t)}\cdot\frac{\chi(2t)}{2\chi(t)}\cdot \frac{\chi(t)}{t\chi'(t)} \leq p2^{p-1}.
\end{equation}
Consequently we have the following sequence of inequalities:
$$\int_X \chi(u) \omega_v^n = \int_0^\infty \chi'(t) \omega_v^n\{ |u| >t \}dt \leq 2^{p}p \int_0^\infty\chi'(t)\omega_v^n\{ |u| >2t \} dt$$
Noticing that $\{u < -2t \} \subset \{u < -t + v \} \cup \{ v < -t\}$ we can continue to write:
\begin{flalign*}
\int_X \chi(u) \omega_v^n \leq & 2^{p}p \Big(\int_0^\infty\chi'(t)\omega_v^n\{ u < -t + v \} dt + \int_0^\infty\chi'(t)\omega_v^n\{ v < -t \} dt\Big)\\
\leq & 2^{p}p \Big(\int_0^\infty\chi'(t)\omega_u^n\{ u < -t + v \} dt +E_\chi(v)\Big)\\
\leq & 2^{p}p \Big(\int_0^\infty\chi'(t)\omega_u^n\{ u < -t\} dt +E_\chi(v)\Big) = 2^{p}p \big(E_\chi(u) +E_\chi(v)\big),
\end{flalign*}
where in the second line we have used Proposition \ref{prop: comp_princ_E} and in the last line we have used that $\{u < -t + v \} \subset \{u < -t \}$.
\end{proof}
Before we can establish the continuity property of the Monge--Amp\`ere operator along monotonic sequences of potentials, we need to establish the following auxilliary result, which states that if $u \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$, then it is possible to find a $\tilde \chi$ with bigger growth than $\chi$ such that $u \in \mathcal E_{\tilde \chi}(X,\omega)$ still holds:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: CompBiggerEn}
Suppose $u \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega), \ \chi \in \mathcal W^+_{p}$. Then there exists $\tilde{\chi} \in \mathcal W^+_{2p+1}$ such that $ \chi(t) \leq \tilde \chi(t)$, $\chi(t)/\tilde{\chi}(t) \searrow 0$ as $t \to \infty$, and $u \in \mathcal E_{\tilde{\chi}}(X,\omega)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} The weight ${\tilde{\chi}}:\Bbb R^+ \to \Bbb R^+$ will be constructed as an increasing limit of weights ${\tilde{\chi}}^j \in \mathcal W^+_{2p+1}, j \in \Bbb N$ constructed below.
We set ${\tilde{\chi}}_0(t) = \chi$. Let $t_0 \in \Bbb R^+$, to be specified later. We define ${\tilde{\chi}}_1:\Bbb R^+ \to \Bbb R^+$ by the formula
$${\tilde{\chi}}_1(t) = \begin{cases} {\tilde{\chi}}_0(t), & \mbox{if } { t \leq t_1}
\\{\tilde{\chi}}_0(t_1) + 2({\tilde{\chi}}_0(t) - {\tilde{\chi}}_0(t_1)), & \mbox{if } { t >t_1. } \end{cases}$$
Notice that ${\tilde{\chi}}_1$ satisfies $\chi \leq \tilde \chi_1$ and the following also hold
\begin{equation}\label{CompWeightEst1}
\sup_{t >0}\frac{|t{\tilde{\chi}}_1'(t)|}{|{\tilde{\chi}}_1(t)|}\leq \sup_{t >0}\frac{2|t{\tilde{\chi}}_0'(t)|}{|{\tilde{\chi}}_0(t)|} < 2p + 1,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{CompWeightEst2}
\lim_{t \to \infty}\frac{|t{\tilde{\chi}}_1'(t)|}{|{\tilde{\chi}}_1(t)|}=p.
\end{equation}
We can choose $t_1$ to be big enough such that $E_{{\tilde{\chi}}_1}(u) < E_\chi(u) + 1$.
Now pick $t_2 > t_1$, again specified later. One defines ${\tilde{\chi}}_2:\Bbb R^+ \to \Bbb R^+$ in a similar manner:
$${\tilde{\chi}}_2(t) = \begin{cases} {\tilde{\chi}}_1(t), & \mbox{if } { t \leq t_2}
\\{\tilde{\chi}}_1(t_2) + 2({\tilde{\chi}}_1(t) - {\tilde{\chi}}_1(t_2)), & \mbox{if } { t >t_2. } \end{cases}$$
As $\eqref{CompWeightEst2}$ holds for ${\tilde{\chi}}_1$, it is possible to choose $t_2>t_1$ big enough so that the ${\tilde{\chi}}_2$-analogs of \eqref{CompWeightEst1},\eqref{CompWeightEst2} are satisfied and $E_{{\tilde{\chi}}_2}(u) < E_\chi(u) + 1$.
We define ${\tilde{\chi}}_k, k \in \Bbb N$, following the above procedure. As $\lim_{t \to \infty} {\tilde{\chi}}_k(t)/\chi(t)=2^k$, the limit weight ${\tilde{\chi}}(t) = \lim_{k \to \infty} {\tilde{\chi}}_k(t)$ is seen to satisfy the requirements of the lemma.
\end{proof}
The following result, allowing to take weak limits of certain measures, will be used in many different contexts throughout the survey:
\begin{proposition}\label{prop: MA_cont} Assume that $\{ \phi_k\}_{k \in \Bbb N},\{ \psi_k\}_{k \in \Bbb N},\{ v_k\}_{k \in \Bbb N} \subset \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$ decrease (increase a.e.) to $\phi,\psi, v \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$ respectively. Suppose the following hold: \\
(i) $\psi_k \leq \phi_k$ and $\psi_k \leq v_k$.\\
(ii) $h:\Bbb R \to \Bbb R$ is continuous with $\limsup_{|l| \to \infty} |h(l)|/\chi(l) \leq C$ for some $C>0$. \\
Then $h(\phi_k - \psi_k)\omega_{v_k}^n \to h(\phi-\psi)\omega_{v}^n$ weakly.
\end{proposition}
We will apply this porposition mostly for $h = \chi$ and $h = 1$. In the latter case this proposition simply tells that the complex Monge--Amp\`ere measures, as defined in \eqref{eq: CMA_general_def}, converge weakly along monotonic sequences of $\mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$. Though we will not use it here, this also holds more generally for sequences inside $\mathcal E(X,\omega)$, as shown in \cite{gz}.
\begin{proof} We can suppose without loss of generality that all the functions involved are negative.
First we suppose that there exists $L >1$ such that $-L < \phi,\phi_k,\psi,\psi_k,v,v_k < 0$ are prove the theorem under this assumption. Given $\varepsilon >0$ one can find an open $O \subset X$ such that $\textup{Cap}_X(O) < \varepsilon$ and $\phi,\phi_k,\psi,\psi_k,v,v_k$ are all continuous on $X \setminus O$ (\cite[Theorem 2.2]{bl3} or \cite[Definition 2.4, Corollary 2.8]{gz05}). We have
\begin{flalign}\label{eq: some1}
\int_X h(\phi_k - \psi_k)\omega_{v_k}^n - \int_X h( \phi - \psi)\omega_{v_k}^n=\int_O + \int_{X \setminus O} \big[h(\phi_k - \psi_k) - h( \phi - \psi)\big]\omega_{v_k}^n.
\end{flalign}
The integral on $O$ is bounded by $2\varepsilon L^n|h(L)|$. The second integral tends to $0$ as on the closed set $X \setminus O$ we have $\phi_k \to \phi$ and $\psi_k \to \psi$ uniformly. We also have
\begin{flalign}\label{eq: some2}
\int_X h(\phi - \psi)\omega_{v_k}^n - \int_X h({\phi - \psi})\omega_{v}^n \to 0,
\end{flalign}
as the function $h({\phi - \psi})$ is quasi--continuous and bounded. Indeed, quasi--continuity and boundedness implies again that for all $\varepsilon >0$ one can find an open $\tilde O \subset X$ such that $\textup{Cap}_X(\tilde O) < \varepsilon$ and $h({\phi - \psi})$ is continuous on $X \setminus \tilde O$. Furthermore, by Tietze's extension theorem we can extend $h({\phi - \psi})|_{X \setminus \tilde O}$ to a continuous function $\alpha$ on $X$. As $\textup{Cap}_X(\tilde O) < \varepsilon$, we have that $\int |h({\phi - \psi}) - \alpha| \omega_{v_k}^n \leq C\varepsilon$ and $|h({\phi - \psi}) - \alpha| \omega_{v}^n \leq C\varepsilon$. On the other hand $\int_X \alpha \omega^n_{v_k} \to \int_X \alpha \omega^n_{v}$ by Bedford-Taylor theory (see \cite[Theorem 2.2.5]{bl3}). Putting these facts together we get \eqref{eq: some2}. Finally, \eqref{eq: some1} and \eqref{eq: some2} together give the proposition for bounded potentials.
Now we argue that the result also holds when $\phi,\phi_k,\psi,\psi_k,v,v_k$ are unbounded. For this we show that
\begin{flalign}\label{uniformlimit}
\int_X h(\phi_k - \psi_k)\omega_{v_k}^n - \int_X h(\phi^L_k - \psi^L_k)\omega_{v^L_k}^n \to 0
\end{flalign}
\begin{flalign}\label{uniformlimit2}
\int_X h(\phi - \psi)\omega_{v}^n - \int_X h(\phi^L - \psi^L)\omega_{v^L}^n \to 0
\end{flalign}
as $L \to \infty$, uniformly with respect to $k$, where $v^L = \max (v,-L)$ and $v^L_k,\psi^L_k,\psi^L,\phi^L_k,\phi^L$ are defined similarly.
Now we pick ${\tilde{\chi}} \in \mathcal W^+_{2p+1}$. If $\psi_k \searrow \psi$ then choose ${\tilde{\chi}}$ in such a way that it satisfies the assumptions of the previous lemma for $\psi$, i.e., $\psi \in \mathcal E_{\tilde{\chi}}(X,\omega)$. In case $\psi_k \nearrow \psi$, choose ${\tilde{\chi}}$ in such a way that it satisfies the assumptions of the previous lemma for $\psi_1$, i.e. $\psi_1 \in \mathcal E_{\tilde{\chi}}(X,\omega)$. By Corollary \ref{cor: monotonicity_E_chi} we obtain in both cases that $\phi_k,\phi,\psi_k,\psi,v_k,v \in \mathcal E_{\tilde{\chi}}(X,\omega), k \in \Bbb N$.
For the rest of the proof assume that the sequences $\phi_k,\psi_k,v_k$ are decreasing. The case of increasing sequences is argued similarly.
Since $\{ \phi_k \leq -L\} \cup \{ v_k \leq -L\} \subseteq\{ \psi_k \leq -L\}$, and for big enough $L$ we have $|h(t)| \leq (C+1)\chi(t)$ for $|t| \geq L$, using the definition of the complex Monge--Amp\`ere measure \eqref{eq: CMA_general_def} we can start writing:
\begin{flalign*}
\Big|\int_X\big[ h(&\phi_k - \psi_k)\omega_{v_k}^n - h(\phi_k^L - \psi_k^L)\omega_{v_k^L}^n \big]\Big| =\Big|\int_{\{\psi_k \leq -L\}}\big[ h(\phi_k - \psi_k)\omega_{v_k}^n - h(\phi_k^L - \psi_k^L)\omega_{v_k^L}^n \big]\Big| \\
&\leq(C+1)\int_{\{\psi_k \leq -L\}} \chi(\psi_k)\omega_{v_k}^n + (C+1)\int_{\{\psi_k \leq -L\}} \chi(\psi^L_k)\omega_{v_k^L}^n \\
&\leq\frac{(C+1)\chi(L)}{\tilde{\chi}(L)}\Big(\int_{\{\psi_k \leq -L\}} \tilde{\chi}(\psi_k)\omega_{v_k}^n + \int_{\{\psi_k \leq -L\}} \tilde{\chi}(\psi_k^L)\omega_{v_k^L}^n \Big)\\
&\leq\frac{(C+1)\chi(L)}{\tilde{\chi}(L)}\Big(\int_X \tilde{\chi}(\psi_k)\omega_{v_k}^n + \int_X \tilde{\chi}(\psi_k^L)\omega_{v_k^L}^n \Big)\\
&\leq\frac{C(p)\chi(L)}{\psi(L)}\Big(E_{\tilde \chi}(\psi_k) + E_{\tilde \chi}(v_k) + E_{\tilde \chi}(\psi_k^L) + E_{\tilde \chi}(v_k^L) \Big)\leq\frac{C(p)\chi(L)}{\tilde \chi(L)} E_{\tilde \chi}(\psi),
\end{flalign*}
where in the last line we have used Proposition \ref{prop: mixed_finite_prop: Energy_est} and Proposition \ref{prop: Energy_est}. As $\chi(L)/\tilde \chi(L) \to 0$, this justifies \eqref{uniformlimit} and \eqref{uniformlimit2} is established the same way, finishing the proof.
\end{proof}
Later, when showing that $\mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$ admits a complete metric structure, we will make use of the following corollary:
\begin{corollary}\textup{\cite[Proposition 5.6]{gz}} \label{cor: E_semicont} Suppose $\chi\in \mathcal W^+_p$ and $\{u_k\} _{k \in \Bbb N} \subset \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$ is a sequence decreasing to $u \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$. If
$\sup_k E_\chi(u_k) < \infty$ then $u \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$ and
$$E_\chi(u) = \lim_{k\to \infty}E_\chi(u_k).$$
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof} Let $u^l_k = \max(u,-l)$ and $u^l=\max(u,-l)$ be the canonical cutoffs. As $-l \leq u^l \leq u^k_l$, by the previous proposition and Proposition \eqref{prop: Energy_est} we get that $E_\chi(u^l)=\lim_k E_\chi(u^l_k) \leq (p+1)^nC := (p+1)^n \limsup_k E_\chi(u_k).$
Finally, we apply Proposition \ref{prop: cutoff_aprox} to obtain that $E_\chi(u)= \lim_{l \to \infty} E_\chi(u^l) \leq (p+1)^n C$, i.e., $u \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$. Another application of the previous proposition gives that $E_\chi(u) = \lim_{k\to \infty}E_\chi(u_k).$
\end{proof}
\section{Examples and singularity type of finite energy potentials}
It is clear that $\textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \cap L^\infty \subset \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ for all $p \geq 1$. In this short section we will show that this inclusion is always strict, as one can construct unbounded elements of $\mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$. However the content of our first result is that the singularity type of full mass potentials is always mild, even when they are unbounded.
Given $u \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ and $x_0 \in X$ it is possible to measure the local singularity of $u$ at $x_0$ using the \emph{Lelong number} $\mathcal L(u,x_0)$, whose definition we now recall:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Lelong_def}
\mathcal L(u,x_0):= \sup \{ r \geq 0 \ | \ u(x) \leq r \log |x| + C_r \ \forall x \in U_r \ \textup{ for some } C_r>0\},
\end{equation}
where $U_r \subset \Bbb C^n$ is some coordinate neighborhood of $x_0$ that identifies $x_0$ with $0 \in \Bbb C^n$. Roughly speaking, $\mathcal L(u,x_0)$ measures the extent to which the singularity of $u$ at $x_0$ is logarithmic. For an extensive treatment of Lelong numbers we refer to \cite[Section~2.3]{gzbook}.
To begin, we observe that elements of $\mathcal E(X,\omega)$ have singularity so mild that Lelong numbers can not detect them:
\begin{proposition}\textup{\cite[Corollary 1.8]{gz}}\label{prop: Lelong_E} If $u \in \mathcal E(X,\omega)$ then all Lelong numbers of $u$ are zero.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} Let $x_0 \in X$ and $U \subset X$ a coordinate neighborhood of $x_0$, identifying $x_0$ with $0 \in \Bbb C^n$ via a biholomorphism $\varphi : B(0,2) \to U$. Let $v \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ such that $v$ is smooth on $X \setminus \{x_0 \}$ and $v \circ \varphi|_{B(0,1)} = c \log |x|$ for some $c >0$. Using a partition of unity, such $v$ can be easily constructed.
If $\mathcal L(u,x_0)>0$, then for some $\varepsilon >0$ we will have $u \leq \varepsilon v + 1/\varepsilon$. The monotonicity property (Proposition \ref{prop: monotonicity_E}) now implies that $\varepsilon v \in \mathcal E(X,\omega)$. However this cannot happen, yielding a contradiction. Indeed, by the definition of $\omega_{\varepsilon v}^n$ (see \eqref{eq: CMA_general_def}) we have that
\begin{flalign*}
\int_X \omega_{\varepsilon v}^n &= \textup{Vol}(X) - \lim_{k \to \infty}\int_{\{\varepsilon v \leq -k\}} \omega_{\max(\varepsilon v,-k)}^n\\
&\leq \textup{Vol}(X) - \lim_{k \to \infty} \int_{B(0,1)} i\big(\del\dbar \max (c\varepsilon\log|x|, -k)\big)^n \\
&= \textup{Vol}(X) - c^n \varepsilon^n (2\pi)^n,
\end{flalign*}
where in the last line we have used that $i\del\dbar \big(\max(\log |z|, \log r)\big)^n = (2\pi)^n d\sigma_{\partial B(0,r)}$, where $d\sigma_{\partial B(0,r)}$ is the Euclidean surface measure of $\partial B(0,r)$ (see the exercise following \cite[Corollary 2.2.7]{bl3}).
\end{proof}
The purpose of our next proposition is to give a flexible construction for unbounded elements of $\mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$:
\begin{proposition}\textup{\cite[Example 2.14]{gz}, \cite[Proposition 5]{bl2}}\label{prop: E_p_examples} Suppose that $u \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$, $ u < -1$ and $\alpha \in (0,1/2)$. Then $v = -(- u)^{\alpha} \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ for all $p \in [1,(1-\alpha)/\alpha)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} First assume that $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$ and $u \leq -1$. For $v = -(-u)^{\alpha}$ we have
\begin{flalign*}
\omega_{v}&=\alpha(1-\alpha) (-u)^{\alpha - 2} i \partial u \wedge \bar\partial u + \alpha (-u)^{\alpha - 1}\omega_{u} + (1 - \alpha (-u)^{\alpha - 1}) \omega \nonumber\\
&\leq (-u)^{\alpha - 2} i \partial u \wedge \bar\partial u + (-u)^{\alpha -1}\omega_{u} + \omega.
\end{flalign*}
Consequently $v \in \mathcal H_\omega$, and for some $C:=C(\alpha) > 1$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq: o_v_est}
\omega_v^n \leq C\Big( \sum_{k=0}^{n-1} (-u)^{\alpha - 2 + k(\alpha - 1)} i \partial u \wedge \bar\partial u \wedge \omega_{u}^k \wedge \omega ^{n-1 -k} + \sum_{k=0}^{n} (-u)^{k(\alpha - 1)} \omega_u^k \wedge \omega^{n-k}\Big).
\end{equation}
For arbitrary $a > 0$, integration by parts gives the following estimates
\begin{flalign*}
a\int_X (-u)^{-a-1}i\partial u \wedge \bar\partial u \wedge \omega_u^k \wedge \omega^{n-k-1} &= \int_X i \partial (-u)^{-a} \wedge \bar\partial u \wedge \omega_u^k \wedge \omega^{n-k-1}\\
&=-\int_X (-u)^{-a} i \del\dbar u \wedge \omega_u^k \wedge \omega^{n-k-1}\\
& \leq \int_X (-u)^{-a} \omega_u^k \wedge \omega^{n-k} \leq \textup{Vol}(X),
\end{flalign*}
where in the last inequality we have used that $(-u)^{-a} \leq 1$. This estimate and \eqref{eq: o_v_est} implies that for any $b \in (0,1-\alpha)$ we have
$$\int_X |v|^{\frac{b}{\alpha}} \omega_v^n=\int_X |u|^{b} \omega_v^n \leq C(\omega, \alpha, b) \Big( 1 + \int_X |u| \omega^n \Big).$$
Returning to the general case $ u \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$, let $\{ u_k\}_k\subset \mathcal H_\omega$ be a sequence of smooth potentials decreasing to $u$ (Theorem \ref{thm: BK_approx}). We can assume that $u_k < -1$, hence the above inequality implies that $\int_X |v_k|^{b/\alpha} \omega_{v_k}^n$ is uniformly bounded for $v_k :=-(-u_k)^{\alpha}$. Consequently, Corollary \ref{cor: E_semicont} implies that $v \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ for any $p \in (0,(1-\alpha)/\alpha)$.
\end{proof}
\section{Envelopes of finite energy classes}
Envelope constructions are ubiquitous throughout pluripotential theory. In our setting, given an usc function $f: X \to [-\infty,\infty)$, the simplest envelope one can consider is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq: P_env_def}
P(f):= \sup \{u \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \textup{ s.t. } u \leq f\}.
\end{equation}
As we know, the supremum of a family of $\omega$-psh functions may not be $\omega$-psh, as $P(f)$ may not be usc to begin with. However by \cite[Theorem 1.2.3]{bl3} the usc regularization $P(f)^*$ is indeed $\omega$-psh. As $f$ is usc, we obtain that $P(f)^* \leq f^* = f$, immediately giving that $P(f)^*$ is a candidate in the definition of $P(f)$, hence $P(f)=P(f)^*$, i.e., $P(f) \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$.
Slightly generalizing the above concept, for usc functions $\{f_1,f_2,\ldots,f_k \}$ we introduce the \emph{rooftop envelope} $$P(f_1,f_2,\ldots,f_k):=P(\min(f_1,f_2,\ldots,f_k)).$$
When $f$ is smooth (or just continuous), as $P(f)$ is usc, we obtain that the \emph{non-contact set} $\{f > P(f) \} \subset X$ is open. A classical Perron type argument (see \cite[Corollary 9.2]{BT1} or \cite[Proposition 1.4.10]{bl3}). yields that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: coinc_vanish}
\omega_{P(f)}^n(\{f > P(f) \})=0
\end{equation}
This observation suggests that $P(f)$ can have at most bounded but not continuous second derivatives. This is mostly confirmed by the next result, whose proof is provided in the appendix:
\begin{theorem}[Theorem \ref{thm: DR_reg}, \textup{\cite[Theorem 2.5]{DR1}}]\label{thm: reg_thm_for_P(f)} Given $f_1,...,f_k \in C^\infty(X)$, then $P(f_1,f_2,...,f_k) \in C^{1,\alpha}(X), \ \alpha \in (0,1)$. More precisely, the following estimate holds:
$$\|P(f_1,f_2,...,f_k)\|_{C^{1,\bar 1}} \leq C(X,\omega,\| f_1\|_{C^{1,\bar 1}},\| f_2\|_{C^{1,\bar 1}},\ldots,\| f_k\|_{C^{1,\bar 1}}).$$
\end{theorem}
By a bound on the $C^{1,\bar1}$ norm of $P(f)$ we mean a uniform bound on all mixed second order derivatives $\partial^2 P(f)/\partial z_j \bar \partial z_k$. Since $P(f)$ is $\omega$-psh, this is equivalent to saying that $\Delta^\omega P(f)$ is bounded, and by the Calderon--Zygmund estimate \cite[Chapter 9, Lemma 9.9]{GT}, we automatically obtain that $P(f_1,f_2,\ldots,f_k) \in C^{1,\alpha}(X), \alpha < 1$. We introduce the following subspace of $\textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: H_01bar1_def}
\mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}:=\{u \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \ \textup{ s.t. } \ \|u\|_{C^{1,\bar 1}} < \infty \}.
\end{equation}
When $k=1$, the above result was first proved in \cite{bd} using the Kiselman technique for attenuation of singularities. An independent ``PDE proof" has been given by Berman \cite{Brm2}, and we present this in the appendix (see Theorem \ref{thm: BD_reg}). The proof of the general case $k \geq 1$ was given in the paper \cite{DR1}, that provided a detailed regularity analysis for the rooftop envelopes introduced above. By reduction to the case $k=1$, we prove this more general result in the appendix as well (see Theorem \ref{thm: DR_reg}). Lastly, we mention that very recently it was shown by Tosatti \cite{To} and Chu-Zhou \cite{ChZh} that in fact it is possible to bound the full Hessian of $P(f_1,\ldots,f_k)$ in terms of the Hessians of $f_1,\ldots,f_k$.
With the above introduced notation, we will use Theorem \ref{thm: reg_thm_for_P(f)} in the following form:
\begin{corollary}\label{cor: rooftop_env_reg} If $u_0,u_1,\ldots,u_k \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$ then $P(u_0,u_1,\ldots,u_k) \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof} Let $f_j^i \in C^\infty(X)$ be such that $f_j^i \to u_j$ uniformly, and the mixed second derivatives of $f_j^i$ are uniformly bounded. By the previous theorem, the mixed second derivatives of $P(f^i_0,f^i_1,\ldots,f^i_k)$ are uniformly bounded as well. Since $P(f^i_0,f^i_1,\ldots,f^i_k) \to P(u_0,u_1,\ldots,u_k)$ uniformly, the result follows.
\end{proof}
\noindent As a consequence of the above corollary, we get a volume partition formula for $\omega_{P(u_0,u_1)}^n$:
\begin{proposition}\textup{\cite[Proposition 2.2]{da1}} \label{prop: MA_form} For $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$, we introduce the contact sets $\Lambda_{u_0} = \{ P(u_0,u_1)=u_0\}$ and $\Lambda_{u_1} = \{ P(u_0,u_1)=u_1\}$. Then the following partition formula holds:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: MA_partition}
\omega_{P(u_0,u_1)}^n= \mathbbm{1}_{\Lambda_{u_0}}\omega_{u_0}^n + \mathbbm{1}_{\Lambda_{u_1} \setminus \Lambda_{u_0}}\omega_{u_1}^n.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} As pointed out in \eqref{eq: coinc_vanish}, $\omega_{P(u_0,u_1)}^n$ is concentrated on the coincidence set $\Lambda_{u_0} \cup \Lambda_{u_1}.$ Having bounded Laplacian implies that all second order partials of $P(u_0,u_1)$ are in any $L^p(X), \ p <\infty$ \cite[Chapter 9, Lemma 9.9]{GT}. It follows from \cite[Chapter 7, Lemma 7.7]{GT} that on $\Lambda_{u_0}$ all the second order partials of $P(u_0,u_1)$ and $u_0$ agree a.e., and the analogous statement holds on $\Lambda_{u_1}$. Hence, using \cite[Proposition 2.1.6]{bl3} one can write:
\begin{flalign*}
\omega_{P(u_0,u_1)}^n&=\mathbbm{1}_{\Lambda_{u_0} \cup \Lambda_{u_1}}\omega_{P(u_0,u_1)}^n \nonumber =\mathbbm{1}_{\Lambda_{u_0}}\omega_{u_0}^n + \mathbbm{1}_{\Lambda_{u_1} \setminus \Lambda_{u_0}}\omega_{u_1}^n,
\end{flalign*}
finishing the proof.
\end{proof}
The partition formula (\ref{eq: MA_partition}) is at the core of many theorems presented later in this survey. Interestingly, it fails to hold evein in the slightly more general case of Lipschitz potentials $$u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H^{0,1}_\omega:= \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \cap C^{0,1}(X).$$ For a counterexample, suppose $\dim X = 1$ and $g_x$ is the $\omega-$Green function with pole at $x \in X$. Such function is characterized by the property $\int_X g_x \omega =0$ and $\omega + i\partial \bar \partial g_x = \delta_x$. We choose $u_0 = \max\{g_x,0\}$ and $u_1 =0$. In this case $P(u_0,u_1)=0, \ \Lambda_{u_0} = \{ g_x \leq 0\}$ and $\Lambda_{u_1} \setminus \Lambda_{u_0}= X \setminus \Lambda_{u_0} \neq \emptyset$. As
$ \textup{Vol}(X) = \int_{\Lambda_{u_0}} \omega_{u_0}^n = \int_X \omega_{P(u_0,u_1)}^n,$ it is seen that the right hand side of (\ref{eq: MA_partition}) has total integral greater then the left hand side, hence they can not equal.
As $\int_X \omega_{u_1}^n$ is finite, it follows that $\omega_{u_1}^n(\{u_0 = u_1 +\tau\})>0$ only for a countable number of values $\tau \in \Bbb R$. Consequently, \eqref{eq: MA_partition} implies the following observation:
\begin{remark} \label{rem: MA_form_remark} Given $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$, for any $\tau \in \Bbb R$ outside a countable set we have:
$$\omega_{P(u_0,u_1+\tau)}^n= \mathbbm{1}_{\Lambda_{u_0}}\omega_{u_0}^n + \mathbbm{1}_{\Lambda_{u_1+\tau}}\omega_{u_1}^n.$$
In particular, $\textup{Vol}(X)=\int_{\{P(u_0,u_1 + \tau)=u_0\}}\omega_{u_0}^n + \int_{\{P(u_0,u_1 + \tau)=u_1 + \tau\}}\omega_{u_1}^n$.
\end{remark}
Corollary \ref{cor: rooftop_env_reg} simply says that the operation $(u_0,u_1) \to P(u_0,u_1)$ is closed inside the class $\mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$. The next proposition tells that the same holds inside the finite energy classes as well:
\begin{proposition}\textup{\cite[Lemma 3.4]{da1}} \label{prop: env_exist} Suppose $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p$ and ${u_0},{u_1} \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$. Then $P(u_0,u_1) \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$, and if $u_0,u_1 \leq 0$ then following estimate holds:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: e_est}
E_\chi(P({u_0},{u_1})) \leq (p+1)^n(E_\chi({u_0}) + E_\chi({u_1})).
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} As $P(u_0-c,u_1-c)=P(u_0,u_1)-c$ for $c \in \Bbb R$, it follows that without loss of generality we can assume that $u_0,u_1 <0$.
By Theorem \ref{thm: BK_approx}, it is possible to find negative potentials $u^j_0,u^j_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$ that decrease to $u_0,u_1$. Furthermore, by Proposition \ref{prop: MA_form} we can also assume that $P(u^j_0,u^j_1) \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{eq: MA_approx_part}
\omega_{P(u_0^j,u_1^j)}^n \leq \mathbbm{1}_{\Lambda_{u^j_0}}\omega_{u^j_0}^n + \mathbbm{1}_{\Lambda_{u_1^j}}\omega_{u_1^j}^n.
\end{equation}
Using this formula we can write:
\begin{flalign*}E_\chi(P({u^j_0},{u^j_1}))&= \int_X \chi (P({u^j_0},{u_1^j}))\omega_{P({u^j_0},{u^j_1})}^n \\
&\leq \int_{\{P({u^j_0},{u^j_1}) = {u^j_0}\}}\chi({u^j_0})\omega_{{u^j_0}}^n + \int_{\{P({u^j_0},{u^j_1}) = {u^j_1}\}}\chi({u_1^j})\omega_{u^j_1}^n \\
&\leq \int_X\chi({u_0^j})\omega_{u_0^j}^n + \int_X\chi({u_1^j})\omega_{u_1^j}^n = E_\chi({u^j_0}) + E_\chi({u^j_1})\\
&\leq (p+1)^n (E_\chi({u_0}) + E_\chi({u_1})),
\end{flalign*}
where in the last line we have used Proposition \ref{prop: Energy_est}. As $P(u^j_0,u^j_1)$ decreases to $P(u_0,u_1)$, by Corollary \ref{cor: E_semicont} we have $P(u_0,u_1) \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$, and \eqref{eq: e_est} holds.
\end{proof}
Observe that $t u_0 + (1-t)u_1 \geq P(u_0,u_1)$ for any $t \in [0,1]$, hence as a consequence of the previous proposition and the monotonicity property of $\mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$ (Corollary \ref{cor: monotonicity_E_chi}) we obtain that $\mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$ is convex:
\begin{corollary}\label{cor: E_chi_convex} If $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$ then $tu_0+(1-t)u_1 \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$ for any $t \in [0,1]$.
\end{corollary}
Lastly, we prove the \emph{domination principle} for the class $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ (recall \eqref{eq: E_p_def}). We mention that these results also hold more generally for the class $\mathcal E(X,\omega)$, by a theorem of S. Dinew \cite{Di,BL12}. The short proof below was pointed out to us by C.H. Lu, and it is based on the arguments of \cite{DDL17}.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop: domination principle}
Let $\phi,\psi\in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$. If $\psi\leq \phi$ almost everywhere with respect to $\omega_{\phi}^n$ then $\psi\leq \phi$.
\end{proposition}
Since $\mathcal E_p(X,\omega) \subset \mathcal E_1(X,\omega), \ p \geq 1$, we obtain that the domination principle trivially holds for $\phi,\psi\in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega), \ p \geq 1$ as well.
\begin{proof}
We can assume without loss of generality that $\phi,\psi<0$.
As $\phi,\psi \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$, it suffices to prove that $\psi\leq \phi$ a.e. with respect to $\omega^n$. This will then imply that $\psi \leq \phi$ globally.
Suppose that $\omega^n(\{\phi < \psi \}) > 0$. By the next lemma, this implies existence of $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ such that $u \leq \psi$ and $\omega_u^n(\{\phi < \psi \})>0$.
By Corollary \ref{cor: E_chi_convex} we have that $tu + (1-t)\psi \in \mathcal E(X,\omega)$ for any $t \in [0,1]$.
By the comparison principle (Proposition \ref{prop: comp_princ_E}) we can write:
$$t^n\int_{\{\phi< t u + (1-t) \psi \}}\omega_u^n \leq \int_{\{\phi < tu + (1-t)\psi\}}\omega_{tu + (1-t)\psi}^n\leq \int_{\{\phi < tu + (1-t)\psi\}}\omega_\phi^n=\int_{\{\phi < \psi\}}\omega_\phi^n=0. $$
We conclude that $0=\omega^n_u(\{\phi<tu + (1-t)\psi\}) \nearrow \omega^n_u(\{\phi<\psi\})$, as $t \searrow 0$. As a result, $\omega^n_u(\{\phi<\psi\})=0$, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} Suppose that $U \subset X$ is a Borel set with non--zero Lebesgue measure and $\psi \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$. Then there exists $u\in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ such that $u \leq \psi$ and $\omega_u^n(U)>0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} We can assume that $\psi <0$. We fix $C >0$ and let $\psi_C := P(\psi + C,0)$.
Let $u_j \in \mathcal H_\omega$ be a decreasing approximating sequence of $\psi$, that exists by Theorem \ref{thm: BK_approx}. We can assume that $u_j <0$. The partition formula of Proposition \ref{prop: MA_form} gives:
\[
\omega_{P(u_j + C,0)}^n \leq \mathbbm{1}_{\{u_j\leq -C\}} \omega_{u_j}^n + \omega^n \leq -\frac{u_j}{C} \omega_{u_j}^n + \omega^n.
\]
Notice that $P(u_j + C,0) \searrow \psi_C$ as $j \to \infty$. Taking the limit, Proposition \ref{prop: MA_cont} gives us the estimate of measures $\omega_{\psi_C}^n \leq -\frac{\psi}{C}\omega_{\psi}^n + \omega^n$. Using this we can write:
$$\omega_{\psi_C}^n (X\setminus U) \leq \frac{1}{C} \int_{X \setminus U} |\psi|\omega_{\psi}^n + \omega^n(X\setminus U) < \frac{1}{C} \int_X |\psi|\omega_{\psi}^n + \omega^n(X\setminus U).$$
As $\omega_{\psi_C}^n(X)= \omega^n(X)$, for $C$ big enough we get that $\omega_{\psi_C}^n (U)>0$. The choice $u:= \psi_C-C$ satisfies the requirements of the lemma.
\end{proof}
\chapter{The Finsler geometry of the space of K\"ahler potentials}
As follows from the definition \eqref{eq: H_o_def}, the space of K\"ahler potentials $\mathcal H_\omega$ is a convex open subset of $C^\infty(X)$, hence one can think of it as a trivial Fr\'echet manifold. As such, one can introduce on $\mathcal H_\omega$ a collection of $L^p$ type Finsler metrics whose geometry we will study in this section. If $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$ and $\xi \in T_u \mathcal H_\omega \simeq C^\infty(X)$, then the $L^p$-length of $\xi$ is given by the following expression:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Lp_metric_def}
\| \xi\|_{p,u} = \bigg( \frac{1}{\textup{Vol}(X)}\int_X |\psi|^p \omega_u^n\bigg)^{\frac{1}{p}},
\end{equation}
where $\textup{Vol}(X) = \int_X \omega^n.$ In case $p=2$, we recover the Riemannian geometry of Mabuchi \cite{m} (independently discovered by Semmes \cite{s} and Donaldson \cite{do}). Though these metrics will be our primary object of study, unfortunately the associated weights $\chi_p(l)=l^p/p$ are not twice differentiable for $1 \leq p < 2$. This will cause problems as we shall see, and an approximation with more regular weights will be necessary to carry out even the most basic geometric arguments. For this reason, one needs to first work with even more general Finsler metrics on $\mathcal H_\omega$ with smooth weights in $\mathcal W^+_p$ (see \eqref{eq: GrowthEst}) and then use approximation via Propositions \ref{prop: approx_lemma} and \ref{prop: approx_lemma2} to return to the $L^p$ metrics in the end.
Following our discussion above, we introduce the Orlicz--Finsler length of $\xi$ for any weight $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: FinslerDef}
\|\xi\|_{\chi,u}=\inf \Big\{ r > 0 : \frac{1}{\textup{Vol}(X)}\int_X \chi\Big(\frac{\xi}{r}\Big) \omega_u^n \leq \chi(1) \Big\}.
\end{equation}
The above expression introduces a norm on each fiber of $T\mathcal H_\omega$, and the length of a smooth curve $[0,1]\ni t \to \alpha_t \in \mathcal{H}_\omega$ is computed by the usual formula:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: curve_length_def}
l_\chi(\alpha_t)=\int_0^1\|\dot \alpha_t\|_{\chi,\alpha_t}dt.
\end{equation}
To clarify, smoothness of $t \to \alpha_t$ simply means that the map $\alpha(t,x)=\alpha_t(x)$ is smooth as a map from $[0,1]\times X$ to $\Bbb R$.
Furthermore, the distance $d_\chi({u_0},{u_1})$ between ${u_0},{u_1} \in \mathcal H_\omega$ is the infimum of the $l_\chi$-length of smooth curves joining ${u_0}$ and ${u_1}$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: d_chi_def}
d_\chi(u_0,u_1)= \inf\{l_\chi(\gamma_t): \ t \to \gamma_t \ \textup{ is smooth and } \ \gamma_0 = u_0,\gamma_1=u_1 \}.
\end{equation}
The distance $d_\chi$ is a pseudo--metric (the triangle inequality holds), but $d_\chi(u,v)=0$ may not imply $u=v$, as our setting is infinite--dimensional. We will see in Theorem \ref{thm: XXChenThm} below that $d_\chi$ is a bona fide metric, but this will require a careful analysis of our Finsler structures.
When dealing with the $L^p$ metric structures \eqref{eq: Lp_metric_def}, the associated curve length and path length metric will be denoted by $l_p$ and $d_p$ respectively.
As we will see, the different weights in $\mathcal W^+_p$ induce different geometries on $\mathcal H_\omega$, however the equation for the shortest length curves between points of $\mathcal H_\omega$, the so called geodesics, will be essentially the same. Motivated by this, in the next section we will focus on the $L^2$ Riemannian geometry first, in which case we can get an explicit equation for these geodesics.
\section{Riemannian geometry of the space of K\"ahler potentials}
When $p=2$ the metric of \eqref{eq: Lp_metric_def} is induced by the following non-degenerate inner product:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Riem_metric_def}
\langle \phi, \psi\rangle_u= \frac{1}{\textup{Vol}(X)}\int_X \phi \psi \omega_u^n, \ \ u \in \mathcal H_\omega, \ \phi,\psi \in T_u \mathcal H_\omega.
\end{equation}
This Riemannian structure was first studied by Mabuchi \cite{m} and later independently by Semmes \cite{s} and Donaldson \cite{do}. For another introductory survey on the Mabuchi geometry of $\mathcal H_\omega$ we refer to \cite{bl1}.
Let us compute the Levi--Civita connection of this metric. For this we choose a smooth curve $[0,1] \ni t \to u_t \in \mathcal H_\omega$ and $[0,1] \ni t \to \phi_t,\psi_t \in C^\infty(X)$, two vector fields along $t \to u_t$.
In the future, when working with time derivatives, we will use the notation $\dot u_t = du_t/dt$, $\ddot u_t = d^2u_t/dt^2$, etc.
We will identify the Levi--Civita connection $\nabla_{(\cdot)}(\cdot)$, using the fact that it is torsion free and satisfies the following product rule:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Levi_Civita_product}
\frac{d}{dt}\langle \phi_t,\psi_t\rangle_{u_t}=\langle \nabla_{\dot u_t} \phi_t,\psi_t \rangle_{u_t} + \langle\phi_t,\nabla_{\dot u_t} \psi_t \rangle_{u_t}.
\end{equation}
Using the identities $\frac{d}{dt}\omega_{u_t}^n=n i \del\dbar \dot u_t \wedge \omega_{u_t}^{n-1}=\frac{1}{2}\Delta^{\omega_{u_t}} \dot u_t \omega_{u_t}^n$ and $-\int_X \langle\nabla^{\omega_{u_t}}f, \nabla^{\omega_{u_t}}g\rangle\omega_{u_t}^n=\int_X f \Delta^{\omega_{u_t}}g\omega_{u_t}^n$ (see the discussion following \eqref{eq: Lapl_grad_formula} in the appendix), we can start writing:
\begin{flalign*}
\frac{d}{dt}\langle \phi_t,\psi_t\rangle_{u_t} &= \int_X (\dot \phi_t \psi_t + \phi_t \dot \psi_t + \frac{1}{2}\phi_t\psi_t\Delta^{\omega_{u_t}} \dot u_t) \omega_{u_t}^n\\
&= \int_X (\dot \phi_t \psi_t + \phi_t \dot \psi_t - \frac{1}{2}\langle \nabla^{\omega_{u_t}}(\phi_t\psi_t),\nabla^{\omega_{u_t}} \dot u_t \rangle) \omega_{u_t}^n\\
&= \int_X (\dot \phi_t - \frac{1}{2}\langle \nabla^{\omega_{u_t}}\phi_t,\nabla^{\omega_{u_t}} \dot u_t \rangle)\psi_t \omega_{u_t}^n+\int_X \phi_t(\dot \psi_t - \frac{1}{2}\langle \nabla^{\omega_{u_t}}\psi_t,\nabla^{\omega_{u_t}} \dot u_t \rangle) \omega_{u_t}^n.
\end{flalign*}
Comparing with \eqref{eq: Levi_Civita_product}, this line of calculation suggests the following formula for the Levi--Civita connection, and it is easy to see that the resulting connection is indeed torsion free:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: CovDerivative}
\nabla_{\dot u_t} \phi_t = \dot \phi_t - \frac{1}{2}\langle \nabla^{\omega_{u_t}} \dot u_t , \nabla^{\omega_{u_t}} \phi_t \rangle, \ t \in [0,1].
\end{equation}
This immidiately implies that $t\to u_t$ is a geodesic if and only if $\nabla_{\dot u_t} \dot u_t=0$, or equivalently
\begin{equation}\label{eq: geod_eq_Lev_Civ}
\ddot u_t - \frac{1}{2}\langle \nabla^{\omega_{u_t}} \dot u_t , \nabla^{\omega_{u_t}} \dot u_t \rangle=0, \ t \in [0,1].
\end{equation}
As discovered independently by Semmes \cite{s} and Donaldson \cite{do}, the above equation can be understood as a complex Monge--Amp\`ere equation. For this one has to introduce the trivial complexification $u \in C^\infty(S\times X)$, using the formula
$$u(s,x) = u_{\textup{Re }s}(x),$$
where $S = \{0 < \textup{Re s} <1 \} \subset \Bbb C$ is the unit strip. We pick a coordinate patch $U \subset X$, where the metric $\omega_u$ has a potential $g_u \in C^\infty(X)$, i.e., $\omega_u = i\del\dbar g_u=i{g_u}_{j\bar k}dz_j \wedge d \bar z_k$. Then on $[0,1] \times U$ the geodesic equation \eqref{eq: geod_eq_Lev_Civ} is seen to be equivalent to $\ddot u - g_u^{j\bar k}\dot {u}_j\dot {u}_{\bar k}=0$, where $g_u^{j\bar k}$ is the inverse of ${g_u}_{j\bar k}$. By involving the complexified variable $s$, this identity is further seen to be equivalent to
$u_{s\bar s} - g_u^{j\bar k} u_{j\bar s} u_{s\bar k}=0$ on $S\times U$. After multiplying with $\det({g_u}_{j\bar k})$, this last equation can be written globally on $S \times X$ as:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: geodesic_eq}
(\pi^*\omega + i \partial \overline{\partial}u)^{n+1}=0.
\end{equation}
where $\pi: S \times X \to X$ is the projection map to the second component. Consequently, the problem of joining the potentials $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$ with a smooth geodesic equates to finding a smooth solution $u \in \mathcal C^\infty({S} \times X)$ to the following boundary value problem:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: BVPGeod}
\begin{cases}
(\pi^* \omega + i \partial \overline{\partial}u)^{n+1}=0, \\
\omega + i \partial \overline{\partial}u\big|_{\{s \}\times X} >0, \ s \in S, \\
u(t+ir,x) =u(t,x) \ \forall x \in X, t \in (0,1), \ r \in \Bbb R.\\
\lim_{s \to 0}u(s,\cdot)=u_0 \textup{ and }\lim_{s \to 1}u(s,\cdot)=u_1.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
To be precise, here $\lim_{s \to 0,1}u(s,\cdot)=u_{0,1}$ simply means that $u(s,\cdot)$ converges uniformly to $u_{0,1}$ as $ s \to 0,1$.
Unfortunately, as detailed below, this boundary value problem does not usually have smooth solutions, but a unique weak solution (in the sense of Bedford--Taylor) does exist. Instead, one replaces \eqref{eq: geod_eq_Lev_Civ} with the following equation for $\varepsilon$\emph{-geodesics}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: eps_geod_eq_Lev_Civ}
(\ddot u^\varepsilon_t - \frac{1}{2}\langle \nabla^{\omega_{u^\varepsilon_t}} \dot u^\varepsilon_t , \nabla^{\omega_{u^\varepsilon_t}} \dot u^\varepsilon_t \rangle)\omega_{u^\varepsilon_t}^n=\varepsilon \omega^n, \ t \in [0,1].
\end{equation}
By an elementary calculation, similar to the one giving \eqref{eq: geodesic_eq}, the associated boundary value problem for this equation becomes:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: epsBVPGeod}
\begin{cases}
(\pi^* \omega + i \partial \overline{\partial}u^\varepsilon)^{n+1}=\frac{\varepsilon}{4} (i ds \wedge d\bar{s} + \pi^* \omega)^{n+1},\\
u^\varepsilon(t+ir,x) =u^\varepsilon(t,x) \ \forall x \in X, t \in (0,1), r \in \Bbb R.\\
\lim_{s \to 0}u^\varepsilon(s,\cdot)=u_0 \textup{ and }\lim_{s \to 1}u^\varepsilon(s,\cdot)=u_1.\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Since $\omega_{u_0},\omega_{u_1}>0$, we see that $\pi^* \omega + i \partial \overline{\partial}u^\varepsilon>0$ on $S \times X$. As a result the condition $\omega + i \partial \overline{\partial}u|_{\{s \}\times X} >0, \ s \in S$ is automatically satisfied.
In contrast with \eqref{eq: BVPGeod}, this Dirichlet problem is elliptic and its solutions are smooth, moreover we have the following regularity result due to X.X. Chen \cite{c1} (with complements by Blocki \cite{bl1}):
\begin{theorem}\label{thm: ueps_estimates}The boundary value problem \eqref{eq: epsBVPGeod} admits a unique smooth solution $u^\varepsilon \in C^\infty(\overline{S} \times X)$ with the following bounds that are independent of $\varepsilon>0$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: ueps_estimates}
\| u^\varepsilon\|_{C^0(\overline{S} \times X)},\| u^\varepsilon\|_{C^{1}(\overline{S} \times X)}, \|\Delta u^\varepsilon \|_{C^0(\overline{S} \times X)} \leq C(\|u_0\|_{C^{3}(X)},\|u_1\|_{C^{3}(X)},X,\omega).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
Recall from our discussion preceding \eqref{eq: H_01bar1_def} that having a bound on $\Delta u$ is equivalent to bounding all mixed second order complex derivatives of $u$ on $S\times X$.
We refer to \cite[Theorem 12]{bl1} for an elaborate treatment of Theorem \ref{thm: ueps_estimates} (see also the survey paper \cite{bo}). Although we will not need it, let us mention that recently Chu--Tosatti--Weinkove have showed that one can more generally bound the Hessian of $u^\varepsilon$ \cite{ctw} independently of $\varepsilon$. Additionally, it was shown by Berman--Demailly \cite{bd} and He \cite{he1} that one can in fact bound each $\Delta^\omega u_t^\varepsilon, \ t \in [0,1],$ using bounds on $\Delta^\omega u_0$ and $\Delta^\omega u_1$.
Using the Bedford--Taylor interpretation of $(\pi^* \omega + i \partial \overline{\partial}u^\varepsilon)^{n+1}$ as a Borel measure, the boundary value problems \eqref{eq: BVPGeod} and \eqref{eq: epsBVPGeod} can be stated for $u, u^\varepsilon \in \textup{PSH}(S \times X, \pi^* \omega)$ that are only bounded and not necessarily smooth. Additionally, after pulling back by the $\log$ function, we can equivalently state \eqref{eq: BVPGeod} and \eqref{eq: epsBVPGeod} as boundary value problems with circle--invariant solutions on $A \times X$, where $ A$ is the annulus $\{e^0 < |z| < e^1 \} \subset \Bbb C$. Consequently, the next result (whose proof closely follows \cite[Theorem 21]{bl1}) will assure that uniqueness of solutions to \eqref{eq: BVPGeod} and \eqref{eq: epsBVPGeod} holds not only for smooth solutions, but also for solutions that are merely in $\textup{PSH}(S \times X, \pi^* \omega) \cap L^\infty$:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm: uniqueness_BVP} Suppose $M$ is a $k$ dimensional compact complex manifold with smooth boundary and K\"ahler form $\eta$. If $u,v \in \textup{PSH}(M,\eta) \cap L^\infty$ with $\liminf_{x \to \partial M}(u-v)(x) \geq 0$ and $(\eta + i\del\dbar v)^k \geq (\eta + i\del\dbar u)^k $, then $u \geq v$ on $M$.
\end{theorem}
Since $\pi^* \omega$ is only non-negative on $S \times X$, the above result is not directly applicable to our situation. This small inconvenience can be fixed by taking $\eta := \pi^* \omega + i\partial \overline{\partial} g$, where $g$ is a smooth function on $S$, such that $i\partial \overline{\partial} g >0$, $g(t + ir) =g(t)$, and $g(ir)=g(1+ir)=0$.
\begin{proof} Let $\delta >0$ and $v_\delta := \max(u,v -\delta) \in \textup{PSH}(M,\eta) \cap L^\infty$. Then $v_\delta = u$ near $\partial M$. To conclude the proof, it is enough to show that $v_\delta =u$ on $M$.
From Bedford--Taylor theory (see \cite[Theorem 2.2.10]{bl3}) it follows that
$$\eta_{v_\delta}^k \geq \mathbbm{1}_{\{u \geq v-\delta\}}\eta_{u}^k + \mathbbm{1}_{\{u < v-\delta\}}\eta_{v}^k \geq \eta_{u}^k.$$
As $v_\delta$ and $u$ agree near the boundary and $v_\delta \geq u$, we can integrate by parts \cite[Theorem 1.3.4]{bl3} and write:
$$0 \leq \int_M (v_\delta-u) (\eta_{v_\delta}^k-\eta_u^k) = -\sum_{j=0}^{k-1} \int_M i \partial (v_\delta-u) \wedge \bar \partial (v_\delta-u) \wedge \eta_{u}^j \wedge \eta_{v_\delta}^{k-j-1}.$$
As each of the summands above is non-negative, it follows that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: somezeroid}
\int_M i \partial (u-v_\delta) \wedge \bar \partial (u-v_\delta) \wedge \eta_{u}^j \wedge \eta_{v_\delta}^{k-j-1}=0, \ j \in \{0,1,\ldots,k-1\}.
\end{equation}
The equality $v_\delta=u$ will follow, if we can show that $\int_M i \partial (u-v_\delta) \wedge \bar \partial (u-v_\delta) \wedge \eta^{k-1}=0$. Indeed, this would imply that all Sobolev derivatives of $u-v_\delta$ are zero. This last identity will be established as the last step in an inductive argument showing that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: firstzeroid}
\int_M i \partial (u-v_\delta) \wedge \bar \partial (u-v_\delta) \wedge \eta_{u}^j \wedge \eta^{k-j-1}=0, \ j \in \{0,1,\ldots,k-1\}.\end{equation}
This identity holds for $j=k-1$ by the above. As all the steps are carried out similarly, we only show that
\begin{equation} \label{eq: L^2normgradzero} \int_M i \partial (u-v_\delta) \wedge \bar \partial (u-v_\delta) \wedge \eta_{u}^{k-2} \wedge \eta=0.
\end{equation}
Denote $f = u - v_\delta$. Using \eqref{eq: firstzeroid} and integration by parts we can write:
\begin{flalign} \label{eq: random_estimate}
\int_{M} i \partial f \wedge \bar\partial f \wedge \eta_{u}^{k-2} \wedge \eta &= \int_{M} i \partial f \wedge \bar\partial f \wedge \eta_{u}^{k-1}- \int_{M} i \partial f \wedge \bar\partial f \wedge i\del\dbar u \wedge \eta_{u}^{k-2} \nonumber\\
&=- \int_{M} i \partial f \wedge i\del\dbar u \wedge \bar\partial f \wedge\eta_{u}^{k-2} \nonumber\\
&= -\int_{M} i \partial f \wedge \bar\partial u \wedge (\eta_u - \eta_{v_
\delta}) \wedge \eta_{u}^{k-2} \nonumber\\
&= -\int_{M} i \partial f \wedge \bar\partial u \wedge \eta_{u}^{k-1}+\int_{M} i \partial f \wedge \bar\partial u \wedge \eta_{v_\delta} \wedge \eta_{u}^{k-2}.
\end{flalign}
Using the Cauchy--Schwarz inequality of Bedford--Taylor theory \cite{bl3} we can write
$$\bigg|\int_{M} i \partial f \wedge \bar\partial u \wedge \eta_{u}^{k-1}\bigg|^2 \leq \int_{M} i \partial u \wedge \bar\partial u \wedge \eta_{u}^{k-1} \cdot \int_{M} i \partial f \wedge \bar\partial f \wedge \eta_{u}^{k-1},$$
hence by \eqref{eq: somezeroid}, it follows that the first term in \eqref{eq: random_estimate} is zero. It can be shown similarly that the second term in \eqref{eq: random_estimate} is zero as well, implying \eqref{eq: L^2normgradzero} and finishing the proof.
\end{proof}
Now we return to \eqref{eq: BVPGeod} and \eqref{eq: epsBVPGeod}. As each $u^\varepsilon$ is invariant in the $i\Bbb R$ direction, plurisubharmonicity of $u^\varepsilon$ implies that $t \to u^\varepsilon(t,x)$ is convex for each $x \in X$. As each $u^\varepsilon$ solves the boundary value problem \eqref{eq: epsBVPGeod}, we additionally obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: ueps_upper_bound}
u^{\varepsilon}(s,x) \leq (1-\textup{Re }s) u_0(x) + \textup{Re }s u_1(x).
\end{equation}
On top of proving uniqueness of general solutions to \eqref{eq: BVPGeod} and \eqref{eq: epsBVPGeod}, the above theorem also shows that the family $\{ u^\varepsilon\}_\varepsilon$ increases as $\varepsilon \searrow 0$. Using this, \eqref{eq: ueps_upper_bound} and the continuity of the complex Monge--Amp\`ere operator along increasing sequences \cite[Theorem 2.2.5]{bl3} it follows that solutions of \eqref{eq: epsBVPGeod} approximate solutions of \eqref{eq: BVPGeod}, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{eq: epsgeod_limit}
\lim_{\varepsilon \to 0} u^\varepsilon = u.
\end{equation}
From here, an application of the Arzela--Ascoli compactness theorem yields that the estimates of \eqref{eq: ueps_estimates} also hold for solutions of \eqref{eq: BVPGeod}:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm: u_estimates} For the unique solution $u \in \textup{PSH}(S \times X,\pi^* \omega)$ of \eqref{eq: BVPGeod} the following estimates hold:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: u_estimates}
\| u\|_{C^0(\overline{S} \times X)},\| u\|_{C^{1}(\overline{S} \times X)}, \|\Delta u \|_{C^0(\overline{S} \times X)} \leq C(\|u_0\|_{C^{3}(X)},\|u_1\|_{C^{3}(X)},X,\omega).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
By the examples of \cite{lv,dl} this regularity result is essentially optimal, as no higher order estimates are possible for weak solutions. Often we will refer to the unique solution of \eqref{eq: BVPGeod} as the \emph{weak} $C^{1,\bar 1}$--\emph{geodesic} joining $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$, and it will be denoted as
\begin{equation}\label{eq: weak_geod_def}
[0,1] \ni t \to u_t \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}.
\end{equation}
Moving on, as follows from standard elliptic PDE theory, given a smooth family of boundary data for \eqref{eq: epsBVPGeod} one obtains a corresponding smooth family of solutions. As another simple consequence of the uniqueness theorem, we obtain a uniform bound on the rate of change of this family as the parameter changes:
\begin{corollary}[\cite{c1}]\label{cor: duds_estimate}
Suppose $[0,1] \ni \rho \to u_0(\cdot,\rho),u_1(\cdot,\rho) \in \mathcal H_\omega$ is smooth family of boundary data for \eqref{eq: epsBVPGeod}. For the smooth family of solutions $[0,1] \ni \rho \to u^\varepsilon(\cdot,\cdot,\rho) \in C^\infty(\overline {S} \times X)$ we have the following estimate for all $\varepsilon>0$:
$$\Big\|\frac{du^\varepsilon}{d\rho}\Big\|_{C^0( \overline{S} \times X \times [0,1])} \leq \max\Big(\Big\|\frac{du_0}{d\rho}\Big\|_{C^0(X \times [0,1])},\Big\|\frac{du_1}{d\rho}\Big\|_{C^0(X \times [0,1])}\Big).$$
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}Let $\rho_0 \in [0,1]$ and $C > \max(\|{du_0}/{d\rho}\|_{C^0(X \times [0,1])},\|{du_1}/{d\rho}\|_{C^0(X \times [0,1])}).$ Then Theorem \ref{thm: uniqueness_BVP} implies that
$$u^\varepsilon(s,x,\rho_0) - C\delta \leq u^\varepsilon(s,x,\rho_0+\delta) \leq u^\varepsilon(s,x,\rho_0) + C\delta, \ (s,x) \in \overline{S} \times X$$
for all $\delta \in \Bbb R$ such that $\rho_0 + \delta \in [0,1]$. This gives that ${|u^\varepsilon(s,x,\rho_0+\delta)-u^\varepsilon(s,x,\rho_0)|}/{\delta} \leq C,$
implying the desired estimate.
\end{proof}
As a last consequence of the uniqueness theorem, we note the following concrete estimate for the tangent vectors of weak $C^{1,\bar 1}$-geodesics:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: dot_u_est} Given $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$, let $[0,1] \ni t \to u_t \in \mathcal H_\omega$ be the weak $C^{1,\bar 1}$--geodesic joining $u_0,u_1$. Then the following estimate holds:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: dot_u_est}
\| \dot u_t\|_{C^0(X)} \leq \| u_0 - u_1\|_{C^0(X)}, \ \ \ t \in [0,1].
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Let $C := \sup_X |u_0 - u_1|$. Convexity in the $t$ variable implies that $\dot u_0 \leq \dot u_t \leq \dot u_1$. Hence we only need to show that $-C \leq \dot u_0$ and $\dot u_1 \leq C$.
Examining \eqref{eq: geod_eq_Lev_Civ}, it is clear that the curve $[0,1] \in t \to v_t:= u_0 - C t \in \mathcal H_\omega$ is a smooth geodesic connecting $u_0$ and $u_0 - C$. Hence its complexification $v$ is a solution to \eqref{eq: BVPGeod}.
As $u_0 - C \leq u_1$, Theorem \ref{thm: uniqueness_BVP} gives that that $v_t \leq u_t, \ t \in [0,1]$, implying that $-C \leq \dot u_0$.
The same trick applied to the ``reverse" $C^{1,\bar 1}$--geodesic $t \to u_{1-t}$ gives $-C \leq - \dot u_1$, finishing the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{The Orlicz geometry of the space of K\"ahler potentials}
As discussed in the beginning of the present chapter, in our study of $L^p$ Finsler metrics on $\mathcal H_\omega$, we need to return to the full generality of Orlicz--Finsler metrics \eqref{eq: FinslerDef} on $\mathcal H_\omega$ with weight in $\mathcal W^+_p$. We will do this in this section, and our main theorem connects the $d_\chi$ pseudo--distance (see \eqref{eq: d_chi_def}) with the weak $C^{1,\bar 1}$ geodesic of the $L^2$ Mabuchi geometry (see \eqref{eq: weak_geod_def}), in the process showing that $d_\chi$ is indeed a bona fide metric:
\begin{theorem}\textup{\cite[Theorem 1]{da2}}\label{thm: XXChenThm} If $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p, \ p \geq 1$ then $(\mathcal H_\omega,d_\chi)$ is a metric space and for any $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$ the weak $C^{1,\bar 1}$ geodesic $t \to u_t$ connecting $u_0,u_1$ satisfies:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: ChiDistGeodFormula}
d_\chi(u_0,u_1)=\|\dot u_t \|_{\chi,u_t}, \ t \in [0,1].
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
Although the metric spaces $(\mathcal H_\omega, d_\chi)$ are not quasi isometric for different $\chi$ (as we will see, they have different metric completions), it is remarkable that the \emph{same} weak $C^{1 \bar 1}$--geodesic is ``length minimzing'' for \emph{all} $d_\chi$ metric structures. Additionally, as we will see in the next sections, this same curve is an honest metric geodesic in the completion of each space $(\mathcal H_\omega, d_\chi)$.
In the proof of Theorem \ref{thm: XXChenThm}, we first show the result for Finsler metrics with smooth weight $\chi$, and afterwards use approximation via Proposition \ref{prop: approx_lemma} and Proposition \ref{prop: approx_lemma2} to establish the result for all metrics with weight in $\mathcal W^+_p$, which includes as particular case the $L^p$ metrics.
In the particular case of the $L^2$ metric, Theorem \ref{thm: XXChenThm} was obtained by X.X. Chen \cite{c1} and our proof in case of Finsler metrics with smooth weight follows his ideas and a careful differential analysis of Orlicz norms.
To ease the technical nature of future calculations, for the rest of this section we assume the normalizing condition
\begin{equation}\label{eq: vol_normalization}
V:=\textup{Vol}(X)=\int_X \omega^n = 1.
\end{equation}
This can always be achieved by rescaling the K\"ahler metric $\omega$.
Given a differentiable normalized Young weight $\chi$, the differentiability of the associated norm $\| \cdot\|_\chi$ (see \eqref{eq: OrliczNormDef}) is well understood (see \cite[Chapter VII]{rr}). As a first step in proving Theorem \ref{thm: XXChenThm}, we adapt \cite[Theorem VII.2.3]{rr} to our setting:
\begin{proposition}\textup{\cite[Proposition 3.1]{da2}}\label{prop: OrliczNormDiff} Suppose $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p \cap C^\infty(\Bbb R)$. Given a smooth curve $(0,1) \ni t \to u_t \in \mathcal H_\omega$, and a vector field $(0,1) \ni t \to f_t \in C^\infty(X)$ along this curve with $f_t \not \equiv 0, \ t\in (0,1)$, the following formula holds:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: OrliczNormDiffEq}
\frac{d}{dt}\|f_t\|_{\chi,u_t} = \frac{\int_X \chi' \Big(\frac{f_t}{\|f_t\|_{\chi,u_t}}\Big)\nabla_{\dot u_t} f_t \omega_{u_t}^n}{\int_X \chi'\Big(\frac{f_t}{\|f_t\|_{\chi,u_t}}\Big) \frac{f_t}{\|f_t\|_{\chi,u_t}} \omega_{u_t}^n},
\end{equation}
where $\nabla_{(\cdot)}(\cdot)$ is the covariant derivative from \eqref{eq: CovDerivative}.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We introduce the smooth function $F: \Bbb R^+ \times (0,1) \to \Bbb R$ given by
$$F(r,t) = \int_X \chi\Big(\frac{f_t}{r}\Big)\omega_{u_t}^n.$$
As $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p$, by \eqref{eq: GrowthControl} we have $\chi'(l) >0, \ l >0$ and $\chi'(l) <0, \ l <0$. As $t \to f_t$ is non-vanishing, it follows that
$$\frac{d}{dr} F(r,t)=- \frac{1}{r^2}\int_X {f_t} \chi'\Big(\frac{f_t}{r}\Big) \omega_{u_t}^n < 0$$
for all $r > 0,\ t \in (0,1)$. Using the fact that
$F(\|f_t\|_{\chi,u_t},t) = \chi(1)$ (see \eqref{eq: OrliczNormId}), an application of the implicit function theorem yields that the map $t \to \|f_{t}\|_{\chi,u_t}$ is differentiable and the following formula holds:
$$\frac{d}{dt}\|f_t\|_{\chi,u_t} =
\frac{\int_X \Big[\dot f_t \chi'\Big(\frac{f_t}{\|f_t\|_{\chi,u_t}}\Big) + \frac{1}{2} \|f_t\|_{\chi,u_t} \chi\Big(\frac{f_t}{\|f_t\|_{\chi,u_t}}\Big) \Delta^{\omega_{u_t}} \dot u_t \Big] \omega_{u_t}^n}{\int_X \frac{f_t}{\|f_t\|_{\chi,u_t}} \chi'\Big(\frac{f_t}{\|f_t\|_{\chi,u_t}}\Big) \omega_{u_t}^n}.$$
Recalling the formula for the covariant derivative \eqref{eq: CovDerivative}, an integration by parts yields \eqref{eq: OrliczNormDiffEq}.
\end{proof}
The estimate for $\varepsilon$--geodesics (see \eqref{eq: eps_geod_eq_Lev_Civ}) from the following technical lemma will be of great use in our later study:
\begin{lemma} \label{lem: dotintegralest} Suppose $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p \cap C^\infty(\Bbb R)$ and $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$. Then the $\varepsilon$--geodesic $[0,1] \ni t \to u^\varepsilon_t \in \mathcal H_\omega$ connecting $u_0,u_1$ satisfies the following estimate:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: dotintegralest}\int_X \chi( \dot u^\varepsilon_t ) \omega_{u^\varepsilon_t}^n \geq \max\Big(\int_X \chi(\min(u_1 - u_0,0))\omega_{u_0}^n,\int_X \chi(\min(u_0 - u_1,0))\omega_{u_1}^n\Big) -\varepsilon R > 0,
\end{equation}
for all $t \in [0,1]$, where $R:=R(\chi, \| u_0\|_{C^2}, \| u_1\|_{C^2})$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
As $t \to u^\varepsilon_t(x)$ is convex for any $x \in X$, on the set $\{ u_0 \geq u_1 \}$ the estimate $\dot u^\varepsilon_0 \leq u_1 - u_0\leq 0$ holds, hence
$$\int_X \chi( \dot u^\varepsilon_0 ) \omega_{u_0}^n \geq \int_X \chi(\min(u_1 - u_0,0))\omega_{u_0}^n.$$
We can similarly deduce that
$$\int_X \chi( \dot u^\varepsilon_1 ) \omega_{u_1}^n \geq \int_X \chi(\min(u_0 - u_1,0))\omega_{u_1}^n.$$
For $t \in [0,1]$, using the Riemannian connection $\nabla_{(\cdot)}(\cdot)$ (see \eqref{eq: CovDerivative}) and the fact that $t \to u^\varepsilon_t$ is an $\varepsilon$--geodesic (see \eqref{eq: eps_geod_eq_Lev_Civ}), we can write:
$$
\Big|\frac{d}{dt} \int_X \chi(\dot u^\varepsilon_t) \omega_{u^\varepsilon_t}^n\Big|=\Big|\int_X \chi'(\dot u^\varepsilon_t) \nabla_{\dot u^\varepsilon_t} \dot u^\varepsilon_t\omega_{u^\varepsilon_t}^n\Big|= \varepsilon \Big|\int_X \chi'(\dot u^\varepsilon_t) \omega^n\Big| \leq \varepsilon R(\chi, \| u_0\|_{C^2}, \| u_1\|_{C^2}),$$
where in the last estimate we have used that $\dot u^\varepsilon_t$ is uniformly bounded in terms of $\| u_0\|_{C^2}, \| u_1\|_{C^2}$ (Theorem \ref{thm: ueps_estimates}). After putting together the last three estimates, \eqref{eq: dotintegralest} follows.
\end{proof}
As a consequence of the previous two results we obtain the following corollary:
\begin{corollary} \label{cor: EpsGeodDiffCor} Suppose $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p \cap C^\infty(\Bbb R)$ and $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega, \ u_0 \neq u_1$. Then there exists $\varepsilon_0 >0$ dependent on upper bounds for $\| u_0\|_{C^2(X)}, \| u_1\|_{C^2(X)}$ and lower bounds for $\|\chi(u_1 -u_0)\|_{L^1(\omega^n)}, \omega_{u_0}^n /\omega^n$ and $\omega_{u_1}^n /\omega^n$, such that for all $\varepsilon \in (0,\varepsilon_0)$ the $\varepsilon$--geodesic $[0,1] \ni t \to u^\varepsilon_t \in \mathcal H_\omega$ of \eqref{eq: epsBVPGeod}, connecting $u_0,u_1$ satisfies:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: EpsGeodDiffEq}
\frac{d}{dt}\|\dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t}=\varepsilon\frac{\int_X \chi'\Big(\frac{\dot u^\varepsilon_t}{\|\dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t}}\Big)\omega^n} {\int_X \frac{\dot u^\varepsilon_t}{\|\dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t}} \chi'\Big(\frac{\dot u^\varepsilon_t}{\|\dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t}}\Big) \omega_{u^\varepsilon_t}^n}, \ t \in [0,1].
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}This is a simple application of the formula of Proposition \ref{prop: OrliczNormDiff} for the $\varepsilon$--geodesic $t \to u^\varepsilon_t$ and the vector field $t \to f_t := \dot u_t$. Indeed, by the previous lemma, one can choose $\varepsilon_0>0$ as indicated, so that $\dot u_t$ is non-vanishing for all $t \in [0,1]$, hence the assumptions of Proposition \ref{prop: OrliczNormDiff} are satisfied.
\end{proof}
Continuing to focus on smooth weights $\chi$, we establish concrete bounds for the $\chi$--length of tangent vectors along the $\varepsilon$--geodesics and their derivatives. This is the analog of \cite[Lemma 13]{bl1} in our more general setting:
\begin{proposition} \label{prop: EpsGeodTanEst} Suppose $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p \cap C^\infty(\Bbb R)$ and $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega, \ u_0 \neq u_1$. Then there exists $\varepsilon_0 >0$ such that for any $\varepsilon \in(0,\varepsilon_0)$ the $\varepsilon$--geodesic $[0,1] \ni t \to u^\varepsilon_t \in \mathcal H_\omega$ connecting $u_0,u_1$ satisfies:\vspace{0.1cm}\\
\noindent(i)$\| \dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t} > R_0, \ t \in [0,1]$,\\
\noindent(ii)$\big|\frac{d}{dt}\|\dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t}\big| \leq \varepsilon R_1, \ t \in [0,1]$,\vspace{0.1cm}\\
where $\varepsilon_0,R_0,R_1$ depend on upper bounds for $\| u_0\|_{C^2(X)}$, $\| u_1\|_{C^2(X)}$ and lower bounds for $\|\chi(u_1 -u_0)\|_{L^1(\omega^n)}, \omega_{u_0}^n /\omega^n$ and $\omega_{u_1}^n /\omega^n$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}The estimate of (i) follows from \eqref{eq: dotintegralest} and Proposition \ref{prop: NormIntegralEst}. To establish (ii) we shrink $\varepsilon_0$ enough to satisfy the requirements of Corollary \ref{cor: EpsGeodDiffCor}. Using the Young identity \eqref{eq: YoungIdIneq} we can write:
\begin{flalign}\label{epstangentest}
\Big|\frac{d}{dt}\|\dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t}\Big|&=\varepsilon\frac{\Big|\int_X \chi'\Big(\frac{\dot u^\varepsilon_t}{\|\dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t}}\Big)\omega^n\Big|} {\int_X \frac{\dot u^\varepsilon_t}{\|\dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t}} \chi'\Big(\frac{\dot u^\varepsilon_t}{\|\dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t}}\Big) \omega_{u^\varepsilon_t}^n}=\varepsilon\frac{\Big|\int_X \chi'\Big(\frac{\dot u^\varepsilon_t}{\|\dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t}}\Big)\omega^n\Big|} {\chi(1)+\int_X \chi^*\Big(\chi'\Big(\frac{\dot u^\varepsilon_t}{\|\dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t}}\Big)\Big) \omega_{u^\varepsilon_t}^n}\leq \nonumber \\
&\leq \frac{\varepsilon}{\chi(1)}\int_X \chi'\Big(\frac{\dot u^\varepsilon_t}{\|\dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t}}\Big)\omega^n.
\end{flalign}
Using (i) and the fact that $\dot u^\varepsilon_t$ is uniformly bounded in terms of $\| u_0\|_{C^2}, \| u_1\|_{C^2}$ (Theorem \ref{thm: ueps_estimates}) the estimate of (ii) follows.
\end{proof}
We can now establish the main geometric estimate for $\varepsilon$--geodesics, which generalizes the corresponding statement for the $L^2$--metric (\cite[Theorem 14]{bl1}):
\begin{proposition}[\cite{da2}] Suppose $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p \cap C^\infty(\Bbb R)$, $[0,1] \ni s \to \psi_s \in\mathcal H_\omega$ is a smooth curve, $\phi \in \mathcal H_\omega \setminus \psi([0,1])$ and $\varepsilon >0$. We denote by $u^\varepsilon \in C^\infty([0,1]\times [0,1] \times X)$ the smooth function for which $[0,1] \ni t \to u^\varepsilon_t(\cdot,s):= u^\varepsilon(t,\cdot,s) \in \mathcal H_\omega$ is the $\varepsilon$--geodesic connecting $\phi$ and $\psi_s$. There exists $\varepsilon_0(\phi,\psi) >0$ such that for any $\varepsilon \in(0,\varepsilon_0)$ the following holds:
$$l_\chi(u^\varepsilon_t(\cdot,0)) \leq l_\chi(\psi) + l_\chi(u^\varepsilon_t(\cdot,1)) + \varepsilon R,$$
for some $R(\phi,\psi,\chi,\varepsilon_0) >0$ independent of $\varepsilon >0$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}Whenever it will not cause confusion, we will drop sub/superscripts when addressing the $\varepsilon$--geodesic $t \to u^\varepsilon_t(\cdot,s)$. To avoid cumbersome notation, derivatives in the $t$--direction will be denoted by dots, derivatives in the $s$--direction will be denoted by $d/ds$, and sometimes we also omit dependence on $(t,s)$.
Fix $s \in [0,1]$. By Proposition \ref{prop: OrliczNormDiff} and Proposition \ref{prop: EpsGeodTanEst}(i) there exists $\varepsilon_0(\phi,\psi)>0$ such that for $\varepsilon \in (0,\varepsilon_0)$ the following holds:
\begin{flalign*}
\frac{d}{ds}l_\chi(u_t(\cdot,s))&= \int_0^1 \frac{d}{ds} \|\dot u(t,\cdot, s))\|_{\chi,u(t,s)}dt = \int_0^1 \frac{\int_X \chi' \Big(\frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}}\Big)\nabla_{\frac{du}{ds}}\dot u \omega_{u}^n}{\int_X \chi'\Big(\frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}}\Big) \frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}} \omega_{u}^n}dt
\end{flalign*}
Using the Young identity \eqref{eq: YoungIdIneq} and the fact that $\nabla_{(\cdot)}(\cdot)$ is a Riemannian connection, we can continue:
\begin{flalign}\label{eq: anothercalc}
&=\int_0^1 \frac{\int_X \chi' \Big(\frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}}\Big)\nabla_{\frac{du}{ds}}\dot u \omega_{u}^n}{\chi(1) + \int_X \chi^*\Big(\chi'\Big(\frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}}\Big)\Big)\omega_{u}^n}dt \nonumber\\
&=\int_0^1 \frac{\int_X \chi' \Big(\frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}}\Big)\nabla_{\dot u}\frac{du}{ds} \omega_{u}^n}{\chi(1) + \int_X \chi^*\Big(\chi'\Big(\frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}}\Big)\Big)\omega_{u}^n}dt\nonumber\\
&=\int_0^1 \frac{\frac{d}{dt}\int_X \chi' \Big(\frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}}\Big)\frac{du}{ds}\omega_{u}^n -\int_X \frac{du}{ds} \nabla_{\dot u}\Big(\chi' \Big(\frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}}\Big)\Big) \omega_{u}^n}{\chi(1) + \int_X \chi^*\Big(\chi'\Big(\frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}}\Big)\Big)\omega_{u}^n}dt.
\end{flalign}
We make the following side computation:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: interimnabla}
\nabla_{\dot u}\Big(\chi' \Big(\frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}}\Big)\Big)\omega_{u}^n=\chi'' \Big(\frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}}\Big)\Big( \frac{\nabla_{\dot u}\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}} - \frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}^2}\frac{d}{dt}\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}\Big)\omega_u^n.
\end{equation}
After possibly further shrinking $\varepsilon_0(\phi,\psi) >0$, from Proposition \ref{prop: EpsGeodTanEst}(i)(ii) and \eqref{eq: eps_geod_eq_Lev_Civ} it follows that $\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}$ is uniformly bounded away from zero and both $\nabla_{\dot u} \dot u\omega_u^n$ and $\frac{d}{dt} \|\dot u \|_{\chi,u}$ are of the form $\varepsilon R$, where $R$ is an uniformly bounded quantity for $\varepsilon < \varepsilon_0(\phi,\psi)$.
Furthermore, it follows from Theorem \ref{thm: ueps_estimates} that $\dot u$ is uniformly bounded independently of $\varepsilon$. All of this implies that the quantity of \eqref{eq: interimnabla} is also of the form $\varepsilon R$. Lastly, Corollary \ref{cor: duds_estimate} implies that $du/ds$ is uniformly bounded as well, hence putting the above together it follows that the second term in the numerator of \eqref{eq: anothercalc} is also of the form $\varepsilon R$, and we can continue to write:
\begin{flalign*}
&= \int_0^1 \frac{\frac{d}{dt}\int_X \chi' \Big(\frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}}\Big)\frac{du}{ds} \omega_{u}^n}{\chi(1) + \int_X \chi^*\Big(\chi'\Big(\frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}}\Big)\Big)\omega_{u}^n}dt +\varepsilon R
\end{flalign*}
As $\chi^*$ is the Legendre transform of $\chi$, it follows that ${\chi^*}' (\chi'(l))=l, \ l \in \Bbb R$. Using this, our prior observations and the chain rule, we obtain that the expression
$$\frac{d}{dt}\left( \chi(1)+\int_X \chi^*\Big(\chi'\Big(\frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}}\Big)\Big)\omega_{u}^n\right)=\int_X \frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}} \chi''\Big(\frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}}\Big)\nabla_{\dot u}\Big(\frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}}\Big)\omega_{u}^n$$
is again of magnitude $\varepsilon R$, hence in our sequence of calculations we can write
\begin{flalign}\label{lastestimate}
&= \int_0^1 \frac{d}{dt} \frac{\int_X \chi' \Big(\frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}}\Big)\frac{du}{ds} \omega_{u}^n}{\chi(1) + \int_X \chi^*\Big(\chi'\Big(\frac{\dot u}{\|\dot u\|_{\chi,u}}\Big)\Big)\omega_{u}^n}dt +\varepsilon R \nonumber\\
&=\frac{\int_X \chi' \Big(\frac{\dot u(1,s)}{\|\dot u(1,s)\|_{\chi,\psi}}\Big)\frac{d \psi(s)}{ds} \omega_{\psi}^n}{\chi(1) + \int_X \chi^*\Big(\chi'\Big(\frac{\dot u(1,s)}{\|\dot u(1,s)\|_{\chi,\psi}}\Big)\Big)\omega_{\psi}^n} + \varepsilon R \nonumber\\
&\geq -\Big\|\frac{d\psi(s)}{ds}\Big\|_{\chi, \psi} + \varepsilon R,
\end{flalign}
where in the last line we have used the Young inequality \eqref{eq: YoungIdIneq} in the following manner:
\begin{flalign*}
\frac{{\int_X \chi' \Big(\frac{\dot u(1,s)}{\|\dot u(1,s)\|_{\chi,\psi}}\Big)\frac{d \psi(s)}{ds} \omega_{\psi}^n}}{\| {d \psi}/{ds}\|_{\chi,\psi}}&\geq- \int_X \Big[ \chi \Big( \frac{{d \psi}/{ds}}{\| {d \psi}/{ds}\|_{\chi,\psi}}\Big) + \chi^*\Big(\chi' \Big(\frac{\dot u(1,s)}{\|\dot u(1,s)\|_{\chi,\psi}}\Big)\Big) \Big]\omega_{\psi}^n\\
&=-\Big[\chi(1) + \int_X \chi^*\Big(\chi' \Big(\frac{\dot u(1,s)}{\|\dot u(1,s)\|_{\chi,\psi}}\Big)\Big) \omega_{\psi}^n\Big].
\end{flalign*}
Integrating estimate \eqref{lastestimate} with respect to $s$ yields the desired inequality.
\end{proof}
With the previous result established, there is no more need to differentiate expressions involving the $l_\chi$ length of curves, hence we can return to general Finsler metrics on $\mathcal H_\omega$, with possibly non--smooth weight $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p$, and prove Theorem \ref{thm: XXChenThm} in the process:
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm: XXChenThm}] First we show the following identity for the weak $C^{1,\bar 1}$--geodesic joining $u_0,u_1$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: distgeodformula1}
d_\chi(u_0,u_1)=l_\chi(u_t).
\end{equation}
We can assume that $u_0 \neq u_1$. By Theorem \ref{thm: ueps_estimates} and \eqref{eq: epsgeod_limit},\eqref{eq: u_estimates}, the smooth $\varepsilon$--geodesics $u^\varepsilon$ connecting $u_0,u_1$ $C^{1,\alpha}$--converge to the weak $C^{1,\bar 1}$ geodesic $u$, connecting $u_0,u_1$. As a result, $\dot u^\varepsilon_t$ converges uniformly to $\dot u_t$. Next we argue that the lengths of these tangent vectors converge as well:
\begin{claim}$\|\dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t} \to \|\dot u_t\|_{\chi,u_t}$ as $\varepsilon \to 0$.
\end{claim}
From Proposition \ref{prop: EpsGeodTanEst}(i) and Theorem \ref{thm: ueps_estimates} it follows that there exists $C_2>C_1>0$ such that for small enough $\varepsilon >0$ we have
$$0 < C_1 \leq \|\dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t} \leq C_2.$$
In particular, we only have to argue that all cluster points of the set $\{ \|\dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t} \}_{\varepsilon}$ are equal to $\|\dot u_t\|_{\chi,u_t}$. Let $N$ be such a cluster point, and after taking a subsequence, we can assume that $\|\dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t} \to N$ as $\varepsilon \to 0$. By uniform convergence of tangent vectors, we obtain that $\dot u^\varepsilon_t/ \|\dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t}$ converges to $\dot u_t/N$ uniformly as well. Since $\omega_{u^\varepsilon_t}^n \to \omega_{u_t}^n$ weakly, this allows to conclude that
$$\chi(1)=\int_X \chi\bigg(\frac{\dot u^\varepsilon_t}{\|\dot u^\varepsilon_t\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_t}}\bigg) \omega^n_{u^\varepsilon_t} \to \int_X \chi\bigg( \frac{\dot u_t}{N}\bigg) \omega^n_{u_t}, \textup{ as } \varepsilon \to 0.$$
Using \eqref{eq: OrliczNormId} we get that $N = \|\dot u_t\|_{\chi,u_t}$, finishing the proof of the claim.
Using the claim, we can apply the dominated convergence theorem to conclude that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: length_epsgeod_lim}
\lim_{\varepsilon \to 0} l_\chi(u^{\varepsilon}_t) = l_\chi(u_t),
\end{equation}
hence $d_\chi(u_0,u_1) \leq l_\chi(u_t)$. To prove the reverse inequality, and with that establishing \eqref{eq: distgeodformula1}, we assume first that $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p \cap C^\infty$. We have to prove that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: reverseineq}
l_\chi(\phi_t) \geq l_\chi(u_t)
\end{equation}
for all smooth curves $[0,1] \ni t \to \phi_t \in \mathcal H$ connecting $u_0,u_1$. We can assume that $u_1 \not \in \phi[0,1)$ and let $h \in [0,1)$. Letting $\varepsilon \to 0$ in the estimate of the previous result, by \eqref{eq: length_epsgeod_lim} we obtain that
$$l_\chi(u_{1-t}) \leq l_\chi(\phi_t|_{[0,h]}) + l_\chi(w^h_t),$$
where $[0,1] \ni t \to u_{1-t},w^h_t \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$ are the weak $C^{1,\bar 1}$--geodesic segments joining $u_1,u_0$ and $u_1,\phi_h$ respectively. As $h \to 1$, by Lemma \ref{lem: dot_u_est} we have $l_\chi(w^h_t)\to 0$ and we obtain \eqref{eq: reverseineq} for smooth weights $\chi$.
For general $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p$ by Proposition \ref{prop: approx_lemma2} there exists a sequence $\chi_k \in \mathcal W^+_{p_k} \cap C^\infty(\Bbb R)$ such that $\chi_k$ converges to $\chi$ uniformly on compacts. From what we just proved it follows that
$$\int_0^1 \| \dot \phi_t\|_{\chi_k,\phi_t}dt=l_{\chi_k}(\phi_t) \geq l_{\chi_k}(u_t)=\int_0^1 \| \dot u_t\|_{\chi_k,u_t}dt.$$
Using Proposition \ref{prop: approx_lemma} and the dominated convergence theorem ($\dot \phi_t, \dot u_t$ are uniformly bounded), we can take the limit in this last estimate to conclude \eqref{eq: reverseineq}, which gives\eqref{eq: distgeodformula1}.
Formula \eqref{eq: ChiDistGeodFormula} follows now from the fact that $l_\chi(u_t)=\int_0^1 \| \dot u_l\|_{\chi,u_l}dl$ and Lemma \ref{lem: chilengthgeodconst} below.
Finally, if $u_0\neq u_1$ then after taking the limit $\varepsilon \to 0$ in the estimate of Lemma \ref{lem: dotintegralest} we obtain that $\dot u_0 \not\equiv 0$, hence $d_\chi(u_0,u_1)=\| \dot u_0\|_{\chi,u_0}>0$. This implies that $(\mathcal H, d_\chi)$ is a metric space, as claimed.
\end{proof}
According to the last lemma of this section, the $\chi$--length of tangent vectors along a $C^{1,\bar 1}$--geodesic is always constant. This parallels a similar result of Berndtsson \cite[Proposition 2.2]{br2}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: chilengthgeodconst} Given $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$, let $[0,1] \ni t \to u_t \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$ be the weak $C^{1,\bar 1}$--geodesic connecting $u_0,u_1$. Then for any $\chi \in \mathcal W^+_p$ and $t_0,t_1 \in [0,1]$ the following hold:\\
\begin{equation}\label{eq: chilengthgeodconst}
\|\dot u_{t_0} \|_{\chi,u_{t_0}}=\|\dot u_{t_1} \|_{\chi,u_{t_1}}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} As we already argued in the proof of the previous result, for the $\varepsilon$--geodesics $t \to u^\varepsilon_t$ joining $u_0,u_1$ we have
$\| \dot u^\varepsilon_{t_0}\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_{t_0}} \to \| \dot u_{t_0}\|_{\chi,u_{t_0}}$ and $\| \dot u^\varepsilon_{t_1}\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_{t_1}} \to \| \dot u_{t_1}\|_{\chi,u_{t_1}}$ as $\varepsilon \to 0$. Furthermore Proposition \ref{prop: EpsGeodTanEst}(ii) implies that $|\| \dot u^\varepsilon_{t_1}\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_{t_1}}-\|\dot u^\varepsilon_{t_0}\|_{\chi,u^\varepsilon_{t_0}}| \leq |t_1 -t_0|\varepsilon R_1$. Putting all of this together, and letting $\varepsilon \to 0$, \eqref{eq: chilengthgeodconst} follows.
\end{proof}
\section{The weak geodesic segments of $\textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$}
As noted after Theorem \ref{thm: u_estimates}, it is not possible to join smooth potentials $u_0,u_1$ with a geodesic staying inside $\mathcal H_\omega$. The main point of the present section is to show that a similar phenomenon does not occur if $u_0,u_1$ is allowed to be more singular. Indeed, as we will see, if $u_0,u_1$ are bounded, or they are from a finite energy space, then it is possible to define a weak geodesic connecting them that is also bounded or stays inside the finite energy space respectively. Our study will connect properties of weak geodesics with that of envelopes, and we will make good use of the results of Section 2.4.
When considering the boundary value problem \eqref{eq: BVPGeod}, we constructed the (weak) solution $u$ as the limit of solutions to the family of elliptic problems \eqref{eq: epsBVPGeod}. Moving away from this idea, as noted by Berndtsson \cite[Section 2.1]{brn1}, it possible to describe the (weak) solution $u$ in another way, using a slight generalization of the classical Perron--Bremmerman envelope from the local theory.
The advantage of this approach is that one can consider very general boundary data in \eqref{eq: BVPGeod}. Indeed, to begin, let $u_0,u_1 \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$. In the future, we will refer to $i\Bbb R$--invariant elements of $\textup{PSH}(S\times X, \pi^*\omega)$ as \emph{weak subgeodesics} (recall that $S =\{ 0<\textup{Re }z <1 \} \subset \Bbb C$). This name is justified by the following formula:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: udef1}
u = \sup_{v \in \mathcal S}v,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal S$ is the following family of subgeodesics:
$$ \mathcal S = \{ (0,1) \ni t \to v_t \in \text{PSH}(X,\omega) \textup{ is a subgeodesic with }\lim_{t \to 0,1}v_t \leq u_{0,1} \}.$$
As we know, the supremum of a family of $\pi^* \omega$-psh functions may not be $\pi^* \omega$-psh, and the first step is to show that $u$, as defined in \eqref{eq: udef1}, is $\pi^* \omega$-psh nonetheless. Indeed, by convexity in the $t$ variable, each member of $w_t \in \mathcal S$ satisfies $w_t \leq (1-t)u_0 + tu_1$, hence this also holds for the supremum $u$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: u_upperbound}
u_t \leq (1-t)u_0 + t u_1.
\end{equation}
By taking the usc regularization of the above inequality, we conclude that the same inequality holds with $u^*$ in place of $u$:
$$u^*_t \leq (1-t)u_0 + t u_1.$$
We obtain that $u^* \in \mathcal S$, hence $u^* \leq u$ by \eqref{eq: udef1}. Trivially $u \leq u^*$, and this implies that $u = u^* \in \textup{PSH}(S \times X,\pi^* \omega)$.
We will call the curve $[0,1] \ni t \to u_t \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ resulting from the construction of \eqref{eq: udef1} the \emph{weak geodesic} connecting $u_0,u_1$. This terminology is justified by the following result, which says that \eqref{eq: udef1} gives the unique solution to \eqref{eq: BVPGeod} for boundary data that is merely bounded:
\begin{lemma} \label{lem: boundedBVP_solution} When $u_0,u_1 \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \cap L^\infty$ then the unique bounded $\pi^*\omega$-psh solution of \eqref{eq: BVPGeod} is given by \eqref{eq: udef1}.
\end{lemma}
As a result of this lemma, for $u_0,u_1 \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \cap L^\infty$, we will call the weak geodesic $t \to u_t$ connecting $u_0,u_1$ a \emph{bounded geodesic}.
\begin{proof} Let $C := \|u_1 - u_0 \|_{L^\infty}$. It is easy to see that $t \to (u_0 - C t)$ and $t \to (u_1 -C(1-t))$ are (sub)geodesics that are both members of $\mathcal S$, hence so is their maximum $v_t := \max(u_0 - Ct, u_1 - C(1-t)) \in \mathcal S$.
This and \eqref{eq: u_upperbound} gives
\begin{equation}\label{eq: u_boundary_est}
\max(u_0 - Ct, u_1 - C(1-t)) \leq u_t \leq (1-t)u_0 + tu_1.
\end{equation}
Consequently, $u \in \textup{PSH}(S \times X,\pi^*\omega) \cap L^\infty$ and $\lim_{t \to 0,1}u_t = u_{0,1}$. The classical Perron--Bremmerman argument can now be adapted to this setting to give $(\pi^* \omega + i\del\dbar u)^{n+1}=0$. Lastly, uniqueness of $u$ is a consequence of Theorem \ref{thm: uniqueness_BVP}.
\end{proof}
Turning back to non-bounded endpoints $u_0,u_1$, it turns out that even the very general weak geodesic segment $t \to u_t$ connecting $u_0,u_1$ exhibits some structure, as we will see in the next two results:
\begin{proposition}[\cite{da1}] \label{prop: weak_geod_approx} Suppose $u^k_0,u_0,u^k_1,u_1 \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ are such that $u^k_0 \searrow u_0$ and $u^k_1 \searrow u_1$. Let $[0,1] \ni t \to u^k_t,u_t \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ be the weak geodesics connecting $u^k_0,u^k_1$ and $u_0,u_1$ respectively. Then the following hold:\\
(i) $u^k_t \searrow u_t, \ t \in [0,1]$.\\
(ii) For any $t_1,t_2 \in [0,1]$ we have that $[0,1] \ni l \to u_{(1-l)t_1 + l t_2} \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ is the weak geodesic joining $u_{t_1}$ and $u_{t_2}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} By the definition of $u^k\in \textup{PSH}(S \times X,\pi^*\omega)$ \eqref{eq: udef1} it is clear that $u^k $ is decreasing in $k$ and $v := \lim_k u_k \in \textup{PSH}(S \times X,\pi^*\omega)$. As $u$ is a candidate in the definition of each $u_k$, it follows that $u \leq u^k$, hence also $u \leq v$. For the other direction, by \eqref{eq: u_upperbound} we have that $u^k_t \leq (1-t)u^k_0 + t u^k_1$ hence we can take the limit to obtain that
$$v \leq (1-t)u_0 + t u_1.$$
Consequently $v$ is a candidate for $u$, giving that $v \leq u$, finishing the proof of (i).
Now we turn to proving (ii). Let $u^k_0=\max(u_0,-k)$ and $u^k_1 = \max(u_1,-k)$ be the canonical cutoffs and let $t \to u^k_t$ be the bounded geodesics joining $u^k_0$ and $u^k_1$. Part (i) implies that $u^k_{t_1} \searrow u_{t_1}$ and $u^k_{t_2} \searrow u_{t_2}$. Hence, applying (i) again, it is enough to prove that $[0,1] \ni l \to u^k_{(1-l)t_1 + l t_2} \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ is the bounded/weak geodesic joining $u^k_{t_1},u^k_{t_2}$.
Now \eqref{eq: u_boundary_est} implies that each $t \to u^k_t$ is Lipschitz continuous in the $t$ variable, hence $u_{t} \to u_{t_{1,2}} $ uniformly as ${t \to t_{1,2}}$. By Lemma \ref{lem: boundedBVP_solution}, $[0,1] \ni l \to u^k_{(1-l)t_1 + l t_2} \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ is indeed the unique bounded/weak geodesic joining $u^k_{t_1}$ and $u^k_{t_2}$.
\end{proof}
The next result connects weak geodesics to the rooftop envelopes of Section 3.3:
\begin{lemma}[\cite{da1}] \label{lem: Leg_transf_Envelope} Suppose $u_0,u_1 \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ and $t \to u_t$ is the weak geodesic connecting $u_0,u_1$. Then the following holds:
$$\inf_{t \in (0,1)} (u_t - t\tau) = P(u_0,u_1 -\tau), \ \tau \in \Bbb R.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}Notice that $t \to v_t:= u_t - \tau t$ is the weak geodesic connecting $u_0,u_1-\tau$, hence the proof of the general case reduces to the particlar case $\tau =0$.
By definition we have $P(u_0,u_1) \leq u_0,u_1$. As a result, for the constant (sub)geodesic $t \to h_t :=P(u_0,u_1)$ we have $h \in \mathcal S$. This trivially gives $h_l \leq u_t, \ t \in [0,1]$, hence $P(u_0,u_1) \leq \inf_{t \in (0,1)} u_t$.
For the reverse inequality, we use the Kiselman minimum principle \cite[Chapter I, Theorem 7.5]{De}, which guarantees that $w:=\inf_{t \in (0,1)}u_t \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$. Using this and \eqref{eq: u_upperbound} we obtain that $w \leq u_0,u_1$ hence $w$ is a candidate for $P(u_0,u_1)$, i.e., $w \leq P(u_0,u_1)$, finishing the proof.
\end{proof}
We can now relate the super--level sets of tangent vectors along weak geodesics to contact sets of rooftop envelopes:
\begin{lemma}[\cite{da1}] \label{lem: sublevel_lemma}Suppose $u_0,u_1 \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$. Let $t \to u_t$ be the weak geodesic joining $u_0,u_1$. Then for any $\tau \in \Bbb R$ we have
$$\{ \dot u_0 \geq \tau \} = \{ P(u_0,u_1 - \tau)=u_0\}.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} By the previous result we have $\inf_{t \in [0,1]}(u_t - t\tau)= P(u_0,u_1 - \tau).$ Given $x \in X$, it follows that $P(u_0,u_1 - \tau t)(x)=u_0(x)$ if and only if $\inf_{t \in [0,1]}(u_t(x) - \tau t)=u_0(x)$. Convexity in the $t$ variable implies that this last identity is equivalent to $\dot u_0(x) \geq \tau$.
\end{proof}
With the aid of Lemma \ref{lem: Leg_transf_Envelope}, we can show that weak geodesics with endpoints in finite energy classes stay inside finite energy classes:
\begin{proposition}[\cite{da1}] \label{prop: geod_Echi} Suppose $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega), \ \chi \in \mathcal W^+_p, \ p \geq 1$. Then for the weak geodesic $t \to u_t$ connecting $u_0,u_1$ we have that $u_t \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$ for all $t \in [0,1]$. In case $u_0,u_1 \leq 0$ the following estimate holds:
$$E_\chi(u_t) \leq (p+1)^{2n}(E_\chi(u_0) + E_\chi(u_1)), \ t \in [0,1].$$
\end{proposition}
As a consequence of this proposition, for $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$ we will call the the curve $[0,1] \ni t \to u_t \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$ the \emph{finite energy geodesic} connecting $u_0,u_1$.
\begin{proof} To start, Proposition \ref{prop: env_exist} implies that $P(u_0,u_1) \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega)$. By Lemma \ref{lem: Leg_transf_Envelope}, we have that $P(u_0,u_1) \leq u_t$, hence by the monotonicity property (Corollary \ref{cor: monotonicity_E_chi}) it follows that $u_t \in \mathcal E_\chi(X,\omega), \ t \in [0,1]$.
When $u_0,u_1 \leq 0$, \eqref{eq: u_upperbound} implies that $u_t\leq 0, \ t \in [0,1]$. To finish the proof, by Proposition \ref{prop: env_exist} and Proposition \ref{prop: Energy_est} we have the following estimates:
$$E_\chi(u_t) \leq (p+1)^n E_\chi(P(u_0,u_1)) \leq (p+1)^{2n}(E_\chi(u_0)+E_\chi(u_1)).$$
\end{proof}
\section{Extension of the $L^p$ metric structure to finite energy spaces}
For the rest of this chapter we will focus only various $L^p$ Finsler geometries of $\mathcal H_\omega$. Most of the results we present also have analogs for the more general Orlicz Finsler structures discussed in the previous sections (see \cite{da2}). Having later applications in mind, we do not seek the greatest generality, and we leave it to the interested reader to adapt our argument to more general metrics. As done it previously, we will assume the volume normalization condition \eqref{eq: vol_normalization} throughout this section as well.
Given $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$, by Theorem \ref{thm: BK_approx} there exists decreasing sequences $u^k_0, u^k_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$ such that $u^k_0 \searrow u_0$ and $u^k_1 \searrow u_1$. We propose to define the distance $d_p(u_0,u_1)$ by the formula:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: dp_def_general}
d_p(u_0,u_1)=\lim_{k\to \infty}d_p(u^k_0,u^k_1).
\end{equation}
We will show that the above limit exists and it is also independent of the approximating sequences. Developing this further, our main result of this section is the following:
\begin{theorem}[\cite{da2}] \label{thm: e2space}$(\mathcal E_p(X,\omega), d_p)$ is a geodesic pseudo--metric space extending $(\mathcal H_\omega,d_p)$. Additionally, for $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ the finite energy geodesic $t \to u_t$ joining $u_0,u_1$ (given by Proposition \ref{prop: geod_Echi}) is a $d_p$-geodesic.
\end{theorem}
Recall that a pseudo--metric is just a metric that may not satisfy the non-degeneracy condition. Also, given a pseudo--metric space $(M,d)$, we say that a curve $[0,1] \ni t \to \gamma_t \in M$ is a $d$\emph{--geodesic} if
\begin{equation}\label{eq: d_geod_def}
d(\gamma_{t_1},\gamma_{t_2}) = |t_1 - t_2|d(\gamma_{0},\gamma_{1}), \ \ t_1,t_2 \in [0,1].
\end{equation}
A \emph{geodesic pseudo--metric space} $(M,d)$ is pseudo--metric space in which any two points can be joining by a $d$--geodesic.
In the next section we will show that in fact $d_p$ is in fact a bona fide metric, but this will require additional machinery. Finally, as the last major theorem of this chapter, we will prove that the resulting metric space $(\mathcal E_p(X,\omega), d_p)$ is the completion of $(\mathcal H_\omega,d_p)$.
The proof of Theorem \ref{thm: e2space} will be split into a sequence of lemmas and propositions. Our first one is an estimate for ``comparable" potentials:
\begin{proposition}\label{prop: Mdist_est}Suppose $u,v \in \mathcal H_\omega$ with $u \leq v$. Then we have:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Mdist_est}
\frac{1}{2^{n+p}}\max\Big( \int_X|v-u|^p \omega_u^n, \int_X|v-u|^p \omega_v^n \Big) \leq d_p(u,v)^p \leq \int_X|v-u|^p \omega_u^n.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} Suppose $[0,1] \ni t \to w_t \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$ is the $C^{1,\bar 1}$-geodesic segment joining $u_0 = u$ and $u_1 = v$. By \eqref{eq: ChiDistGeodFormula} we have
$$d_p(u,v)^p=\int_X |\dot w_0|^p \omega_u^n=\int_X |\dot w_1|^p \omega_v^n.$$
Since $u \leq v$, we have that $u \leq w_t$, as follows from \eqref{eq: udef1} (or Theorem \ref{thm: uniqueness_BVP}). Since $(t,x) \to w_t(x)$ is convex in the $t$ variable, we get $0 \leq \dot w_0 \leq v-u \leq \dot w_1$, and together with the above identity we obtain part of \eqref{eq: Mdist_est}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Mdist_est_interm}
\int_X |v-u|^p \omega_v^n \leq d_p(u,v)^p \leq \int_X |v-u|^p \omega_u^n.
\end{equation}
Now we prove the rest of \eqref{eq: Mdist_est}. Using $ \omega_{u}^n \leq 2^{n}\omega_{(u+v)/2}^n$ we obtain that
$$\frac{1}{2^{n+p}}\int_X |v - u|^p \omega_{u}^n \leq \int_X \Big|u - \frac{u+v}{2}\Big|^p\omega^n_{(u+v)/2}.$$
Since $u \leq (u+v)/2$, the first estimate of \eqref{eq: Mdist_est_interm} allows us to continue and write:
$$\frac{1}{2^{n+p}}\int_X |v - u|^p \omega_{u}^n \leq d_p \Big(\frac{u + v}{2},u\Big)^p.$$
The lemma below implies that $d_p((u + v)/2,u) \leq d_p(v,u)$, giving the remaining estimate in \eqref{eq: Mdist_est}.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem: NaiveCompare}Suppose $u,v,w \in \mathcal H_\omega$ and $u \geq v \geq w$. Then $d_p(v,w) \leq d_p(u,w)$ and $d_p(u,v) \leq d_p(u,w)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} We introduce the $C^{1,\bar 1}$ geodesics $[0,1] \ni t \to \alpha_t,\beta_t \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$ connecting $\alpha_0 := w,\alpha_1 := v$ and $\beta_0 := w,\beta_1 := u$ respectively. From \eqref{eq: udef1} (or Theorem \ref{thm: uniqueness_BVP}) it follows that both of these curves are increasing in $t$. Additionally, $\alpha \leq \beta$ by Theorem \ref{thm: uniqueness_BVP}. As $\alpha_0=\beta_0$, it follows that $0 \leq \dot \alpha_0 \leq \dot \beta_0$. Using this and Theorem \ref{thm: XXChenThm} we obtain that $d_p(w,v) \leq d_p(w,u)$. The estimate $d_p(u,v) \leq d_p(u,w)$ is proved similarly.
\end{proof}
Next we turn our attention to smooth approximants of finite energy potentials:
\begin{lemma} Suppose $u \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ and $\{ u_k\}_{k} \subset \mathcal H_\omega$ is a sequence decreasing to $u$. Then $d_p(u_l,u_k) \to 0$ as $l,k \to \infty$.\label{lem: IntDistEst}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We can suppose that $l \leq k$. Then $u_k\leq u_l$, hence by Proposition \ref{prop: Mdist_est} we have:
$$d_p(u_l,u_k)^p \leq \int_X|u_k-u_l|^p\omega_{ u_k}^n.$$
We clearly have $u - u_l, u_k - u_l \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega_{u_l})$ and $u - u_l\leq u_k - u_l\leq0$. Hence, applying Proposition \ref{prop: Energy_est} for the class $\mathcal E_p(X,\omega_{u_l})$ we obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: estimate}
d_p(u_l,u_k)^p\leq (p+1)^n\int_X|u-u_l|^p\omega_u^n.
\end{equation}
As $u_l$ decreases to $u \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$, it follows from the dominated convergence theorem that $d_p(u_l,u_k) \to 0$ as $l,k \to \infty$.
\end{proof}
Our next lemma confirms that the way we proposed to extend the $d_p$ to $\mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ (see \eqref{eq: dp_def_general}) does not have inconsistencies:
\begin{lemma} Given $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$, the limit in \eqref{eq: dp_def_general} is finite and independent of the approximating sequences $u^k_0, u^k_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$. \end{lemma}
In particular, this result implies that for $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$ the distance $d_p(u_0,u_1)$ will be the same according to both \eqref{eq: dp_def_general} and our original definition in \eqref{eq: d_chi_def}. Lastly, the triangle inequality will also hold, hence $d_p$ is a pseudo--metric on $\mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$, as claimed in Theorem \ref{thm: e2space}.
\begin{proof} By the triangle inequality and Lemma \ref{lem: IntDistEst} we can write:
$$|d_p(u^l_0,u^l_1)-d_p(u^k_0,u^k_1)| \leq d_p(u^l_0,u^k_0) +d_p(u^l_1,u^k_1) \to 0, \ l,k \to \infty, $$
proving that $d_p(u^k_0,u^k_1)$ is indeed convergent.
Now we prove that the limit in \eqref{eq: dp_def_general} is independent of the choice of approximating sequences. Let $v^l_0, v^l_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$ be different approximating sequences. By adding small constants if necessary, we can arrange that the sequences $u^l_0, u^l_1$, respectively $v^l_0, v^l_1$, are strictly decreasing to $u_0,u_1$.
Fixing $k$ for the moment, the sequence $\{\max\{ u^{k+1}_0,v^j_0\}\}_{j \in \Bbb N}$ decreases pointwise to $u^{k+1}_0$. By Dini's lemma the convergence is uniform, hence there exists $j_k\in \Bbb N$ such that for any $j \geq j_k$ we have $v^j_0 < u^k_0$. By repeating the same argument we can also assume that $v^j_1 < u^k_1$ for any $j \geq j_k$. By the triangle inequality again
$$|d_p(u^j_0,u^j_1)-d_p(v^k_0,v^k_1)| \leq d_p(u^j_0,v^k_0) +d_p(u^j_1,v^k_1), \ j \geq j_k. $$
From \eqref{eq: estimate} it follows that for $k$ big enough the quantities $d(u^j_0,v^k_0)$, $d(u^j_1,v^k_1), \ j \geq j_k$ are arbitrarily small, hence $d_p(u_0,u_1)$ is independent of the choice of approximating sequences.
When $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_
\omega$, then it is possible to approximate with a constant sequence, hence our argument implies that the restriction of $d_p$ (as extended in \eqref{eq: dp_def_general}) to $\mathcal H_\omega$ coincides with the original definition in \eqref{eq: d_chi_def}.
\end{proof}
By the previous result, the triangle inequality is inherited by the extension of $d_p$ to $\mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$, making $(\mathcal E_p(X,\omega),d_p)$ a pseudo--metric space. In the last part of this section we turn our attention to showing that finite energy geodesic segments of Proposition \ref{prop: geod_Echi} are in fact $d_p$--geodesics:
\begin{lemma} Suppose $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ and $[0,1]\ni t \to u_t \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ is the finite energy geodesic segment connecting $u_0,u_1$. Then $t\to u_t$ is a $d_p$-geodesic.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} First we prove that
\begin{flalign}\label{eq: geod_half}
d_p(u_0,u_l)=ld_p(u_0,u_1), \ \ l \in [0,1].
\end{flalign}
By Theorem \ref{thm: BK_approx}, suppose $u^k_0,u^k_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$ are strictly decreasing approximating sequences of $u_0,u_1$ and let $[0,1]\ni t \to u^k_t \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$ be the decreasing sequence of $C^{1,\bar 1}$ geodesics connecting $u_0^k,u_1^k$. By the definition of \eqref{eq: dp_def_general} and Theorem \ref{thm: XXChenThm} we can write:
$$d_p(u_0,u_1)^p=\lim_{k\to \infty}d_p(u^k_0,u^k_1)^p=\lim_{k\to \infty}\int_X |\dot u_0^k|^p \omega_{u^k_0}^n.$$
By Proposition \ref{prop: weak_geod_approx}(i), the geodesic segments $[0,1]\ni t \to u^k_t \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$ are decreasing pointwise to $[0,1]\ni t \to u_t\in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$. In particular, this implies that $u^k_l \searrow u_l$.
We want to find a decreasing sequence $\{w^k_l\}_k \subset \mathcal H_\omega$ such that $u^k_l \leq w^k_l$, $w^k_l \searrow u_l$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq: approx_lim}
l^pd_p(u_0^k,u^k_1)^p - d_p(u^k_0, w^k_l)^p=l^p\int_X |\dot u^k_0|^p \omega_{u^k_0}^n - \int_X |\dot w^k_0|^p \omega_{u^k_0}^n \to 0 \textup{ as } k \to \infty,
\end{equation}
where $t \to w^k_t$ is the $C^{1,\bar 1}$--geodesic segment connecting $u^k_0$ and $w^k_l$. By the definition of $d_p$, letting $k \to \infty$ in \eqref{eq: approx_lim} would give us \eqref{eq: geod_half}.
Finding such sequence $w_l^k$ is always possible by an application of Lemma \ref{lem: geod_tangent_limit} applied to $v_0 := u^k_0$ and $v_1 := u^k_l$, as we observe that the bounded geodesic segment connecting $u^k_0$ and $u^k_l$ is exactly $t \to u_{lt}^k$ (see Proposition \ref{prop: weak_geod_approx}(ii)).
Finally, to finish the proof, we argue that for $t_1,t_2 \in [0,1], \ t_1 \leq t_2$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq: geod_def1}
d_p(u_{t_1},u_{t_2})=(t_2 -t_1)d_p(u_0,u_1).
\end{equation}
Let $h_0 = u_{t_2}$ and $h_1 = u_0$. From Proposition \ref{prop: weak_geod_approx}(ii) it follows that $[0,1] \ni t \to h_t := u_{t_2(1-t)} \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ is the finite energy geodesic connecting $h_0,h_1$. Applying \ref{eq: geod_half} to $t \to h_t$ and $l = 1 - t_1/t_2$ we obtain
$$(1 - t_1/t_2)d_p(u_{t_2},u_0)=d_p(u_{t_2},u_{t_1}).$$ Now applying \eqref{eq: geod_half} for $t \to u_t$ and $l = t_2$ we have
$$d_p(u_0, u_{t_2})=t_2 d_p(u_0,u_1).$$ Putting these last two formulas together we obtain \eqref{eq: geod_def1}, finishing the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem: geod_tangent_limit} Suppose $v_0,v_1 \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \cap L^\infty$ and $\{v^j_1 \}_{j \in \Bbb N}\subset \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \cap L^\infty$ is sequence decreasing to $v_1$. By $[0,1] \ni t \to v_t,v_t^j \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \cap L^\infty$ we denote the bounded geodesics connecting $v_0,v_1$ and $v_0, v^j_1$ respectively. By convexity in the $t$ variable, we can introduce $\dot v_0 = \lim_{t \to 0}(v_t - v_0)/t$ and $\dot v^j_0 = \lim_{t \to 0}(v^j_t - v_0)/t$, and the following holds:
$$\lim_{j \to \infty}\int_X |\dot v^j_0|^p \omega_{v_0}^n = \int_X |\dot {v_0}|^p \omega_{v_0}^n.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} By \eqref{eq: u_boundary_est} there exists $C >0$ such that $\|\dot v_0\|_{L^\infty(X)}, \|\dot v^j_0\|_{L^\infty(X)} \leq C$. We also have $v \leq v^j, \ j \in \Bbb N$ by \eqref{eq: udef1} (or Theorem \ref{thm: uniqueness_BVP}). As we have convexity in the $t$ variable and all our bounded geodesics share the same starting point, it also follows that $\dot v^j_0 \searrow \dot v_0$ pointwise. Consequently, the lemma follows now from Lebesgue's dominated convergence theorem.
\end{proof}
\section{The Pythagorean formula and applications}
In this section we explore the geometry of the operator $(u,v) \to P(u,v)$ restricted to the spaces $\mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$. The main focus will be on the following result, establishing a metric relationship between the vertices of the ``triangle" $(u,v,P(u,v))$. This will help in proving that $d_p$ is non--degenerate, that $v \to P(u,v)$ is a $d_p$--contraction, and a number of other properties. Again, throughout this section we will assume the volume normalization condition \eqref{eq: vol_normalization} holds. The main result of this section is the Pythagorean formula of \cite{da2}:
\begin{theorem}
[Pythagorean formula, \textup{\cite[Corollary 4.14]{da2}}] \label{thm: pythagorean} Given $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$, we have $P(u_0,u_1)\in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ and
$$d_p(u_0,u_1)^p = d_p(u_0,P(u_0,u_1))^p + d_p(P(u_0,u_1),u_1)^p.$$
\end{theorem}
The name of the above formula comes from the particular case $p=2$, in which case it suggests that $u_0,u_1$ and $P(u_0,u_1)$ form a right triangle with hypotenuse $t \to u_t$.
Before we give the proof of this result, we argue how it implies the non--degeneracy of $d_p$, giving that $(\mathcal E_p(X,\omega),d_p)$ is a metric space:
\begin{proposition}\label{prop: dp_nondegeneracy} Given $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ if $d_p(u_0,u_1)=0$ then $u_0=u_1$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} By Theorem \ref{thm: pythagorean} it follows that $d_p(u_0,P(u_0,u_1))=0$ and $d_p(u_1,P(u_0,u_1))=0$. By the first estimate of the next lemma, which generalizes Proposition \ref{prop: Mdist_est}, it follows that $u_0=P(u_0,u_1)$ a.e. with respect to $\omega_{P(u_0,u_1)}^n$, and similarly, $u_1= P(u_0,u_1)$ a.e. with respect to $\omega_{P(u_0,u_1)}^n$. By the domination principle (Proposition \ref{prop: domination principle}) it follows that $u_0 \leq P(u_0,u_1)$ and $u_1 \leq P(u_0,u_1)$. As the reverse inequalities are trivial, we obtain that $u_0 = P(u_0,u_1)=u_1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: Mdist_est_gen} Suppose $u,v \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ with $u \leq v$. Then we have:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Mdist_est_gen}
\max\Big( \frac{1}{2^{n+p}}\int_X|v-u|^p \omega_u^n, \int_X|v-u|^p \omega_v^n \Big) \leq d_p(u,v)^p \leq \int_X|v-u|^p \omega_u^n.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} By Proposition \ref{prop: mixed_finite_prop: Energy_est}, all the integrals in \eqref{eq: Mdist_est_gen} are finite. By Theorem \ref{thm: BK_approx}, we can choose $u_k,v_k \in \mathcal H_\omega$ such that $v_k \searrow v$ and $u_k \searrow u$ and $u_k \leq v_k$. By Proposition \ref{prop: Mdist_est}, estimate \eqref{eq: Mdist_est_gen} holds for $u_k,v_k$. Using Proposition \ref{prop: MA_cont} and definition \eqref{eq: dp_def_general} we can take the limit $k \to \infty$ in the estimates for $u_k,v_k$, and obtain \eqref{eq: Mdist_est_gen}.
\end{proof}
By the next corollary we will only need to prove Theorem \ref{thm: pythagorean} for smooth potentials $u_0,u_1$:
\begin{corollary} \label{cor: d_p_monotone_limit}
If $\{w_k\}_{k \in \Bbb N} \subset \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ decreases (increases a.e.) to $w \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ then $d_p(w_k,w)\to 0$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof} By the previous lemma, we have $d_p(w,w_k)^p \leq \int_X |w -w_k|^p (\omega_{w_k}^n + \omega_{w}^n)$. We can use Proposition \ref{prop: MA_cont} again to conclude that $d_p(w,w_k) \to 0$.
\end{proof}
As $P(u_0,u_1) \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$ for $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$ (Corollary \ref{cor: rooftop_env_reg}), we need to generalize Theorem \ref{thm: XXChenThm} for endpoints in $\mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$, before we can prove Theorem \ref{thm: pythagorean}. The first step is the next lemma:
\begin{lemma} Suppose $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$ and $t \to u_t$ is the bounded geodesic connecting them. Then the following holds:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: lengthequal}
\int_X |\dot u_0|^p \omega_{u_0}^n=\int_X |\dot u_1|^p \omega_{u_1}^n
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} To obtain \eqref{eq: lengthequal} we prove:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: lengthequal1}\int_{\{\dot u_0 >0\}} |\dot u_0|^p\omega_{u_0}^n=\int_{\{\dot u_1 > 0\}} |\dot u_1|^p \omega_{u_1}^n,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq: lengthequal2} \int_{\{\dot u_0 <0\}} |\dot u_0|^p\omega_{u_0}^n=\int_{\{\dot u_1 <0\}} |\dot u_1|^p\omega_{u_1}^n.
\end{equation}
Using Remark \ref{rem: MA_form_remark} and Lemma \ref{lem: sublevel_lemma} multiple times we can write:
\begin{flalign*} \int_{\{\dot u_0 > 0\}} |\dot u_0|^p \omega_{u_0}^n&= p\int_0^{\infty} \tau^{p-1}\omega_{u_0}^n(\{{\dot u_0 \geq \tau}\})d\tau\\
&= p\int_0^{\infty} \tau^{p-1}\omega_{u_0}^n(\{ P(u_0,u_1 - \tau)=u_0\})d\tau\\
&= p\int_0^{\infty} \tau^{p-1}(\textup{Vol}(X)-\omega_{ u_1}^n(\{ P(u_0,u_1 - \tau)=u_1-\tau\}))d\tau\\
&= p\int_0^{\infty} \tau^{p-1} \omega_{u_1}^n(\{ P(u_0,u_1 - \tau)<u_1-\tau\})d\tau\\
&= p\int_0^{\infty} \tau^{p-1}\omega_{u_1}^n(\{ P(u_0+\tau,u_1)<u_1\})d\tau\\
&= p\int_0^{\infty} \tau^{p-1}\omega_{u_1}^n(\{ \dot u_1 > \tau\})d\tau\\
&=\int_{\{\dot u_1 > 0\}} |\dot u_1|^p\omega_{ u_1}^n,
\end{flalign*}
where in the second line we used Lemma \ref{lem: sublevel_lemma}, in the third line we used Remark \ref{rem: MA_form_remark} and in the sixth line we used Lemma \ref{lem: sublevel_lemma} again, but this time for the ``reversed" geodesic $t \to u_{1-t}$. Formula \eqref{eq: lengthequal2} follows if we apply \eqref{eq: lengthequal1} to the bounded geodesic $t \to u_{1-t}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition} \label{prop: distgeod_general} Suppose $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$ and $t \to u_t$ is the bounded geodesic connecting them. Then we have:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: distgeod_formula}
d_p(u_0,u_1)^p = \int_X |\dot u_0|^p \omega_{u_0}^n=\int_X |\dot u_1|^p\omega_{u_1}^n.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} As usual, let $u^k_0,u^k_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$ be a sequence of potentials decreasing to $u_0,u_1$. Let $[0,1] \ni t \to u^{kl}_t \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$ be the $C^{1,\bar 1}$--geodesic joining $u_0^k,u^l_1$. By Theorem \ref{thm: XXChenThm} we have
$$d_p(u_0^k,u^l_1)^p = \int_X |\dot u^{kl}_0|^p\omega_{u_0^k}^n.$$
If we let $l \to \infty$, by Lemma \ref{lem: geod_tangent_limit} and \eqref{eq: dp_def_general} we obtain that that
$$d_p(u_0^k,u_1)^p = \int_X |\dot u^k_0|^p\omega_{u_0^k}^n,$$
where $t \to u^k_t$ is bounded geodesic connecting $u^k_0$ with $u_1$. Using the previous lemma we can write:
$$d_p(u_0^k,u_1)^p = \int_X |\dot u^k_1|^p\omega_{u_1}^n.$$
Letting $k \to \infty$, another application of Lemma \ref{lem: geod_tangent_limit} yields \eqref{eq: distgeod_formula} for $t=1$, and the case $t=0$ follows by symmetry.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm: pythagorean}] By Corllary \ref{cor: d_p_monotone_limit}, it is enough to prove the Pythgaorean formula for $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$. According to Corollary \ref{cor: rooftop_env_reg} we have $P(u_0,u_1) \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$. Suppose $[0,1] \ni t\to u_t \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$ is the $C^{1,\bar 1}$--geodesic connecting $u_0,u_1$. By Theorem \ref{thm: XXChenThm} we have:
$$d_p(u_0,u_1)^p = \int_X |\dot u_0|^p \omega_{u_0}^n.$$
To complete the argument we will prove the following:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: u1dist}
d_p(u_1, P(u_0,u_1))^p = \int_{\{\dot u_0 >0\}} |\dot u_0|^p \omega_{u_0}^n,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq: u0dist}
d_p(u_0, P(u_0,u_1))^p = \int_{\{\dot u_0 < 0\}} |\dot u_0|^p \omega_{u_0}^n.
\end{equation}
We prove now \eqref{eq: u1dist}. Using Lemma \ref{lem: sublevel_lemma} we can write:
\begin{flalign*} \int_{\{\dot u_0 > 0\}} |\dot u_0|^p \omega_{u_0}^n&= p\int_0^{\infty} \tau^{p-1}\omega_{u_0}^n(\{{\dot u_0 \geq \tau}\})d\tau\\
&= p\int_0^{\infty} \tau^{p-1}\omega_{u_0}^n(\{ P(u_0,u_1 - \tau)=u_0\})d\tau.
\end{flalign*}
Suppose $t\to \tilde u_t $ is the bounded geodesic connecting $P(u_0,u_1),u_1$. Since $P(u_0,u_1) \leq \tilde u_t, \ t \in [0,1]$, the correspondence $(t,x) \to \tilde u_t(x)$ is increasing in the $t$ variable, hence $\dot{\tilde {u}}_0 \geq 0$. By \eqref{eq: distgeod_formula}, Lemma \ref{lem: sublevel_lemma} and Proposition \ref{prop: MA_form} we can write:
\begin{flalign*} d_p (P(u_0,u_1),u_1)^p &=\int_X |\dot{\tilde {u}}_0|^p \omega_{P(u_0,u_1)}^n=\int_{\{\dot{\tilde {u}}_0 > 0\}} |\dot{\tilde {u}}_0|^p \omega_{P(u_0,u_1)}^n\\
&= p\int_0^{\infty} \tau^{p-1} \omega_{P(u_0,u_1)}^n(\{ \dot{\tilde {u}}_0 \geq \tau\})d\tau\\
&= p\int_0^{\infty} \tau^{p-1} \omega_{ P(u_0,u_1)}^n(\{ P(P(u_0,u_1),u_1 - \tau)=P(u_0,u_1)\})d\tau\\
&= p\int_0^{\infty} \tau^{p-1} \omega_{ P(u_0,u_1)}^n(\{ P(u_0,u_1,u_1 - \tau)=P(u_0,u_1)\})d\tau\\
&= p\int_0^{\infty} \tau^{p-1}\omega_{ P(u_0,u_1)}^n(\{ P(u_0,u_1-\tau)=P(u_0,u_1)\})d\tau\\
&= p\int_0^{\infty} \tau^{p-1}\omega_{u_0}^n(\{ P(u_0,u_1-\tau)=P(u_0,u_1)=u_0\})d\tau\\
&= p\int_0^{\infty} \tau^{p-1}\omega_{u_0}^n(\{ P(u_0,u_1-\tau)=u_0\})d\tau,
\end{flalign*}
where in the third line we have used Lemma \ref{lem: sublevel_lemma}, in the sixth line we have used Proposition \ref{prop: MA_form} together with the fact that $\{ P(u_0,u_1)=u_1\}\cap\{ P(u_0,u_1 -\tau)=P(u_0,u_1)\}$ is empty for $\tau>0$.
Comparing our above calculations \eqref{eq: u1dist} follows. One can conclude \eqref{eq: u0dist} from \eqref{eq: u1dist} after reversing the roles of $u_0,u_1$ and then using \eqref{eq: lengthequal1}.
\end{proof}
As another application of Theorem \ref{thm: pythagorean} we will show that the $d_p$ metric is comparable to a concrete analytic expression:
\begin{theorem}[\cite{da2}] \label{thm: Energy_Metric_Eqv} For any $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Energy_Metric_Eqv}
\frac{1}{2^{p-1}} d_p(u_0,u_1)^p \leq \int_X |u_0 - u_1|^p \omega_{u_0}^n + \int_X |u_0 - u_1|^p \omega_{u_1}^n\leq {2^{2n + 3p + 3}} d_p(u_0,u_1)^p.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} To obtain the first estimate we use the triangle inequality and Lemma \ref{lem: Mdist_est_gen}:
\begin{flalign*}
d_p(u_0,u_1)^p &\leq
(d_p(u_0,\max(u_0,u_1)) + d_p(\max(u_0,u_1),u_1))^p\\
& \leq 2^{p-1}(d_p(u_0,\max(u_0,u_1))^p + d_p(\max(u_0,u_1),u_1)^p)\\
&\leq 2^{p-1}\Big(\int_X |u_0-\max(u_0,u_1)|^p \omega_{u_0}^n + \int_X |\max(u_0,u_1)-u_1|^p \omega_{u_1}^n\Big)\\
&= 2^{p-1}\Big(\int_{\{u_1 > u_0\}} |u_0-u_1|^p \omega_{u_0}^n + \int_{\{u_0>u_1\}} |u_0-u_1|^p \omega_{u_1}^n\Big)\\
&\leq 2^{p-1}\Big(\int_X |u_0-u_1|^p \omega_{u_0}^n + \int_X |u_0-u_1|^p \omega_{u_1}^n\Big).
\end{flalign*}
Now we deal with the second estimate in \eqref{eq: Energy_Metric_Eqv}. By the next result result and Theorem \ref{thm: pythagorean} we can write
\begin{flalign*}
2^{n+p+1}d_p(u_0,u_1)^p &\geq d_p\Big(u_0,\frac{u_0 + u_1}{2}\Big)^p \geq d_p\Big(u_0,P\Big(u_0,\frac{u_0 + u_1}{2}\Big)\Big)^p\\
&\geq \int_X \Big|u_0 - P\Big(u_0,\frac{u_0 + u_1}{2}\Big)\Big|^p \omega_{u_0}^n.
\end{flalign*}
By a similar reasoning as above, and the fact that $2^n \omega^n_{(u_0 + u_1)/2} \geq \omega^n_{u_0}$ we can write:
\begin{flalign*}
2^{n+p+1}d_p(u_0,u_1)^p &\geq d_p\Big(u_0,\frac{u_0 + u_1}{2}\Big)^p \geq d_p\Big(\frac{u_0+u_1}{2},P\Big(u_0,\frac{u_0 + u_1}{2}\Big)\Big)^p\\
&\geq \int_X \Big|\frac{u_0+u_1}{2} - P\Big(u_0,\frac{u_0 + u_1}{2}\Big)\Big|^p \omega_{(u_0 + u_1)/2}^n\\
&\geq \frac{1}{2^n} \int_X \Big|\frac{u_0+u_1}{2} - P\Big(u_0,\frac{u_0 + u_1}{2}\Big)\Big|^p \omega^n_{u_0}.
\end{flalign*}
Adding the last two estimates, and using the convexity of $t \to t^p$ we obtain:
\begin{flalign*}
2^{2n+p+2} d_p(u_0,u_1)^p&\geq \int_X \Big(\Big|u_0 - P\Big(u_0,\frac{u_0 + u_1}{2}\Big)\Big|^p+\Big|\frac{u_0+u_1}{2} - P\Big(u_0,\frac{u_0 + u_1}{2}\Big)\Big|^p \Big) \omega^n_{u_0}\\
&\geq \frac{1}{2^{2p}}\int_X |u_0 - u_1|^p \omega^n_{u_0}.
\end{flalign*}
By symmetry we also have $2^{2n +3p + 2}d_p(u_0,u_1)^p \geq \int _X |u_0 - u_1|^p\omega_{u_1}^n$, and adding these last two estimates together the second inequality in \eqref{eq: Energy_Metric_Eqv} follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem: halwayest} Suppose $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$. Then we have
$$d_p\Big(u_0,\frac{u_0+u_1}{2}\Big)^p \leq 2^{n+p+1} d_p(u_0,u_1)^p.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Using Theorem \ref{thm: pythagorean} and Lemma \ref{lem: NaiveCompare} we can start writing:
\begin{flalign*}
d_p\Big(u_0,\frac{u_0 + u_1}{2}\Big)^p &= d_p\Big(u_0, P\Big(u_0,\frac{u_0 + u_1}{2}\Big)\Big)^p + d_p\Big(\frac{u_0 + u_1}{2},P\Big(u_0,\frac{u_0 + u_1}{2}\Big)\Big)^p\\
&\leq d_p(u_0, P(u_0,u_1))^p + d_\chi\Big(\frac{u_0 + u_1}{2},P(u_0,u_1)\Big)^p\\
&\leq \int_X |u_0 - P(u_0,u_1)|^p \omega^n_{P(u_0,u_1)} + \int_X\Big|\frac{u_0+u_1}{2} - P(u_0,u_1)\Big|^p\omega^n_{P(u_0,u_1)}\\
&\leq \frac{3}{2}\int_X |u_0 - P(u_0,u_1)|^p \omega^n_{P(u_0,u_1)} + \frac{1}{2}\int_X|u_1 - P(u_0,u_1)|^p\omega^n_{P(u_0,u_1)}\\
& \leq 3 \cdot 2^{n+p-1} d_p(u_0, P(u_0,u_1))^p + 2^{n+p-1}d_p(u_1,P(u_0,u_1))^p\\
&\leq 2^{n+p+1}d_p(u_0,u_1)^p,
\end{flalign*}
where in the second line we have used Lemma \ref{lem: NaiveCompare} and the fact that $P(u_0,u_1) \leq P(u_0,(u_0 + u_1)/2)$, in the third and fifth line Lemma \ref{lem: Mdist_est_gen}, and in the sixth line we have used Theorem \ref{thm: pythagorean} again.
\end{proof}
\section{The complete metric spaces $(\mathcal E_p(X,\omega),d_p)$}
To show completeness of $(\mathcal E_p(X,\omega),d_p)$ we have to argue that limits of Cauchy sequences land in $\mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$. According to our first result, which extends Corollary \ref{cor: d_p_monotone_limit}, monotone $d_p$--bounded sequences are Cauchy, and their limit is in $\mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: lemma mononton_seq} Suppose $\{u_k\}_{k \in \Bbb N} \subset \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ is a decreasing/increasing $d_p$--bounded sequence. Then $u = \lim_{k \to \infty} u_k \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ and additionally $d_p(u,u_k) \to 0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} First we assume that $u_k$ is decreasing. Without loss of generality, we can also suppose that $u_k < 0$. By Lemma \ref{lem: Mdist_est_gen} it follows that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: some_int_est}
\max(\int_X |u_j|^p \omega_{u_j}^n,\int_X |u_j|^p \omega^n) \leq 2^{n+p}d_p(u_j,0)^p \leq D.
\end{equation}
As $\int_X |u_j|^p \omega^n$ is uniformly bounded, it follows that the limit function $u= \lim_k u_k$ exists and $u \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$. Since $E_p(u_j)=\int_X |u_j|^p \omega_{u_j}^n$ is uniformly bounded we can use Corollary \ref{cor: E_semicont}, to obtain that $u \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ and Corollary \ref{cor: d_p_monotone_limit} gives that $d_p(u_k,u) \to 0$.
Now we turn to the case when $u_k$ is increasing. We know that $d_p(u_k,0)$ is uniformly bounded, hence using Theorem \ref{thm: Energy_Metric_Eqv} we obtain that $\int_X |u_k|^p \omega^n$ is uniformly bounded as well. By the $L^1$--compactness of subharmonic functions \cite[Chapter I, Proposition 4.21]{De} we obtain that $u_k \nearrow u \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ a.e. with respect to $\omega^n$. By the monotonicity property (Corollary \ref{cor: monotonicity_E_chi}) we obtain that $u \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ and another application of Corollary \ref{cor: d_p_monotone_limit} gives that $d_p(u_k,u) \to 0$.
\end{proof}
As another consequence of the Pythagorean identity, we note the contractivity of the operator $v \to P(u,v)$, when restricted to finite energy spaces. This result will be essential in proving that $(\mathcal E_p(X,\omega),d_p)$ is a complete metric space.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop: contractivity} Given $u,v,w \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ we have
$$d_p (P(u,v),P(u,w)) \leq d_p(v,w).$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}By Corollary \ref{cor: d_p_monotone_limit} we can assume that $u,v,w \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$ and $P(u,v),P(u,w) \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$ (see Corollary \ref{cor: rooftop_env_reg}).
First we assume that $v \leq w$. Let $t \to \phi_t$ be the $C^{1,\bar 1}$ geodesic connecting $v,w$, and $t \to \psi_t$ be the bounded geodesic connecting $P(u,v),P(u,w)$. By Proposition \ref{prop: distgeod_general} we have to argue that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: dist_est}
\int_X |\dot{\psi_0}|^p\omega_{P(u,v)}^n\leq\int_X |\dot{\phi_0}|^p \omega_{v}^n.
\end{equation}
Proposition \ref{prop: MA_form} implies that
$$\int_X |\dot{\psi_0}|^p\omega_{P(u,v)}^n\leq \int_{\{P(u,v)=u\}} |\dot{\psi_0}|^p\omega_{u}^n + \int_{\{P(u,v)=v\}} |\dot{\psi_0}|^p \omega_{v}^n.$$
We argue that the first term in this sum is zero. As $P(u,v) \leq P(u,w) \leq u$, by \eqref{eq: udef1} (or Theorem \ref{thm: uniqueness_BVP}), it is clear that $P(u,v) \leq \psi_t \leq u, \ t \in [0,1]$. Hence, if $x \in \{ P(u,v)=u\}$ then $\psi_t(x)=u(x), \ t \in [0,1]$, implying $\dot \psi_0 \big|_{\{ P(u,v)=u\}}\equiv 0$.
At the same time, using Theorem \ref{thm: uniqueness_BVP} again, it follows that $\psi_t \leq \phi_t, \ t \in [0,1]$. This implies that $0 \leq \dot \psi_0 \big|_{\{ P(u,v)=v\}}\leq\dot \phi_0 \big|_{\{ P(u,v)=v\}},$ which in turn implies \eqref{eq: dist_est}.
The general case follows now from an application of the Pythagorean formula (Theorem \ref{thm: pythagorean}) and what we just proved above:
\begin{flalign*}
d_p(P(u,v),P(u,w))^p&= d_p(P(u,v),P(u,v,w))^p + d_p(P(u,w),P(u,v,w))^p\\
&= d_p(P(u,v),P(u,P(v,w)))^p + d_p(P(u,w),P(u,P(v,w)))^p\\
&\leq d_p(v,P(v,w))^p + d_p(w,P(v,w))^p\\
&= d_p(v,w)^p.
\end{flalign*}
\end{proof}
We arrive to the main result of this section. Using the previous proposition we will show that any Cauchy sequence of $(\mathcal E_p,d_p)$ is equivalent to a monotonic Cauchy sequence. By the Lemma \ref{lem: lemma mononton_seq}, such sequences have limit in $\mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$, showing that this space is complete with respect to $d_p$:
\begin{theorem}[\cite{da2}] \label{thm: EpComplete} $(\mathcal E_p (X, \omega),d_p)$ is a geodesic metric space, which is the metric completion of $(\mathcal H_\omega,d_p)$. Additionally, the finite energy geodesic $t \to u_t$ connecting $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal E_{p}(X, \omega)$ is a $d_p$-geodesic.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} By Theorem \ref{thm: BK_approx} and Corollary \ref{cor: d_p_monotone_limit} $\mathcal H_\omega$ is a $d_p$--dense subset of $\mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$. The statement about geodesics was addressed in Theorem \ref{thm: e2space}, hence we only need to argue completeness.
Suppose $\{u_k\}_{k \in \Bbb N} \subset \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ is a $d_p$--Cauchy sequence. We will prove that there exists $v \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ such that $d_p (u_k,v) \to 0.$ After passing to a subsequence we can assume that
$$d_p(u_l,u_{l+1}) \leq 1/2^l, \ l \in \Bbb N.$$
By Proposition \ref{prop: env_exist} we can introduce $v^k_l = P(u_k,u_{k+1},\ldots,u_{k+l}) \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega), \ l,k \in \Bbb N$. We argue first that each decreasing sequence $\{ v^k_l\}_{l \in \Bbb N}$ is $d_p$--Cauchy.
We observe that $v^k_{l+1}=P(v^k_l,u_{k+ l+1})$ and $v^k_l=P(v^k_l,u_{k+l})$. Using this and Proposition \ref{prop: contractivity} we can write:
$$d_p(v^k_{l+1},v^k_l) = d_p(P(v^k_l,u_{k+l+1}),P(v^k_l,u_{k+l})) \leq d_p(u_{k+l+1}, u_{k+l})\leq \frac{1}{2^{k+l}}.$$
By Lemma \ref{lem: lemma mononton_seq}, it follows now that each sequence $\{ v^k_l\}_{l \in \Bbb N}$ is $d_p$--convergening to some $v^k \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$. Using the same trick as above, we can write:
\begin{flalign*}
d_p(v^k,v^{k+1}) &=\lim_{l \to \infty}d_p(v^k_{l+1},v^{k+1}_l)= \lim_{l \to \infty}d_p(P(u_k,v^{k+1}_{l}),P(u_{k+1},v^{k+1}_l))\\
&\leq d_p (u_k,u_{k+1}) \leq \frac{1}{2^k},
\end{flalign*}\vspace{-0.7cm}
\begin{flalign*}
d_p(v^k,u_k) &=\lim_{l \to \infty}d_p(v^k_l,u_k)=\lim_{l \to \infty}d_p(P(u_k,v^{k+1}_{l-1}),P(u_k,u_k))\\
&\leq\lim_{l \to \infty}d_p(v^{k+1}_{l-1},u_k)=\lim_{l \to \infty}d_p(P(u_{k+1},v^{k+2}_{l-2}),u_k)\\
&\leq \lim_{l \to \infty}d_p(P(u_{k+1},v^{k+2}_{l-2}),u_{k+1}) + d_p(u_{k+1},u_k)\\
&\leq \lim_{l \to \infty} \sum_{j=k}^{l+k} d_p (u_j,u_{j+1}) \leq \frac{1}{2^{k-1}}.
\end{flalign*}
Consequently, $\{v^k\}_{k \in \Bbb N}$ is an increasing $d_p$--bounded $d_p$--Cauchy sequence that is equivalent to $\{u_k\}_{k \in \Bbb N}$. By Lemma \eqref{lem: lemma mononton_seq} there exists $v \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ such that $d_p(v_k,v) \to 0$, which in turn implies that $d_p(u_k,v)\to 0$, finishing the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{Special features of the $L^1$ Finsler geometry}
When it comes to applications of measure theory, the most important $L^p$ spaces are the $L^1$ space, its dual $L^\infty$, and the Hilbert space $L^2$. A similar pattern can be observed with the $L^p$ Finsler geometries on $\mathcal H_\omega$. One can show that the $d_\infty$ metric is a multiple of the usual $L^\infty$ metric. As follows from the work of Calabi--Chen \cite{cc}, the completion of $(\mathcal H_\omega,d_2)$ is non--postively curved and as such it provides fertile ground to the study of geometric gradient flows explored in \cite{st1,st2,bdl1}.
In this section we will focus exclusively on the $L^1$ Finsler geometry of $\mathcal H_\omega$, whose path length metric structure has a number of interesting properties making it suitable in our study of canonical K\"ahler metrics, detailed in the next chapter.
The starting point is the Monge--Amp\`ere energy $I: \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)\cap L^\infty \to \Bbb R$ (sometimes called Aubin--Yau, or Aubin--Mabuchi energy):
\begin{equation}\label{eq: I_energy_def}
I(u):= \frac{1}{(n+1)V}\sum_{j=0}^{n}\int_X u \omega_{u}^j \wedge \omega^{n-j}.
\end{equation}
The following lemma explains the choice of name for the $I$ energy, as it turns out that the first order variation of this functional is exactly the complex Monge--Amp\`ere operator:
\begin{lemma} \label{lem: I_differential} Suppose $[0,1]\ni t \to v_t \in \mathcal H_\omega$ is a smooth curve. Then $t \to I(v_t)$ is differentiable and
$$\frac{d}{dt}I(v_t)= \frac{1}{V}\int_X \dot v_t \omega_{v_t}^n.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}Using the definition of $I$ we can calculate the differential of $t \to I(v_t)$ directly:
\begin{flalign*}
\frac{d}{dt}I(v_t) &= \frac{1}{(n+1)V} \bigg ( \sum_{j=0}^{n}\int_X \dot v_t \omega_{v_t}^j \wedge \omega^{n-j} + \sum_{j=0}^{n} j \int_X v_t i\del\dbar \dot v_t \wedge \omega_{v_t}^{j-1} \wedge \omega^{n-j}\bigg)\\
&= \frac{1}{(n+1)V} \bigg ( \sum_{j=0}^{n}\int_X \dot v_t \omega_{v_t}^j \wedge \omega^{n-j} + \sum_{j=0}^{n} j \int_X \dot v_t i\del\dbar v_t \wedge \omega_{v_t}^{j-1} \wedge \omega^{n-j}\bigg)\\
&= \frac{1}{(n+1)V} \bigg ( \sum_{j=0}^{n}\int_X \dot v_t \omega_{v_t}^j \wedge \omega^{n-j} + \sum_{j=0}^{n} j \int_X \dot v_t ( \omega_{v_t} - \omega) \wedge \omega_{v_t}^{j-1} \wedge \omega^{n-j}\bigg)\\
&= \frac{1}{V} \int_X \dot v_t \omega_{v_t}^n.
\end{flalign*}
\end{proof}
Based on the last lemma, we deduce a number of properties of the Monge--Amp\`ere energy:
\begin{proposition}\label{prop: I_energy_prop}
Given $u,v \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \cap L^\infty$, the following hold:\\
\begin{equation}\label{eq: I_energy_diff}
I(u)-I(v) = \frac{1}{(n+1)V}\sum_{j=0}^{n}\int_X (u-v) \omega_{u}^j \wedge \omega_v^{n-j},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq: I_energy_diff_est}
\frac{1}{V}\int_X (u-v)\omega_u^{n} \leq I(u)-I(v) \leq \frac{1}{V}\int_X (u-v)\omega_v^{n}.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}First we show \eqref{eq: I_energy_diff} for $u,v \in \mathcal H_\omega$. Let $[0,1] \ni t \to h_t := (1-t)v + t u \in \mathcal H_\omega$ be the smooth affine curve joining $v$ and $u$. By the previous lemma and the binomial theorem we can write
\begin{flalign*}
I(u)-I(v)&= \int_0^1 \frac{d}{dt} I(h_t)dt = \frac{1}{V}\int_X (u-v) \int_0^1 ((1-t)\omega_v + t \omega_u)^n dt\\
&= \frac{1}{V} \sum_{j=0}^n {n \choose j} \cdot \int_0^1 t^j (1-t)^{n-j} dt \cdot \int_X (u-v) \omega_u^j \wedge \omega_v^{n-j} dt
\end{flalign*}
After an elementary calculation involving integration by parts we obtain that
$$\int_0^1 t^j (1-t)^{n-j}dt = \frac{j! (n-j)!}{(n+1)!},$$
giving \eqref{eq: I_energy_diff} for $u,v \in \mathcal H_\omega$. For the general case $u,v \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \cap L^\infty$ by Theorem \ref{thm: BK_approx} we can find $u_k,v_k \in \mathcal H_\omega$ decreasing to $u$ and $v$ respectively. We can use the Bedford--Taylor theorem on the continuity of the complex Monge--Amp\`ere measures (\cite[Theorem 2.2.5]{bl3}) to conclude that $I(u_k) \to I(u)$, $I(v_k) \to I(v)$ and $\int_X (u_k - v_k)\omega_{u_k}^j \wedge \omega_{v_k}^{n-j} \to \int_X (u - v)\omega_{u}^j \wedge \omega_{v}^{n-j}$, giving \eqref{eq: I_energy_def} for bounded potentials.
Now we turn to the estimates in \eqref{eq: I_energy_diff_est}. First we prove the following estimate:
\begin{flalign}\label{eq: I_energy_int_parts_ineq}
\int_X (u-v) \omega_u^j &\wedge \omega_v^{n-j} = \int_X (u-v) \omega_u^{j-1} \wedge \omega_v^{n-j + 1} + \int_X (u-v) i\del\dbar (u-v) \wedge \omega_u^{j-1} \wedge \omega_v^{n-j} \nonumber\\
& = \int_X (u-v) \omega_u^{j-1} \wedge \omega_v^{n-j + 1} - \int_X i\partial (u-v) \wedge i\bar\partial (u-v) \wedge \omega_u^{j-1} \wedge \omega_v^{n-j}\nonumber \\
& \leq \int_X (u-v) \omega_u^{j-1} \wedge \omega_v^{n-j + 1}.
\end{flalign}
Using this estimate inductively for the terms of \eqref{eq: I_energy_diff} yields \eqref{eq: I_energy_diff_est}.
\end{proof}
As a consequence of \eqref{eq: I_energy_diff} we note the monotonicity property of $I$:
\begin{corollary} Suppose $u,v \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \cap L^\infty$ such that $u \geq v$. Then $I(u) \geq I(v)$.
\end{corollary}
This results allows to extend the definition of $I$ to $\textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$. Indeed, if $u \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ then using the canonical cutoffs $u_k = \max(u,-k)$ we can write:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: I_def_general}
I(u) := \lim_{k \to \infty}I(u_k).
\end{equation}
Though the limit in the above definition is well defined, it may equal $-\infty$ for certain potentials $u$. By our next result $I$ is finite exactly on $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$. What is more, $I$ is $d_1$--continuous when restricted to this space:
\begin{proposition}\label{prop: I_finiteness_and_cont}
Let $u \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$. Then $I(u) > -\infty$ if and only if $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$. Also, the following holds:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: I_Lipschitz_cont}
|I(u_0)-I(u_1)| \leq d_1(u_0,u_1), \ \ u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega).
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} By definition, $I(u+c)=I(u) +c$ for all $c \in \Bbb R$, hence we can assume that $u \leq 0$. Consequently, by \eqref{eq: I_energy_diff_est} for the canonical cutoffs $u_k=\max(u,-k)$ we have:
$$ -\frac{E_1(u_k)}{V} = \frac{1}{V} \int_X u_k \omega_{u_k}^n \leq I(u_k) \leq \frac{1}{(n+1)V} \int_X u_k \omega_{u_k}^n=-\frac{E_1(u_k)}{(n+1)V}.$$
If $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ then by the fundamental estimate (Proposition \ref{prop: Energy_est}) we have that $E_1(u_k)$ is uniformly bounded, hence $I(u)=\lim_k I(u_k)$ is finite. On the other hand, if $I(u)$ is finite then $I(u_k)$ is uniformly bounded, hence so is $E_1(u_k)$. By Corollary \ref{cor: E_semicont} we obtain that $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$.
Now we turn to \eqref{eq: I_Lipschitz_cont}. By Corollary \ref{cor: d_p_monotone_limit} and \eqref{eq: I_def_general} it follows that it is enough to prove \eqref{eq: I_Lipschitz_cont} for bounded potentials. Furthermore, using Theorem \ref{thm: BK_approx} it is actually enough to prove \eqref{eq: I_Lipschitz_cont} for potentials in $\mathcal H_\omega$. For $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$ let $t \to u_t$ be the $C^{1,\bar 1}$ geodesic connecting $u_0,u_1$.
By \eqref{eq: dIdt_C11geod}, proved in the next lemma, we can finish our argument:
$$|I(u_1)-I(u_0)| = \Big| \int_0^1 \frac{d}{dt} I(u_t)dt\Big| \leq \frac{1}{V} \int_0^1 \int_X |\dot u_t|\omega_{u_t}^n dt = d_1(u_0,u_1),$$
where in the last equality we have used Theorem \ref{thm: XXChenThm}.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}Suppose $t \to u_t$ is the $C^{1,\bar 1}$ geodesic connecting $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$. Then $t \to I(u_t)$ is differentiable, moreover
\begin{equation}\label{eq: dIdt_C11geod}
\frac{d}{dt} I(u_t) = \frac{1}{V}\int_X \dot u_t \omega_{u_t}^n.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} As $t \to u_t$ is $C^{1,\bar 1}$ it follows that $(u_{t +\delta}-u_t)/\delta \to \dot u_t$ uniformly as $\delta \to 0$. Using this and \eqref{eq: I_energy_diff} we can write:
\begin{flalign}
\frac{d}{dt}I(u_t)&=\lim_{\delta \to 0} \frac{I(u_{t + \delta}) - I(u_t)}{\delta} = \frac{1}{(n+1)V} \sum_{j=0}^n\lim_{\delta \to 0} \int_X \frac{u_{t + \delta} - u_t}{\delta}\omega_{u_{t + \delta}}^j \wedge \omega_{u_{t}}^{n-j} \nonumber\\
&= \frac{1}{V}\int_X \dot u_t \omega_{u_t}^n,
\end{flalign}
where we have used that $\omega_{u_{t+\delta}}^j\wedge\omega_{u_t}^{n-j}\to \omega_{u_t}^n$ weakly.
\end{proof}
Further linking the Monge--Amp\`ere energy to the $L^1$ Finsler geometry is the fact that $I$ is affine along finite energy geodesics:
\begin{proposition}\label{prop: I_linrear} Suppose $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ and $t \to u_t$ is the finite energy geodesic connecting $u_0,u_1$. Then $t \to I(u_t)$ is affine: $I(u_t)=(1-t)I(u_0) + t I(u_1), \ t \in [0,1].$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} First we show that $t \to I(u_t)$ is affine for the $C^{1,\bar 1}$ geodesic connecting $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$. Let $[0,1] \ni t \to u^{\varepsilon}_t \in \mathcal H_\omega$ be the smooth $\varepsilon$--geodesic connecting $u_0,u_1$ (see \eqref{eq: epsBVPGeod}). By Lemma \ref{lem: I_differential} we have that
$$\frac{d}{dt}I(u_t^\varepsilon)= \frac{1}{V} \int_X \dot u_t^\varepsilon \omega_{u_t^\varepsilon}^n = \frac{1}{V} \int_X \dot u_t^\varepsilon \omega_{u_t^\varepsilon}^n = \langle 1,\dot u_t^\varepsilon \rangle_{u_t^\varepsilon}.$$
As we take one more derivative of the above formula, we can use the $L^2$ Mabuchi Levi--Civita connection (see \eqref{eq: CovDerivative}) and \eqref{eq: eps_geod_eq_Lev_Civ} to obtain:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: I_second_deriv_epsgeod}
\frac{d^2}{dt^2}I(u_t^\varepsilon)= \langle 1,\nabla_{\dot u_t^\varepsilon}\dot u_t^\varepsilon \rangle_{u_t^\varepsilon} = \frac{1}{V}\int_X \nabla_{\dot u_t^\varepsilon}\dot u_t^\varepsilon \omega_{u_t^\varepsilon}^n= \frac{1}{V}\int_X \varepsilon \omega^n= \varepsilon.
\end{equation}
For fixed $t \in [0,1]$ we have that $u^\varepsilon_t \nearrow u_t$ uniformly, hence \eqref{eq: I_energy_diff} gives that $I(u^\varepsilon_t) \to I(u_t)$. By an elementary argument, \eqref{eq: I_second_deriv_epsgeod} implies that $t \to I(u_t) = \lim_{\varepsilon \to 0} I(u_t^\varepsilon)$ is affine.
Next we show the result for $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$. In this case let $u^k_0,u^k_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$ be decreasing approximating sequences that exist by Theorem \ref{thm: BK_approx}. Let $ t \to u^{k}_t$ be the $C^{1,\bar 1}$ geodesics joining $u^k_0,u^k_1$, and $t \to u_t$ be the finite energy geodesic joining $u_0,u_1$. By Proposition \ref{prop: weak_geod_approx} it follows that for fixed $t$ we have $u^k_t \searrow u_t$. Corollary \ref{cor: d_p_monotone_limit} now gives that $d_1(u^k_t,u_t) \to 0$. We can now use Proposition \ref{prop: I_finiteness_and_cont} to conclude that $I(u^k_t) \to I(u_t)$. Since $t \to I(u^k_t)$ is affine, so is $t \to I(u_t)$.
\end{proof}
By revisiting the Pythagorean formula of the $L^1$ geometry (Theorem \ref{thm: pythagorean}) we obtain the following concrete formula for the $d_1$ metric in terms of the Monge--Amp\`ere energy:
\begin{proposition} \label{prop: d_1_I_formula} If $u,v \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ then
\begin{equation}\label{eq: d_1_I_formula}
d_1(u,v)=I(u) + I(v) -2 I(P(u,v)).
\end{equation}
In particular, if $u \geq v$ then $d_1(u,v)=I(u) - I(v)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} We show that $d_1(u,v)=I(u) - I(v)$ when $u \geq v$. Then the Pythagorean formula (Theorem \ref{thm: pythagorean}) will imply \eqref{eq: d_1_I_formula}. By Theorem \ref{thm: BK_approx} , Corollary \ref{cor: d_p_monotone_limit} and Proposition \ref{prop: I_finiteness_and_cont} it is enough to show $d_1(u,v)=I(u) - I(v)$ for $u,v \in \mathcal H_\omega$. Let $[0,1] \ni t \to u_t \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$ be the $C^{1,\bar 1}$ geodesic joining $u_0:=v$ and $u_1:=u$. As $u_1 \geq u_0$, by Theorem \ref{thm: uniqueness_BVP} we obtain that $u_0 \leq u_t$. Using convexity in the $t$ variable, we obtain that $0 \leq \dot u_0 \leq \dot u_t.$
Since $\dot u_t \geq 0$, by Theorem \ref{thm: XXChenThm} we can conclude that
$$d_1(u,v)= \frac{1}{V}\int_0^1 \int_X \dot u_t \omega_{u_t}^n dt = \int_0^1 \frac{d}{dt} I(u_t) dt=I(u_1)-I(u_0)=I(u)-I(v),$$
where in the second equality we have used \eqref{eq: dIdt_C11geod}.
\end{proof}
Recall that the correspondence $u \to \omega_u$ is one-to-one up to a constant. To make the correspondence between metrics and potentials one-to-one, we need to restrict the map $u \to \omega_u$ to a hyper--surface of $\mathcal H_\omega$. There are many normalizations that come to mind, but the most convenient choice is to use the following space and its completion:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: H_0_def}
\mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)= \{u \in \mathcal H_\omega \textup{ s.t. } I(u)=0 \} \ \ \textup{ and } \ \ \mathcal E_1(X,\omega) \cap I^{-1}(0).
\end{equation}
As $I:\mathcal E_1(X,\omega) \to \Bbb R$ is $d_1$-continuous, we see that $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega) \cap I^{-1}(0)$ is indeed the $d_1$--completion of $\mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)$. We focus on the preimage of $I$ due to the conclusion of Proposition \ref{prop: I_linrear}. Indeed, according to this result, if $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega) \cap I^{-1}(0)$ then $t \to u_t$, the finite energy geodesic connecting $u_0,u_1$, satisfies $u_t \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega) \cap I^{-1}(0)$, hence the ``hypersurface" $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega) \cap I^{-1}(0)$ is totally geodesic.
The $J$ energy is closely related to the Monge--Amp\`ere energy and is given by the following formula:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: J_def}
J(u) = \frac{1}{V}\int_X u \omega^n - I(u).
\end{equation}
By \eqref{eq: I_energy_diff_est} it follows that $J(u) \geq 0$ for all $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$.
For $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega) \cap I^{-1}(0)$, the $J$ energy is given by the especially simple formula $J(u)=\frac{1}{V}\int_X u \omega^n$. Additionally, on $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega) \cap I^{-1}(0)$ the growth of the $d_1$ metric and the $J$ energy is closely related:
\begin{proposition}[\cite{da2,dr2}] ]\label{prop: d_1_growth_J}
There exists $C=C(X,\omega)> 1$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: d_1_growth_J}
\frac{1}{C}J(u) -C \leq d_1(0,u) \leq C J(u) + C, \ \ u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega) \cap I^{-1}(0).
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} Let $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega) \cap I^{-1}(0)$. By Theorem \ref{thm: Energy_Metric_Eqv} we have
$$J(u)=\frac{1}{V} \int_X u \omega^n \leq \frac{1}{V} \int_X |u| \omega^n \leq Cd_1(0,u),$$
implying the first estimate in \eqref{eq: d_1_growth_J}. For the second estimate, since $I(u)=0$, we have that $\sup_X u \geq 0$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq: somethingd_1}
d_1(0,u)=-2 I(P(0,u)).
\end{equation}
Clearly, $u - \sup_X u \leq \min(0,u)$, so
$u - \sup_X u \leq P(0,u)$. Thus, $-\sup_X u = I(u - \sup_X u) \leq I(P(0,u)).$
Combined with \eqref{eq: somethingd_1}, we obtain that $
d_1(0,u)=-2I(P(0,u))\leq 2 \sup_X u.$
Finally, according to the next basic lemma, $\sup_X u \leq C' \int_X u \omega^n + C'$ for some $C'(X,\omega) > 1$, finishing the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: sup_int_psh_eqv}
There exists $C := C(X,\omega) > 1$ such that for any $u \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ we have
$$\frac{1}{V} \int_X u \omega^n \leq \sup_X u \leq \frac{1}{V} \int_X u \omega^n + C.$$
\end{lemma}
This is a well known result in pluripotential theory. A proof using compactness can be found in \cite[Proposition 1.7]{gz05}. Below we give a constructive argument using only the sub-mean value property of psh functions.
\begin{proof}
The first estimate is trivial. To argue the second estimate, it is enough to show that $\int_X u \omega^n$ is uniformly bounded from below, for all $u \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ with $\sup_X u =0$. We fix such potential $u$ for the rest of the proof.
We pick nested coordinate charts $U_k \subset W_k \subset X$, such that $\{U_k\}_{1 \leq k \leq N}$ covers $X$, and there exist holomorphic diffeomorphisms $\varphi_k: B(0,4) \to W_k $ such that $\varphi_k(B(0,1))=U_k$ and there exists $\psi_k \in C^\infty(W_k)$ such that $\omega|_{W_k} = i\del\dbar \psi_k$. Notice that it is enough to show the existence of $C:=C(X,\omega)<0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: patch_estimate}
\int_{B(0,1)} u \circ \varphi_j d\mu \geq C, \ \ \ j \in \{1,\ldots,N\},
\end{equation}
where $d\mu$ is the Euclidean measure on $\Bbb C^n$.
Using our setup, we obtain that $\psi_k + u \in \textup{PSH}(W_k)$ for all $k \in \{1,\ldots,N\}$.
As $u$ is usc, its supremum is realized at some $x_1 \in X$, i.e. $u \leq u(x_1)=0$. As $\{U_k\}_k$ covers $X$, $x_1 \in U_l$ for some $l \in \{1,\ldots,N \}$. For simplicity, we can assume that $l=1$.
Let $z_1:=\varphi^{-1}_1(x_1) \in B(0,1)$. As $B(z_1,2)\subset B(0,4)$, by the sub-meanvalue property of psh functions we can write:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: sup_int_est_interm}
\psi_1(x_1)=u\circ \varphi_1(z_1) + \psi_1 \circ \varphi_1(z_1) \leq \frac{1}{\mu(B(z_1,2))}\int_{B(z_1,2)} (u\circ \varphi_1 +\psi_1 \circ \varphi_1)d\mu.
\end{equation}
Since $u \leq 0$ and $B(0,1) \subset B(z_1,2)$, there exists $C_1 < 0$, independent of $u$, such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: patch_estimate_1}
\int_{B(0,1)} u \circ \varphi_1 d\mu \geq C_1.
\end{equation}
As $\{U_k \}_{k}$ is a covering of $X$, $U_1$ needs to intersect at least another member of the covering. We can assume that $U_1 \cap U_2$ is non-empty.
Since $u \leq 0$ and \eqref{eq: patch_estimate_1} holds, there exists $x_2 \in U_2\cap U_1,r_2 \in (0,1)$ and $\tilde C_1<0$, independent of $u$, such that for $z_2 = \varphi_2^{-1}(x_2)$ we have $\varphi_2(B(z_2,r_2)) \subset U_1 \cap U_2$ and
$$ \frac{1}{\mu(B(z_2,r_2))}\int_{B(z_2,r_2)}( u \circ \varphi_2 + \psi_2 \circ \varphi_2)d\mu \geq \tilde C_1.$$
Since $ u \circ \varphi_2 + \psi_2 \circ \varphi_2$ is psh in $B(0,4)$, we can further write that:
$$ \frac{1}{\mu(B(z_2,2))}\int_{B(z_2,2)} ( u \circ \varphi_2 + \psi_2 \circ \varphi_2) d\mu \geq \frac{1}{\mu(B(z_2,r_2))}\int_{B(z_2,r_2)} ( u \circ \varphi_2 + \psi_2 \circ \varphi_2) d\mu \geq \tilde C_1.$$
Since $B(0,1) \subset B(z_2,2)$ and $u \leq 0$, from here we conclude the existence of $C_2 <0$, independent of $u$, such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: patch_estimate_2}
\int_{B(0,1)} u \circ \varphi_2 d\mu \geq C_2.
\end{equation}
Continuing the above process, after $N-2$ more steps we eventually arrive at \eqref{eq: patch_estimate}.
\end{proof}
\section{Relation to classical notions of convergence}
Theorem \ref{thm: Energy_Metric_Eqv} gave a characterization of $d_p$--convergence using concrete analytic expressions. When dealing with $d_1$, it turns out that an even more convenient characterization can be given with the help of the Monge--Amp\`ere energy. This is the content of the next theorem, which also shows that $d_1$--convergence implies classical $L^1$ convergence of potentials and also the weak convergence of the associated complex Monge--Amp\`ere measures:
\begin{theorem}[\cite{da2}] \label{thm: d_1-convergence} Suppose $u_k,u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$. Then the following hold:\\
\noindent (i) $d_1(u_k,u) \to 0$ if and only if $\int_X |u_k -u|\omega^n \to 0$ and $I(u_k) \to I(u)$.\\
\noindent (ii) If $d_1(u_k,u) \to 0$ then $\omega_{u_k}^n \to \omega_u^n$ weakly, and $\int_X |u_k - u|\omega_v^n \to 0$ for any $v \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$.
\end{theorem}
The proof of this result is given in a number of propositions and lemmas below. The new analytic input will be given by the bi--functional $\mathcal I(\cdot,\cdot):\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)\times\mathcal E_1(X,\omega) \to \Bbb R$ and its properties:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: I_script_def}
\mathcal I(u_0,u_1)= \int_X (u_0 - u_1)(\omega_{u_1}^n - \omega_{u_0}^n).
\end{equation}
Observe that by Lemma \ref{prop: mixed_finite_prop: Energy_est} the above expression is indeed finite. Moreover, if $d_1(u_j,u) \to 0$ then by Theorem \ref{thm: Energy_Metric_Eqv} we get $\mathcal I(u_j,u) \to 0$. As it turns out, the relationship between $d_1$ and $\mathcal I$ is much deeper then this simple observation might suggest.
When $u_0,u_1$ are bounded, then Bedford--Taylor theory allows to integrate by parts and obtain:
$$\mathcal I(u_0,u_1) =\sum_{j=0}^{n-1} \int_X i \partial (u_0 - u_1) \wedge \bar\partial (u_0 - u_1) \wedge \omega_{u_0}^{j} \wedge \omega_{u_1}^{n-j-1}.$$
In particular, $\mathcal I(u_0,u_1) \geq 0$ for bounded potentials. Applying the next lemma to canonical cutoffs, we deduce that this also holds in general:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: I_script_Pyt} Suppose $u_0,u_0^j, u_1, u_1^j \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ and $u^j_0 \searrow u_0$, $u^j_1 \searrow u_1$. Then the following hold:\\
\noindent (i) $\mathcal I(u_0,u_1)=\mathcal I(u_0,\max(u_0,u_1)) + \mathcal I(\max(u_0,u_1),u_1).$\\
\noindent (ii) $\lim_{j \to \infty}\mathcal I(u^j_0,u^j_1)=\mathcal I(u_0,u_1).$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} (i) follows from the locality of the complex Monge--Amp\`ere measure on plurifine open sets (see \eqref{eq: GZ_MP_local}). Indeed, $\mathbbm{1}_{\{u_1 > u_0\}}(\omega_{\max(u_0,u_1)}^n - \omega_{u_0}^n) = \mathbbm{1}_{\{u_1 > u_0\}}(\omega_{u_1}^n - \omega_{u_0}^n)$, consequently
$$\mathcal I(u_0,\max(u_0,u_1))=\int_{\{u_1>u_0 \}} (u_0 - u_1)(\omega_{u_1}^n-\omega_{u_0}^n),$$
and for similar reasons, $\mathcal I(\max(u_0,u_1),u_1)=\int_{\{u_0>u_1 \}} (u_0 - u_1)(\omega_{u_1}^n-\omega_{u_0}^n)$. Adding these last two identities yields (i).
To address (ii), we start with $\mathcal I(u^j_0,u^j_1) = \mathcal I(u^j_0,\max(u^j_0,u^j_1)) + \mathcal I(\max(u^j_0,u^j_1),u^j_1)$. Trivially, $u^j_0,u^j_1 \leq\max(u^j_0,u^j_1)$, hence we can apply Proposition \ref{prop: MA_cont} to each term on the right hand side of \eqref{eq: I_script_def} to conclude that $\mathcal I(u^j_0,\max(u^j_0,u^j_1)) \to \mathcal I(u_0,\max(u_0,u_1))$ and $\mathcal I(\max(u^j_0,u^j_1),u^j_1) \to \mathcal I(\max(u_0,u_1),u_1)$. Another application of (i) yields (ii).
\end{proof}
The next proposition contains the main analytic properties of the $\mathcal I$ functional:
\begin{proposition}\textup{\cite[Lemma 3.13, Lemma 5.8]{BBGZ}}\label{prop: I_script_est} Suppose $C>0$ and $\phi,\psi,u,v \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{eq: C_estimates}
-C \leq I(\phi),I(\psi),I(u),I(v),\sup_X \phi, \sup_X \psi,\sup_X u,\sup_X v \leq C.
\end{equation}
Then there exists $f_C: \Bbb R^+ \to \Bbb R^+ $ (only dependent on $C$) continuous with $f_C(0)=0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: I_script_est1}\Big|\int_X \phi (\omega_u^n - \omega_v^n)\Big| \leq f_C(\mathcal I(u,v)),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq: I_script_est2}\Big|\int_X (u-v) (\omega_\phi^n-\omega_\psi^n)\Big| \leq f_C(\mathcal I(u,v)).
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
Before we get into the argument, we note that by the lemma following this proposition, the condition \eqref{eq: C_estimates} is seen to be equivalent with
\begin{equation}\label{eq: C_estimates_d1}
d_1(0,\phi),d_1(0,\psi),d_1(0,u),d_1(0,v) \leq C'.
\end{equation}
\begin{proof}By repeated application of
the dominated convergence theorem, \eqref{eq: CMA_general_def} and Lemma \ref{lem: I_script_Pyt}(ii), one can see that it is enough to show \eqref{eq: I_script_est1} and \eqref{eq: I_script_est2} for bounded potentials.
We focus now on \eqref{eq: I_script_est1} and introduce the quantities $a_k: = \int_X \phi \omega_{u}^k \wedge \omega_v^{n-k}$. We note that \eqref{eq: I_script_est1} follows if we are able to prove
\begin{equation}\label{eq: ak_ak1}
|a_{k+1} - a_k| \leq f_C(\mathcal I(u,v)), \ \ k \in \{0,\ldots,n-1\}.
\end{equation}
As our potentials are bounded, we can use integration by parts and start writing:
\begin{flalign*}
a_{k+1}-a_k & = \int_X \phi i\del\dbar (u - v) \wedge \omega_u^{k} \wedge \omega_v^{n-k-1}\\
&=\int_X i \partial \phi \wedge \bar\partial (v - u) \wedge \omega_u^{k} \wedge \omega_v^{n-k-1},
\end{flalign*}
Consequently, by the Cauchy--Schwarz inequality we can write:
\begin{flalign*}
|a_{k+1}-a_k|^2 & \leq \int_X i \partial \phi \wedge \bar\partial \phi \wedge \omega_u^{k} \wedge \omega_v^{n-k-1} \cdot \int_X i \partial (u-v) \wedge \bar\partial (u-v) \wedge \omega_u^{k} \wedge \omega_v^{n-k-1}\\
& \leq \int_X i \partial \phi \wedge \bar\partial \phi \wedge \omega_u^{k} \wedge \omega_v^{n-k-1} \cdot \mathcal I(u,v).
\end{flalign*}
By the above, \eqref{eq: ak_ak1} would follow if we can show that $\int_X i \partial \phi \wedge \bar\partial \phi \wedge \omega_u^{k} \wedge \omega_v^{n-k-1}$ is uniformly bounded, and this exactly what we argue:
\begin{flalign*}
\int_X i \partial \phi \wedge \bar\partial \phi \wedge \omega_u^{k} \wedge \omega_v^{n-k-1}&=\int_X \phi \omega \wedge \omega_u^{k} \wedge \omega_v^{n-k-1} - \int_X \phi \omega_\phi \wedge \omega_u^{k} \wedge \omega_v^{n-k-1}\\
& \leq \int_X |\phi| \omega \wedge \omega_u^{k} \wedge \omega_v^{n-k-1} + \int_X |\phi| \omega_\phi \wedge \omega_u^{k} \wedge \omega_v^{n-k-1} \\
& \leq D \int_X |\phi| \omega^n_{ \phi/4 + u/8 + v/8}\\
& \leq D'd_1(u/8 + v/8,\phi/4 + u/8 + v/8).
\end{flalign*}
where in the last estimate we have used Theorem \ref{thm: Energy_Metric_Eqv}. To finish, by the triangle inequality we have to argue that $d_1(0,u/8+v/8)$ and $d_1(0,\phi /4+u/8+v/8)$ are bounded. This can be deduced from \eqref{eq: C_estimates_d1} by repeated application of Lemma \ref{lem: halwayest} and the triangle inequality for $d_1$.
Now we turn to \eqref{eq: I_script_est2}. The proof has similar philosophy, but it is slightly more intricate. We introduce $\alpha := u-v$, and the quantities $b_k := \int_X \alpha \omega_{u}^k \wedge \omega_\phi^{n-k}$. We will show that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: b_k_main_est}
|b_{k+1}-b_k| \leq f_C(\mathcal I(u,v)), \ \ k \in \{0,\ldots,k-1\}.
\end{equation}
This will imply that $\Big|\int_X (u -v)(\omega_u^n - \omega_{\phi}^n) \Big| \leq f_C(\mathcal I(u,v))$, and using the symmetry in $u,v$, and basic properties of the absolute value, we obtain \eqref{eq: I_script_est2}.
Integration by parts yields the following:
\begin{flalign*}
b_{k+1}-b_k &=\int_X \alpha i\del\dbar (u-\phi) \wedge \omega_u^{k} \wedge \omega_\phi^{n-k-1}= -\int_X i\partial \alpha \wedge \bar\partial (u-\phi) \wedge \omega_u^{k} \wedge \omega_\phi^{n-k-1}
\end{flalign*}
Introducing $\beta := (u + v)/2$ and $c_k := \int_X i\partial \alpha \wedge \bar\partial \alpha \wedge \omega_\beta^{k} \wedge \omega_\phi^{n-k-1} $, by the Cauchy--Schwarz inequality we deduce that
\begin{flalign}\label{eq: c_k_est}
|b_{k+1}-b_k|^2 &\leq \mathcal I(u,\phi) \int_X i\partial \alpha \wedge \bar\partial \alpha \wedge \omega_u^{k} \wedge \omega_\phi^{n-k-1} \leq 2^k \mathcal I(u,\phi) c_k \leq D c_k,
\end{flalign}
where in the last inequality we have used that $\mathcal I(u,\phi)$ is bounded. Indeed, this follows from \eqref{eq: C_estimates_d1}, the triangle inequality for $d_1$, and Theorem \ref{thm: Energy_Metric_Eqv}. Consequently, to prove \eqref{eq: b_k_main_est} it suffices to show that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: c_k_main_est}
c_k \leq f_C(\mathcal I(u,v)).
\end{equation}
To obtain this, we integrate by parts again:
\begin{flalign}\label{eq: someiniedaf}
c&_{k+1}-c_k = \int_X i \partial \alpha \wedge \bar\partial \alpha \wedge i\del\dbar (\beta-\phi) \wedge \omega_{\beta}^{k} \wedge \omega_{\phi}^{n-k-2} \nonumber \\
&= \int_X i \partial \alpha \wedge \bar\partial (\beta-\phi) \wedge i\del\dbar \alpha \wedge \omega_{\beta}^{k} \wedge \omega_{\phi}^{n-k-2}\\
&= \int_X i \partial \alpha \wedge \bar\partial (\beta-\phi) \wedge \omega_u \wedge \omega_{\beta}^{k} \wedge \omega_{\phi}^{n-k-2}-\int_X i \partial \alpha \wedge \bar\partial (\beta-\phi) \wedge \omega_v \wedge \omega_{\beta}^{k} \wedge \omega_{\phi}^{n-k-2}. \nonumber
\end{flalign}
Using that $\omega_u \leq 2 \omega_\beta$ and the Cauchy--Schwarz inequality we can estimate the first term from the right hand side in the following manner:
\begin{flalign*}
\Big|\int_X i \partial \alpha \wedge \bar\partial (\beta-\phi) \wedge \omega_u \wedge \omega_{\beta}^{k-1} \wedge \omega_{\phi}^{n-k-1}\Big|^2 &\leq D' \mathcal I(\beta,\phi) \int_X i \partial \alpha \wedge \bar\partial \alpha \wedge \omega_{\beta}^{k+1} \wedge \omega_{\phi}^{n-k-2}\\
&= D' \mathcal I\Big(\frac{u+v}{2},\phi\Big)c_{k+1} \leq D'' c_{k+1},
\end{flalign*}
where in the last inequality we used that $\mathcal I({(u+v)}/{2},\phi)$ is bounded. This follows from \eqref{eq: C_estimates_d1}, as repeated application of Lemma \ref{lem: halwayest} and the triangle inequality for $d_1$ yields that $d_1(\phi,(u+v)/2)$ is bounded.
We can similarly estimate the other term on the right hand side of \eqref{eq: someiniedaf} and putting everything together we obtain that $c_k \leq c_{k+1} + 2D'' c_{k+1}^{1/2}$. After a successive application of this inequality, we find that $c_{k} \leq f_C(c_{n-1})$, which is equivalent to \eqref{eq: c_k_main_est}.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: d1bounded_char} Suppose $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ and $-C \leq I(u) \leq \sup_X u \leq C$ for some $C>0$. Then $d_1(0,u) \leq 3C$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}By the triangle inequality and Proposition \ref{prop: d_1_I_formula} we can write:
\begin{flalign*}
d_1(0,u) &\leq d_1(0,\sup_X u) + d_1(\sup_X u,u)=d_1(0,\sup_X u) + d_1(0,u-\sup_X u)\\
&= |\sup_X u| + I(0) - I(u - \sup_X u)\\
&= |\sup_X u| +\sup_X u - I(u) \\
& \leq 3C.
\end{flalign*}
\end{proof}
We note the following important corollary of Proposition \ref{prop: I_script_est}:
\begin{corollary} \label{cor: int_d1_est} For any $C>0$ there exists $\tilde f_C:\Bbb R^+ \to \Bbb R^+$ continuous with $\tilde f_C(0)=0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: int_d_1_est}
\int_X |u-v|\omega_{\psi}^n \leq \tilde f_C(d_1(u,v)),
\end{equation}
for $u,v,\psi \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ satisfying $d_1(0,u),d_1(0,v),d_1(0,\psi) \leq C$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}By Lemma \ref{prop: I_finiteness_and_cont} and Theorem \ref{thm: Energy_Metric_Eqv} we note that $d_1(0,u),d_1(0,v),d_1(0,\psi) \leq C$ implies that $I(u),I(v),I(\psi)$ and $\sup_X u,\sup_X v, \sup_X \psi$ are uniformly bounded. Consequently \eqref{eq: I_script_est2} gives that
$$\Big|\int_X (u-v)\omega_{\psi}\Big| \leq f_C(\mathcal I(u,v)) + \int_X |u-v|\omega_u^n \leq \tilde f_C(d_1(u,v)).$$
Next, by Theorem \ref{thm: Energy_Metric_Eqv}, $d_1(u,\max(u,v))$ is uniformly bounded. By the triangle inequality, so is $d_1(0,\max(u,v))$. Consequently, since $\mathcal I(\max(u,v),v) \leq \mathcal I(u,v)$ (see Lemma \eqref{lem: I_script_Pyt}) we also have:
$$\Big|\int_X (\max(u,v)-v)\omega_{\psi}\Big| \leq \tilde f_C(d_1(u,v)).$$
Using $|u - v|= 2 (\max(u,v) - v) - (u-v)$, we can add these last two inequalities to obtain \eqref{eq: int_d_1_est}.\end{proof}
As another corollary of Proposition \ref{prop: I_script_est} we obtain the second part of Theorem \ref{thm: d_1-convergence}:
\begin{corollary}Suppose $u_k,u,v \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ with $d_1(u_k,u) \to 0$. The following hold:\\
\noindent (i) $\omega_{u_k}^n \to \omega_u^n$ weakly.\\
\noindent (ii) $\int_X |u_k - u|\omega_v^n \to 0.$
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof} Given $\phi \in C^\infty(X)$, after possibly multiplying with a small positive constant, we can assume that $\phi \in \mathcal H_\omega$. As $d_1(u_k,u) \to 0$ implies that $\mathcal I(u_k,u) \to 0$ (Theorem \ref{thm: Energy_Metric_Eqv}), we see that \eqref{eq: I_script_est1} gives (i). The convergence statement of (ii) follows immediately from the previous corollary.
\end{proof}
Now we prove the rest of Theorem \ref{thm: d_1-convergence}:
\begin{proposition}Suppose $u_k,u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$. Then $d_1(u,u_k)\to 0$ if and only if $\int_X |u - u_k|\omega^n \to 0$ and $I(u_k) \to I(u)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} The fact that $d_1(u_k,u) \to 0$ implies $\int_X |u - u_k|\omega^n \to 0$, follows from the previous corollary. $I(u_k) \to I(u)$ follows from the $d_1$--continuity of $I$.
We focus on the reverse direction. The first step is to show that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: v_conv}
\int_X u_k \omega_u^n \to \int_X u\omega_u^n.
\end{equation}
By Theorem \ref{thm: BK_approx}, pick $v_k\in \mathcal H_\omega$ decreasing to $u$. Consequently $\sup_X v_k$ and $I(v_k)$ is uniformly bounded, hence by \eqref{eq: I_script_est1} we can write:
$$
\Big | \int_X u_k (\omega_u^n - \omega_{v_j}^n)\Big| \leq f_C(\mathcal I(v_j,u)), \ \ j,k \in \Bbb N.
$$
As $v_j$ is smooth and $\int_X |u_k - u|\omega^n \to 0$, we can write
$$\Big|\limsup_k \int_X u_k \omega_u^n - \int_X u \omega_{v_j}^n\Big| \leq f_C(\mathcal I(v_j,u)), \ \ j \in \Bbb N.$$
As $v_j \searrow u$, we can use Proposition \ref{prop: MA_cont} to get $\limsup_k \int_X u_k \omega_u^n = \int_X u \omega_u^n$. The analogous statement also holds for $\liminf$, and we obtain \eqref{eq: v_conv}.
Next we use the following estimate, which is a consequence of \eqref{eq: I_energy_diff} and \eqref{eq: I_energy_int_parts_ineq}:
$$\frac{\mathcal I(u,u_k)}{(n+1)V} \leq I(u_k) - I(u) - \frac{1}{V}\int_X (u - u_k) \omega_u^n.$$
By \eqref{eq: v_conv} we have $\mathcal I(u,u_k) \to 0$. Using \eqref{eq: v_conv} again and \eqref{eq: I_script_est2} we can write
\begin{equation}\label{eq: v_k_conv}
\int_X (u_k-u) \omega_{u_k}^n \to 0.
\end{equation}
Since, $\mathcal I(u,u_k) \to 0$, Lemma \ref{lem: I_script_Pyt}(i) gives that $
\mathcal I(\max(u_k,u),u) \to 0$. Also, by our assumptions, $\int_X (\max(u_k,u)-u) \omega^n \to 0$, hence \eqref{eq: I_script_est2} implies that
$$\int_X (\max(u_k,u)-u) \omega_{u}^n \to 0 \ \ \textup{ and } \ \ \int_X (\max(u_k,u)-u) \omega_{u_k}^n \to 0,$$
where in the last limit we also used the locality of the complex Monge--Amp\`ere operator with respect to the plurifine topology (see \eqref{eq: GZ_MP_local}). Using the fact that $|u_k - u|= 2 (\max(u_k,u) - u) - (u_k - u)$, together with \eqref{eq: v_conv} and \eqref{eq: v_k_conv} we get that
$$\int_X |u-u_k|\omega_u^n + \int_X |u-u_k|\omega_{u_k}^n \to 0.$$
Theorem \ref{thm: Energy_Metric_Eqv} now gives $d_1(u_k,u) \to 0$.
\end{proof}
For the last result of this section we return to the general $d_p$ metric topologies. First observe that for any $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$ and $\xi \in T_u \mathcal H_\omega$ the H\"older inequality gives $\| \xi\|_{u,p'} \leq \| \xi\|_{u,p}$ for any $p' \leq p$. This in turn implies that the $L^{p'}$ length of smooth curves in $\mathcal H_\omega$ is shorter then their $L^p$ length, ultimately giving that the $d_p$ metric dominates $d_p'$. Consequently, all $d_p$ metrics dominate the $d_1$ metric, hence Theorem \eqref{thm: d_1-convergence}(ii) holds for $d_p$--convergence as well. We record this (in a slightly stronger form) in our last result:
\begin{proposition}\label{prop: dp_mixed_convergence} Suppose $v,u,u_k \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega)$ and $d_p(u_k,u) \to 0$. Then $\omega_{u_k}^n \to \omega_u^n$ weakly and $
\int_X |u -u_k|^p \omega_v^n \to 0.$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} We only need to argue that $\int_X |u - u_k|^p \omega_v^n \to 0.$ Given an arbitrary subsequence of $u_k$, there exists a sub-subsequence, again denoted by $u_k$, satisfying the sparsity condition:
\begin{equation}\label{sparsity}
d_\chi(u_k,u_{k+1}) \leq \frac{1}{2^k}, \ \ k \in \Bbb N.
\end{equation}
Using this sparsity condition and Proposition \ref{prop: contractivity} we can write
\begin{flalign*}
d_\chi(P(u,u_0,\ldots,u_k),P(u,&u_0,\ldots,u_{k+1}))= \\ &=d_\chi(P(P(u,u_0,\ldots,u_k),u_k),P(P(u,u_0,\ldots,u_k),u_{k+1}))\\
&\leq d_\chi(u_k,u_{k+1}) \leq \frac{1}{2^k}.
\end{flalign*}
Hence, the decreasing sequence $h_k = P(u,u_0,u_1, \ldots,u_k), \ k \geq 1$ is bounded and Lemma \ref{lem: lemma mononton_seq} (or completeness) implies that the limit satisfies $h:=\lim_k h_k \in \mathcal E_p(X,\omega).$
As $d_p(u_k,0),d_p(u,0)$ are bounded, by Theorem \ref{thm: Energy_Metric_Eqv} and Lemma \ref{lem: sup_int_psh_eqv} there exists $M>0$ such that
$h \leq u_k,u \leq M$. Putting everything together we get
\begin{equation}\label{eq: u_uk_domination}
h - M \leq u_k - u \leq M - h.
\end{equation}
By Theorem \ref{thm: d_1-convergence}(ii) we have $\int_X |u - u_k| \omega_v^n \to 0$, hence $u_k \to u$ a.e. with respect to $\omega_v^n$. Finally, using \eqref{eq: u_uk_domination}, the dominated convergence theorem gives $\int_X |u_k - u|^p \omega_v^n \to 0.$
\end{proof}
\paragraph{Brief historical remarks.} In this chapter we put extensive focus on the particular case of the $L^1$ geometry. Historically however, the study of the $L^2$ structure was the one developed first. In particular, Calabi-Chen showed that $C^{1,1}$ geodesics of $\mathcal H_\omega$ satisfy the CAT(0) inequality \cite{cc}. As shown in \cite{da1}, this implies that the completion $(\mathcal E_2(X,\omega),d_2)$ is a CAT(0) geodesic metric space. The possibility of identifying $\mathcal E_2(X,\omega)$ with the metric completion of $\mathcal H_\omega$ was conjectured by Guedj \cite{g}, who worked out the case of toric K\"ahler manifolds. As detailed in this chapter, this conjecture was confirmed in \cite{da1}, and later generalized to the case of $L^p$ Finsler structures \cite{da2}.
As noticed by J. Streets \cite{st1,st2}, the CAT(0) property allows to study of the Calabi flow \cite{ch} in the context of the metric completion, leading to precise convergence results for this flow in \cite{bdl1}.
Endowing the space of K\"ahler metrics with natural geometries goes back to the work of Calabi in the 50's \cite{clb}. Calabi's Riemannian metric is defined in terms of the Laplacian of the potentials, and the resulting geometry differs from that of Mabuchi. The study of this structure was taken up by Calamai \cite{clm} and Clarke-Rubinstein \cite{cr}. In the latter work the completion of the Calabi path lengh metric was identified, and was compared to the Mabuchi geometry in \cite{da5}.
It is also possible to introduce a Dirichlet type Riemannian metric on $\mathcal H_\omega$ in terms of the gradient of the potentials \cite{clm,czh}. Not much is known about the metric theory of this structure. However properties of this space seem to be closely immeresed with the study of the K\"ahler-Ricci flow \cite{bl}.
\chapter{Applications to K\"ahler--Einstein metrics}
Given a K\"ahler manifold $(X,\omega)$, we will be interested
in picking a metric with special curvature properties from $\mathcal H$, the space of all K\"ahler metrics $\omega'$ whose de Rham cohomology class equals that of $\omega$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: H_def}
\mathcal H = \{\omega' \textup{ is a K\"ahler metric on }X \textup{ such that } [\omega']=[\omega] \in H^2(X,\Bbb R)\}.
\end{equation}
By the $\del\dbar$--lemma of Hodge theory, there exists $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$ \eqref{eq: H_o_def}, unique up to a constant, s.t. $\omega' = \omega_u$ (see \cite[Theorem 3]{bl1}). As follows from Stokes' theorem (see more generally Lemma \ref{lem: const_volume_lem}), the total volume of each metric in $\mathcal H$ is the same, and we introduce the constant
$$V := \int_X \omega_u^n=\int_X \omega^n, \ \ u \in \mathcal H_\omega.$$
As a result of the above observations, we will focus on the space of potentials $\mathcal H_\omega$ instead of $\mathcal H$, and our goal will be to find $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$ whose Ricci curvature is a multiple of the metric $\omega_u$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: KE_eq}
\textup{Ric } \omega_u = \lambda \omega_u.
\end{equation}
Such metrics are called \emph{K\"ahler--Einstein} (KE) metrics. Recall from Appendix 6.1 that $\textup{Ric } \omega_u$ is always closed. Moreover, by the well known formula \eqref{prelricdifference} for the change of Ricci curvature
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Ricci_diff_eq}
\textup{Ric } \omega_u - \textup{Ric } \omega_v = i \del\dbar \log \Big(\frac{\omega_v^n}{\omega_u^n}\Big), \ \ u,v \in \mathcal H_\omega
\end{equation}
we deduce that the de Rham class $[\textup{Ric }\omega_u]$ does not depend on the choice of $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$. What is more, $[\textup{Ric }\omega_u]$ agrees with $c_1(X)$, the first Chern class of $X$ (see \cite[Section III.3]{we} for more details). Consequently, if \eqref{eq: KE_eq} holds then $X$ needs to have special cohomological properties depending on the sign of $\lambda \in \Bbb R$: \vspace{0.2cm}\\
\noindent (i) if $\lambda =0$ then $c_1(X)=0$, i.e., $X$ is \emph{Calabi--Yau}. \\
\noindent (ii) if $\lambda <0$ then $K_X$ is an ample line bundle, i.e., $X$ is of \emph{general type}.\\
\noindent (iii) if $\lambda >0$ then $-K_X$ is an ample line bundle, i.e., $X$ is \emph{Fano}. \vspace{0.2cm}
After close inspection it turns out that \eqref{eq: KE_eq} is a fourth order PDE in terms of the derivatives of $u$.
As we show now, with the help of \eqref{eq: Ricci_diff_eq} one can write down a scalar equation equivalent to \eqref{eq: KE_eq}, that is merely a second order PDE, greatly simplifying our subsequent treatment. Indeed, from $\lambda [\omega]=c_1(X)$ it follows that for each $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$ there exists a unique $f_u \in C^\infty(X)$ such that $\int_X e^{f_u}\omega_u^n = V$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Ricci_pot_def}
\textup{Ric }\omega_u = \lambda \omega + i \del\dbar f_u.
\end{equation}
Fittingly, the potential $f_u$ is called the \emph{Ricci potential} of $\omega_u$, and $\omega_u$ is KE if and only if $f_u=0$. Consequently, by \eqref{eq: Ricci_diff_eq}, \eqref{eq: KE_eq} is equivalent to
$$
i \del\dbar \log \Big(\frac{\omega_u^n}{\omega^n}\Big) = \textup{Ric } \omega - \textup{Ric } \omega_u = \lambda \omega + i \del\dbar f_0 - \lambda \omega_u = i\del\dbar (f_0 - \lambda u).
$$
And now the (magical!) drop of order takes place. As there are only constants in the kernel of $i\del\dbar$, there exists $c \in \Bbb R$ such that
$$\log \Big(\frac{\omega_u^n}{\omega^n}\Big)= f_0 - \lambda u + c.$$
When $\lambda \neq 0$, the constant $c$ can be ``contracted" into $u$. When $\lambda =0$, then the normalization condition on $f_0$ implies that $c=0$. Summarizing, we arrive at the scalar KE equation:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: KE_scalar_eq}
\omega_u^n = e^{- \lambda u + f_0} \omega^n, \ \ u \in \mathcal H_\omega.
\end{equation}
When $\lambda <0$, the existence of unique solutions was proved by Aubin and Yau \cite{A,Y}. In the case $\lambda =0$, existence and uniqueness was obtained by Yau, as a particular case of the solution of the Calabi conjecture \cite{Y}.
When $X$ is Fano ($\lambda>0$) the situation is more involved. Uniqueness up to holomorphic automorpshims was shown by Bando--Mabuchi (\cite{bm}, see also Section 4.5 below). As it turns out, on a general Fano manifold $(X,\omega)$, there are numerous obstructions to existence of KE metrics (see \cite{mat,fu}). Recently the algebro--geometric notion of K--stability has been found to be equivalent with existence of KE metrics (\cite{cds,t2}), with this verifying an important particular case of the Yau--Tian--Donaldson conjecture. Our goal in this chapter is to give equivalent characterizations, more in line with the variational study of partial differential equations, eventually verifying related conjectures of Tian.
As mentioned above, in the rest of this chapter we will assume that $(X,\omega)$ is Fano. Also, after possibly rescaling $\omega$, we can also assume that $\lambda =1$, i.e., $[\omega]=c_1(X)$. Next we introduce Ding's $\mathcal F$ functional \cite{ding}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: F_def}
\mathcal F(u) = -I(u) - \log \frac{1}{V}\int_X e^{-u+f_0}\omega^n, \ \ u \in \mathcal H_\omega,
\end{equation}
where $I$ is the Monge--Amp\`ere energy (see \eqref{eq: I_energy_def}). By definition, $\mathcal F$ is invariant under adding constants, i.e., $\mathcal F(u+c)=\mathcal F(u)$, and as a consequence of Lemma \ref{lem: I_differential} it follows that the critical points of $\mathcal F$ are exactly the KE metrics:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: F_func_differential}Suppose $[0,1] \ni t \to v_t \in \mathcal H_\omega$ is a smooth curve. Then
$$V \frac{d}{dt}\mathcal F(v_t) = \int_X \dot v_t \bigg ( - \omega_{v_t}^n + \frac{V}{\int_X e^{-v_t + f_0} \omega^n}e^{-v_t + f_0} \omega^n \bigg).$$
\end{lemma}
Comparing with \eqref{eq: KE_scalar_eq}, we deduce that existence of KE potentials in $\mathcal H_\omega$ is equivalent with existence of critical points of $\mathcal F$. As we will see, the natural domain of definiton of $\mathcal F$ is not $\mathcal H_\omega$, but rather its $d_1$ metric completion $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$. In addition to this, $\mathcal F$ will be shown to be $d_1$--continuous and it will be convex along the finite energy geodesics of $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$. Using convexity we will deduce that critical points of $\mathcal F$ are exactly the minimizers of $\mathcal F$, and we can use properness properties of $\mathcal F$ to characterize existence of these minimizers. All this will be done in the forthcoming sections.
\section{The action of the automorphism group}
We continue to assume that $(X,\omega)$ is Fano with $[\omega]=c_1(X)$. Let $\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ denote the connected component of the complex Lie group of biholomorphisms of $(X,J)$, and denote by $\textup{aut}(M,J)$ its complex Lie algebra of holomorphic vector fields. $\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ acts on $\mathcal H$ by pullback of metrics. Indeed,
$f^\star\eta \in \mathcal H$ for any $f\in\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ and $\eta\in\mathcal H.$
Given the one-to-one correspondence between $\mathcal H$ and $\mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)$ (recall \eqref{eq: H_0_def}), the group $\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ also acts on $\mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)$ and we describe this action more precisely in the next lemma:
\begin{lemma}\textup{\cite[Lemma 5.8]{dr2}}
For $\varphi \in \mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)$ and $f \in \textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ let $f.\varphi\in\mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)$ be the unique element such that $f^*\omega_\varphi=\omega_{f.\varphi}$.
Then,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq: factionIEq}
f.\varphi=f.0+\varphi\circ f.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First we note that the right hand side of \eqref{eq: factionIEq} is a K\"ahler potential for $f^*\omega_\varphi$. Indeed, since $f\in\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ we have $f^\star i\del\dbar\varphi=i\del\dbar \varphi\circ f$.
The identity $I(f.0+\varphi\circ f)=0$ follows from \eqref{eq: I_energy_diff} as we have:
\begin{flalign*}
I(f.0+\varphi\circ f)&=I(f.0+\varphi\circ f) - I(f.0)=\frac{1}{(n+1)V}\int_X \varphi \circ f \sum_{j=0}^n f^\star \omega^{n-j}\wedge f^\star \omega_\varphi^j \\
&=\frac{1}{(n+1)V}\int_X \varphi \sum_{j=0}^n \omega^{n-j}\wedge \omega_\varphi^j = I(\varphi)=0.
\end{flalign*}
\end{proof}
With the formula of the above lemma, we show that $\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ acts on $\mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)$ by $d_p$--isometries:
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem: dpIsomLemma}
The action of $\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ on $\mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)$ is by $d_p$--isometries, for any $p \geq 1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
From \eqref{eq: factionIEq} it follows that $
{d}(f.\varphi_t)/dt=\dot\varphi_t\circ f,$
for any smooth curve $[0,1] \ni t \to \varphi_t \in \mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)$. Thus, the $d_p$--length of $t \to f.\varphi_t$ satisfies:
$$
l_p(f.\varphi_t)=\int_0^1 \bigg(\frac{1}{V}\int_X|\dot\varphi_t\circ f|^p f^\star \omega_{\varphi_t}^n\bigg)^{\frac{1}{p}} dt
=
\int_0^1 \bigg(\frac{1}{V}\int_X|\dot\varphi_t|^p \omega_{\varphi_t}^n \bigg)^{\frac{1}{p}}dt.
$$
Since this last quantity is exactly the the $d_p$-length of $t \to \varphi_t$, it follows that $\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ acts by $d_p$--isometries.
\end{proof}
As a consequence of this last result (see also Lemma \ref{lem: LipschitzExt} below), the action of $\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ on $\mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)$ has a unique $d_p$--isometric extension to the $d_p$--metric completion $\mathcal E_p(X,\omega) \cap I^{-1}(0)$. In what follows we will focus on the case $p=1$.
Recall the definition of the $J$ functional \eqref{eq: J_def} and let $H\leq \textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ be a subgroup. The ``$H$--dampened" functional $J_H:\big(\mathcal E_1 \cap I^{-1}(0)\big)/H \to \Bbb R$ is introduced by the formula
\begin{equation}
\label{eq: JGEq}
J_H(Hu):= \inf_{f \in H} {J}(f.u).
\end{equation}
As a direct consequence of Proposition \ref{prop: d_1_growth_J} we have the following estimates for this functional:
\begin{lemma} There exists $C:=C(X,\omega)>1$ such that for any $u \in \mathcal E_1 \cap I^{-1}(0)$ we have
\label{lem: JGPropernessLemma}
\begin{equation}
\label{lem: JGdGEqv}
\frac{1}{C} J_H(Hu) -C \leq d_{1,H}(H0,Hu)
\leq C J_H(Hu) + C,
\end{equation}
where $d_{1,H}$ is the pseudo--metric of the quotient $\big(\mathcal E_1 \cap I^{-1}(0)\big)/H$ given by the formula $d_{1,H}(Hu,Hv):=\inf_{f\in H} d_1(u,f.v)$.
\end{lemma}
Lastly, we note that $\mathcal F$ is affine along one parameter subgroups of $\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$, and that the map $(u,v) \to \mathcal F(u)-\mathcal F(v)$ is $\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$--invariant:
\begin{lemma} \label{lem: F_one_par_linear} Suppose $\Bbb R \ni t \to \rho_t \in \textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ is a one parameter subgroup. Then:\\
(i) for any $u \in \mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)$ the map $t \to \mathcal F(\rho_t. u)$ is affine.\\
\noindent (ii) if $u,v \in \mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)$ and $g \in \textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ then $\mathcal F(u)-\mathcal F(v)=\mathcal F(g.u)-\mathcal F(g.v)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} First we show that for any $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$ we have that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Ricci_pot_eq}
\frac{e^{-u + f_0}}{\int_X e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n}{\omega^n} = \frac{e^{f_u}}{V}\omega_u^n,
\end{equation}
where $f_u$ is the Ricci potential of $u$ (see \eqref{eq: Ricci_pot_def}). By definition, we have $\textup {Ric } \omega_u = \omega_u + i\del\dbar f_u$ and $\textup {Ric } \omega = \omega + i\del\dbar f_0$. Substituting this into \eqref{eq: Ricci_diff_eq} we see that \eqref{eq: Ricci_pot_eq} holds.
Now we argue (i). Let $h \in C^\infty(X)$ be the unique function such that $\int_X h \omega_u^n = 0$ and $\frac{d}{dt}\big|_{t=0} \rho_t^* \omega_u = i\del\dbar h$. We claim that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: action_diff}
\frac{d}{dt} \rho_t.u = h \circ \rho_t, \ \ t \in \Bbb R.
\end{equation}
Indeed, this follows from a simple calculation: $i\del\dbar \frac{d}{dt}\rho_t.u = \frac{d}{dt} \omega_{\rho_t.u} = \frac{d}{dt} \rho_t^* \omega_{u} = \rho^*_t i\del\dbar h = i\del\dbar h \circ \rho_t$.
Finally, using Lemma \ref{lem: F_func_differential}, \eqref{eq: Ricci_pot_eq}, \eqref{eq: action_diff}, and the fact that $f_u \circ \rho_t = f_{\rho_t .u}$ we can conclude that $t \to \mathcal F(\rho_t.u)$ is indeed affine:
\begin{flalign}\label{eq: F_deriv_calc}
V \frac{d}{dt}\mathcal F(\rho_t.u) &= \int_X \frac{d}{dt} \rho_t.u \bigg ( -\omega_{\rho_t.u}^n + \frac{V}{\int_X e^{-\rho_t.u + f_0} \omega^n}e^{-\rho_t.u + f_0} \omega^n \bigg) \nonumber\\
&=\int_X \frac{d}{dt}\rho_t.u \Big( -\omega_{\rho_t.u}^n +e^{f_{\rho_t.u}} \omega^n_{\rho_t. u}\Big) \nonumber\\
&=\int_X h \circ \rho_t \Big( -\rho_t^*\omega_{u}^n + e^{f_{u}\circ \rho_t}\rho_t^* \omega^n_{u}\Big)=\int_X h \big(-1 + e^{f_{u}}\big) \omega_{u}^n.\nonumber
\end{flalign}
Now we focus on (ii). Let $[0,1] \ni t \to \gamma_t\in \mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)$ be any smooth segment connecting $u,v$. For example, one can take $ \gamma_t:= (1-t)u + tv - I((1-t)u + tv)$. Consequently, $t \to g.\gamma_t$ connects $g.u,g.v$. Using Lemma \ref{lem: F_func_differential}, \eqref{eq: factionIEq},
and \eqref{eq: Ricci_pot_eq} we can finish the proof:
\begin{flalign*}
V(\mathcal F(g.v) - \mathcal F(g.u)) &= V\int_0^1 \frac{d}{dt}\mathcal F(\gamma_t) dt = \int_0^1 \int_X \dot \gamma_t \circ g (-1 + e^{f_{g.\gamma_t}})\omega_{g.\gamma_t}^n dt.\\
&= \int_0^1 \int_X \dot \gamma_t \circ g (-1 + e^{f_{\gamma_t} \circ g})g^*\omega_{\gamma_t}^n dt\\
&= \int_0^1 \int_X \dot \gamma_t (-1 + e^{f_{\gamma_t}})\omega_{\gamma_t}^n dt=V(\mathcal F(v) - \mathcal F(u)).
\end{flalign*}
\end{proof}
\section{The existence/properness principle and relation to Tian's conjectures}
Staying with a Fano manifold $(X,\omega)$, our main goal is to show that existence of KE metrics in $\mathcal H$ is equivalent with properness of the Ding energy (and later the K-energy). As it turns out, our proof will rest on a very general existence/properness principle for abstract metric spaces, and we describe this now as it provides the skeleton for our later arguments concerning K\"ahler geometry.
To begin, we introduce $(\mathcal R,d,F,G)$, a metric space structure with additional data satisfying the following \emph{axioms}:
\begin{enumerate}[label = (A\arabic*)]
\item\label{a1} $(\mathcal R,d)$ is a metric space with a
distinguished
element $0\in\mathcal R$,
whose metric completion is denoted by $(\overline{\mathcal R},d)$.
\item\label{a2} $F : \mathcal R \to \Bbb R$
is $d$--lsc. Let
$F: \overline{\mathcal R} \to \Bbb R \cup \{ +\infty\}$
be the largest $d$--lsc extension
of $F: \mathcal R \to \Bbb R$:
$$F(u) = \sup_{\varepsilon > 0 } \bigg(\inf_{\substack{v \in \mathcal R\\ d(u,v) \leq \varepsilon}} F(v) \bigg), \ \ u \in \overline{ \mathcal R}.$$
\item\label{a3}
By $\mathcal M$ we denote the set of minimizers of $F$ on $\overline{\mathcal R}$:
$$
\mathcal M:=
\Big\{ u \in \overline{\mathcal R} \ : \ F (u)=
\inf_{v \in \overline{\mathcal R}} F(v)
\Big\}.
$$
\item\label{a4} $G$ is a group
acting on ${\mathcal R}$ by
$G\times{\mathcal R}\ni(g,u) \to g.u\in {\mathcal R}$. Denote by
${\mathcal R} /G$ the orbit space, by $Gu\in{\mathcal R} /G$ the
orbit of $u\in{\mathcal R}$,
and~define~$d_G:{\mathcal R}/G\times {\mathcal R}/G\to\Bbb R_+$ by
$$
d_G(Gu,Gv):=\inf_{f,g\in G}d(f.u,g.v).
$$
\end{enumerate}
In addition to the above, our data $(\mathcal R,d,F,G)$ also enjoys the following \emph{properties}:
\begin{enumerate}[label = (P\arabic*)]
\item\label{p1
For any $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal R$ there exists a $d$--geodesic segment $[0,1] \ni t \mapsto u_t \in \overline{\mathcal R}$ connecting $u_0,u_1$ (see \eqref{eq: d_geod_def}) for which
$t\mapsto F(u_t) \textup{ is continuous and convex on }[0,1].$
\item \label{p2}
If $\{u_j\}_j\subset \overline{\mathcal R}$ satisfies
$\lim_{j\to\infty}F(u_j)= \inf_{\overline{\mathcal R}} F$, and
for some $C>0$, $d(0,u_j) \leq C$ for all $j$, then there exists $u\in \mathcal M$ and a subsequence $\{u_{j_k}\}_k$ s.t. $d(u_{j_k},u) \to 0$.
\item[(P2)] \hspace{-0.2cm}$^*$ \label{p2*} If $\{u_j\}_j\subset \overline{\mathcal R}$ satisfies
$F(u_j) \leq C$, and
$d(0,u_j) \leq C, \ j \geq 0$ for some $C>0$, then there exists $u\in \mathcal R$ and a subsequence $\{u_{j_k}\}_k$ s.t. $d(u_{j_k},u) \to 0$.
\item\label{p3}
$\mathcal M \subset \mathcal R.$
\item\label{p4} $G$ acts on ${\mathcal R}$ by $d$-isometries.
\item\label{p5} $G$ acts on $\mathcal M$ transitively.
\item \label{p7} For all $u,v \in \mathcal R$ and $g \in G$,
$F(u) - F(v)=F(g.u) - F(g.v)$.
\end{enumerate}
We make three remarks. First, by \ref{a2},
\begin{equation}
\label{eq: InfRealization}
\inf_{v \in \overline{\mathcal R}} F(v)
=
\inf_{v \in \mathcal R} F(v).
\end{equation}
Second, condition $\textup{\ref{p2*}}^*$ is stronger than \ref{p2} and we will require that only one of these conditions holds.
Third, thanks to \ref{p4} and the next lemma,
the action of $G$, originally defined on $\mathcal R$ \ref{a4},
extends to an action by $d$--isometries on the completion $\overline{\mathcal R}$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem: LipschitzExt}
Let $(X,\rho)$ and $(Y,\delta)$ be two complete metric spaces, $W$ a dense subset of $X$ and $f:W \to Y$ a $C$-Lipschitz function, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{eq: lipineq}
\delta(f(a),f(b)) \leq C \rho(a,b), \ \ \forall\, a,b \in W.
\end{equation}
Then $f$ has a unique $C$--Lipschitz continuous extension
to a map $\bar f:X\to Y$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}Let $w_k \in W$ be a sequence converging to some $w \in X$. Lipschitz continuity gives
$$\delta(f(w_k),f(w_l)) \leq C \rho(w_k,w_l),$$
hence $\bar f(w) := \lim_k f(w_k) \in Y$ exists and independent of the choice of approximating sequence $w_k$. Choose now another sequence $z_k \in W$ with limit $z \in X$, plugging in $w_k,z_k$ in \eqref{eq: lipineq} and taking the limit gives that $\bar f: X \to Y$ is $C$-Lipschitz continuous.
\end{proof}
A $d$-geodesic ray $[0,\infty) \ni t \to u_t \in \overline{\mathcal R}$ is $G$-\emph{calibrated} if the curve $t \to Gu_t$ is a $d_G$-geodesic with the same speed as $t \to u_t$, i.e.,
$$d_G(Gu_0,Gu_t)=d(u_0,u_t), \ \ \ t \geq 0.$$
The next result will provide the framework that relates existence of canonical K\"ahler metrics
to energy properness and uniform geodesic stability.
\begin{theorem}\textup{\cite[Theorem 3.4]{dr2}}
\label{thm: ExistencePrinc}
Suppose $(\mathcal R,d,F,G)$ satisfies \ref{a1}--\ref{a4} and \ref{p1}--\ref{p7}.
The following are equivalent:\vspace{0.1cm}\\
\noindent
(i)(existence of minimizers) $\mathcal M$ is nonempty\vspace{0.1cm}.
\noindent
(ii)(energy properness) $F:{\mathcal R}\to \Bbb R$
is $G$-invariant, and
for some $C,D>0$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Dproperness}
F(u) \geq Cd_G(G0,Gu)-D,\ \ \textup{for all\ } u \in \mathcal R.
\end{equation}
\noindent
If $\textup{\ref{p2*}}^*$ holds instead of \ref{p2}, then the above are additionally equivalent to:\vspace{0.1cm}\\
(iii)(uniform geodesic stability) Fix $u_0 \in \mathcal R$ with $F(u_0) <+\infty$. Then $F:{\mathcal R}\to \Bbb R$
is $G$-invariant, and
there exists $C>0$ such that for all geodesic rays $[0,\infty) \ni t \to u_t \in \overline{\mathcal R}$ we have that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Dgeodstab1}
\limsup_{t \to \infty} \frac{F(u_t)-F(u_0)}{t}\geq C \limsup_{t \to \infty}{\frac{d_G(Gu_0,Gu_t)}{t}}.
\end{equation}
(iv)(uniform geodesic stability) Fix $u_0 \in \mathcal R$ with $F(u_0) <+\infty$. Then $F:{\mathcal R}\to \Bbb R$
is $G$-invariant, and
there exists $C>0$ such that for all $G$-calibrated geodesic rays $[0,\infty) \ni t \to u_t \in \overline{\mathcal R}$ we have that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Dgeodstab}
\limsup_{t \to \infty} \frac{F(u_t)-F(u_0)}{t}\geq C d(u_0,u_1).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
Before arguing the above theorem we recall standard facts from metric geometry in the form of the following two lemmas:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: pseudo_metr} If \ref{p4} holds,
then $(\overline{\mathcal R}/G,d_G)$ and $(\mathcal R/G,d_G)$ are pseudo--metric spaces.\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}It is enough to show that $(\overline{\mathcal R}/G,d_G)$ is a pseudo--metric space. Since $d$ is symmetric,
$$
d_G(Gu,Gv):=\inf_{f,g\in G}d(f.u,g.v)=\inf_{f,g\in G}d(g.v,f.u)=d_G(Gv,Gu).
$$
Hence $d_G$ is also symmetric. Given $u,v,w \in \overline{\mathcal R}$ and $\varepsilon >0$, there exist $f,g \in G$ such that
$d_G(Gu,Gw) > d(f.u,w)-\varepsilon$
and $d_G(Gv,Gw)> d(g.v,w)-\varepsilon$.
The triangle inequality for $d$ and \ref{p4} give
\begin{flalign*}
d_{G}(Gu,Gv)&\leq
d(u,f^{-1}g.v)=d(f.u,g.v) \cr
&\leq d(f.u,w)+d(g.v,w) < 2\varepsilon+d_{G}(Gu,Gv) + d_{G}(Gv,Gw).
\end{flalign*}
Letting $\varepsilon \to 0$ shows $d_G$ satisfies the triangle inequality. Thus $d_G$ is a pseudo--metric.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: GeodDescentLemma} Suppose \ref{p4} holds, $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal R$ and $[0,1] \ni t \to u_t \in \overline{\mathcal R}$ is a $d$--geodesic connecting $u_0,u_1$. If $d(u_0,u_1) -\varepsilon \leq d_G(Gu_0,Gu_1)\leq d(u_0,u_1)$ for some $\varepsilon >0$ then
$$
d(u_a,u_b) -\varepsilon \leq d_G(Gu_a,Gu_b) \leq d(u_a,u_b), \ \ \forall\, a,b \in [0,1].
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} The proof is by contradiction. Suppose $d_G(Gu_a,Gu_b) < d(u_a,u_b) - \varepsilon$.
Since $d(u_0,u_a)+ d(u_a,u_b)+d(u_b,u_1)=d(u_0,u_1)$ we can write
\begin{flalign}
d_{G}(Gu_0,Gu_1)
&\leq d_{G}(Gu_0,Gu_a)+ d_G(Gu_a,Gu_b)+d_{G}(Gu_b,Gu_1)
\cr
&< d(u_0,u_a)+ d(u_a,u_b)+d(u_b,u_1)-\varepsilon
\cr
&=d(u_0,u_1) - \varepsilon \leq d_G(Gu_0,Gu_1).
\end{flalign}
This is a contradiction, finishing the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm: ExistencePrinc}]
First we show (ii)$\Rightarrow$(i). If condition (ii) holds, then $F$ is bounded from below.
By \eqref{eq: InfRealization}, \eqref{eq: Dproperness}, the $G$--invariance of $F$, and the definition of $d_G$ there
exists $u_j \in \mathcal R$ such that
$\lim_{j}F(u_j) = \inf_{\overline{\mathcal R}} F$
and $d(0,u_j) \leq d_G(G0,Gu_j) + 1<C$ for $C$ independent of $j$.
By \ref{p2}, $\mathcal M$ is non-empty.
We now show that (i)$\Rightarrow$(ii). First we argue that $F:\mathcal R \to \Bbb R$ is $G$--invariant. Let $v\in\mathcal M$.
By \ref{p3}, $v\in\mathcal R$.
By \ref{p4},
$f.v \in \mathcal M$ for any $f \in G$.
Thus, $F(v)=F(f.v)$. Consequently,
$F(u) - F(v)=F(u) - F(f.v)$. By \ref{p7}, we get
$F(u) - F(v)=F(f^{-1}.u) - F(v)$, so
$F(u)=F(f^{-1}.u)$ for every $f\in G$, i.e., $F$ is $G$--invariant.
For $v \in \mathcal M \subset \mathcal R$ we define
$$
C:= \inf \bigg\{
\frac{F(u)-F(v)}{d_G(Gv,Gu)}
\,:\, u \in \mathcal R,\; d_G(Gv,Gu) \geq 2\bigg\} \geq 0.
$$
If $C>0$, then we are done. Suppose $C=0$. Then
there exists $\{u^k\}_k \subset \mathcal R$ such that
$$
(F(u^k)-F(v))/{d_G(Gv,Gu^k)} \to 0
$$
and $d_G(Gv,Gu^k) \geq 2$. By $G$--invariance of $F$ we can also assume that $d(v,u^k) -1/k \leq d_G(Gv,Gu^k) \leq d(v,u^k)$. Thus,
$$
\lim_{k\to\infty}
\frac{F(u^k) - F(v)}{d(v,u^k)} = 0.
$$
Using \ref{p1}, let $[0,d(v,u^k)] \ni t \mapsto u^k_t \in \overline{\mathcal R}$ be a unit
speed $d$--geodesic connecting $u^k_0:=v$ and $u^k_{d(v,u^k)}:=u^k$ such that $t \mapsto F(u^k_t)$ is convex.
As $v$ is a minimizer of $F$, by convexity we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{eq: ConvConseqEq}
0 \leq
F(u^k_1) -F(v)\leq
\frac{F(u^k)-F(v)}{d(v,u^k)} \to 0.
\end{equation}
Trivially, $d(v,u^k_1)=1$, hence \ref{p2} and \eqref{eq: ConvConseqEq} imply that $d(u^k_1,\tilde v) \to 0$ for some $\tilde v \in \mathcal M$ (after perhaps passing to a subsequence of $u^k_1$). By
\ref{p5}, $\tilde v=f.v$ for some $f \in G$, hence $d_G(Gv,G\tilde v)=0$.
From Lemma \ref{lem: GeodDescentLemma} we obtain $1 - 1/k \leq d_G(Gv,Gu^k_1) \leq 1$. Since $d(u^k_1,\tilde v) \to 0$, we also have $d_G(Gu^k_1,G\tilde v) \to 0$, which gives $d_G(Gv,G\tilde v)=1$, a contradiction with $d_G(Gv,G\tilde v)=0$. This implies that $C>0$, finishing the proof of the implication (i)$\Rightarrow$(ii).\vspace{0.1cm}
The implications (ii)$\Rightarrow$(iii)$\Rightarrow$(iv) is trivial and we finish the proof by showing that (iv)$\Rightarrow$(i). Suppose (i) does not hold but (iv) does. We will derive a contradiction. Since $F$ is $G$-invariant there exists $\{ u^k\} \subset \mathcal R$ such that $d(u_0,u^k) - 1/k \leq d_G(Gu_0,Gu^k)$ and $F(u^k)$ decreases to $\inf_{u \in \mathcal R} F(u)$. By $\textup{\ref{p2}}^*$ we must have $d(u_0,u^k) \to \infty$, otherwise there would exists $u \in \overline{\mathcal R}$ such that $F(u)=-\infty$, a contradiction.
Let $[0,d(u_0,u^k)] \ni t \to u^k_t \in \overline{\mathcal R}$ be the $d$-geodesic joining $u_0,u^k$ from \ref{p1}. We note that by Lemma \ref{lem: GeodDescentLemma} it follows that
\begin{equation}\label{1/kEst}
d(u_0,u^k_t) - 1/k \leq d_G(Gu_0,Gu^k_t), \ \ t \in [0,d(u_0,u^k)].
\end{equation}
Fix $l \in \Bbb Q_+$. For big enough $k$ using convexity of $F$ we can write:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: u_k_t_F_est}
\frac{F(u^k_l)-F(u_0)}{l} \leq \frac{F(u^k)-F(u_0)}{d(u^k,u_0)}\leq 0.
\end{equation}
As $d(u^k_l,u_0)=l$, we can use $\textup{\ref{p2}}^*$ and a Cantor diagonal process, to conclude the existence of a sequence $k_j \to \infty$ and $u_l \in \overline{\mathcal R}$ for all $l \in \Bbb Q_+$ such that $d(u^{k_j}_{l},u_l) \to 0$. As each curve $t \to u^k_t$ is $d$-Lipschitz, it follows that in fact we can extend the curve $\Bbb Q_+ \ni l \to u_l \in \overline{\mathcal R}$ to a curve $[0,\infty) \ni t \to u_t \in \mathcal \overline{\mathcal R}$ such that $d(u^{k_t}_{l},u_t) \to 0$.
For elementary reasons $t \to u_t$ is a $d$-geodesic. By \ref{a2} and \eqref{eq: u_k_t_F_est} we get that
\begin{equation}
\frac{F(u_l)-F(u_0)}{l} \leq {d(u_l,u_0)}\leq 0, \ \ l \geq 0.
\end{equation}
Finally, we argue that $t \to u_t$ is a $G$-calibrated geodesic ray, yielding a contradiction with \eqref{eq: Dgeodstab}. Let $g \in G$ be arbitrary, from \eqref{1/kEst} it follows that $d(u_0,u^{k_j}_t) - 1/{k_j} \leq d(g.u_0,u^{k_j}_t)$. Letting $k_j \to \infty$, we obtain $d(u_0,u_t)\leq d(g.u_0,u_t)$ for $t \in \Bbb Q_+$ and by density for all $t \geq 0$. Consequently, $t \to u_t$ is $G$-calibrated.
\end{proof}
Later, when dealing with the K-energy functional, we will make use of the following observation:
\begin{remark}
\label{rem: existence_princ}
The direction (ii)$\Rightarrow$(i) in the above argument only uses the compactness condition~\ref{p2}.
\end{remark}
The next result, together with Theorem \ref{thm: K-energy_properness}, represents the main application of Theorem \ref{thm: ExistencePrinc}:
\begin{theorem} \textup{\cite[Theorem 7.1]{dr2}}
\label{thm: F_func_properness}
Suppose $(X,\omega)$ is Fano and set $G:=\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$.
The following are equivalent: \vspace {0.1cm} \\
\noindent (i) There exists a KE metric in $\mathcal H$.
\noindent (ii)
For some $C,D >0$ the following holds:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: F_d_1_properness}
\mathcal F(u) \geq C d_{1,G}(G0,Gu) - D, \ \ u\in\mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0).
\end{equation}
\noindent (iii)
For some $C,D>0$ the following holds:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: F_J_properness}
\mathcal F(u) \geq C J_G(Gu) - D, \ \ u\in\mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The equivalence between (ii) and (iii) is the content of Lemma \ref{lem: JGPropernessLemma}.
For the equivalence between (i) and (ii)
we wish to apply Theorem \ref{thm: ExistencePrinc} to the data
\begin{equation}\label{eq: F_choice_of_data}
\mathcal R=\mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0), \ \ \ d=d_1, \ \ \ F = \mathcal F, \ \ \ G:=\textup{Aut}_0(X,J).
\end{equation}
We first have to show that \eqref{eq: F_d_1_properness} implies a bit of extra information: that $\mathcal F$ is invariant under the action of $\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$. Indeed, \eqref{eq: F_d_1_properness} implies that $\mathcal F$ is bounded from below. This and Lemma \ref{lem: F_one_par_linear}(i) implies that $\Bbb R \ni t \to \mathcal F(\rho_t.u) \in \Bbb R$ is affine and bounded for all one parameter subgroups $\Bbb R \ni t \to \rho_t \in \textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$. Consequently $t \to \mathcal F(\rho_t.u)$ has to be constant equal to $\mathcal F(u)$. As $\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ is connected, we obtain that $\mathcal F$ is invariant under the action of this group, as claimed.
To finish the proof, we go over the axioms and properties of $(\mathcal R,d,F,G)$, as imposed in the statement of Theorem \ref{thm: ExistencePrinc}:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\ref{a1}] By Theorem \ref{thm: EpComplete} and the fact that $I$ is $d_1$--continuous (Proposition \ref{prop: I_finiteness_and_cont}) we obtain that $\overline{(\mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0),d_1)}=(\mathcal E_1(X,\omega) \cap I^{-1}(0),d_1).$
\item[\ref{a2}] That $\mathcal F$ is $d_1$--continuous on $\mathcal H_\omega$ will be proved in Theorem \ref{thm: F_d_1_cont}. As we will see, the $d_1$--continuous extension $\mathcal F: \mathcal E_1(X,\omega) \to \Bbb R$ is given by the original formula for smooth potentials (see \eqref{eq: F_def}).
\item[\ref{a3}] We choose $\mathcal M$ as the minimizer set of the extended functional $\mathcal F: \mathcal E_1(X,\omega) \cap I^{-1}(0) \to \Bbb R$.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\ref{p1}] This fact is due to
Berndtsson \cite[Theorem 1.1]{brn1}, and we present this result in Theorem \ref{thm: F_convex} below.
\item[\ref{p2}] This property will be verfied in Theorem \ref{thm: E_1_F_min_compactness}.
\item[\ref{p3}] That elements of $\mathcal M$ are in fact smooth KE potentials follows after combination of results due to Berman, Tosatti--Sz\'ekelyhidi and Berman--Boucksom--Guedj--Zeriahi. We present this in Theorem \ref{thm: F_min_regularity} below.
\item[\ref{p4}] This is Lemma \ref{lem: dpIsomLemma} for $p=1$.
\item[\ref{p5}] This follows from \ref{p3} and the Bando--Mabuchi uniqueness theorem that we will prove in Theorem \ref{thm: BMuniqueness} below.
\item[\ref{p7}] This is exactly the content of Lemma \ref{lem: F_one_par_linear}(ii) above.\vspace{-.8cm}
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} The equivalence between (i) and (iii) in the above theorem verifies the analogue of a conjecture of Tian for the Ding functional $\mathcal F$ (see \cite[p. 127]{t3},\cite[Conjecture 7.12]{t1}).
In Theorem \ref{thm: K-energy_properness} below we will verify Tian's original conjecture for the K--energy as well, giving another characterization for existence of KE metrics on Fano manifolds. For other results of the same spirit, as well as relation to the literature, we refer to \cite{dr2,bdl2,cc2,cc3,dl18}.
\end{remark}
\section{Continuity and compactness properties of the Ding functional}
Given a Fano manifold $(X,\omega)$, in this section we will show that the $\mathcal F$ functional is $d_1$--continuous on $\mathcal H_\omega$, hence naturally extends to the $d_1$--completion $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ (Theorem \ref{thm: F_d_1_cont}). In addition to this, we will show that $d_1$--bounded sequences that are $\mathcal F$ minimizing are $d_1$--subconvergent, with this establishing an important compactness property of $\mathcal F$ (Theorem \ref{thm: E_1_F_min_compactness}).
To start, we need to prove the following preliminary compactness lemma:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: L_1_closedness} For $B,D \in \Bbb R$ we consider the following subset of $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$:
$$\mathcal C =\{u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega) \ : \ B \leq I(u) \leq \sup_X u \leq D \}.$$
Then $\mathcal C$ is compact with respect to the weak $L^1(\omega^n)$ topology of $\textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $\sup_X u$ is bounded for any $u \in \mathcal C$, by Lemma \ref{lem: sup_int_psh_eqv} it follows that $\int_X |u|\omega^n$ is bounded as well. By the Montel property of psh functions (\cite[Proposition I.4.21]{De}) it follows that $\mathcal C$ is precompact with respect to the weak $L^1(\omega^n)$ topology.
Now we argue that $\mathcal C$ is $L^1$--closed. Let $u_k \in \mathcal C$ and $u \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ such that $\int_X |u -u_k|\omega^n \to 0$. As $u_k \leq D$ and $u_k \to u$ a.e., it follows that $\sup_X u \leq D$.
Since $u_k \to u$ a.e., it follows that $v_k \searrow u$, where $v_k := (\sup_{j \geq k}u_j)^* \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$. By the monotonicity property of $I$ we have that $B \leq I(u_k) \leq I(v_k) \leq \sup_X v_k \leq D, \ k \geq 1$. By Lemma \ref{lem: d1bounded_char} and Lemma \ref{lem: lemma mononton_seq} it follows that $d_1(v_k,u) \to 0$. Consequently $I(v_k) \to I(u)$ (Proposition \ref{prop: I_finiteness_and_cont}), hence $u \in \mathcal C$.
\end{proof}
In contrast with Proposition \ref{prop: I_finiteness_and_cont},
as a consequence of the above argument, we also obtain that $I$ is $L^1(\omega^n)$--usc:
\begin{corollary}\label{cor: I_L_1_semicont} For $u_k,u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ we have $\limsup_{k \to \infty}I(u_k) \leq I(u)$.
\end{corollary}
Before we proceed, we recall Zeriahi's uniform version of the famous Skoda integrability theorem \cite{ze}:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm: ZerSkoda} Suppose $\mathcal S \subset \textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ is an $L^1(\omega^n)$--compact family whose elements have zero Lelong numbers. Then for any $p \geq 1$ there exists $C:=C(p,\mathcal S,\omega) >1$ such that
$$\int_X e^{-pu} \omega^n \leq C, \ \ u \in \mathcal S.$$
\end{theorem}
For a full account of this result we refer to \cite[Theorem 2.50]{gzbook}. Since full mass potentials have zero Lelong numbers (Propostion \ref{prop: Lelong_E}), we obtain the following corollary:
\begin{corollary}\label{cor: Skodacor} For $D,p \geq 1$ there exists $C: = C(p,D,\omega)>0$ such that for any $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ with $d_1(0,u) \leq D$ we have
$$\int_X e^{-pu}\omega^n \leq C.$$
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}From Theorem \ref{thm: Energy_Metric_Eqv} it follows that $\int_X u \omega^n$ is uniformly bounded. By Lemma \ref{lem: sup_int_psh_eqv} so is $\sup_X u$. By Proposition \ref{prop: I_finiteness_and_cont} it follows that $I(u)$ is bounded as well. This allows to apply Lemma \ref{lem: L_1_closedness}, and together with Proposition \ref{prop: Lelong_E} the conditions of of Theorem \ref{thm: ZerSkoda} are satisfied to conclude the result.
\end{proof}
In particular, this last corollary implies that the original definition of the $\mathcal F$ functional for smooth potentials (see \eqref{eq: F_def}) extends to $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ as well. Additionally, our next theorem shows that this extension is in fact $d_1$--continuous:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm: F_d_1_cont} The map
$$\mathcal E_1(X,\omega) \ni u \to \mathcal F(u):= -I(u) - \log \frac{1}{V}\int_X e^{-u+f_0}\omega^n \in \Bbb R$$
is $d_1$--continuous.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}We know that $u \to I(u)$ is $d_1$--continuous and finite on $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$, hence we only have to argue that so is $u \to \int_X e^{-u + f_0} \omega^n$. For $u,v \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$, using the inequality $|e^x - e^y| \leq |x-y|(e^{x} + e^y), \ x,y \in \Bbb R$, we have the following estimates:
$$\Big|\int_X e^{-u + f_0 }\omega^n-\int_X e^{-v + f_0 }\omega^n\Big| \leq \int_X e^{f_0 }\Big|e^{-u} -e^{-v}\Big|\omega^n \leq \int_X e^{f_0 }|u-v|(e^{-u} + e^{-v})\omega^n.$$
Using the fact that $f_0$ is bounded, the H\"older inequality gives
\begin{equation}\label{eq: exp_d_1_cont}
\Big|\int_X e^{-u + f_0 }\omega^n-\int_X e^{-v + f_0 }\omega^n\Big|^2 \leq C \Big(\int_X (e^{-2u} + e^{-2v})\omega^n \Big)\cdot \Big(\int_X |u-v|^2 \omega^n\Big).
\end{equation}
Suppose $u_k \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ such that $d_1(u_k,u) \to 0$. Then Proposition \ref{prop: dp_mixed_convergence} implies that $\int_X |u_k - u|\omega^n \to 0$. As all $L^p$ topologies on $\textup{PSH}(X,\omega)$ are equivalent (see \cite[Theorem 4.1.8]{ho}) we obtain that $\int_X |u_k - u|^2\omega^n \to 0$. Finally, \eqref{eq: exp_d_1_cont} and Corollary \ref{cor: Skodacor} implies that $\int_X e^{-u_k + f_0 }\omega^n \to \int_X e^{-u + f_0 }\omega^n$.
\end{proof}
Lastly, we argue the compactness property of $\mathcal F$ that is a vital ingredient in the existence/properness principle of the previous section:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm: E_1_F_min_compactness} Suppose $u_k \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ such that $\mathcal F(u_k) \to \inf_{\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)}\mathcal F$ and $d_1(u_k,0) \leq C$ for some $C>0$. After possibly taking a subsequence, there exists $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ such that $d_1(u_k,u) \to 0$. In particular, $\mathcal F(u)=\inf_{\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)}\mathcal F$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
First we construct a candidate for the minimizer $u\in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$. From Theorem \ref{thm: Energy_Metric_Eqv} it follows that $\int_X u_k \omega^n$ is uniformly bounded. By Lemma \ref{lem: sup_int_psh_eqv} so is $\sup_X u_k$. By Proposition \ref{prop: I_finiteness_and_cont} it follows that $I(u_k)$ is bounded as well. Now Lemma \ref{lem: L_1_closedness} implies that after possibly taking a subsequence we can find $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ such that $\int_X |u_k - u| \omega^n \to 0$.
We now show that $u$ is actually a minimizer of $\mathcal F$.
Using \eqref{eq: exp_d_1_cont} in the same way as in the proof of the previous result, we obtain that $\int_X e^{-u_k + f_0}\omega^n \to \int_X e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n$. By Corollary \ref{cor: I_L_1_semicont} $I$ is
usc with respect to the weak $L^1(\omega^n)$ topology, hence we can write
\begin{equation}
\label{liminfAM}
\lim_{k}\mathcal F(u_{k})
\geq
- \limsup_{k}I(u_{k})
-\log\frac{1}{V}\int_M e^{-u+f_0}\omega^n \geq \mathcal F(u).
\end{equation}
As $\{u_{k}\}_k$ minimizes $\mathcal F$,
it follows that all the inequalities above are equalities.
Thus, $u$ minimizes $\mathcal F$.
Lastly, we show that there is a subsequence of $u_k$ that $d_1$-converges to $u$. As $\limsup_{k}I(u_{k}) = I(u)$, after possibly passing to a subsequence,
$\lim_k I(u_{k})=I(u)$.
This together with $|u_{k}-u|_{L^1(\omega^n)} \to 0$
and Theorem \ref{thm: d_1-convergence} gives that $d_1(u_{k},u)\to 0$.
\end{proof}
\section{Convexity of the Ding functional}
We stay with a Fano manifold $(X,\omega)$ for this section as well. Previously we extended Ding's functional to $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$. In this short section we show that this extension is convex along the finite energy geodesics of $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ (Theorem \ref{thm: F_convex}). We start by computing the Hessian of the Ding functional with respect to the $L^2$ Mabuchi metric of $\mathcal H_\omega$:
\begin{proposition}\label{prop: F_Hess_prop} Suppose $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$ and $\phi,\psi \in C^\infty(X) \simeq T_u \mathcal H_\omega$. We have the following formula for the Hessian of $\mathcal F$ with respect to the $L^2$ Mabuchi metric:
\begin{flalign}\label{eq: F_Hess_formula}
\nabla^2& \mathcal F(u)(\phi,\psi)=\\
&=\frac{1}{V}\int_X\bigg[ \frac{1}{2}\langle \nabla^{\omega_u} \phi, \nabla^{\omega_u} \psi \rangle_{\omega_u} - \Big( \phi - \frac{1}{V}\int_X \phi e^{f_u}\omega_u^n\Big) \cdot \Big( \psi - \frac{1}{V}\int_X \psi e^{f_u}\omega_u^n\Big)\bigg] e^{f_u} \omega_u^n. \nonumber
\end{flalign}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
First we compute the Hessian of the Aubin--Yau energy $I$. From Lemma \ref{lem: I_differential} it follows that for small $t >0$ we have:
$$dI(u + t \psi)(\phi)= \frac{1}{V}\int_X \phi \omega_{u + t \psi}^n.$$
Using the formulas $\nabla^2 I(u + t \psi)(\phi,\psi) = \frac{d}{dt}d I(u + t \psi)(\phi) - dI(u+t\psi)(\nabla_{\frac{d}{dt}}\phi)$ and $\nabla_{\frac{d}{dt}} \phi = -\frac{1}{2}\langle \nabla^{\omega_{u}} \phi,\nabla^{\omega_{u}} \psi \rangle_{\omega_u}$, we can write:
\begin{flalign}\label{eq: I_Hess_eq}
\nabla^2 I(u)(\phi,\psi)&=\frac{n}{V}\int_X \phi i \del\dbar \psi \wedge \omega_u^{n-1} + \frac{1}{2V}\int_X \langle \nabla^{\omega_{u}} \phi,\nabla^{\omega_{u}} \psi \rangle_{\omega_u} \omega_u^n \nonumber\\
&=\frac{1}{2V}\int_X \phi (\Delta^{\omega_{u}} \psi) \omega_u^{n} + \frac{1}{2V}\int_X \langle \nabla^{\omega_{u}} \phi,\nabla^{\omega_{u}} \psi \rangle_{\omega_u}\omega_u^n = 0,
\end{flalign}
where in the last line we have used \eqref{eq: Lapl_grad_formula} in the appendix and the formula below it. Next we introduce $\mathcal B: \mathcal H_{\omega} \to \Bbb R$ by the formula
\begin{equation}\label{eq: B_oper_def}
\mathcal B(u)= - \log \frac{1}{V}\int_X e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n, \ u \in \mathcal H_\omega.
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{eq: Ricci_pot_eq} and $d\mathcal B(u+t\psi)(\phi) = {\int_X \phi e^{-u - t\psi + f_0}\omega^n}/{\int_X e^{-u - t\psi + f_0}\omega^n},$ we obtain that $d\mathcal B(u+t\psi)(\phi) =\frac{1}{V} \int_X \phi e^{f_u}\omega_u^n$. Another differentiation gives
\begin{flalign*}
\frac{d}{dt}\bigg|_{t=0}d \mathcal B(u + t\psi)(\phi) &= -\frac{\int_X \phi\psi e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n}{\int_X e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n} + \frac{\int_X \phi e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n}{\int_X e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n} \cdot \frac{\int_X \psi e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n}{\int_X e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n} \\
&= -\frac{1}{V} {\int_X \phi\psi e^{f_u}\omega^n_u} + \frac{1}{V^2}{\int_X \phi e^{f_u}\omega_u^n} \cdot {\int_X \psi e^{f_u}\omega_u^n}.
\end{flalign*}
where in the last line we have used \eqref{eq: Ricci_pot_eq} again. Reorganizing terms in this identity and using $\nabla^2 \mathcal B(u + t \psi)(\phi,\psi) = \frac{d}{dt}d \mathcal B(u + t \psi)(\phi) - d\mathcal B(u + t\psi)(\nabla_{\frac{d}{dt}}\phi)$ we conclude that
\begin{flalign*}
\nabla^2 & \mathcal B(u)(\phi,\psi) =\\
&=\frac{1}{V}\int_X\bigg[ \frac{1}{2}\langle \nabla^{\omega_u} \phi, \nabla^{\omega_u} \psi \rangle_{\omega_u} - \Big( \phi - \frac{1}{V}\int_X \phi e^{f_u}\omega_u^n\Big) \cdot \Big( \psi - \frac{1}{V} \int_X \psi e^{f_u}\omega_u^n\Big)\bigg] e^{f_u} \omega_u^n.
\end{flalign*}
The proof is finished after we subtract \eqref{eq: I_Hess_eq} from this last formula.
\end{proof}
Next we will show that $\nabla^2 \mathcal F(u)(\cdot,\cdot)$ is positive semi--definite for all $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$. Before this we introduce and study the following complex valued weighted complex Laplacian
\begin{equation}\label{eq: L_f_def}
L^{f_u} h= \partial ^* \partial h - \langle\partial h, \partial f_u \rangle_{\omega_u}, \ \ \ \ h \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb C).
\end{equation}
To clarify, by $\langle\partial h, \partial f_u \rangle_{\omega_u}$ we mean the quantity $g_u^{j\bar k} h_{j} {f_u}_{\bar k}$ (expressed in local coordinates). Also $\partial ^*$ is the Hermitian $L^2$ adjoint of $\partial$ with respect to $\omega_u$.
For $g,h \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb C)$ integration by parts gives the following:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: self_adj}
\int_X ( L^{f_u} g ) \bar h e^{f_u}\omega_u^n =\int_X \langle \partial g, \partial h \rangle_{\omega_u} e^{f_u}\omega_u^n=\int_X g \overline{( L^{f_u} h )} e^{f_u}\omega_u^n.
\end{equation}
Consequently $L^{f_u}$ is a self--adjoint elliptic operator with respect to the Hermitian inner product
$$\langle\alpha,\beta \rangle = \int_X \alpha \bar \beta e^{f_u} \omega_u, \ \ \ \alpha,\beta \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb C).$$
We conclude that $L^2(e^{f_u}\omega_u^n)$ has an orthonormal base composed of eigenfunctions corresponding to the eigenvalues $\lambda_0 < \lambda_1 < \ldots$ of $L^{f_u}$. As another application of \eqref{eq: self_adj} we see that $\lambda_0 = 0$ and the eigenspace of this eigenvalue is composed by the constant functions. Moreover, we have the following general result about the eigenfunctions of $L^{f_u}$ due to Futaki:
\begin{proposition}[\cite{fu}] \label{prop: Fut_ineq}Suppose $v \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb R)$ and $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$ such that $\int_X v e^{f_u} \omega_u^n =0$. In addition, let $h$ be an eigenfunction $L^{f_u}$, i.e., $L^{f_u} h = \lambda h$.
Then the following hold:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Fut_id}
\lambda \int_X \langle \partial h, \partial h \rangle_{\omega_u} e^{f_u}\omega_u^n = \int_X \langle \partial h, \partial h \rangle_{\omega_u} e^{f_u}\omega_u^n + \int_X \langle \mathcal L h, \mathcal L h \rangle_{\omega_u} e^{f_u}\omega_u^n,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Fut_ineq}
\int_X |v|^2 e^{f_{u}}\omega^n_{u} \leq \frac{1}{2}\int_X \langle \nabla^{\omega_u} v, \nabla^{\omega_u} v \rangle_{\omega_u} e^{f_{u}}\omega_{u}^n=
\int_X \langle \partial v, \partial v \rangle_{\omega_u} e^{f_u}\omega_u^n=\int_X ( L^{f_u} v ) \bar v e^{f_u}\omega_u^n,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal L$ is the Lichnerowitz operator \textup{(}see \eqref{eq: Lich_def} in the appendix\textup{)}. Also, one has equality in \eqref{eq: Fut_ineq} if and only if $\mathcal L v=0$, or equivalently, $\nabla^{\omega_u}_{0,1} v \in T^{1,0}_{\Bbb C}X$ is a holomorphic vector field.
\end{proposition}
Recall from the discussion following \eqref{eq: Lich_def} in the appendix that the condition $\mathcal L v=0$ is indeed equivalent with $\nabla^{\omega_u}_{0,1} v \in T^{1,0}_{\Bbb C}X$ being holomorphic.
\begin{proof} By the the discussion preceding the proposition, the condition $\int_X v e^{f_u} \omega_u^n =0$ simply means that $v$ is orthogonal to the eigenspace of $\lambda_0$, hence to prove \eqref{eq: Fut_ineq} we only need to argue \eqref{eq: Fut_id}. Indeed, the rightmost term in \eqref{eq: Fut_id} is nonnegative hence either $\lambda = \lambda_0 =0$ (in which case $h$ is a constant) or $\lambda \geq \lambda_1 \geq 1$. Consequently the inequality between the first and last term of \eqref{eq: Fut_ineq} follows after expressing $v$ using the orthonormal base of $L^2(e^{f_u}\omega_u^n)$ composed of eigenfunctions of $L^{f_u}$.
Lastly, we note that the middle identities of \eqref{eq: Fut_ineq} are simply a consequence of \eqref{eq: self_adj} and the formula following \eqref{eq: Lapl_grad_formula}, since $v$ is real valued.
We now argue \eqref{eq: Fut_id}. To ease notation, we will drop the subscript of $f_u$ and $\omega_u$ in the rest of the proof. Also, recall that by a choice of normal coordinates identifying a neighborhood of $x \in X$ with that of $0 \in \Bbb C^n$, we can assure that locally $\omega = i\del\dbar g$, with $g_{j\bar k}(0)=\delta_{jk}$ and $g_{j\bar k l}(0)=g_{j\bar k \bar l}(0)=0$ (see Proposition \ref{prop: prelnormcoord} below). With such a choice of coordinates we also have $\textup{Ric}\ \omega _{j\bar k}|_x = - g_{j \bar k a \bar a}(0)$ (see \eqref{eq: prelcurvnormalcoord}). Making use of this and integrating by parts multiple times we get
\begin{flalign*}\lambda \int_X \langle \partial h,\partial h \rangle e^{f}\omega^n & = \int_X \langle \partial (L^{f} h), \partial h \rangle e^{f}\omega^n= \int_X g^{j\bar k}(L^{f}h)_j \bar h_{\bar k} e^{f}\omega^n\\
&= \int_X g^{j\bar k}(-g^{a\bar b} h_{a\bar b} - g^{a\bar b} h_{a} {f}_{\bar b})_j \bar h_{\bar k} e^{f}\omega^n\\
&= \int_X (g_{\bar a jb} h_{a\bar b} \bar h_{\bar j} - h_{a\bar a j} \bar h_{\bar j} -h_{aj}f_{\bar a}\bar h_{\bar j} - h_a f_{\bar a j} \bar h_{\bar j})e^{f}\omega^n\\
&= \int_X (g_{\bar a jb} h_{a\bar b} \bar h_{\bar j} + h_{aj} \bar h_{\bar a \bar j} + h_{aj}f_{\bar a}\bar h_{\bar j}-h_{aj}f_{\bar a}\bar h_{\bar j} - h_a f_{\bar a j} \bar h_{\bar j})e^{f}\omega^n\\
&= \int_X (g_{\bar a jb} h_{a\bar b} \bar h_{\bar j} + h_{aj} \bar h_{\bar a \bar j} - h_a f_{\bar a j} \bar h_{\bar j})e^{f}\omega^n\\
&= \int_X (-g_{\bar a jb \bar b} h_{a} \bar h_{\bar j} + h_{aj} \bar h_{\bar a \bar j} - h_a f_{\bar a j} \bar h_{\bar j})e^{f}\omega^n\\
&= \int_X (\textup{Ric} \ \omega_{u}(\partial h,\bar\partial \bar h) + h_{aj} \bar h_{\bar a \bar j} - i\del\dbar f_u(\partial h,\bar\partial h))e^{f}\omega^n\\
&= \int_X (\langle \partial h,\partial h \rangle + h_{aj} \bar h_{\bar a \bar j})e^{f}\omega^n = \int_X \langle \partial h,\partial h \rangle e^{f}\omega^n + \int _X \langle \mathcal L h, \mathcal L h \rangle e^{f}\omega^n,
\end{flalign*}
where in the last line we have used the identity $\textup{Ric }\omega_u - \omega_u = i\del\dbar f_u$, and the expression of $\mathcal L$ in normal coordinates (see \eqref{eq: Lich_def}).
\end{proof}
From \eqref{eq: Fut_ineq} and Proposition \ref{prop: F_Hess_prop} it follows that $\nabla^2 \mathcal F(u)(\cdot,\cdot)$ is indeed positive semi--definite. As an additional consequence we obtain that $\mathcal B$ is convex along $\varepsilon$--geodesics:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: F_eps_convex}Suppose $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$ and $\varepsilon > 0$. Let $[0,1] \ni t \to u^\varepsilon_t \in \mathcal H_\omega$ be the smooth $\varepsilon$--geodesic joining $u_0,u_1$ \textup{(}see \eqref{eq: eps_geod_eq_Lev_Civ}\textup{)}. Then $t \to \mathcal B(u^\varepsilon_t):=-\log\big(\int_X e^{-u_t^{\varepsilon} + f_0}\omega^n\big)$ is convex.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} As it will not cause confusion, we will drop the reference to $\varepsilon$ in our argument.
Using the $L^2$ Mabuchi structure of $\mathcal H_\omega$ we have the following formula:
\begin{flalign*}
\frac{d^2}{dt^2}\mathcal B(u_t) = \nabla^2 \mathcal B(u_t)(\dot u_t,\dot u_t) + d \mathcal B(u_t)(\nabla_{\dot u_t} \dot u_t).
\end{flalign*}
From Proposition \ref{prop: Fut_ineq} it follows that $\nabla^2 \mathcal B(u_t)(\dot u_t,\dot u_t) \geq 0$. In addition to this, the equation of $\varepsilon$--geodesics (see \eqref{eq: eps_geod_eq_Lev_Civ}) gives $\nabla_{\dot u_t} \dot u_t > 0$, hence we obtain $d \mathcal B(u_t)(\nabla_{\dot u_t} \dot u_t) \geq 0$. Putting the last two facts together we get that $\frac{d^2}{dt^2}\mathcal B(u_t) \geq 0$.
\end{proof}
Finally, we argue that $\mathcal F$ is convex along the finite energy geodesics of $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm: F_convex} Suppose $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ and let $t \to u_t$ be the finite energy geodesic connecting $u_0,u_1$. Then $t \to \mathcal F(u_t)$ is convex and continuous on $[0,1]$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} As $t \to I(u_t)$ is known to be affine (Proposition \ref{prop: I_linrear}), we only need to argue that $t \to \mathcal B(u_t):=-\log \big( \int_X e^{-u_t + f_0}\omega^n\big)$ is also affine.
As $u \to \mathcal F(u)$ and $u \to I(u)$ is $d_1$-continuous (see Proposition \ref{prop: I_finiteness_and_cont} and Theorem \ref{thm: F_d_1_cont}), we obtain that so is $u \to \mathcal B(u)$.
Let us assume first that $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$. In this case $u^\varepsilon_t \nearrow u_t$ as $\varepsilon \to 0$, where $t \to u^\varepsilon_t$ is the $\varepsilon$--geodesic joining $u_0,u_1$ (see \eqref{eq: epsgeod_limit}). Consequently $d_1(u^\varepsilon_t,u_t) \to 0, \ t \in [0,1]$. Hence $\mathcal B(u^\varepsilon_t) \to \mathcal B(u_t), \ t \in [0,1]$. By Lemma \ref{lem: F_eps_convex} it follows that $t \to \mathcal B(u_t)$ is convex.
In the general case $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$, let $u_0^j,u_1^j \in \mathcal H_\omega$ be smooth decreasing approximants that exist by Theorem \ref{thm: BK_approx}. Let $t \to u^j_t$ be the $C^{1,\bar 1}$--geodesics joining $u^j_0,u^j_1$. By Proposition \ref{prop: weak_geod_approx}(i) it follows that $d_1(u^j_t,u_t) \to 0, \ t \in [0,1]$ and consequently $\mathcal B(u^j_t) \to \mathcal B(u_t), \ t \in [0,1]$, implying that $t \to \mathcal B(u_t)$ is convex, finishing the proof.
\end{proof}
For weak geodesics joining bounded potentials the above theorem was proved by Berndtsson in much more general context \cite[Theorem 1.2]{brn0}. The argument that we presented in this section follows more closely the simplified treatment in \cite{he2}.
\section{Uniqueness of KE metrics and reductivity of the automorphism group}
In this section we will give the proof of an important theorem of Bando--Mabuchi according to which on a Fano manifold $(X,\omega)$ K\"ahler--Einstein metrics are unique up to pullback by an automorphism:
\begin{theorem}[\cite{bm}] \label{thm: BMuniqueness} Suppose $u,v \in \mathcal H_\omega$ both solve \eqref{eq: KE_scalar_eq}, i.e., they are both KE potentials. Then there exists $g \in \textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ such that $g^* \omega_u = \omega_v$.
\end{theorem}
As we plan to use some of the machinery that we developed in previous parts, we will not follow the original proof of Bando--Mabuchi. Instead our proof will be a combination of the arguments of Berndtsson \cite{brn1} and Berman--Berndtsson \cite[Section 4]{bb}, and bears similarities with the treatment in \cite{Li}.
The proof will need a sequence of preliminary results about the automorphism group of K\"ahler--Einstein manifolds and will also use the classical theory of self adjoint elliptic differential operators on compact manifolds (see \cite[Chapter 4]{we}).
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: Fano_coh_vanishing} Suppose $X$ is a Fano manifold. Then $H^{0,q}(X,\Bbb C)$ is trivial for $q \in \{1,\ldots,n\}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}We start with the observation $H^{0,q}(X,\Bbb C) \simeq H^{n,q}(X,-K_X)$. As $-K_X >0$ by the Fano condition, the triviality of $H^{n,q}(X,-K_X)$ follows from the Kodaira vanishing theorem (\cite[Theorem VII.3.3]{De}).
\end{proof}
Note that by the Hodge decomposition we also have $H^1(X,\Bbb C)\simeq H^{1,0}(X,\Bbb C) \oplus H^{0,1}(X,\Bbb C)$, hence this group is trivial as well. Though we will not use this, we mention that by an argument involving the Bonnet--Myers theorem and the Euler characteristic, we can further deduce that $X$ is in fact simply connected.
Now we focus on the Lie algebra $\mathfrak g$ of $G:=\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$. Pick $U \in \mathfrak g$.
As $U= U^{1,0} + \overline{U^{1,0}}$ is real holomorphic it follows that $\bar\partial (U^{1,0} \lrcorner \omega_u) =0$ for all $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$. Indeed, this is immediate after one computes $\partial_{\bar l}(U^{1,0}_j {g^u}_{j\bar k})=0, \ l \in \{1,\ldots,n\}$ in normal coordinates (here and below $g^u$ is a local potential of $\omega_u$).
Using the previous lemma it follows that there exists a unique $v_{\omega_u}^U \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb C)$ with $\int_X v_{\omega_u}^U\omega_u^n =0$ such that
$$U^{1,0} \lrcorner \omega_u = \bar\partial v_{\omega_u}^U.$$
Equivalently, using Hamiltonian formalism this can be written as $X^{\omega_u}_{1,0}({ v_{\omega_u}^U})=U^{1,0},$ and we have the following identification for $\mathfrak g$ using $\omega_u$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: mathfrak_g_def}
\mathfrak g \simeq \mathfrak g_{\omega_u}:=\{v \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb C)\ : \ X^{\omega_u}_{1,0} v \in T^{1,0}_{\Bbb C} X \textup{ is holomorphic and } \int_X v \omega_u^n = 0\}.
\end{equation}
Recall that the ``complex" gradient $\nabla^{\omega_u}_{1,0} v = JX^{\omega_u}_{1,0} v$ (see \eqref{eq: grad_Ham_relation}) is holomorphic precisely when $\mathcal L v=0$, where $\mathcal L$ is the Lichnerowitz operator of the metric $\omega_u$ (see \eqref{eq: Lich_def}).
When $\mathcal H_\omega$ contains a KE potential $u$ then $S_{\omega_u}$ is trivially constant, hence by Proposition \ref{prop: prelLichform} we have that
$$\mathcal L^* \mathcal L(f)= \frac{1}{4}\Delta^{\omega_u}(\Delta^{\omega_u} f) + \langle Ric_{\omega_u}, i\partial \bar \partial f\rangle_{\omega_u}=\frac{1}{4}\Delta^{\omega_u}(\Delta^{\omega_u} f) + \frac{1}{2}\Delta^{\omega_u} f$$
is a real differential operator. As a result, $v \in \ker \mathcal L^* \mathcal L = \ker \mathcal L$ if and only if $\textup{Re }v, \textup{Im }v \in \ker \mathcal L$. Consequently, for KE Fano manifolds the above description of $\mathfrak g$ can be sharpened, to imply that $\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ is reductive, which was one of the first known obstructions to existence of KE metrics:
\begin{proposition}[\cite{mat}]\label{prop: Matsushima_thm} Suppose $(X,\omega_u)$ is a Fano KE manifold. Introducing $\mathfrak k_{\omega_u} = \mathfrak g_{\omega_u} \cap C^\infty(X,\Bbb R)$ we can write
$$\mathfrak g_{\omega_u} = \mathfrak k_{\omega_u} \oplus i \mathfrak k_{\omega_u}.$$
In particular, $\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ is the complexification of the compact connected Lie group $\textup{Isom}_0(X,\omega_u,J)$, with Lie algebra $\mathfrak k_{\omega_u}$.
\end{proposition}
Here $\textup{Isom}_0(X,\omega_u,J)$ is the identity component of the group of holomorphic isometries of the KE metric $\omega_u$. As $X$ is compact, the group of smooth isometries of $(X,\omega_u)$ is compact as well, hence so is its subgroup $\textup{Isom}_0(X,\omega_u,J)$.
\begin{proof} The decomposition $\mathfrak g_{\omega_u} = \mathfrak k_{\omega_u} \oplus i \mathfrak k_{\omega_u}$ follows from the discussion preceding the proposition. We have to argue that the Lie algebra of $\textup{Isom}_0(X,\omega_u,J)$ is exactly $\mathfrak k_{\omega_u}$.
Suppose $U \in \frak k_{\omega_u}$. Trivially $v := v^U_{\omega_u} \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb R)$, and since $U^{1,0}=X^{\omega_u}_{1,0} v$, by conjugation we obtain that in fact $U = X^{\omega_u}_v$. Consequently,
$$d (U \lrcorner \omega_u) = d (U^{1,0} \lrcorner \omega_u + U^{0,1} \lrcorner \omega_u)= d(\bar\partial h + \partial h)=d d h=0,$$ hence $U$ represents an infinitesimal symplectomorphism. Since $U$ is holomorphic, by \eqref{eq: form_Riem_rel} $U$ represents an infinitesimal isometry as well, i.e., $U \in \textup{Lie}(\textup{Isom}_0(X,\omega_u,J))$ as claimed.
Conversely, if $U \in \textup{Lie}(\textup{Isom}_0(X,\omega_u,J))$ then $0=d (U \lrcorner \omega_u) = d (U^{1,0}+ U^{0,1}) \lrcorner \omega_u = d(\bar\partial v^U_{\omega_u} + \partial \overline{v^U_{\omega_u}})= 2i \del\dbar \textup{Im }v^U_{\omega_u}$. Consequently $v^U_{\omega_u} \in \mathfrak g_{\omega_u} \cap C^\infty(X,\Bbb R)=\mathfrak k_{\omega_u}$.
\end{proof}
According to the next result the action of a one parameter subgroup of automorphisms in the direction of $i\mathfrak k$ gives $d_p$--geodesic rays inside $\mathcal H_\omega$:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: aut_geod_dp} Suppose $u \in \mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)$ is a KE potential. Let $U \in i\mathfrak k_{\omega_u}$ and $\Bbb R \ni t \to \rho_t \in \textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ be the associated one parameter subgroup. Then $t \to u_t :=\rho_t.u$ is a smooth $d_p$--geodesic ray for any $p \geq 1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} As $U \in i \mathfrak k_{\omega_u}$, it follows that $v^U_{\omega_u}=ih$ for some $h \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb R)$ with $\int_X h \omega_u^n =0$. Differentiating $\rho_t^* \omega_u = \omega_{u_t}$ we find that $i\del\dbar \dot u_t = \rho_t^*d (U \lrcorner \omega_{u})=\rho_t^*d (\bar\partial v^U_{\omega_u} + \partial \overline{v^U_{\omega_u}}) = 2i \rho_t^*\del\dbar (\textup{Im }v^U_{\omega_u}) = 2i\del\dbar h \circ \rho_t$.
Since $I(u_t)=0, \ t \geq 0$, Lemma \ref{lem: I_differential} gives that $\int_X \dot u_t \omega_{u_t}^n = 0$. Also, $\int_X h \circ \rho_t \omega_{u_t}^n=\int_X h \circ \rho_t \rho_t^*\omega_{u}^n=\int_X h \omega_{u}^n=0$, so we conclude that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: tang_vect_id}
\dot u_t = 2h \circ \rho _t.
\end{equation}
Differentiating this identity we obtain
\begin{flalign*}
\ddot u _t &= 2\rho^*_t (U \lrcorner d h) = 2\rho^*_t \langle \nabla^{\omega_u} h , U \rangle_{\omega_u} = 2\rho^*_t \langle \nabla^{\omega_u} h , J X^{\omega_u} h \rangle_{\omega_u}\\
&=2\langle \nabla^{\omega_{u_t}} h\circ \rho_t , \nabla^{\omega_{u_t}} h\circ \rho_t \rangle_{\omega_{u_t}}=\frac{1}{2} \langle \nabla^{\omega_{u_t}} \dot u_t, \nabla^{\omega_{u_t}} \dot u_t \rangle_{\omega_{u_t}},
\end{flalign*}
where we used \eqref{eq: grad_Ham_relation} in the second to last equality, and \eqref{eq: tang_vect_id} again in the last equality. The above arguments show that $t \to u_t$ satisfies \eqref{eq: geod_eq_Lev_Civ}, hence by Theorem \ref{thm: EpComplete} we obtain that $t \to u_t$ is a geodesic ray for any $p \geq 1$.
\end{proof}
The following result will play an important role in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm: BMuniqueness}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop: J_group_minimizer} Let $(X,\omega)$ be Fano. Suppose $u \in \mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)$ is a KE potential. Then the map $\textup{Aut}_0(X,J) \ni h \to J_\omega(h.u) \in \Bbb R$ admits a minimizer $g \in \textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ that satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{eq: v_orthog}
\int_X v \omega^n =0 \ \ \textup{ for all } \ \ v \in \mathfrak g_{\omega_{g.u}}.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
Recall the definition of the $J$ functional from \eqref{eq: J_def}. To avoid the possibility of confusion with the complex structure, we denoted this functional with $J_\omega$ in the above proposition, and will continue to do so in the rest of this section.
\begin{proof} By Proposition \ref{prop: d_1_growth_J} the functional $J_\omega$ has the same growth as the metric $d_1$. We turn to the group $\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ which is reductive by Proposition \ref{prop: Matsushima_thm}, hence we can apply Proposition \ref{prop: PartialCartanProp} in the appendix to deduce that the map $C: \textup{Isom}_0(X,\omega_u,J)\oplus \mathfrak k_{\omega_u} \to \textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ given by $C(k,U)=k \textup{exp}_{I}(JU)$ is surjective.
For any $k \in \textup{Isom}_0(X,\omega_u,J)$ and any $U \in \mathfrak k_{\omega_u}$ the previous proposition gives that $t \to k\textup{exp}_I(tJU).u =\textup{exp}_I(tJU).u=: u_t \in \mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)$ is a smooth $d_1$--geodesic. As the growth of $J_\omega$ is equivalent with the growth of the $d_1$ metric, it follows that the map
$$(K,\mathfrak k_{\omega_u}) \ni (k,U) \to \Theta(k,U):=J_\omega(C(k,U).u)=J_\omega(\textup{exp}_I(JU).u) =\Theta(I,U)\in \Bbb R$$
is proper (meaning that $\Theta(k_j,U_j)=\Theta(I,U_j) \to \infty$ if $|U_j | \to \infty$), hence it admits a minimizer. As $C$ is surjective, it follows that $\textup{Aut}_0(X,J) \ni h \to J_\omega(h.u) \in \Bbb R$ admits a minimizer $g \in \textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ as well.
Fix $v \in \mathfrak k_{\omega_{g.u}}$. We introduce the vector field $W = X^{\omega_{g.u}}v$, and by the previous proposition $[0,\infty) \ni t \to h_t := \textup{exp}(tJW).(g.u) \in \mathcal H_0 \cap I^{-1}(0)$ is a geodesic ray.
As the identity element minimizes $\textup{Aut}_0(X,J) \ni h \to J_\omega(h.(g.u)) \in \Bbb R$, we can write
$$0=\frac{d}{dt}\Big|_{t=0}J_\omega(\textup{exp}(tJW).(g.u))=\frac{1}{V}\frac{d}{dt}\Big|_{t=0} \int_X h_t \omega^n = \frac{1}{V}\int_X \dot h_0 \omega^n.$$
Using \eqref{eq: tang_vect_id} we conclude that $\dot h_0 = 2v$, hence $\int_X v \omega^n =0$. Finally, the decomposition formula of Proposition \ref{prop: Matsushima_thm} implies that \eqref{eq: v_orthog} in fact holds for any $v \in \mathfrak g_{\omega_{g.u}}$.
\end{proof}
For $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$, recall the self adjoint differential operator $L^{f_u}$ from \eqref{eq: L_f_def}. Motivated by the explicit formula for the Hessian of $\mathcal F$ (see \ref{eq: F_Hess_formula}) we introduce the differential operator $\mathcal D^u:C^\infty(X,\Bbb C) \to \Bbb R$:
$$\mathcal D^u (h) = L^{f_u}(h) - h + \frac{1}{V}\int_X h e^{f_u}\omega_u^n.$$
Integrating by parts in \eqref{eq: F_Hess_formula} we get the following formula, relating $\nabla^2 \mathcal F(u)$ and $\mathcal D^u$:
\begin{flalign}\label{eq: F_Hess_D_rel}
\nabla^2 \mathcal F(u)(\phi,\psi)&= \frac{1}{V}\int_X \phi\Big( \overline{L^{f_u}\psi -\psi + \frac{1}{V}\int_X \psi e^{f_u}\omega_u^n}\Big) e^{f_u} \omega_u^n = \frac{1}{V}\int_X \phi\overline{\mathcal D^{u}(\psi)} e^{f_u} \omega_u^n. \nonumber\\
&= \frac{1}{V}\int_X \Big({L^{f_u}\phi -\phi + \frac{1}{V}\int_X \phi e^{f_u}\omega_u^n}\Big)\psi e^{f_u} \omega_u^n = \frac{1}{V}\int_X {\mathcal D^{u}(\phi)}\overline{\psi} e^{f_u} \omega_u^n.
\end{flalign}
This implies that $\mathcal D^u$ is a self--adjoint differential operator as well. Additionally, the kernel of $\mathcal D^u$ is exactly equal to the eigenspace of $\mathcal L^{f_u}$ corresponding to the eigenvalue $\lambda = 1$. In Proposition \ref{prop: Fut_ineq} (see especially the identity \eqref{eq: Fut_id}) we gave an exact description of this space that we now recall:
$$\textup{Ker } \mathcal D^u = \{v \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb C) \textup{ s.t.} \int_X v e^{f_u}\omega^n_u =0 \textup{ and }\nabla^{\omega_u}_{1,0}v \in T^{1,0}_{\Bbb C} X\textup{ is holomorphic} \}.$$
In case $u \in \mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)$ is a KE potential we trivially have $f_u =0$, and comparing with \eqref{eq: mathfrak_g_def} we get the following identification:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Ker_D_u_mathfrak_g}
\textup{Ker } \mathcal D^u = \mathfrak g_{\omega_u}.
\end{equation}
As $\mathcal D^u$ is self--adjoint and elliptic, for any $h \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb C)$ such that $ h \perp \textup{Ker } \mathcal D^u$ there exists $v \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb C)$ such that $\mathcal D^u(v)=h$ (see \cite[Theorem IV.4.11]{we}). We note this fact in slightly more precise form in the following lemma:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: F_Hess_range} Let $(X,\omega_u)$ is a KE manifold. Suppose that $\int_X v \omega^n =0$ for all $v \in \mathfrak g_{\omega_u}$. Then there exists $g \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb R)$ such that
$$\nabla^2 \mathcal F(u)(f,g)= \frac{1}{V} \int_X f \overline{\mathcal D^u(g)} \omega_u^n = \frac{1}{V}\int_X f\omega^n, \ \ \forall \ f \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb C).$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Denote $h := \omega^n/\omega_u^n \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb R)$. By our assumption we have that $h \perp \mathfrak g_{\omega_u}$ with respect to the Hermitian product $\langle \alpha, \beta \rangle= \frac{1}{V} \int_X \alpha \overline{\beta} \omega_u^n$, hence by our above remarks there exists $g \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb C)$ such that $\mathcal D^u(g)=h$. As $u$ is a KE potential, we have $f_u =0$, and as a result $\mathcal D^u$ is a real differential operator. Consequently, we can make sure that $g \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb R)$, finishing the argument.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm: BMuniqueness}] Without loss of generality we can assume that our KE potentials $u,v$ satisfy $u,v \in \mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)$. Also, by Proposition \ref{prop: J_group_minimizer}, after possibly pulling back $u$ and $v$ by an element of $\textup{Aut}_0(X,J)$ we can assume that
$$\int_X h \omega^n=0, \ \ \forall \in h \in \mathfrak g_{\omega_u} \cup \mathfrak g_{\omega_v}.$$
Using this, by the previous lemma we can find $g_u,g_v \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb R)$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Hessian_F_u}
\nabla^2 \mathcal F(u)(f,g_u) = \nabla^2 \mathcal F(v)(f,g_v) = -\frac{1}{V}\int_X f \omega^n, \ \ \forall \ f \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb R).
\end{equation}
For the rest of the proof we will be working with the twisted Ding functional $\mathcal F_s: \mathcal H_\omega \to \Bbb R, \ s \geq 0$ given by the formula:
$$\mathcal F_s(h)= \mathcal F(h) + s J_\omega(h).$$
For small enough $s>0$ we can suppose that the potentials $u_0^s := u + s g_u$ and $u_1^s := v + s g_u$ satisfy $u^s_0,u^s_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega$.
The differential of $\mathcal F_s$ is equal to $d \mathcal F + s d J$. Choosing $w \in C^\infty(X,\Bbb R)$ with $\int_X w \omega_{u}^n=0$ a simple differentiation gives
$$\frac{d}{ds}\Big|_{s=0} d\mathcal F_s(u^s_0)(w)= \nabla^2 \mathcal F(u)(w,g_u) + d \mathcal F(u)(\nabla_{\frac{d}{ds}} w) + dJ_\omega(u)(w).$$
Since $u$ minimizes $\mathcal F$ we have that $d \mathcal F(u)(\nabla_{\frac{d}{ds}} w)=0$. Since $\int_X w \omega_u^n=0$ we also have $d J_\omega(u)(w)=\frac{1}{V}\int_X w\omega^n$, so we can continue the above identity and write:
$$\frac{d}{ds}\Big|_{s=0} d\mathcal F_s(u^s_0)(w)= \nabla^2 \mathcal F(u)(w,g_u) + \frac{1}{V}\int_X w\omega^n=0,$$
where in the last identity we have used \eqref{eq: Hessian_F_u}. Consequently $s \to d \mathcal F_s(u^s_0)(w)=O(s^2)$. Since $d \mathcal F_s(u^s_0)(w)= \frac{1}{V}\int_X w f_s \omega^n$ for some smooth curve $s \to f_s$, we can conclude that $f_s = O(s^2)$ and we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq: dF_s_est}
\big| d\mathcal F_s(u^s_0)(w) \big|\leq C s^2 \sup_X |w| \textup{ for all }w \in C(X,\Bbb R).
\end{equation}
A similar estimate holds for $\big| d\mathcal F_s(u^s_1)(w) \big|$ as well.
Let $[0,1] \ni t \to u^s_t \in \mathcal H_\omega^{1,\bar 1}$ be the $C^{1,\bar 1}$--geodesic connecting $u_0^s$ and $u_1^s$. By convexity of $t \to \mathcal F(u^s_t)$ and $t \to J_\omega(u^s_t)$ it follows that
\begin{flalign*}
0 \leq s \Big( \frac{d}{dt}\Big|_{t = 1} J_\omega(u^s_t)- \frac{d}{dt}\Big|_{t = 0} J_\omega(u^s_t)\Big)
&\leq \frac{d}{dt}\Big|_{t = 1} \mathcal F_s(u^s_t)- \frac{d}{dt}\Big|_{t = 0} \mathcal F_s(u^s_t) \\
&=d \mathcal F_s(u^s_1)(\dot u^s_1) - d \mathcal F_s(u^s_0)(\dot u^s_0) \leq C s^2,
\end{flalign*}
where the last inequality is a consequence of \eqref{eq: dF_s_est}. Taking the limit $s \searrow 0$ in the above estimate, (by convexity) we obtain that $t \to J_\omega(u^0_t)$ is affine. By the lemma below, this implies that $u = u^0_0=u^0_1 =v$, finishing the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
Suppose $u_0,u_1 \in \mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0)$ and $t \to u_t$ is the $C^{1,\bar 1}$--geodesic connecting $u_0,u_1$. If $t \to J_\omega(u_t)$ is affine then $u_0 = u_1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} We know that $t \to I(u_t)$ is affine (Proposition \ref{prop: I_linrear}). Using this, our assumption implies that $t \to \int_X u_t \omega^n$ is linear as well, hence $\frac{d}{d_t}\big|_{t =0} \int_X u_t \omega^n=\frac{d}{d_t}\big|_{t =1} \int_X u_t \omega^n$. This implies that $\int_X (\dot u_1 - \dot u_0)\omega^n =0$. By convexity in the $t$ variable we have $\dot u_1 \geq \dot u_0$, so we conclude that $\dot u_0 = \dot u_1$, hence $t \to u_t$ is affine, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{eq: dot_u_t_special}
\dot u_0 = \dot u_1 = u_1 - u_0.
\end{equation}
Since $t \to I(u_t)$ is affine too, we have $\frac{d}{dt}\big|_{t =0} I(u_t)=\frac{d}{dt}\big|_{t =1} I(u_t)$, and by \eqref{eq: dIdt_C11geod} and \eqref{eq: dot_u_t_special} we get that $\int_X (u_1 - u_0)\omega_{u_0}^n = \int_X (u_1 - u_0)\omega_{u_0}^n$. Subtracting the right hand side from the left and integrating by parts we obtain
$$\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\int_X i \partial (u_1 - u_0) \wedge \bar\partial (u_1 - u_0) \wedge \omega_{u_0}^{j} \wedge \omega_{u_1}^{n-1-j}=0.$$
As all terms in the above sum are nonnegative, we get that $\int_X i \partial (u_1 - u_0) \wedge \bar\partial (u_1 - u_0) \wedge \omega_{u_0}^{n-1}=0$. Consequently, $\langle \nabla^{\omega_{u_0}} (u_1 - u_0),\nabla^{\omega_{u_0}} (u_1 - u_0) \rangle_{\omega_{u_0}}=0$, hence $u_1= u_0 + c$. As $I(u_0)=I(u_1)=0$, we have in fact $u_0 = u_1$.
\end{proof}
\section{Regularity of weak minimizers of the Ding functional}
In this short section we will show that minimizers of the extended $\mathcal F$ functional are actually smooth, with this verifying another important condition in the existence/properness principle described earlier (see Theorem \ref{thm: ExistencePrinc}):
\begin{theorem}If $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ minimizes $\mathcal F: \mathcal E_1(X,\omega) \to \Bbb R$ then $u$ is a smooth K\"ahler--Einstein potential. \label{thm: F_min_regularity}
\end{theorem}
In case $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$ minimizes $\mathcal F$, then after computing the first order variation of $t \to \mathcal F(u + tv)$ for all $v \in C^\infty(X)$, Lemma \ref{lem: F_func_differential} allows to conclude that:\begin{equation}\label{eq: KE_weak_eq}
\omega_u^n= \frac{V}{\int_X e^{- u + f_0}\omega^n} e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n,
\end{equation}
hence $u$ is indeed a KE potential. In case $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ we can't even guarantee that $t \to u +tv \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ for small $t$. Getting around this obstacle will represent one of main technical ingredients in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm: F_min_regularity}.
Eventually we will be able to show that \eqref{eq: KE_weak_eq} holds for minimizers from $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ as well.
Notice that by Zeriahi's version of Skoda's theorem (Corollary \ref{cor: Skodacor}) the right hand side of this equation does indeed makes sense for potentials of $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$. The proof is completed by appealing to work of Kolodziej and Tosatti--Sz\'ekelyhidi on the apriori regularity theory of such equations:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm: SzToregularity} If $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ solves \eqref{eq: KE_weak_eq} then $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$, i.e., $u$ is a smooth KE potential.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}[Sketch of proof.] As $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ Corollary \ref{cor: Skodacor} implies that $e^{-u + f_0} \in L^p(\omega^n)$ for all $p > 1$. By Kolodziej's theorem \cite{k0}, since $u$ solves \eqref{eq: KE_weak_eq}, we obtain that $u$ is bounded (for a full proof of this fact see \cite[Theorem 14.1]{gzbook}). Using a result of Tosatti--Sz\'ekelyhidi \cite[Theorem 1.1]{szto} we obtain that $u$ is actually a smooth KE potential (see also \cite[Theorem 14.1]{gzbook}).
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm: F_min_regularity}] Let $v \in C^\infty(X)$. Recall from \eqref{eq: P_env_def} that $P(u+tv) \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega),$ $t \in \Bbb R$ is defined as follows:
$$P(u+tv)= \sup\{v \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \textup{ s.t. } v \leq u + tv \}.$$
Since $u - t \sup_X |v| \leq P(u + tv)$, Corollary \ref{cor: monotonicity_E_chi} implies that $P(u+tv) \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$, and this allows to introduce the function
$$g(t)= - I(P(u + tv)) - \log \int_X e^{-u -tv+ f_0}\omega^n + \log (V).$$
We claim that $g(t)$ is differentiable at $t=0$ and the following formula holds:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Dg(t)}
\frac{d}{dt}\Big|_{t=0} g(t) = -\frac{1}{V}\int_X v\bigg(\omega_u^n - \frac{V}{\int_X e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n}e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n\bigg).
\end{equation}
From the proposition below it follows that $\frac{d}{dt}\big|_{t=0} I(P(u+tv))= \frac{1}{V}\int_X v \omega_u^n.$ Consequently, to prove \eqref{eq: Dg(t)} it suffices to show that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: interm_dexp(t)}
\frac{d}{dt}\Big|_{t=0} \log \int_X e^{-u -tv + f_0}\omega^n=\frac{1}{\int_X e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n}e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n.
\end{equation}
Using the elementary inequality $|e^{x}-e^y| \leq |x-y|(e^x + e^y)$ we can write that
$$\Big|\frac{e^{-u -tv + f_0} - e^{-u -lv + f_0}}{t - l}\Big| \leq |v|( e^{-u - tv + f_0} + e^{-u -lv + f_0}) \leq C e^{-u}, \ \ \ l,t \in (-1,1).$$
Corollary \ref{cor: Skodacor} implies that the right most quantity in this inequality is integrable, hence we can conclude \eqref{eq: interm_dexp(t)} using the dominated convergence theorem.
Since $P(u+tv) \leq u +tv$, we notice that $g(0)= \mathcal F(u) \leq \mathcal F(P(u + tv)) \leq g(t), \ t \in \Bbb R.$ This implies that $\frac{d}{dt}\big|_{t=0} g(t)=0$, and by
\eqref{eq: Dg(t)} we can conclude that \eqref{eq: KE_weak_eq} holds for $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$. Now using Theorem \ref{thm: SzToregularity} we conclude that $u$ is smooth, finishing the argument.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\textup{\cite[Lemma 3.10]{bebo}} Suppose $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ and $v \in C^\infty(X)$. Then $P(u + tv) \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ for all $t \in \Bbb R$, and $t \to I(P(u+tv))$ is differentiable at $t=0$. More precisely,
$$\frac{d}{dt}\Big|_{t=0} I(P(u+tv))= \frac{1}{V}\int_X v \omega_u^n.$$
\end{proposition}
In our approach we will follow closely the simplified argument proposed by Lu and Nguyen \cite{ln}.
\begin{proof} We want to show that
$$\frac{I(P(u + tv)) - I(u)}{t} \to \frac{1}{V} \int_X v \omega_u^n.$$
After changing $v$ to $-v$, it suffices to consider $t > 0$ in the above limit.
Using \eqref{eq: I_energy_diff} we can write
$$\frac{I(P(u + tv)) - I(u)}{t}\leq \frac{1}{V}\int_X \frac{P(u + tv)-u}{t} \omega_u^n \leq \frac{1}{V}\int_X v \omega_u^n, \ t >0.$$
By the same inequality we also have that
$$\frac{1}{V}\int_X \frac{P(u + tv)-u}{t} \omega_{P(u + tv)}^n \leq \frac{I(P(u + tv)) - I(u)}{t}.$$
By the lemma below $\omega_{P(u + tv)}^n$ is concentrated on the coincidence set $\{P(u + tv)=u+tv \}$, thus we have
$$\frac{1}{V}\int_X v \omega_{P(u + tv)}^n \leq \frac{I(P(u + tv)) - I(u)}{t}.$$
We also have $|P(u + tv) - u| \leq t \sup_X |v|$, and
since the complex Monge--Amp\`ere operator is continuous under uniform convergence we conclude that
$$\frac{1}{V}\int_X v \omega_{u}^n \leq \liminf_{t \to 0}\frac{I(P(u + tv)) - I(u)}{t},$$
finishing the argument.
\end{proof}
Finally, we provide the lemma promised in the proof of the above proposition:
\begin{lemma} Suppose $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ and $v \in C^\infty(X)$. Then $\int_{\{u + tv > P(u + tv)\}} \omega_{P(u+tv)}^n=0.$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Using Theorem \ref{thm: BK_approx} we choose $u_k \in \mathcal H_\omega$ such that $u_k \searrow u$. By a classical Perron type argument it follows that $\int_{\{u_k + tv > P(u_k + tv)\}} \omega_{P(u_k+tv)}^n=0$ (see \cite[Corollary 9.2]{BT1}). This is equivalent to $\int_X (u_k + tv - P(u_k + t v))\omega_{P(u_k + tv)}^n =0.$
As $u_k + t \sup_X |v| \geq P(u_k +tv)$, Proposition \ref{prop: MA_cont} allows to take the limit $k \to \infty$ and conclude that
$$\int_X (u + tv - P(u + t v))\omega_{P(u + tv)}^n =0,$$
which is equivalent to $\int_{\{u + tv > P(u + tv)\}} \omega_{P(u+tv)}^n=0.$
\end{proof}
\section{Properness of the K--energy and existence of KE metrics}
Given $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$, the average of the scalar curvature of the metric $\omega_u$ is independent of $u$, as by \eqref{prelricdifference} and integration by parts yields
\begin{flalign}\label{eq: av_Scal_curv}
\bar S = \frac{1}{V}\int_X S_{\omega_u} \omega_u^n=\frac{n}{V} \int_X \textup{Ric } \omega_{u} \wedge \omega_u^{n-1}= \frac{n}{V} \int_X \textup{Ric } \omega \wedge \omega^{n-1}.
\end{flalign}
Next we introduce Mabuchi's K--energy functional $\mathcal K: \mathcal H_\omega \to \Bbb R$ \cite{m}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Ken_def}
\mathcal K(u)=\frac{1}{V} \int_X [\log\Big(\frac{\omega_u^n}{\omega^n}\Big)\omega_u^n - {u}\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\text{Ric }\omega\wedge\omega_u^j \wedge \omega^{n-j-1}] + \bar S I(u).
\end{equation}
The reason behind this specific definition is the following variational formula, which shows that critical points of the K--energy are exactly the \emph{constant scalar curvature K\"ahler} (csck) metrics:
\begin{proposition} \label{prop: prelKenergyvariation} For a smooth curve $(0,1) \ni t \to u_t \in \mathcal H_\omega$ we have
$$\frac{d}{dt}\mathcal K(u_t)= \frac{1}{V} \int_X \dot u_t (\bar S - S_{\omega_{u_t}})\omega_{u_t}^n.$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} By straightforward calculations we arrive at the identities:
$$\frac{d}{dt}\Big[\log\Big(\frac{\omega_{u_t}^n}{\omega^n}\Big)\omega_{u_t}^n \Big] = \frac{1}{2}\Delta^{\omega_{u_t}}\dot u_t\omega_{u_t}^n + n\log\Big(\frac{\omega_{u_t}^n}{\omega^n}\Big) i\partial \bar \partial \dot u_t \wedge \omega_{u_t}^{n-1},$$
$$\frac{d}{dt}\Big[{u_t}\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\textup{Ric } \omega\wedge\omega_{u_t}^j \wedge \omega^{n-j-1}\Big]= \sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\big({\dot u_t} \omega_{u_t}^j + j u_t \cdot i \del\dbar \dot u_t \wedge \omega_{u_t}^{j-1})\wedge \textup{Ric } \omega \wedge \omega^{n-j-1}.$$
Consequently, integration by parts and \eqref{prelricdifference} gives:
$$\frac{d}{dt}\int_X \log\Big(\frac{\omega_{u_t}^n}{\omega^n}\Big)\omega_{u_t}^n = n \int_X \dot u_t \Big(i\partial\bar \partial \log\frac{\omega_{u_t}^n}{\omega^n} \Big) \wedge \omega_{u_t}^{n-1}=n \int_X \dot u_t \Big(\textup{Ric }\omega - \textup{Ric }\omega_u\Big) \wedge \omega_{u_t}^{n-1},$$
$$\frac{d}{dt}\int_X{u_t}\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\textup{Ric }\omega\wedge\omega_{u_t}^j \wedge \omega^{n-j-1}= n\int_X\dot u_t \textup{Ric }\omega \wedge\omega_{u_t}^{n-1}.$$
The desired formula now follows after differentiating $t \to \mathcal K(u_t)$, and using the last two identities together with Lemma \ref{lem: I_differential}.
\end{proof}
Trivially, KE metrics are csck. By the next result, in case $c_1(X)$ is a multiple of $[\omega]$, the reverse is also true:
\begin{lemma} Suppose $c_1(X)=\lambda [\omega]$. Then $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$ is a csck potential if and only if it is a KE potential.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Suppose $u$ is a csck potential, i.e., $S_{\omega_u}=\bar S$. Since $c_1(X)=\lambda [\omega]$, by definition of the Ricci potential (see \eqref{eq: Ricci_pot_def}) and invariance of $\bar S$ (see \eqref{eq: av_Scal_curv}) we have
$$\bar{S }=S_{\omega_u} = n \lambda + \frac{1}{2}\Delta^{\omega_u} f_u=\overline{S }+ \frac{1}{2}\Delta^{\omega_u} f_u,$$
hence $\Delta^{\omega_u} f_u =0$. The condition $\int_X e^{f_u}\omega^n=V$ gives $f_u=0$, i.e., $\omega_u$ is a KE metric.
\end{proof}
By this last lemma, in case $(X,\omega)$ is Fano, the critical points of $\mathcal K$ are exactly the KE potentials, hence the K--energy plays a role similar to the $\mathcal F$ functional. Developing this analogy further, our main result in this section parallels Theorem \ref{thm: F_func_properness}, giving another characterization of existence of KE metrics, confirming a related conjecture of Tian (see \cite[Conjecture 7.12]{t1},\cite[p. 127]{t3}):
\begin{theorem}\textup{({\cite[Theorem 2.4]{dr2}})}
\label{thm: K-energy_properness}
Suppose $(X,\omega)$ is Fano with $c_1(X)=[\omega]$, and set $G:=\textup{Aut}(X,J)_0$. The following are equivalent:\vspace{0.1cm}\\
\noindent (i) there exists a KE metric in $\mathcal H$.
\noindent (ii)
For some $C,D >0$ the following holds:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: K_d_1_properness}
\mathcal K(u) \geq C d_{1,G}(G0,Gu) - D, \ \ u\in\mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0).
\end{equation}
\noindent (iii)
For some $C,D>0$ the following holds:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: K_J_properness}
\mathcal K(u) \geq C J_G(Gu) - D, \ \ u\in\mathcal H_\omega \cap I^{-1}(0).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
For the resolution of other closely related conjectures we refer to \cite{dr2}. It is possible to give a proof for this theorem by verifying the conditions of the existence/properness principle (Theorem \ref{thm: ExistencePrinc}) directly, the same way as we did with Theorem \ref{thm: F_func_properness}. Instead of doing this, we will rely on the special relationship between the K--energy and the $\mathcal F$ functional (see Proposition \ref{prop: K_F_relation} below).
First we have to show that $\mathcal K$ is $d_1$--lsc, and \eqref{eq: Ken_def} gives the $d_1$--lsc extension of this functional to $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$. This will be done in a series of lemmas and propositions:
\begin{lemma}\textup{\cite[Lemma 5.23]{dr2}}
\label{lem: I_twist_ExtLemma}
Suppose $\alpha$ is a smooth closed $(1,1)$-form on $X$. The functional $I_\alpha: \mathcal H_\omega \to \Bbb R$ given by
$$ I_\alpha(u)= \sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\int_X u \alpha \wedge \omega_u \wedge \omega^{n-1-j}
$$
is $d_1$--continuous, and extends uniquely to a $d_1$--continuous functional $I_\alpha:\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)\to \Bbb R$. Additionally, $I_\alpha$ is bounded on $d_1$--bounded subsets of $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}Let $u_k \in \mathcal H_\omega$ and $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$
be such that $d_1(u_k,u) \to 0$. An argument similar to that yielding \eqref{eq: I_energy_diff} shows that
$$
I_\alpha(u_l) -I_\alpha(u_k)= \sum_{j=0}^{n-1} \int_X (u_l-u_k) \alpha \wedge \omega_{u_l}^{j} \wedge \omega_{u_k}^{n-1-j}.
$$
For some $D>0$ we have $-D\omega \leq \alpha \leq D\omega$. Thus,
$\omega_{(u_l+u_k)/{4}}=\omega/2+\omega_{u_l}/4+\omega_{u_k}/4$ and for some $C>0$ we can write
\begin{equation}\label{eq: eqintegralest}
\big|I_\alpha(u_l) - I_\alpha(u_k)\big| \leq C \int_X |u_l-u_k|
\omega_{(u_l+u_k)/{4}}^n.
\end{equation}
Using Lemma \ref{lem: halwayest} and the triangle inequality, $d_1(0,(u_l + u_k)/4)$ is bounded. By Corollary \ref{cor: int_d1_est}, we obtain that $\{I_\alpha(u_k)\}_k$ is a Cauchy sequence, showing that $I_\alpha$ is $d_1$--continuous and it that extends $d_1$--continuously to $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$.
To argue $d_1$--boundedness of $I_\alpha$, we turn again to \eqref{eq: eqintegralest} (with $u_k=0$). By this estimate and Corollary \ref{cor: int_d1_est}, it is enough to show that if $d_1(0,u)$ is bounded then so is $d_1(0,u/4)$. This is a consequence of Lemma \ref{lem: halwayest}.
\end{proof}
As we will see shortly, the entropy functional $u \to \int_X \log\big(\frac{\omega_u^n}{\omega^n}\big)\omega_u^n$ is only $d_1$--lsc. In fact, this functional is already lsc with respect to weak convergence of measures, as it follows from our discussion below and the next proposition.
Suppose $\nu,\mu$ are Borel probability measures on $X$. If $\nu$ is absolutely continuous with respect to $\mu$ then the entropy of $\nu$ with respect to $\mu$ is $\textup{Ent}(\mu,\nu)= \int_X \log \big(\frac{\nu}{\mu}\big)\frac{\nu}{\mu} \mu$, otherwise $\textup{Ent}(\mu,\nu)= \infty.$
The next well known result follows from the classical Jensen inequality:
\begin{lemma} \label{lem: Ent_ineq_class} Suppose $\nu,\mu$ are Borel probability measures on $X$. Then $\textup{Ent}(\mu,\nu) \geq 0$ and equality holds if and only if $\nu = \mu$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} $\textup{Ent}(\mu,\nu) \geq 0$ follows from an application of Jensen's inequality to the convex weight $\rho(x):=x \log x$. As $\rho$ is strictly convex on $\Bbb R^+$, the proof of Jensen's inequality implies that $\textup{Ent}(\mu,\nu) \geq 0$ if and only if $\frac{\mu}{\nu}=1$ (see \cite[Chapter 3, Theorem 3.3]{rud}).
\end{proof}
Let us recall the following classical formula for the entropy of two measures:
\begin{proposition}\label{prop: ent_dual_form} Suppose $\mu,\nu$ are probability Borel measures on $X$. Then the following holds:
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Ent_formula}
\textup{Ent}(\mu,\nu) = \sup_{f \in B(X)}\Big(\int_X f \nu - \log \int_X e^{f}\mu \Big),
\end{equation}
where $B(X)$ is the set of bounded Borel measurable functions on $X$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} In case $\nu$ is not absolutely continuous with respect to $\mu$ then there exists a Borel set $M \subset X$ with $\mu(M)=0$ but $\nu(M) >0$. Then we trivially have that $\int_X c\mathbbm{1}_M \nu - \log \int_X e^{c\mathbbm{1}_M}\mu =\int_X c\mathbbm{1}_M \nu - \log \int_X e^0 \mu= c \nu(M)$ for any $c>0$ and consequently,
$$\sup_{f \in B(X)}\Big(\int_X f \nu - \log \int_X e^{f}\mu \Big) = \infty,$$ which is equal to $\textup{Ent}(\mu,\nu)$ by definition.
We assume now that $\nu$ is absolutely continuous with respect to $\mu$, i.e. $\nu = g \mu$ for some non--negative Borel measurable function $g$. To conclude \eqref{eq: Ent_formula} we need to show that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Ent_formula_alternative}
\int_X g \log g \mu = \sup_{f \in B(X)}\Big(\int_X f \mu - \log \int_X e^{f}\mu \Big).
\end{equation}
By choosing $f_k = \log g_k:=\log (\min(\max(g,1/k),k)), \ k \in \Bbb N$. We get that the right hand side of \eqref{eq: Ent_formula_alternative} is greater then $\int_X g \log g_k \mu - \log \int_X g_k \mu$. Letting $k \to \infty$, we conclude that the right hand side of \eqref{eq: Ent_formula_alternative} is greater then the left hand side.
For the other direction, we need to argue that $\int_X g \log g \mu \geq \int_X f g \mu - \log \int_X e^{f}\mu$ for any $f \in B(X)$. For this it is enough to invoke Jensen's inequality:
$$\log \int_X e^f \mu \geq \log \int_{\{g >0\}} \frac{e^f}{g}g \mu \geq \int_{\{g >0\}} ({f} - \log g)g \mu=\int_{X} ({f} - \log g)g \mu.$$
\end{proof}
As the supremum of continuous functionals is lsc, it follows that $\nu \to \textup{Ent}(\mu,\nu)$ is lsc with respect to weak convergence of Borel measures.
Theorem \ref{thm: d_1-convergence}(ii) implies that for any $u_k,u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ we have that $d_1( u_k,u) \to 0$ implies $\omega_{u_k}^n \to \omega_u^n$ weakly.
We arrive at the following important corollary:
\begin{corollary} \label{cor: Ent_d1_lsc} The functional $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega) \ni u \to \textup{Ent}\big(\frac{1}{V}\omega^n,\frac{1}{V}\omega_u^n\big) \in \Bbb R$ is $d_1$--lsc.
\end{corollary}
Comparing with \eqref{eq: Ken_def}, we observe that for $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$ we actually have
\begin{equation}\label{eq: K-en_alt_def}
\mathcal K(u) = \textup{Ent}\Big(\frac{1}{V}\omega^n,\frac{1}{V}\omega_u^n\Big) - \frac{1}{V} I_{\textup{Ric }\omega}(u) + \bar S I(u).
\end{equation}
This observation together with Proposition \ref{prop: I_finiteness_and_cont}, Lemma \ref{lem: I_twist_ExtLemma} and Corollary \ref{cor: Ent_d1_lsc} allows to conclude that $\mathcal K$ is $d_1$--lsc on $\mathcal H_\omega$ and it extends to $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ in a $d_1$--lsc manner, using the formula of \eqref{eq: K-en_alt_def}.
Lastly, before we prove Theorem \ref{thm: K-energy_properness}, we provide a precise inequality between the K--energy and $\mathcal F$ functional, and we point out the relationship between the minimizers of these functionals:
\begin{proposition}[\cite{brm0}] \label{prop: K_F_relation}Suppose $(X,\omega)$ is a Fano manifold with $c_1(X)=[\omega]$. For any $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq: K_F_ineq}
\mathcal F(u) \leq \mathcal K(u) - \frac{1}{V} \int_X f_0 \omega^n.
\end{equation}
Moreover, for $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ the following are equivalent:\\
(i) $\mathcal F(u) = \mathcal K(u)- \frac{1}{V} \int_X f_0 \omega^n$.\\
(ii) $u$ minimizes $\mathcal F$.\\
(iii) $u$ minimizes $\mathcal K$.\\
(iv) $u$ is a smooth KE potential.
\end{proposition}
Consequently, the minimizers of $\mathcal K$ and $\mathcal F$ on $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ are the same and coincide with the set of smooth KE potentials.
\begin{proof} Let $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$. As both $\mathcal K$ and $\mathcal F$ are constant invariant, we can assume that $\int_X e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n = V$ and note the following identity:
$$\textup{Ent}\Big(\frac{1}{V}e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n, \frac{1}{V} \omega_u\Big) = \textup{Ent}\Big(\frac{1}{V}e^{f_0}\omega^n, \frac{1}{V} \omega_u\Big) + \frac{1}{V}\int_X u \omega^n_u.$$
By the formula of the next lemma, we can write that
$$\mathcal K(u) - \frac{1}{V} \int_X f_0 \omega^n= \textup{Ent}\Big(\frac{1}{V}e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n, \frac{1}{V} \omega_u\Big) - I(u)= \textup{Ent}\Big(\frac{1}{V}e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n, \frac{1}{V} \omega_u\Big) + \mathcal F(u).$$
By Lemma \ref{lem: Ent_ineq_class} we have $\textup{Ent}\big(\frac{1}{V}e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n, \frac{1}{V} \omega_u\big) \geq 0$, hence \eqref{eq: K_F_ineq} follows.
Moreover, by this same lemma, equality holds in \eqref{eq: K_F_ineq} if and only if $\omega_u = e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n$, which is equivalent with $u$ being a smooth KE potential (see Theorem \ref{thm: SzToregularity}). By Theorem \ref{thm: F_min_regularity} it immediately follows that (i), (ii) and (iv) are equivalent.
If (iv) holds, then $u$ minimizes $\mathcal F$, and $\mathcal F(u)=\mathcal K(u) - \frac{1}{V}\int_X f_0 \omega^n$, by (i). Consequently $u$ minimizes $\mathcal K$ as well, hence (iii) holds.
Suppose (iii) holds. By Lemma \ref{lem: Ricci_it}(ii) proved below, there exists $v \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \cap L^\infty$ such that
$$\mathcal K(v) - \frac{1}{V}\int_X f_0 \omega^n \leq \mathcal F(u) \leq \mathcal K(u) - \frac{1}{V}\int_X f_0 \omega^n.$$
As $u$ minimizes $\mathcal K$, it follows that the inequalities above are actually equalities, hence (i) holds.
\end{proof}
As pointed out in the above argument, we need a special expression for the K-energy:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: K_en_alt_formula} Suppose $(X,\omega)$ is a Fano manifold with $c_1(X)=[\omega]$. For $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$ we have
$$\mathcal K(u) = \textup{Ent}\Big(\frac{1}{V} e^{f_0} \omega^n, \frac{1}{V}\omega_u^n \Big) - I(u) + \frac{1}{V} \int_X u \omega_u^n + \frac{1}{V} \int_X f_0 \omega^n.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} We start by deriving an alternative formula for $I_{\Ric \omega}$:
\begin{flalign*}
I_{\Ric \omega}(u)& = \sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\int_X u \Ric \omega \wedge \omega_u^j \wedge \omega^{n-1-j}=\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\int_X u (\omega + i \del\dbar f_0) \wedge \omega_u \wedge \omega^{n-1-j}\\
& = \sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\int_X u \omega_u^j \wedge \omega^{n-j} +\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\int_X f_0 i \del\dbar u \wedge \omega_u \wedge \omega^{n-1-j}\\
& = \sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\int_X u \omega_u \wedge \omega^{n-j} +\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\int_X f_0 \omega_u^{j+1} \wedge \omega^{n-1-j} - \sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\int_X f_0 \omega_u^{j} \wedge \omega^{n-j}\\
& = \sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\int_X u \omega_u \wedge \omega^{n-j} + \int_X f_0 \omega_u^{n} -\int_X f_0 \omega^{n}.
\end{flalign*}
Since $c_1(X)=[\omega]$, we have $\bar S = n$ (see \eqref{eq: av_Scal_curv}), so by the above we conclude that
\begin{flalign*}
-\frac{1}{V}I_{\Ric \omega}(u) + \bar S I(u) &=-\frac{1}{V}I_{\Ric \omega}(u) + n I(u)\\
&=-I(u) + \frac{1}{V}\Big(\int_X u \omega_u^n - \int_X f_0 \omega_u^{n} +\int_X f_0 \omega^{n}\Big).
\end{flalign*}
We note that $\textup{Ent}\big(\frac{1}{V} \omega^n, \frac{1}{V}\omega_u^n \big)=\textup{Ent}\big(\frac{1}{V} e^{f_0} \omega^n, \frac{1}{V} \omega_u^n \big) + \frac{1}{V}\int_X f_0\omega_u^n$. Adding this identity to the above, and comparing with \eqref{eq: K-en_alt_def} finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
In the next lemma, we will make us of the inverse Ricci operator, introduced in \cite{Ru08} in connection with the so-called Ricci iteration.
Given a potential $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$, Corollary \ref{cor: Skodacor} and Kolodziej's estimate \cite{k0,K1} give another potential $\Ric^{-1}(u) \in \textup{PSH}(X,\omega) \cap L^\infty$, unique up to a constant, such that
$$\omega_{\Ric^{-1}(u)}^n = \frac{V}{\int_X e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n}e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n.$$
In case $u \in \mathcal H_\omega$, we notice that $\Ric \omega_{\Ric^{-1}u} = \omega_u,$ motivating the terminology.
By the next lemma, the inverse Ricci operator decreases the $\mathcal F$ functional and sheds further light on the intimate relationship between $\mathcal K$ and $\mathcal F$:
\begin{lemma}[\cite{Ru08}] \label{lem: Ricci_it} Suppose $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$. Then the following hold:\\
(i) $\mathcal F(\Ric ^{-1}(u)) \leq \mathcal F(u).$ \\
(ii)$\ \mathcal K(\Ric ^{-1}(u)) - \frac{1}{V}\int_X f_0 \omega^n \leq \mathcal F(u).$\\
(iii)$\ \mathcal K(\Ric ^{-1}(u))\leq \mathcal K(u).$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} First we argue (ii). We introduce $v:=\textup{Ric}^{-1}(u)$. As both $\mathcal F$ and $\mathcal K$ are constant invariant, we can assume that $\int_X e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n = V$. By the previous lemma, notice that we have
\begin{flalign*}
\mathcal K(v)- \frac{1}{V}\int_X {f_0}\omega^n &=\textup{Ent}\Big(\frac{1}{V}e^{f_0}\omega^n, \frac{1}{V}\omega_v^n\Big) -I(v) + \frac{1}{V}\int_X v\omega_v^n \\
&=\textup{Ent}\Big(\frac{1}{V}e^{f_0}\omega^n, \frac{1}{V}e^{-u + f_0}\omega^n\Big) -I(v) + \frac{1}{V}\int_X v\omega_v^n\\
&= -I(v) + \frac{1}{V}\int_X (v-u)\omega_v^n \leq -I(u)= \mathcal F(u),
\end{flalign*}
where in the penultimate estimate we have used \eqref{eq: I_energy_diff_est}.
Lastly, (i) and (iii) follow from (ii) and \eqref{eq: K_F_ineq}.
\end{proof}
We now prove the main compactness theorem of the space $(\mathcal E_1(X,\omega),d_1)$:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm: E_1_compactness} Let $u_j\in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ be a $d_1$--bounded sequence for which $\textup{Ent}\big(\frac{1}{V}\omega^n,\frac{1}{V}\omega_{u_j}^n\big)$ is bounded. Then $\{u_j \}_j$ contains a $d_1$--convergent subsequence.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} As a consequence of Corollary \ref{cor: Skodacor}, for any $p>0$ there exists $C(p)>0$ such that that $\int_X e^{-pu_j}\omega^n \leq C$. Since $|\sup_X u_j|$ is bounded, we get that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: exp_int_est}\int_X e^{|pu_j|}\omega^n \leq C.
\end{equation}
Consider $\phi,\psi: \Bbb R \to \Bbb R^+$ given by
$$
\phi(|t|) = \frac{(|t|+1)\log(|t|+1)-|t|}{\log 2} \ \textup{ and } \ \psi(t)=\frac{e^{|t|} - |t| -1}{e-1}.
$$
An elementary calculation verifies that both of these functions are normalized Young weights and $\phi^* = \psi$ (in the sense of \eqref{eq: Legendre_trans_def}).
Since $\textup{Ent}\big(\frac{1}{V}\omega^n,\frac{1}{V}\omega_{u_j}^n\big)$ is bounded, so is $\int_X \phi\big(\omega_{u_j}^n/\omega^n \big) \omega^n$. As $\phi$ is convex and $\phi(0)=0$, for some $D \in (0,1)$ we get that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Ent_less_one}
\int_X \phi\bigg(D \frac{\omega_{u_j}^n}{\omega^n} \bigg) \frac{1}{V}\omega^n \leq 1.
\end{equation}
From $d_1$-boundedness we have that $|\sup_X u_j|$ and $I(u_j)$ are bounded. By Lemma \ref{lem: L_1_closedness}, after possibly taking a subsequence, we can find $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ such that $\int_X |u_j-u| \omega^n \to 0$.
Recalling the definition of Orlicz norms from \eqref{eq: OrliczNormDef}, we can use the H\"older inequality \eqref{eq: HolderIneq} to deduce that
\begin{equation}\label{eq: intintintest}
\frac{1}{V}\int_X |u_j - u|\omega_{u_j}^n =\frac{1}{V}\int_X |u_j - u|\frac{\omega_{u_j}^n}{\omega^n}\omega^n \leq \Big\|\frac{1}{D}(u_j - u)\Big\|_{\psi, \frac{1}{V}\omega^n} \Big \| D \frac{\omega_{u_j}^n}{\omega^n} \Big \|_{\phi, \frac{1}{V}\omega^n}.
\end{equation}
From \eqref{eq: Ent_less_one} it follows that $ \| D {\omega_{u_j}^n}/{\omega^n} \|_{\phi, \frac{1}{V}\omega^n} \leq 1$. Since $\psi(t) \leq t^2 e^{|t|}$, for any $r>0$ we can write
\begin{flalign*}
\int_X \psi\Big(\frac{r}{D}(u_j - u)\Big) \omega^n &\leq \int_X \frac{r^2}{D^2}|u_j - u|^2e^{\frac{r}{D}|u_j - u|}\omega^n\\
&\leq \frac{r^2}{D^2} \| (u_j - u)^2 \|_{L^3(\omega^n)} \big\|e^{\frac{r}{D}|u|}\big\|_{L^3(\omega^n)}\big\|e^{\frac{r}{D}|u_j|}\big\|_{L^3(\omega^n)}.
\end{flalign*}
The last two terms on right hand side are bounded by \eqref{eq: exp_int_est}. As $\int_X |u_j - u|\omega^n \to 0$ it follows that $\int_X |u_j - u|^6\omega^n \to 0$, hence $\lim_j \|D^{-1}(u_j - u)\|_{\psi, \frac{1}{V}\omega^n} \leq r$.
Using \eqref{eq: intintintest}, we conclude that $\int_X |u_j-u|\omega_{u_j}^n \to 0$. As a result, \eqref{eq: I_energy_diff_est} (or rather the extension of this inequality to $\mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$) gives that $\liminf_j I(u_j) \geq I(u)$. Together with Corollary \ref{cor: I_L_1_semicont} we obtain that $\lim_j I(u_j) = I(u)$. Since additionally $\int_X |u_j - u|\omega^n \to 0$, Theorem \ref{thm: d_1-convergence}(i) implies that $d_1(u_j,u) \to 0$, finishing the proof.
\end{proof}
Lastly, we prove our main theorem:
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm: K-energy_properness}] The equivalence between (ii) and (iii) follows from Lemma \ref{lem: JGPropernessLemma}.
Suppose (i) holds. Then Proposition \ref{prop: K_F_relation} and Theorem \ref{thm: F_func_properness} implies properness of $\mathcal K$, giving (ii).
Now assume that (ii) holds. Then $\mathcal K$ is bounded from below and we can find $u_j \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$ that is $d_1$--bounded and $\lim_{j} \mathcal K(u_j) = \inf_{v \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)} \mathcal K(v)$.
In particular, $\{\mathcal K(u_j)\}_j$ is bounded. Recalling \eqref{eq: K-en_alt_def}, and the fact that both $I$ and $I_{\Ric \omega}$ are bounded on $d_1$--bounded sets (see Proposition \ref{prop: I_finiteness_and_cont} and Lemma \ref{lem: I_twist_ExtLemma}), it follows that $\textup{Ent}\big(\frac{1}{V}\omega^n,\frac{1}{V}\omega_{u_j}^n\big)$ is bounded as well.
By the previous compactness theorem, after possibly passing to a subsequence, we have $d_1(u_j,u) \to 0$ for some $u \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)$. Since $\mathcal K$ is $d_1$--lsc, we immediately obtain that $\mathcal K(u)= \inf_{v \in \mathcal E_1(X,\omega)} \mathcal K(v)$, i.e., $u$ minimizes $\mathcal K$.
By the equivalence between (iii) and (iv) in Theorem \ref{prop: K_F_relation}, $u$ is in fact a smooth KE potential.
\end{proof}
\paragraph{Brief historical remarks.} Motivated by results in conformal geometry, the relationship between energy properness and existence of canonical metrics in K\"ahler geometry goes back to the work of Tian and collaborators in the nineties \cite{t0,t1}. Numerous conjectures were proposed during this time, a number of which where adressed in the case of Fano manifolds without vectorfields \cite{dt,t,tz}. For general Fano manifolds, all the remaining conjectures where addressed in \cite{dr2}, and we refer to this work for more details.
The sharpest form of the energy properness condition was identified in \cite{pssw} and was later adopted in the literature, including in the present work.
Regarding general K\"ahler manifolds, in \cite{dr2} the equivalence between energy properness and existence of consant scalar curvature (csck) metrics is linked to a regularity problem for fourth order PDE's. In case a csck metric exists, this regularity conjecture was confirmed in \cite{bdl2}, showing that on such manifolds the K-energy is indeed proper, partially generalizing Theorem \ref{thm: K-energy_properness}.
In this chapter we tackled problems related to energy properness directly via the existence/properness principle of \cite{dr2} (Theorem \ref{thm: ExistencePrinc}). The use of geodesic convexity in this context was initially proposed by X.X. Chen, however he advocated for the use of the $L^2$ Mabuchi geometry instead \cite{che2}.
One of the advantages of our method (that uses pluripotential theory predominantly) over previous approaches in the literature is its adaptability to K\"ahler structures with mild singularities \cite{da4,DiG}. For generalizations in other directions, as well as a more thourough overview of the vast related literature we refer to \cite{dr2,r2}.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Rust is a programming language designed to build efficient \textit{and} safe low-level software~\cite{rust-wiki, safe-concurrency-1,safe-concurrency-2,safe-memory-1,rust-performance-1}.
Rust is targeted to achieve performance that is comparable to C,
while avoiding many safety issues in C including both concurrency bugs and memory safety bugs.
Over the past few years, Rust has gained significant popularity,
especially in building low-level software~\cite{rust-love1,rust-love2,rust-love3}.
These Rust applications range from simple libraries~\cite{rand}
and utilities~\cite{rust-binutil,rust-coreutils}
to complex browsers~\cite{servo,quantum}
and operating systems~\cite{stratis,tockos,redox}.
A major design goal of Rust is to provide safe concurrency~\cite{safe-concurrency-1,safe-concurrency-2}.
To achieve the goal, Rust leverages several unique ownership rules,
and imposes the rule checking during compilation.
It is thus widely believed that Rust is much safer than many other languages.
As stated in Rust's official tutorial, ``concurrency is fearlesss'' in Rust.
Since Rust is widely used to implement low-level systems,
it is important to understand whether these compiler
rules can really reduce concurrency bugs and provide safer concurrency.
Unfortunately, there is only limited prior work in understanding Rust's
concurrency. Many key questions are left open.
For example, how does Rust's compiler rules influence its programmability?
Will developers have to use unsafe code to bypass compiler checkings?
What are the common mistakes made by developers when
they develop multithreaded Rust programs?
Will bypassing Rust's compiler checkings introduce concurrency bugs?
Will there be no concurrency bugs in safe code?
The lack of knowledge in Rust's concurrency would severely impair
Rust software development and make
it hard to create Rust development and debugging tools.
In this paper, we conduct the first empirical study on Rust's concurrency.
Our study focuses on two main aspects,
concurrency usage (Section~\ref{sec:usage}) and concurrency bugs (Section~\ref{sec:bug}).
We conduct our study on three popular open-source Rust applications: Servo~\cite{servo},
a web browser, TiKV~\cite{tikv}, a key-value storage system,
and Rand~\cite{rand}, a random number generation library.
Although our study is just preliminary, we are already able to identify interesting new
findings and insights in Rust concurrent programming.
For example, we find that there are still data race bugs in safe Rust code
and Rust programmers should not rely solely on Rust's compiler checkings
and be ``fearless'' in writing concurrent Rust programs.
Another interesting finding is Rust's compiler checkings do restrict its programmability
and change developers' usage habits
of concurrency primitives.
Overall, we make four observations in our study of concurrent programming in Rust
and infer four implications that can be useful for future Rust programmers and language designers.
For example, future research in building Rust bug detectors should
focus on unsafe code and atomic operations in safe code.
Our findings and implications improve the understanding of Rust's
concurrency and guide future tool design.
\section{Background}
In this section, we give a brief overview of Rust,
its mechanism for concurrency safety,
and its thread communication and synchronization mechanisms.
\subsection{Rust and Rust-Based Software}
Rust is a low-level system programming language, firstly designed by Graydon Hoare in 2006.
Rust has been sponsored and maintained by Mozilla since 2009
and was firstly released in 2010~\cite{rust-wiki}.
Providing safe concurrency~\cite{safe-concurrency-1,safe-concurrency-2}
and safe memory~\cite{safe-memory-1} with
similar performance to C~\cite{rust-performance-1} is the design goal of Rust.
In recent years, due to its safety and performance benefits,
Rust draws many interests from developers.
According to surveys on stack overflow,
Rust is the most beloved programming language in the last
three years~\cite{rust-love1,rust-love2,rust-love3}.
Rust has become a popular language in building software systems,
such as browsers~\cite{servo,quantum} and OSes~\cite{stratis,tockos,redox}.
\input{section/tab-rust-app}
In this paper, we select three popular open-source Rust projects
on GitHub to conduct our study (Table~\ref{tab:apps}).
According to the number of stars on GitHub,
Servo is ranked 4th, TiKV is ranked 19th,
and Rand is ranked in the top 3\% among all Rust projects.
They cover different types of functionalities,
including web browsing (Servo),
key-value storage (TiKV), and library utility (Rand).
They are of medium to large size
and have at least two years' development history.
We believe that these three applications are good
representatives of real-world usage of Rust
and leave exploring other Rust applications to future work.
\subsection{Static Ownership Checking}
\label{sec:checking}
Rust supports shared variables between threads.
By default, one Rust value has exact one variable as its owner, and
a value will be destroyed, if its owner variable leaves its scope.
Rust's compiler conducts static ownership checking on shared variables,
with the hope to reduce mistakes during accessing shared variables.
First, the ownership of a value can be \textit{move}d from one scope to another,
through function call or return, message passing, thread creation, and so on.
Rust compiler statically guarantees that an owner variable will not be
accessed after the ownership is moved to a different scope.
Therefore, a shared value can only be owned by one thread at any time.
Second, Rust supports accessing a value using its reference.
A reference can be \textit{borrow}ed from one scope to another,
without moving ownership.
Rust's compiler does not allow references to be borrowed between threads,
since values' lifetime cannot be statically inferred across threads
and Rust's compiler guarantees
a value's lifetime covers all its reference usage.
Third, to have multiple owner threads,
Rust provides a thread-safe reference-counting pointer (\texttt{Arc}).
Rust's compiler guarantees that all owner threads only access an \texttt{Arc}
to read a shared variable or update a shared variable through \texttt{Arc::make\_mut()},
which will create a per-thread private copy of the shared variable.
Fourth, to allow multiple threads to update the same copy,
a shared variable has to be declared with both \texttt{Arc} and \texttt{Mutex}.
To access the shared variable, a thread needs to invoke
the lock function of the shared variable's
protecting \texttt{Mutex}.
A reference of the shared variable is returned
after successfully invoking the lock function,
so that the thread can read or write the shared variable.
Mutual exclusion provided by \texttt{Mutex} guarantees that
there is at most one thread accessing a shared value at any time.
\subsection{Thread Synchronization in Rust}
\noindent{\underline{Thread Model.}}
Rust does not provide any runtime to manage thread scheduling.
Rust threads are mapped to OS threads in an 1 to 1 way.
To create a thread, \texttt{thread::spawn()} function is invoked
with a piece of code (a \textit{closure}) as parameter.
Ownership of shared variables can be moved from a creating
thread to a created thread during thread creation.
\noindent{\underline{Thread Synchronization.}}
Similar to C/C++, Rust supports traditional synchronization
primitives designed
to protect shared memory accesses,
such as lock (\texttt{Mutex}), read/write lock (\texttt{RwLock}),
conditional variable (\texttt{Condvar}), atomic operations (\texttt{atomic}),
and barrier (\texttt{Barrier}).
There are three difference between \texttt{Mutex} (or \texttt{RwLock})
in Rust and in C/C++.
First, Rust provides a poisoning mechanism~\cite{rust-poisoning} for
\texttt{Mutex} to propagate panic information among threads.
Second, Rust requires a \texttt{Mutex} to be declared
together with its protected data.
Third, there is no explicit unlock function in Rust,
and Rust's compiler automatically adds unlock
at the end of a scope with lock operations.
Rust provides \texttt{Once} as a new primitive to
guarantee the initializations of a global
variable is only conducted once.
Rust provides \texttt{channel} to pass messages between threads.
Each channel has a sender and a receiver.
Ownership can be moved from sender thread to receiver thread
through message passing.
When channel buffer is empty,
pulling data from the channel will block.
\section{Usage Study}
\label{sec:usage}
In this section, we discuss our study results on
concurrency usage in Rust applications, including the usage of unsafe code
and the usage of synchronization primitives.
\subsection{Unsafe Code}
Rust supports \texttt{unsafe} keyword to mark a function
or a code scope to bypass some compiler checkings.
As discussed in Section~\ref{sec:checking}, many static compiler
checkings are designed to avoid concurrency bugs.
Therefore, the usage of \texttt{unsafe}
is highly correlated with whether Rust can really achieve safe concurrency.
\input{section/tab-unsafe}
We first study the amount of \texttt{unsafe} tags.
As shown in Table~\ref{tab:unsafe},
there are a fair amount of \texttt{unsafe} tags
in the three studied applications,
ranging from 47 to 1683.
We calculate the average number of \texttt{unsafe}
tags over total source lines of code.
On average, Servo developers use \texttt{unsafe} most frequently,
and there are 6.62 \texttt{unsafe} tags per thousand lines of code.
TiKV has the smallest number,
and there is less than one \texttt{unsafe} tag
per thousand lines of code.
\texttt{unsafe} can be used to mark a function or a code scope.
For the three studied applications, \texttt{unsafe} is constantly
used more often to tag a code scope,
ranging from 68.27\% to 100.00\% over all \texttt{unsafe} usage sites
for the three applications.
The large number of \texttt{unsafe} tags demonstrates
that Rust's compiler checkings
do restrict its programmability,
encouraging programmers to bypass them using \texttt{unsafe}.
These \texttt{unsafe} sites can potentially
contain concurrency bugs,
making Rust's concurrency less safe,
as we will discuss in Section~\ref{sec:race}.
We then count the lines of code inside each code scope
or function tagged with \texttt{unsafe}.
As shown in Table~\ref{tab:unsafe},
on average, an \texttt{unsafe} is used to tag a very small piece of code.
For Servo, each \texttt{unsafe} tags 6.08 lines of code on average,
which is the largest number among the three applications.
The number drops to 5.62 and 3.63 for TiKV and Rand respectively.
These results show that Rust developers are very careful
when they use \texttt{unsafe}.
In the end, we count the percentage of \texttt{unsafe} code
over all code.
As shown in Table~\ref{tab:unsafe}, the percentage of \texttt{unsafe} code
ranges from 0.44\% to 4.19\% for the three studied applications.
For Rust applications, safe code dominates.
\noindent{\underline{\bf{Observation 1:}}}
{\it{
The majority of code in Rust applications is safe.
However, Rust developers often need to carefully use \texttt{unsafe}
to bypass compiler checkings.
}}
\noindent{\underline{\bf{Implication 1:}}}
{\it{
Compiler checkings do restrict Rust's programmability.
Future works on more precise compiler checkings to give developers more flexibility
and verifying unsafe code in Rust to provide a certain
level of confidence in safety are needed.
}}
\subsection{Concurrency Usage}
Studying the usage of concurrency primitives can help understand
how Rust developers implement thread communication and synchronization,
and quantitatively get a feeling about which primitives are more likely to
be misused, leading to concurrency bugs.
\input{section/tab-primitives-usage}
We count the number of operations for each primitive type.
For example, for \texttt{Mutex}, we count the number of \texttt{Mutex.lock()}
and \texttt{Mutex.try\_lock()} operations.
As shown in Table~\ref{tab:usage}, \texttt{channel} is the most widely used
primitive for two applications.
For Servo, 62.52\% of synchronization operations are channel operations.
For TiKV, the percentage is 42.53\%.
For Rand, its most widely used primitive is \texttt{atomic},
and the percentage is
62.5\% over all primitive types.
For multithreaded programs in other languages,
mutex is the most widely used primitive~\cite{wangyin-1,wangyin-2,go-study-asplos}.
However, this is not true for Rust.
We anticipate that it is Rust's compiler checkings that change
developers' programming habits and usage patterns
when building Rust concurrent software.
We also calculate the average number of concurrency operations
over lines of code.
TiKV developers use concurrency operations most frequently,
and there are 8.49 concurrency operations for every thousand lines of code.
Servo developers use concurrency operations less frequently,
and Rand developers use concurrency operations least frequently.
The average operations per one thousand lines of code are 5.56
and 2.90 for these two applications respectively.
\noindent{\underline{\bf{Observation 2:}}}
{\it{
The usage of concurrency primitive in Rust is different from other programming languages,
possibly caused by Rust's compiler checking mechanism.
}}
\noindent{\underline{\bf{Implication 2:}}}
{\it{
Traditional concurrency bug detection and fixing techniques focus more on
\texttt{Mutex}. Future research works should pay more attention to \texttt{channel} and \texttt{atomic}
to combat concurrency bugs in Rust.
}}
\section{Concurrency Bug Study}
\label{sec:bug}
This section presents a preliminary study of Rust concurrency bugs.
Specifically, we will first introduce our methodology of collecting and categorizing bugs
and then present our identified deadlock and data-race bugs.
\subsection{Methodology}
To collect concurrency bugs, we first search for the keywords ``\textit{deadlock}'' and ``\textit{race}'' in
GitHub commit histories of the three applications in Table~\ref{tab:apps}.
These two keywords are widely used in previous works to collect
concurrency bugs in other programming languages~\cite{characteristics.asplos08,Hary-2,JaConTeBe,go-study-asplos}.
Many previous works categorize
concurrency bugs into deadlock bugs and non-deadlock bugs~\cite{characteristics.asplos08,Rui-FSE,hfix}.
Data race is one of the common types of non-deadlock bugs.
\input{section/tab-bug-overview}
We then manually inspect the resulting commits that contain the two keywords
to identify real concurrency bugs.
In the last step,
we study identified concurrency bugs,
by referring their patches and related discussions on GitHub.
Right now, we have studied 18 bugs.
Their detailed
distribution is shown in Table~\ref{tab:bug}.
\subsection{Rust Deadlock Bugs}
In total, we study 10 deadlock bugs.
We categorize them based on which synchronization primitives causing
threads not to make future progress.
As shown in Table~\ref{tab:bug},
due to implicit unlock in Rust, double locks are the root causes for seven deadlocks.
The other three deadlocks are caused by misusing channel.
\input{section/fig-double-lock}
\noindent{\underline{Implicit Unlock.}}
Rust does not provide any unlock function.
Rust's compiler automatically adds corresponding unlock functions
at the end of a scope with lock functions.
Due to this, Rust developers may forget to
release acquired lock timely,
leading to double-lock deadlocks.
One bug example from Servo is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:double-lock}.
\texttt{sheet.shared\_lock} is a \texttt{RwLock}.
The write lock is acquired at line 2.
The write lock is only needed for the invocation of
function \texttt{write\_with()},
but it is not released until the end
of function \texttt{insert\_rule()} at line 10.
Unfortunately, \texttt{insert\_rule()} invokes \texttt{new\_specific()}
at line 9. \texttt{new\_specific()} acquires
the read lock of the \texttt{RwLock} at line 14,
leading to a double-lock bug.
To fix this bug, Servo developers simply
add a pair of \texttt{\{\}} to create a new scope,
so that the write lock can be released after
invoking \texttt{write\_with()} at line 7.
\noindent{\underline{Misusing Channel.}}
As shown in Table~\ref{tab:usage},
channel is widely used in Rust programs.
When buffer is empty, pulling data from a channel will block,
forming an edge from receiver thread
to sender thread in wait-for graph.
A circle in wait-for graph means circular wait among threads and deadlock.
We have three bugs caused by circular wait involving waiting for
channel message.
\input{section/fig-channel3}
One example from Servo is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:channel}.
There are two threads, master thread and worker thread.
Both of them have a message-processing loop to
handle messages from \texttt{r1} and \texttt{r2} respectively.
In Figure~\ref{fig:worker},
when work thread wants to set its ID,
it creates a channel at line 11, send the sender \texttt{s2}
of the created channel in a \texttt{SetID} message to master thread
at line 12,
and blocks itself to wait for reply from master thread at line 13.
In Figure~\ref{fig:master},
when master thread receives a \texttt{SetID} message from \texttt{r1},
it replies work thread by sending an empty
message \texttt{()} using \texttt{s2} to unblock worker thread.
When master thread receives an \texttt{Exit} message at line 3,
it leaves the message-handling loop at line 4.
After that, master thread notifies worker thread to exit at line 15,
and blocks itself to wait for a reply from worker thread at line 16.
Worker thread can unblock master thread by sending out an empty
message \texttt{()} at line 6 in Figure~\ref{fig:worker}.
This bug happens when master thread receives an \texttt{Exit} message just
before worker thread sends out a \texttt{SetID} message.
Master thread blocks at line 16 in Figure~\ref{fig:master}
waiting for a message should be sent from work
thread at line 6 in Figure~\ref{fig:worker}.
However, worker thread blocks at line 13 in Figure~\ref{fig:worker},
waiting for master thread to unblock it by execution
line 8 in Figure~\ref{fig:master}.
To fix this bug, Servo developers change master thread,
and only allow it to leave the message-processing loop
after worker thread has exit,
so that master thread can always handle messages from worker thread.
\noindent{\underline{\bf{Observation 3:}}}
{\it{
Double locks and misusing channels are two common causes of deadlocks in Rust.
}}
\noindent{\underline{\bf{Implication 3:}}}
{\it{
To detect deadlocks in Rust, it is useful to design static analysis which can
identify possible lock operations in a function call and
can infer thread wait relationship based on inter-thread messaging.
}}
\subsection{Rust Data Races}
\label{sec:race}
Intuitively, there could be data races inside unsafe code.
Our study confirms this intuition.
In total, five out of eight races are caused by
instructions inside unsafe code.
However, what is counter-intuitive is that there are still races inside safe code.
\noindent{\underline{Data Races in Safe Code.}}
Rust supports shared variables in atomic types,
such as \texttt{AtomicBool}, \texttt{AtomicPtr}, and \texttt{AtomicUsize}.
Read and write conducted on atomic variables are automatically ignored
by Rust's ownership checkings.
All races in safe code are caused by misusing atomic operations.
\input{section/fig-atomicity}
An example from Rand is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:atomicity}.
Function \texttt{is\_getrand\_available()} invokes \texttt{getrand()} at line 7,
and checks whether the returned value is \texttt{-1}
at line 8 to decide whether \texttt{getrand()} is available.
\texttt{getrand()} is an expensive system call,
so that Rand developers decide to cache the previous execution result.
Since \texttt{is\_getrand\_available()} can be executed concurrently,
two atomic variables, \texttt{CHECKED} and \texttt{AVAILABLE},
are introduced to achieve the caching functionality.
\texttt{CHECKED} represents whether \texttt{getrand()} is called before,
and \texttt{AVAILABLE} represents whether \texttt{getrand()} is available.
If \texttt{CHECKED} is \texttt{false} at line 5,
\texttt{getrand()} will be called at line 7,
\texttt{AVAILABLE} will be set to suitable value at line 13,
and \texttt{CHECKED} will be set to \texttt{true} at line 14.
If \texttt{CHECKED} is \texttt{true} at line 5,
the value of \texttt{AVAILABLE} will be returned at line 19.
There is a concurrency bug that can cause
\texttt{is\_getrand\_available()} to return incorrect results.
Since either compiler or CPU could reorder the execution of line 13 and line 14,
if the reordering happens,
the caching mechanism is only correct
when line 14 and line 13 are executed atomically.
If the execution of line 14 and line 13 of one thread
is interleaved by the execution of line 5 and line 19 of another thread,
\texttt{is\_getrand\_available()} will return \texttt{false},
no matter \texttt{getrand()} is available or not.
To fix this bug, Rand developers use \texttt{Once} primitive to guarantee
the invocation of \texttt{getrand()} and the initialization of \texttt{AVAILABLE}
are only conducted once and are conducted atomically.
\noindent{\underline{\bf{Observation 4:}}}
{\it{
Unsafe code is indeed one major source of data races in Rust.
However, there are also data races from safe code.
}}
\noindent{\underline{\bf{Implication 4:}}}
{\it{
Race detection techniques are needed for Rust, and they should
focus on unsafe code and atomic operations in safe code.
}}
\section{Related Works}
\label{sec:related}
Many system reliability researchers conducted
empirical studies on real-world bugs before~\cite{lift-study,chou01empirical,
characteristics.asplos08,Lu.study.fast,sullivan92comparison,Rui-FSE,PerfStudy,Hary-1,Hary-2,go-study-asplos,junwen-1}.
These works have successfully guided techniques
to combat bugs from various aspects.
To the best of our knowledge, our work is the first empirical
study on Rust concurrency usage and concurrency bugs.
Although it is still at an initial stage,
our current results can inspire and guide future
techniques for concurrency bugs in Rust.
\section{Conclusion and Future Work}
With the increasing usage of Rust to implement various concurrent systems,
it is important to understand whether Rust's static compiler
checkings can really bring safe concurrency.
We conduct the first study on Rust concurrency from two aspects:
concurrency usage and real-world concurrency bugs.
We expect our study to deepen the understanding of Rust's concurrency
and motivate more research works on Rust.
This paper is just a starting point to understand Rust.
We plan to extend the current work from the following directions.
First, more concurrency bugs should be collected from a wider range of Rust applications.
We should build a more comprehensive taxonomy for Rust concurrency bugs
from various aspects, such as root causes, fix strategies, how bugs are introduced, and so on.
Second, we plan to systematically evaluate existing concurrency bug
detection techniques on Rust. Rust uses LLVM as its backend and doesn't have any runtime.
It is fairly easy to apply existing techniques designed for C/C++ to Rust applications.
Since Rust has message-passing mechanisms, existing techniques are expected
to be extended to have more precise detection results.
Third, safe memory usage is another design goal of Rust.
We plan to extend our study to memory bugs in Rust and
understand whether Rust's compiler checkings can
really reduce memory bugs.
Many memory bugs can be exploited by hackers have large security impact.
We also plan to evaluate security impact of memory bugs in Rust.
Four, Rust is a very young language, and new
language features were added in recent years.
We plan to study new language
features influence Rust's programmability and its safety.
|
\section{Introduction}
In the last decade, direct imaging efforts have revealed a population of
super-Jovian planets at large separations from their host stars.
It has been well established that these planets
are rare; only a small percentage of stars
possess such a companion \citep{bowler16}. %
What is not yet clear is whether the formation process is intrinsically
inefficient there and how important post-formation architectural changes
to the system (through migration or interactions between protoplanets) are.
The formation mechanism that produces these planets
has %
not yet been convincingly identified.
The main contenders are the different flavours of core accretion (CA;
with planetesimals or pebbles building up the core)
and of gravitational instability (GI; with or without tidal stripping).
Therefore, given the current low numbers of detections, %
every new data point can represent an important new challenge
for planet formation.
The first discovery of the SPHERE instrument at the VLT \citep{beuzit08,beuzit19},
\object{HIP\,65426\,b}, is an ${m_{\rm p}}=8$--12~${M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ dusty L$6\pm1$ companion to the $m_\star=1.96\pm0.04~\Msol$ fast rotator HIP\,65426,
which has an equatorial velocity $v_\star\sin i=299\pm9$~km\,s$^{-1}$.
Its projected separation is $92.0\pm0.2$~au, and %
the star is seen close to pole-on \citep{chauvin17}. If the planet is not captured
and its orbital plane is the same as the midplane of the star, the projected separation
is very close to the true separation. %
In this paper, we set out to explore how core accretion could lead
to the objects observed in direct imaging.
We take a closer look at HIP\,65426\,b\ because it is of low mass
and is at a relatively large separation, while its host star is a fast rotator.
Essentially, we are following up on the comment in \citet{chauvin17} that the `planet
location would not favor a formation by core accretion unless
HIP\,65426\,b\ formed significantly closer to the star followed by
a planet--planet scattering event.'
This paper is structured as follows.
In Section~\ref{Theil:MSi} we use planet evolution models and work backwards from the observations to derive
joint constraints on the mass and initial (i.e.\ post-formation) entropy of HIP\,65426\,b,
where `initial' refers to the beginning of the cooling.
We then switch to a forward approach and study the possible formation of HIP\,65426\,b.
In Section~\ref{sec:formationscenario} we use detailed planet formation models
following the disc evolution and $N$-body interactions.
Then in Section~\ref{sec:Gps} we use $N$-body integrations to look in detail at interactions between several companions
once the disc has cleared.
Finally, in Section~\ref{Theil:Zus} we present our conclusions and a discussion.
\section{Constraints on the mass and post-formation entropy}
\label{Theil:MSi}
In this section we use the luminosity to derive, with planet evolution models, constraints on the mass
and initial (post-formation) entropy of HIP\,65426\,b,
following the approach of \citet{mc14}, as also applied
to $\kappa$~And~b and $\beta$~Pic~b \citep{bonnefoy14kap,bonnefoy14betaPic}.
The idea is to explore the parameter space of mass and initial entropy
through the Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method.
We assume Gaussian error bars on the logarithm of the luminosity
and on the linear age.
Both flat and non-flat priors in linear mass and post-formation
entropy are considered, as detailed in Section~\ref{Theil:M,Si-prior}.
\subsection{Luminosity and age}
\label{Theil:L-Kurven}
Firstly, we discuss the input quantities for the MCMC.
The adopted bolometric luminosity is $\log L/\Lsun =-4.06 \pm 0.10$ as derived by \citet{chauvin17}.
Contrary to estimates based on the photometry in individual bands,
this quantity should be robust as it is based on the comparison to young L5--L7 dwarfs
with a similar near-infrared spectrum.
The typical age of stars in the Lower Centaurus--Crux group around HIP\,65426\ is $14\pm2$~Myr, but
the placement of phase-space neighbours of HIP\,65426\ in a Hertzsprung--Russell diagram
suggests an age of 9--10~Myr.
This lead \citet{chauvin17} to adopt an age of $14\pm4$~Myr.
We note that at 2~$\Msol$, HIP\,65426\ is predicted by stellar evolution models to have
a pre-main sequence lifetime of approximately 15~Myr (see the overview as a function
of stellar mass in fig.~1 of \citealp{dotter16}),
so that it is approaching the main sequence or has only recently joined it.
A point to consider is that
if HIP\,65426\,b\ formed by core accretion (CA), its cooling age would be smaller
by a not entirely negligible formation delay ${\Delta t_{\rm form}}$ \citep{fortney05,bonnefoy14betaPic},
which we now briefly discuss.
While the dependence of the formation time ${\Delta t_{\rm form}}$ on stellar mass
has not yet been studied in detail,
it seems plausible that giants form more quickly around more massive stars.
Since runaway accretion proceeds very quickly by construction,
it is the oligarchic growth phase that dominates the total formation time.
For instance, \citet[][their eq.~(11)]{thommes03} found that in this regime,
the planet growth rate scales as $\dot{M} \propto m_\star^{1/6} \Sigma_m\rho_{\mathrm{gas}}^{2/5}$,
where $\Sigma_m$ and $\rho_{\mathrm{gas}}$ are respectively the surface density of planetesimals
and the (midplane) gas density. This scaling reflects in part the fact that
the core accretion rate is proportional to the Keplerian frequency, which at fixed orbital distance increases with stellar mass. %
Since both $\Sigma_m$ and $\rho_{\mathrm{gas}}$ are expected to increase with stellar mass,
the formation time should decrease with planet mass.
Also, observationally, the formation time ${\Delta t_{\rm form}}$ is unlikely much longer than 3~Myr
since discs around more massive stars are shorter-lived \citep{kenken09,ribas15};
already at solar masses,
gas giants must form typically in at most ${\Delta t_{\rm form}}\sim3$--5~Myr
given the lifetimes of protoplanetary discs \citep{haisch01}.
Finally,
population synthesis calculations for a 2~$\Msol$ central star (Mordasini et al., in prep.) %
indicate that most $\sim10~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ planets (approximately the mass of \ HIP\,65426\,b, as we show later)
have reached their final mass after roughly ${\Delta t_{\rm form}}\sim 2$~Myr, and
the simulations presented in Section~\ref{sec:formationscenario} using the \citet{ColemanNelson16b} models
for a 2~$\Msol$ star yield ${\Delta t_{\rm form}}\approx 2.5$--4~Myr.
Therefore, we adopt ${\Delta t_{\rm form}}=2$~Myr, and thus $t_{\rm cool} = 12\pm4$~Myr as the fiducial age.
We note that this ${\Delta t_{\rm form}}$ is of the order of or smaller than the one-sigma error bar on the age.
However, to address formation by gravitational instability, where we expect the planet
to be approximately coeval with the star, we also study the case of $t_{\rm cool}=14\pm4$~Myr.
\subsection{BEX cooling curves}
\label{Theil:BEX-Modelle}
For the MCMC we use the Bern EXoplanet cooling curves (BEX)
with the AMES-COND atmospheres.
The BEX models use the Bern planet evolution (cooling) code
\texttt{completo~21}, which includes the cooling and contraction
of the core and envelope at constant mass
(see sects.~3.2 and~3.8.3 of \citealt{morda12_I},
sect.~2.3 of \citealt{morda12_II}, and sect.~2 of \citealt{linder19})
as well as deuterium burning \citep{moll12}.
The boundary conditions are provided by atmospheric models.
Previously,
only the simple Eddington model had been implemented,
but we can now use arbitrary atmospheric models,
following the coupling approach of \citet{chabrier97}.
This entails simply taking a pressure--temperature point in the adiabatic part
of the deep atmosphere as the starting point of the interior structure calculation.
Since the structure is adiabatic, the precise location (e.g.\ at a Rosseland optical
depth $\Delta{\tau_{\mathrm{R}}}=100$, at a pressure $P=50$~bar,
or at the top of deepest convection zone)
will not matter, and it is easy to verify that in any case the error
in the radius is at most of a few percentage points.
This coupling approach was applied recently to low-mass planets in \citet{linder19}.
Currently, the BEX models are available with boundary conditions
provided by
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)]~the Eddington assumption;
\item[(ii)]~AMES-COND \citep{baraffe03};
\item[(iii)]~\citet{burr97};
\item[(iv)]~\texttt{petitCODE} \citep{moll15};
\item[(v)]~\texttt{HELIOS} (\citealp{malik17}, Malik et al., in review).
\end{enumerate}
For flavours~(ii) and~(iii) we extracted the relevant information
from the publicly available \citet{burr97} tracks %
and the \citet{baraffe03} grids\footnote{See \url{https://www.astro.princeton.edu/~burrows/dat-html/data/} and \url{https://phoenix.ens-lyon.fr/Grids/AMES-Cond/STRUCTURES/}, respectively.}.
The details will be described in a dedicated publication,
but we note already that
we can reproduce very well the \citet{burr97}
and the AMES-COND tracks (see Fig.~\ref{Abb:c21-Kurven}).
By default, the BEX curves
assume full ISM deuterium abundance at the beginning of cooling,
while in fact in core accretion a mass-dependent fraction will be burnt during formation \citep{moll12,3M}.
However, in both cold 1~$\Msol$ and 2~$\Msol$ population syntheses,
objects need a mass of 16~${M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ (20~${M_{\textnormal{J}}}$) to have consumed even only $\approx30$\,\%\ ($\approx70$\,\%)
of their initial D abundance by the end of formation.
Given the masses we find later for HIP\,65426\,b,
and since in GI it is likely that
no deuterium is destroyed during formation,
the use of full deuterium abundance at the beginning of cooling is inconsequential.
We display in Fig.~\ref{Abb:c21-Kurven} the different flavours of the
BEX cooling curves compared to the classical models of \citet{burr97} and \citet{baraffe03}.
The initial luminosities are set to the same values as in \citet{burr97},
except for the 20~m$\Msol$ case for which we took a slightly lower initial luminosity
to avoid non-monotonicities in the re-interpolation of the original \citet{burr97} data.
Otherwise, the BEX curves clearly follow the \citet{burr97} models, including the `shoulder'
that occurs during deuterium burning.
At very old ages (20~Gyr) the black lines diverge because the models are beyond the tabulated range of input atmospheric structures.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\Bildbreite{0.47}\textwidth]{Kuehlungskurven_c21_MKern20_divtKH1p0_B97+AMES_Lum.pdf}
\caption{
\label{Abb:c21-Kurven}
Bern EXoplanet cooling curves (BEX) for planet masses ${m_{\rm p}}=0.5$--20~m$\Msol$ (bottom to top)
with different atmospheric boundary conditions (Eddington, \citealp{baraffe03},
\citealp{burr97}; see legend).
The Bern evolution (cooling) code \texttt{completo~21} is used
and compares very well to the original models.
Units of milli-solar masses (1~m$\Msol=1.05~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$) are used to reproduce
as closely as possible the tracks of \citet{burr97} and \citet{baraffe03}.
The starting luminosities of the original AMES-COND \protect\citep{baraffe03} tracks
are apparently not quite the same as for \protect\citet{burr97}.
The faint grey cross shows $\beta$~Pic~b \citep{bonnefoy14betaPic}
as an example error bar.
}
\end{figure}
We also see that the choice of either of the three classic atmospheric models (Eddington, AMES-Cond, Burrows)
as outer boundary conditions only has a small effect on the cooling,
as expected \citep{baraffe03,chabrier00evol}.
Furthermore, it should be noted that the starting luminosities of the original
AMES-COND \citep{baraffe03} tracks
are apparently not quite the same as for \citet{burr97}.
\subsection{First analysis of the mass}
Figure~\ref{Abb:Lt}a compares HIP\,65426\,b\ to direct detections
and the `hottest start' cooling tracks of \citet{3M},
which use the simple Eddington outer boundary condition.
A direct comparison with these cooling curves suggests a mass ${m_{\rm p}}\approx8$--11~${M_{\textnormal{J}}}$,
which is not rare for direct detections of young isolated brown dwarfs (in the sense of substellar-mass objects;
see the mass histogram in fig.~18 of \citealt{gagn15}).
As shown in Fig.~\ref{Abb:c21-Kurven}, these simpler models
quite closely match cooling tracks based on detailed atmospheric
models such as \citet{burr97} or \citet{baraffe03}.
However, the luminosity error bar (0.1~dex, also a typical size; see e.g.\ \citealp{bowler16})
is small enough for the derived mass to depend slightly on the choice of the cooling curves.
\begin{figure*}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{HIP65426_Lumvst_Artikel.pdf}~\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{HIP65426_Lumvst_KaltWarm_Artikel_neueLinit.pdf}
\caption{
\label{Abb:Lt}
\textit{Left panel:}
Placement of HIP\,65426\,b\ (point with error bars) in the age--luminosity diagram.
The dots show other direct detections from the literature; the error bars are omitted for clarity.
No formation delays ${\Delta t_{\rm form}}$ are subtracted.
The cooling curves are the BEX hottest starts (Eq.~\ref{Gl:lpf hottest})
with the AMES-COND \citep{baraffe03} atmospheres
for masses of ${m_{\rm p}}=1$--40 ${M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ (bottom to top; see labels and legend).
\textit{Right panel:}
Effect of
different post-formation luminosities, as given by the populations
of \citet{3M}:
hottest starts (as in the left panel), %
cold-nominal population, cold-classical population,
and coldest starts (thick to thin lines; see Eq.~(\ref{Gl:lpf})).
Only masses of ${m_{\rm p}}=6$~(black), 8~(blue), 10~(orange), and $12~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ (red)
are shown (bottom to top).
The axis ranges relative to the left panel are different.
}
\end{figure*}
After this first estimate of the mass based on models
with an arbitrarily high post-formation luminosity,
we look at cooling curves whose post-formation (also termed initial) luminosity $L_{\rm pf}$
follows the four relations seen in the population syntheses of \citet[their sect.~5.2.2 and their fig.~13]{3M}.
For ${m_{\rm p}}\approx0.3$ to $\approx12$~${M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ (i.e.\ for planets
that are massive enough to undergo the detached phase during the presence of the nebula,
but not massive enough for deuterium burning to occur), these relations are given by
\begin{subequations}
\label{Gl:lpf}
\begin{align}
L_{\rm pf}^{\textrm{hottest}} &= 7.3\times10^{-5}\Lsun\, ({m_{\rm p}}/{M_{\textnormal{J}}})^{1.4} \label{Gl:lpf hottest},\\
L_{\rm pf}^{\textrm{cold-nom.}} &= 2.6\times10^{-5}\Lsun\, ({m_{\rm p}}/{M_{\textnormal{J}}})^{1.3}\label{Gl:lpf cold-nom.},\\
L_{\rm pf}^{\textrm{cold-class.}} &= 4.3\times10^{-6}\Lsun\, ({m_{\rm p}}/{M_{\textnormal{J}}})^{0.5},\\
L_{\rm pf}^{\textrm{coldest}} &= 4.3\times10^{-7}\Lsun,
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
respectively, for the hottest, cold-nominal, cold-classical, and coldest planets.
Briefly, $L_{\rm pf}^{\textrm{hottest}}$ traces the brightest planet at every mass;
$L_{\rm pf}^{\textrm{cold-nom.}}$
corresponds
to the cold-nominal population,
in which gas is assumed to accrete cold;
$L_{\rm pf}^{\textrm{cold-class.}}$ is the best fit to the cold-classical population
(which however shows an appreciable spread in luminosity at a given mass),
in which the core artificially stops growing in the runaway phase \`a la \citet{marley07}; and finally,
$L_{\rm pf}^{\textrm{coldest}}$ traces the coldest planets at a given mass, which come from the small-core (coldest-start) population.
It should be noted that we defined here the cold-nominal relation (Eq.~(\ref{Gl:lpf cold-nom.})) not as the mean of the cold-nominal population (as in \citealt{3M}, with $L_{\rm pf}=1.2\times10^{-5}\Lsun\, ({m_{\rm p}}/{M_{\textnormal{J}}})^{1.3}$), but as the approximate upper envelope of points of that population.
Cooling tracks from all four relations are shown in Fig.~\ref{Abb:Lt}b.
At this age and for this mass there is barely any difference in the cooling curves
of the hottest and the cold-nominal starts.
However, the luminosities in the cold-classical population are one order of magnitude lower, the initial cooling (Kelvin--Helmholtz) timescale
being $t_{\textrm{KH}}\sim100~\textrm{Myr}$, which is roughly ten times longer
than the age of HIP\,65426\,b.
The coldest starts, finally, are even several orders of magnitude fainter than the others,
with at the lower masses an initial $t_{\textrm{KH}}\sim500$~Myr.
Since the initial luminosities are well below the observed luminosity,
no coldest start can match the observed luminosity of HIP\,65426\,b.
Deuterium burning in more massive objects would be required here to reproduce the observed luminosity.
In any case, as argued from different points of view by \citet{3M} and \citet{berardo17},
the coldest starts are not expected to be realistic.
We conclude that in this simple analysis, only the hottest and cold-nominal populations can reproduce HIP\,65426\,b. In the next section, we revisit this analysis in a more systematic fashion and take the error bars on age and luminosity into account.
\subsection{Inputs: priors on mass and luminosity}
\label{Theil:M,Si-prior}
Recently, using the tool of population synthesis, \citet{3M} presented the first discussion
of the statistics of planetary luminosities
as predicted by a planet formation model.
They looked in particular at the core accretion paradigm \citep{pollack96,morda12_I} and considered three populations,
differing in the assumed efficiencies of the accretional heating of gas and
planetesimals during formation:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] a cold-nominal population, in which the entire gas accretion luminosity is radiated away at the shock,
as in \citet{morda12_II};
\item[(ii)] a hot population, which differs from the first only by the assumption that
the entire accretion luminosity is brought into the planet;
\item[(iii)] a cold-classical population, which assumes, as in the classical work by \citet{marley07}, that
planetesimal accretion stops
artificially once a giant planet enters the disc-limited gas
accretion (detached) phase,
and also does not include planetary migration.
\end{enumerate}
Since the cold-classical population serves rather for model comparisons,
and given that first dedicated and systematic simulations of the accretion shock have been recently
performed (\citealp{mkkm17}; Marleau et al., in prep.) but not yet used to produce cooling curves,
we consider in this work the cold-nominal and hot populations as
more realistic extreme scenarios.
We now turn to the total distribution function, %
which we write as
\begin{equation}
\label{Gl:Prior beide}
\frac{{\rm d}^2 N}{{\rm d} {m_{\rm p}}\,\ds_{\textrm{pf}}} = p({m_{\rm p}},s_{\textrm{pf}}) = p_{s_{\textrm{pf}}}({m_{\rm p}},s_{\textrm{pf}})\times p_{m_{\rm p}}({m_{\rm p}}).
\end{equation}
\citet{3M} showed that there is spread of post-formation entropies
of approximately $\Deltas_{\textrm{pf}}\approx1~k_{\textrm{B}}\,\textrm{baryon}^{-1}$ at a given mass
(see their fig.~12), coming mostly from the core-mass effect \citep{morda13,bodenheimer13}.
Given that the distribution of entropies is rather uniform for a given mass,
we fit simple mass-dependent top-hat functions
to the probability distributions of $s_{\textrm{pf}}$:
\begin{align}
\label{Gl:SiPrior}
p_{s_{\textrm{pf}}}({m_{\rm p}},s_{\textrm{pf}}) = \left\{
\begin{array}{l}
1 \;\;\;\;\mbox{if $s_{\textrm{pf, min}}({m_{\rm p}}) < s_{\textrm{pf}} < s_{\textrm{pf, max}}({m_{\rm p}})$}\\ %
0 \;\;\;\;\mbox{otherwise}.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{align}
The following functions, dropping the usual entropy units $k_{\textrm{B}}\,\textrm{baryon}^{-1}$,
closely fit the envelope of points $s_{\textrm{pf}}({m_{\rm p}})$ in \citet{3M}.
For the cold-nominal population,
the lower and upper edges are given respectively by
\begin{subequations}
\label{Gl:SiPrior kalt}
\begin{align}
\spfmin^{\textrm{cold}} &= \left\{
\begin{array}{l}
9.40 + 0.07 \,({m_{\rm p}}-13.6) \;\;\;\;\eqsep\mbox{if $2<{m_{\rm p}}<13$}\\ %
11.200 - 0.033 \,({m_{\rm p}}-20)^2 \;\;\;\;\mbox{otherwise}
\end{array}
\right.\\
\spfmax^{\textrm{cold}} &= 10.700 + 0.116 \, ({m_{\rm p}}-10),
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where masses ${m_{\rm p}}$ are implicitly in Jupiter masses in these equations, while for the hot population,
the bounds are
\begin{subequations}
\label{Gl:SiPrior warm}
\begin{align}
\spfmin^{\textrm{hot}} &= 10.00 + 0.12 \,({m_{\rm p}}-10)\\ %
\spfmax^{\textrm{hot}} &= 11.300 + 0.116 \,({m_{\rm p}}-10).
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
This holds down to 2~${M_{\textnormal{J}}}$.
We point out that in the Bern planet formation code, as in most codes using the \citet{scvh} equation of state,
there is an entropy offset relative to the published \citet{scvh} tables (see Appendix~B in \citealp{mc14}).
This difference has no physical meaning, but care must be taken when comparing to work using
codes with other entropy reference points such as \texttt{MESA} \citep{paxton11,paxton13,paxton15} as used by \citet{berardo17}.
Marginalising over entropy,
the mass function in both the cold- and hot-start populations
is, for about 1 to 10~${M_{\textnormal{J}}}$, approximately given by
\begin{equation}
\label{Gl:MPrior}
p_{m_{\rm p}}({m_{\rm p}}) = \frac{{\rm d} N}{{\rm d} {m_{\rm p}}}\propto {m_{\rm p}}^{-1},
\end{equation}
i.e.\ the distribution is nearly flat in $\log {m_{\rm p}}$.
As mentioned by \citet{3M}, %
this is similar to the distribution found by \citet{morda09b} for population synthesis planets
detectable by radial velocity,
which in turn agreed with the ${\rm d} N/{\rm d} {m_{\rm p}}\propto {m_{\rm p}}^{-1.05}$ fit of \citet{marcy05}.
We note, however, that \citet{cumming08} found ${\rm d} N/{\rm d} {m_{\rm p}}\propto {m_{\rm p}}^{-1.3\pm0.2}$
but for periods $<2000$~days,
while \citet{brandt14} obtained from direct imaging ${\rm d} N/{\rm d} {m_{\rm p}}\propto {m_{\rm p}}^{-0.7\pm0.6}$ at distances $\gtrsim10$~au.
Larger numbers of log-period radial velocity and direct-imaging detections will be necessary to reduce
the error bars on these exponents.
\subsection{Results: Mass--entropy constraints}
Figure~\ref{Abb:MSi} shows the joint constraints on the mass and post-formation (or initial) entropy %
using the different priors discussed above.
Considering first the case of uniform priors (i.e.\ not using information from formation scenarios),
we find that
the post-formation entropy $s_{\textrm{pf}}\geqslant~9.2~k_{\textrm{B}}\,\textrm{baryon}^{-1}$
but it is not otherwise constrained.
This lower limit holds independently of the formation pathway
and for masses up to ${m_{\rm p}}\approx15~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ (a conservative assumption).
Marginalising instead over entropy, the 68.3\%\ confidence interval (which is used throughout this section despite the non-Gaussianity of the posteriors)
on the mass is
${m_{\rm p}}= 9.6 \pm1.7~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$. %
For high values of $s_{\textrm{pf}}$,
the BEX models using the AMES-COND boundary conditions
closely match the \citet{baraffe03} hot-start cooling tracks for these masses.
If we consider somewhat arbitrarily $s_{\textrm{pf}}\gtrsim14$ to approximate what %
is usually thought of as hot starts, we find
${m_{\rm p}}= 9.0 ^{+ 1.3 }_{-1.5 }~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ for a cooling age $t_{\rm cool} 12\pm4$~Myr.
This agrees well with the ${m_{\rm p}}=10\pm2~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ reported by \citet{chauvin17} for the DUSTY models\footnote{
The value ${m_{\rm p}}=7_{-1}^{+2}~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ quoted by \citet{chauvin17} for COND03 \citep{baraffe03}
does not come from a luminosity comparison and is therefore less robust.
However, COND03 and DUSTY use by construction the same luminosity tracks \citep{baraffe03}.}.
As expected from \citet{mc14}, the relative uncertainty on the hot-start mass
$\sigma_{m_{\rm p}}/{m_{\rm p}}\approx0.2$ is $\approx\frac{1}{2}\sigma_{t_{\rm cool}}/t_{\rm cool}\approx 0.3$.
\begin{figure*}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\Bildbreite{0.8}\textwidth]{MSi_HIP65426_-4.06_+-0.10_12_+-4_BEX-Cond_Mprior_breit.pdf}
\caption{
\label{Abb:MSi}
Statistical constraints on the mass and post-formation entropy of HIP\,65426\,b\ from its age and luminosity.
Green dots show the outcome of the MCMC using the
BEX models with the AMES-COND atmospheres (\textsection~\ref{Theil:BEX-Modelle}).
The cooling age is $t_{\rm cool}=12\pm4$~Myr, %
which is $\Delta t_{\textrm{form}}=2$~Myr less than the star's age,
and the luminosity is $\log L/\Lsun = -4.06\pm0.10$.
Results from the hot (cold) population syntheses of \citet{3M} are shown in dark red (dark blue).
Marginalised posteriors are displayed at the bottom and in the side panel:
with a flat prior, with the prior from the hot population (Eq.~(\ref{Gl:SiPrior warm})),
and with the prior from the cold population (Eq.~(\ref{Gl:SiPrior kalt}))
(green, red, and blue lines, respectively, from top to bottom).
The full lines also use the mass prior ${\rm d} N/{\rm d} {m_{\rm p}}\propto {m_{\rm p}}^{-1}$ (Eq.~(\ref{Gl:MPrior})),
whereas the dotted lines use a flat prior in mass.
The points with error bars show the corresponding peaks of the posteriors and the 68.3\,\%\ confidence intervals.
}
\end{figure*}
Next we fold in the outcome of the population syntheses into the analysis.
If we take only the mass prior (Eq.~(\ref{Gl:MPrior})) into account,
we obtain
${m_{\rm p}}=9.4^{+ 1.5 }_{- 2.0 }~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$,
which is lower by $\Delta{m_{\rm p}}\approx0.2~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ than the case without priors. %
Applying the $s_{\textrm{pf}}$ priors (Eq.~(\ref{Gl:SiPrior})) as well, %
we obtain
${m_{\rm p}}=10.9^{+ 1.4}_{- 2.0}~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ %
for the cold population (Eq.~(\ref{Gl:SiPrior kalt}))
and
${m_{\rm p}}=9.9^{+1.1}_{-1.8}~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ %
for the hot population (Eq.~(\ref{Gl:SiPrior warm})).
These masses are shown as points with horizontal bars in the main panel of Fig.~\ref{Abb:MSi}.
The difference between the mass inferred with and without the mass priors is small,
with $\Delta{m_{\rm p}}\lesssim0.2~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$. %
These differences represent only a modest fraction of the error bars.
However, the $s_{\textrm{pf}}$ priors are mildly important, leading to a difference
$\Delta {m_{\rm p}}\approx1~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ %
between the hot and the cold populations and even $\Delta {m_{\rm p}}=1.5~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ between the flat-prior
and (with Eq.~(\ref{Gl:Prior beide})) the cold-population cases.
Finally, we note the distinctly asymmetrical shape of the confidence intervals
when using the priors.
This asymmetry comes mostly from the $s_{\textrm{pf}}$ prior despite the $p_{m_{\rm p}} \propto {m_{\rm p}}^{-1}$ scaling
since the mass interval is small.
The posterior on the post-formation entropy changes dramatically
when taking the population-synthesis priors into account,
as visible in the right panel of Fig.~\ref{Abb:MSi}.
The lower bound $s_{\textrm{pf}}\gtrsim9.2$ obtained with the uniform prior
does not change, but the population-synthesis priors lead
to the determination of an upper bound, yielding
$s_{\textrm{pf}}=10.4 ^{+ 0.7 }_{- 0.2 }$ %
in the case of the hot population and
$s_{\textrm{pf}}=10.2 ^{+ 0.3 }_{- 0.7 }$ %
for the cold.
It should be noted that the probability maxima are rather flat.
These values differ only marginally from each other,
reflecting the large overlap between the post-formation entropies or luminosities
of the cold- and hot-start populations, which is ultimately a consequence
of the core-mass effect (CME) as discussed by \citet[][sect.~5.2.1]{3M}.
These values $s_{\textrm{pf}}\approx10.3$ are clearly lower than classical (arbitrarily) hot starts ($s_{\textrm{pf}}\approx13$),
with an initial Kelvin--Helmholtz time $t_{\textrm{KH}}\sim10$~Myr as opposed to $t_{\textrm{KH}}\lesssim1$~Myr
for classical hot starts. Thus, HIP\,65426\,b\ would have just begun joining the hot-start cooling track
(see \citealp{mc14} for a general discussion of the shape of cooling tracks).
We finally note that the mass prior barely changes the $s_{\textrm{pf}}$ posteriors.
\subsection{Discussion}
For comparison, with a shorter cooling age $t_{\rm cool}=10\pm4$~Myr
(i.e.\ coming from a longer formation period),
we obtain with uniform priors
${m_{\rm p}}=9.0^{+1.9}_{-1.7}~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ %
and with only the mass prior
${m_{\rm p}}=8.7 ^{+ 1.9 }_{- 2.0 }~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$, %
whereas using the mass and $s_{\textrm{pf}}$ priors from hot-start (cold-start) populations yields
${m_{\rm p}}=9.3 ^{+ 1.3 }_{- 1.8 }~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ %
(${m_{\rm p}} = 10.3 ^{+ 1.6 }_{- 1.8 }~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$). %
Instead, taking a cooling age $t_{\rm cool}=14\pm4$~Myr, i.e. the age of HIP\,65426\ as might
correspond to formation by gravitational instability,
with
only mass priors we obtain
${m_{\rm p}}= 9.9 ^{+ 1.4 }_{- 1.7 }~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$;
instead, using the $s_{\textrm{pf}}$ and mass priors from the hot-start (cold-start) populations yields
${m_{\rm p}}= 10.4 ^{+ 1.0 }_{- 1.6 }~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ %
(${m_{\rm p}}=11.3 ^{+1.0 }_{-1.7 }~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$).
This is somewhat higher than, but still consistent with, the mass
derived by \citet{cheetham19}. Using an age of $14\pm4$~Myr and the AMES-Cond models,
they found ${m_{\rm p}}=7.5\pm0.9~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ based on magnitudes in individual bands
and ${m_{\rm p}}=8.3\pm0.9~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ based on their bolometric luminosity,
which had an uncertainty $\sigma_{\log L}=0.03$~dex half as large
as the value used here. That the mass found by \citet{cheetham19} is lower than
that derived here is not surprising
since the AMES-Cond models they used correspond only to hotter starts,
whereas here a range of $s_{\textrm{pf}}$ was considered.
In general, one could expect somewhat different results
if using the logarithm of the post-formation luminosity
instead of the post-formation entropy as an independent variable
(along with the mass).
Indeed, the luminosity $L$ and entropy $s$ are monotonic functions
of each other at a given mass,
but the slope ${\rm d}\log L/{\rm d} s$ depends on both mass and entropy
\citep{mc14}.
This means that a prior which is uniform in $s$ for all masses
is not uniform in $\log L$ for all masses, and vice versa.
However, one can argue that this should be of negligible concern.
In the case of a flat prior in $s_{\textrm{pf}}$,
the posterior was also relatively flat, and a small distortion
will not change the nature of the weak constraints on $s_{\textrm{pf}}$.
The distortion should be small judging by the precise scalings
identified in eq.~(9) of \citet{mc14},
and while these hold specifically for their Eddington atmospheric models,
the $L(s)$ relation will not be entirely different for AMES-COND. %
In the case of the hot or cold priors, the posteriors are non-zero
over a relatively small region, so that in this case too there
should not be any significant skew.
We finally note that, as mentioned in Section~\ref{Theil:L-Kurven},
Fig.~\ref{Abb:MSi} shows that HIP\,65426\,b\ is unlikely to have a mass
for which a meaningful fraction of deuterium could be burnt (cf.\ \citealp{spiegel11,moll12}).
This justifies a posteriori the use of cooling curves
that assume full deuterium abundance at the start.
In the case of other detections close to the deuterium-burning limit
(${m_{\rm p}}\approx13\pm2~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$), however, this assumption would
need to be revisited if they formed over a longer timescale than
expected from gravitational instability.
To summarise, we find that the mass of HIP\,65426\,b\ is
${m_{\rm p}}=10.9^{+ 1.4}_{- 2.0}~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ %
with priors from the cold population and
${m_{\rm p}}=9.9^{+1.1}_{-1.8}~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$
using the hot population.
\section{Forming HIP 65426 b in core-accretion models}
\label{sec:formationscenario}
We now switch from the study of HIP\,65426\,b's post-formation thermodynamical evolution to numerical experiments concerning its formation.
Core accretion models typically involve forming cores of giant planets and having them undergo runaway gas accretion
at small orbital radii (${a_{\rm p}}\lesssim20$~au) before they migrate in towards the central star, inconsistent with the location of HIP\,65426\,b.
At larger orbital radii, the time taken to form a core through planetesimal accretion is longer than typical protoplanetary disc lifetimes,
though forming a core through pebble accretion could be significantly faster (\citealp{Lambrechts14}; but see also \citealp{rosenthal18}).
Even if a single planetary core is able to form at large orbital radii, either through pebble or planetesimal accretion,
interactions with the local protoplanetary disc will force the planet to migrate through type I migration
to small orbital separations on timescales shorter than that required for the core to accrete
a significant gaseous envelope and undergo runaway gas accretion \citep{ColemanNelson16}.
This fast migration poses the main problem for forming a planet that has properties consistent with that found for HIP\,65426\,b.
To overcome these problems for the core accretion model in forming planets such as HIP\,65426\,b, we ran numerous $N$-body simulations
in which we placed a number of giant planet cores in a protoplanetary disc and allowed them to mutually interact,
migrate throughout the disc, and accrete gaseous disc material.
The idea is that as one giant planet core undergoes runaway gas accretion and rapidly increases its mass,
the system of planets becomes dynamically unstable, leading to the scattering of one of the less massive cores.
This core, once scattered out into the outer disc will then circularise its orbit and begin to migrate back in towards the central star.
However the core will continue accreting gas from the surrounding disc and could then undergo runaway gas accretion in the outer disc,
becoming a gas giant and transitioning to the slower type~II migration regime.
If the planet is scattered out far enough and has insufficient time to migrate back in towards the inner disc,
its final mass and semi-major axis could be similar to those of directly imaged planets and HIP\,65426\,b.
This process has been observed in population synthesis models when, in massive discs,
multiple gas giants form as a first generation and subsequently destabilise the orbits of surrounding embryos,
scattering them to larger orbits where they then grow into gas giants \citep{Ida2013}.
\subsection{Simulation set-up}
In order to run these simulations, we adapted the $N$-body and disc model of \citet{ColemanNelson16}
to be appropriate for a protoplanetary disc surrounding an A-type star such as HIP\,65426.
This model couples a 1D thermally evolving viscous disc model \citep{Shak} to the Mercury-6
symplectic integrator \citep{Chambers} and includes prescriptions for photoevaporation \citep{Dullemond,Alexander09},
both type I and II planet migration \citep{pdk11,LinPapaloizou86}, and gas accretion from the surrounding disc \citep{CPN17}.
Table~\ref{tab:nbodydisc} shows the disc parameters used for the simulations.
We chose the values for the viscosity parameter $\alpha$ and the photoevaporation factor $\Phi_{41}$
to give the disc an appropriate lifetime. Using the values presented in Table~\ref{tab:nbodydisc},
the initial disc had a total mass equivalent to $\sim8\%$
of the mass of HIP\,65426\ (i.e.~around $150~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$) and a lifetime of 3.5~Myr.
The lifetime of the disc in the simulations is always shorter
since a significant fraction of the total gas mass is accreted onto the planets.
\begin{table}
\caption{Stellar and disc parameters used for the $N$-body simulations.
}
\label{tab:nbodydisc}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ll}
\hline
\hline
Parameter & Value\\
\hline
Stellar mass & 2~$\Msun$ \\
Stellar radius & 2~$R_\odot$ \\
Stellar temperature & 10,000~K \\
Disc inner boundary & 0.1~au\\
Disc outer boundary & 200~au \\
Initial surface density exponent & $-1.5$\\
Initial surface density $\Sigma_{0}=\Sigma(1~\mathrm{au})$ & 8655~g\,cm$^{-2}$\\
Disc metallicity & 1 $\times$ solar \\
Photoevaporation factor $\Phi_{41}$ & 1000 \\
Background viscous $\alpha$ & $5\times 10^{-3}$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\tablefoot{For the meaning of $\Phi_{41}$ see \citet{Dullemond}.
}
\end{table}
Since type I migration timescales for giant planet cores are shorter than the timescales
for the cores to reach runaway gas accretion \citep{ColemanNelson16}, we require a mechanism
to stall type I migration (see also \citealp{pudritz18}).
To stall type I migration and counter the short timescales experienced by giant planet cores,
we placed a radial structure in the disc that mimics the effects of a zonal flow.
Zonal flows have been observed in both local \citep{Johansen2009}
and global \citep{SteinackerPapaloizou2002,PapaloizouNelson2003,FromangNelson2006} numerical simulations
of magnetised discs, including those incorporating non-ideal MHD effects \citep{Bai2014,BethuneLesur2016,ZhuStoneBai2014}.
Radial structures which could also be reminiscent of zonal flows have also been seen
in numerous observations of protoplanetary discs \citep{HLTAU,Andrews16,VanBoekel17}.
The effect of zonal flows on a protoplanetary disc is to create a radial pressure bump
in the disc, which results in a positive surface density gradient.
This positive surface density gradient increases the strength of the vortensity component
of a planet's corotation torque, allowing it to balance the planet's Lindblad torque,
thus creating a planet trap that stalls type I migration \citep{Masset2006,Hasegawa11,ColemanNelson16b}.
To account for a radial structure in the disc that mimics the effects of a zonal flow,
we included a single radial structure in each simulation, following the approach used
in \citet[][see their section 2.3.3]{ColemanNelson16b}.
This radial structure increases the local $\alpha$ parameter when calculating the viscosity,
which results in a reduction in the local surface density, creating a positive surface density gradient
that acts as a planet trap as described above.
We assume that this structure remains at the same location in the disc, placed arbitrarily
at either 15 or 20~au in our simulations, and has a lifetime equivalent to the disc lifetime.
The lifetimes of zonal flows in MHD simulations are still unexplored
due to long simulation run times, but since these structures are seen in both young
and old protoplanetary disc observations \citep{HLTAU,Andrews16},
it seems reasonable to assume that the flows are long lived.
To account for planet migration we use the torque formulae of \citet{pdk10,pdk11} whilst the planet is embedded in the disc, to simulate type I migration due to Lindblad and corotation torques.
Our model accounts for the possible saturation of the corotation torque \citep{pdk11}, and also the influences of eccentricity and inclination on the disc forces \citep{cressnels,Fendyke}.
Once the planet has become massive enough to open a gap in the disc we use the impulse approximation to calculate the torques acting on the planet from the surrounding disc as it undergoes type II migration \citep{LinPapaloizou86}.
To calculate gas accretion on to the planet, we use the accretion routine presented in \citet{CPN17}.
In this model, whilst the planet is embedded in the disc we construct a 1D envelope structure model that self-consistently calculates the gas accretion rate taking into account local disc conditions.
After the planet has opened a gap in the disc, we assume that the gas accretion is equal to the viscous supply rate.
All gas that is accreted on to the planet is removed from the surrounding disc.
\begin{figure*}[th!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{MVA_paper_apo_kommentiert.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{main_sim_mae_kommentiert.pdf}
\caption{{\it Left panel}: Evolution of planet mass against orbital distance for an example simulation.
Solid lines show the planets' semi-major axes, while dashed lines show the planets' pericentres and apocentres.
Filled black circles represent final masses and semi-major axes for surviving planets.
Black horizontal lines show the extent of the planets' final orbits from pericentre to apocentre.
The red cross indicates the expected mass and projected orbital distance of HIP\,65426\,b.
{\it Right panel}: Temporal evolution of planet masses (top), semi-major axes (middle) and eccentricities (bottom).
The shaded grey area indicates the time in which the gas disc was present in the simulation. Labels in the left and right panels summarise the description in the text (Sect.~\ref{sec:examplesystem}).}
\label{fig:mva_sim}
\end{figure*}
For each simulation we placed five planets of masses $15\, {\rm M}_{\oplus} \le {m_{\rm p}} \le 20\, {\rm M}_{\oplus}$ at ${a_{\rm p}}=15$--30~au, i.e.\ in the outer disc beyond the radial structure, in close proximity to each other (initial period ratios between neighbouring planets ranging from 1.08 to 1.7).
We placed the planets in close proximity to each other to ensure that they were able to become trapped in resonant chains fairly quickly before a single core could undergo runaway gas accretion and thus destabilise the system.
This configuration is frequently seen to arise in global planet formation simulations that include planet migration, planetesimal accretion, mutual interactions between planetary embryos, and evolution of the protoplanetary disc \citep{ColemanNelson16,ColemanNelson16b}. However, due to the chaotic nature of the formation processes (i.e.\ migration, planetesimal accretion rates, $N$-body interactions), we force this initial set-up onto the planets for these simulations so as to save on computational time.
We also varied the location of the radial structure as described above and the formation time of the giant planet cores which ranged between 1.5~and 2.5~Myr.
These different initial conditions led to the computation of 792~simulations.
\begin{figure*}[th!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{final_mva_ecc_new_hip.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{final_mva_ecc_new.pdf}
\caption{{\it Left panel}: Final planet masses and semi-major axes from simulations that formed a giant planet with final semi-major axis ${a_{\rm p}}>50$~au and final mass ${m_{\rm p}} > 1~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$.
Each planet's final eccentricity is colour-coded, whilst the red diamond denotes the expected mass and semi-major axis of HIP\,65426\,b.
{\it Right panel}: Final planet masses and semi-major axes from all simulations.
Each planet's final eccentricity is colour-coded.
Red diamonds now display the observed directly imaged planets (data taken from \url{exoplanet.eu}).
}
\label{fig:all_mva_ecc}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Example HIP 65426-like simulated system}
\label{sec:examplesystem}
Figure~\ref{fig:mva_sim} shows the mass versus orbital distance evolution (left panel) and the temporal evolution of planet masses, semi-major axes, and eccentricities (right panel) of a typical example of such a simulation.
The mass versus orbital distance tracks of the planets are shown with solid lines indicating semi-major axes and dashed lines displaying the planets' pericentres and apocentres. Black dots represent the final masses and semi-major axes of the planets with the red cross showing the mass and orbital distance of HIP\,65426\,b\ as discussed in Sect.~\ref{Theil:MSi}.
As the simulation starts, all of the planets begin to accrete gas and migrate inwards towards the radial structure.
The planets' migration stalls as they approach the radial structure (see label~A in Fig.~\ref{fig:mva_sim}) due to the enhanced corotation torques arising from the radial structure's effect on the local disc profile.
The outer three cores (blue, green, and yellow lines) then undergo runaway gas accretion, opening a gap in the disc (see the sudden increase in mass for some of the planets at $\sim 2.8$~Myr in the top right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:mva_sim}).
The inner planets (purple and orange lines) are then starved of gas due to the opening of gaps in the disc, delaying their ability to transition to runaway gas accretion.
After a further 50~kyr, the system becomes unstable with two of the giants impacting each other.
Other cores are also scattered, with one core (purple line) being scattered to ${a_{\rm p}} \approx 220$~au with an eccentricity ${e_{\rm p}} \approx 0.85$ (label~B in Fig.~\ref{fig:mva_sim}).
This core then undergoes runaway gas accretion at this large orbital distance, accreting gas when it enters the disc on its eccentric orbit (label~C in Fig.~\ref{fig:mva_sim}).
When the planet's mass has risen to ${m_{\rm p}} \approx 2~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$, it has a close encounter (label~D in Fig.~\ref{fig:mva_sim}) with the most massive giant in the
system (with a mass ${m_{\rm p}}\approx4~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$, shown by the blue line).
This lowers the semi-major axis and eccentricity of the former to ${a_{\rm p}}\approx125$~au and ${e_{\rm p}}\approx0.7$ respectively (see the drops in semi-major axis and eccentricity at $\sim 2.9$~Myr in the middle and bottom right panels of Fig.~\ref{fig:mva_sim}).
This planet then continues to accrete gas and slowly migrate in towards the central star (label~E in Fig.~\ref{fig:mva_sim}), with the disc gradually damping the planet's eccentricity.
We implement eccentricity damping for giant planets by setting the damping timescale to 100~local orbital periods.
This timescale is consistent with eccentricity damping timescales found for eccentric planets in isothermal discs \citep{Bitsch13}.
By the time the disc has fully dispersed, the planet has grown to ${m_{\rm p}} \approx 9.8~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$
and has migrated in to having a semi-major axis of ${a_{\rm p}} \approx 77$~au.
The temporal evolution of the planets' semi-major axis, mass and eccentricity can be seen in the right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:mva_sim}, with the shaded grey region indicating the times during which the disc is present.
Due to the circularisation of its orbit, the planet's eccentricity has dropped to ${e_{\rm p}}\approx0.27$,
resulting in the planet orbiting between 56 and 98~au, spending most of its orbit near apocentre with an orbital distance greater than 90~au.
This range in orbital distance is shown by the horizontal black bar in Fig.~\ref{fig:mva_sim} and is compatible with the observed position of HIP\,65426\,b.
Also remaining in the system are three other giant planets with semi-major axes of ${a_{\rm p}}=9.4$, 15.6, and 25.8~au, and masses ${m_{\rm p}}=0.45$, 2.8, and 7.8~${M_{\textnormal{J}}}$, respectively,
on nearly circular orbits (${e_{\rm p}}\lesssim0.05$ for all).
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{MVA_giant_giant.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{giant_giant_mae.pdf}
\caption{As in Fig.~\ref{fig:mva_sim}, but for a simulation in which a giant--giant scattering event after the disc had fully dispersed (at around 4~Myr) is responsible for the final position of the HIP\,65426\,b-like planet.}
\label{fig:giant_giant}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Overall results}
The system described above, with a giant planet similar to HIP\,65426\,b\ and numerous planets with shorter periods, is a common outcome of these simulations.
The left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:all_mva_ecc} shows the final masses and semi-major axes from the simulations that had a similar outcome to that described above.
We define these systems as containing at least one planet with semi-major axis ${a_{\rm p}} > 50$~au and mass ${m_{\rm p}} > 1~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$.
As can be seen, there are numerous giant planets that are similar to HIP\,65426\,b\ (shown by the red diamond) in terms of mass and semi-major axis (projected orbital distance for HIP\,65426\,b), but with a wide range of eccentricities, spanning essentially ${e_{\rm p}}=0$--1.
All of these planets are accompanied by a number of interior giant companions that could be detectable in long-baseline radial-velocity surveys.
The right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:all_mva_ecc} shows the final semi-major axes and masses of all surviving planets in the simulations.
The colour of the marker indicates each planet's eccentricity, and the red diamonds show the currently observed planets found in direct imaging surveys.
There is good agreement between the observations and simulated giant planets in terms of semi-major axes and planet mass.
The eccentricities cannot really be compared since
for observed planets
they are not well constrained
due to insufficient time sampling of their long orbital periods \citep{bowler18}.
The simulated giant planets have non-zero eccentricities which
in many cases are significant (${e_{\rm p}}>0.5$), with most of these high-eccentricity giants having semi-major axes greater than 100~au.
This is not surprising since for these planets to attain such large semi-major axes, they need to undergo significant scattering, which induces high eccentricities, and since the planets have had little time to migrate back in towards the central star, their orbits have also had insufficient time to circularise.
The plot also shows that for the distant giant planets, eccentricity and orbital distances are positively correlated, an imprint of that planet's main scattering event.
This is expected from the fact that the original formation region ($\sim20$--30~au) remains, at least for a single scattering event, part of the orbit as its pericentre distance.
In the simulations, however, eccentricity damping from the gas disc and minor interactions with other planets in the system can decrease the planet's eccentricity over time, raising the pericentre away from the formation region.
Since the distant planets that formed in the simulations had insufficient time to circularise fully, due to dispersal of the gas disc, this imprint of the main scattering event remains, explaining the distance--eccentricity correlation.
Also seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:all_mva_ecc} are numerous giant planets with semi-major axes ${a_{\rm p}}<10$~au.
Quite often these giant planets were responsible for scattering a giant planet core into the outer system that could then undergo runaway gas accretion at hundreds of astronomical units,
as was described in the example simulation above (Section~\ref{sec:examplesystem}).
While these planets are typically too faint and too close to the star to be observed in direct imaging surveys, they could be observed in radial velocity surveys \citep{RVSURVEY} or in astrometry surveys such as GAIA \citep{GAIA16,GAIA18}.
Further observations of HIP\,65426\ using the radial velocity or astrometry technique could yield additional giant planets in the system closer to the star than HIP\,65426\,b.
Very recently, \citet{cheetham19} ruled out to 5~$\sigma$ the presence of further companions more massive than 16~${M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ down to orbital separations of 3~au.
This is consistent with the simulated planets shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:all_mva_ecc}, %
which all fall below the detection limits out to 30~au.
Most of the inner companions to HIP\,65426\,b-like planets have masses well below 10~${M_{\textnormal{J}}}$.
Should these planets exist, and if HIP\,65426\,b\ were found to have an eccentric orbit, this could suggest the formation origin of HIP\,65426\,b\ as described here, and may indicate that other directly imaged giant planets should have giant planet companions closer to their host star than has been observed up to now.
For systems that contained two or more giant planets at the end of the disc lifetime, it is possible that dynamical instabilities between giant planets as the systems age lead to the planets having wider orbits, similar to HIP\,65426\,b.
Figure~\ref{fig:giant_giant} shows the planet mass versus semi-major axis evolution (left panel) and the temporal evolution of planet mass, semi-major axis, and eccentricity for such a scenario.
Here the planets undergo a similar initial evolution to that described in Sect.~\ref{sec:examplesystem}, but as the disc fully disperses, all five giant planets have relatively stable orbits (given the eccentricity-damping effect of the gas) with ${a_{\rm p}}=8$--70~au.
However these orbits are not stable on long timescales after disc dispersal, and within 0.2~Myr of the disc dispersing, the planets undergo significant dynamical instabilities, increasing eccentricities and scattering some of the giants to larger semi-major axes.
Continued interactions resulted in three of the giant planets being ejected from the system, with the two most massive giant planets remaining.
These surviving planets are shown by the black dots in the left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:giant_giant}, where the solid black horizontal lines shows the extent of their orbit from pericentre to apocentre.
A more detailed study of forming HIP\,65426\,b ~through giant--giant scattering is discussed in Sect.~\ref{sec:Gps}.
\section{Post-formation scattering of giant planets}
\label{sec:Gps}
In this section we explore the formation of systems with giant planets on wide orbits, such as HIP\,65426\,b, through planet--planet scattering after disc dispersal. This mechanism is known to create highly eccentric planets \citep{FoRa1996,LiId1997,Cha2008,MaWe2002}. We estimate here its efficiency in raising the apocentre of a giant planet above $\sim 100$~au without ejecting it. We examine two scenarios: two-planet scattering and three-planet scattering. A system with two planets behaves qualitatively differently than a system with three or more planets.
On initially coplanar circular orbits, if the initial semi-major axes of two planets are closer than \citep{Wi1980,DePaHo2013}
\begin{equation}
\frac{a_1-a_2}{a_1}<1.46\left( \frac{m_1+m_2}{m_\star} \right)^{2/7},
\label{eq:deck}
\end{equation}
their orbits will be unstable on short timescales, typically of order $\tau\sim((m_1+m_2)/m_\star)^{-1/3}P_{1}$ \citep{PeLaBo2017}, where $P_k$, $a_k$, and $m_k$ are the orbital periods, semi-major axes, and the masses of the two planets, and $m_\star$ is the mass of the central star.
Once such a system undergoes an instability, the most probable outcome is a single-planet system
\citep{FoRa2008}. %
Being in the unstable area given by Equation~(\ref{eq:deck}) after disc dispersal requires one of two scenarios:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(a)] the planets have migrated into a stable configuration such as a 1:2 mean-motion resonance (MMR) during the disc phase \citep{LePe2002}, and this stable configuration was disrupted after disc dispersal;
\item[(b)] the planets were in the unstable area during their formation, but the significant disc mass
postponed the instability, for instance through eccentricity damping \citep{FoRa2008}.
\end{enumerate}
In the case (b), instability can ensue before the total dispersal of the disc, which might still affect the orbital evolution of the giant planets. The results of this section thus have to be compared to the occurrences of giant--giant scattering during the disc phase (Section~\ref{sec:formationscenario}).
On the other hand, a system with three or more planets does not have such a sharp stability boundary as in Equation~(\ref{eq:deck}). These systems can become unstable for much larger initial spacings. However, as the initial spacings increase, the timescale of the first close encounter increases as well \citep{ChaWeBo1996}. Single giant planets or pairs are common outcomes of this instability \citep{Cha2008}, as seen for example in Fig.~\ref{fig:giant_giant}.
The two- and the three-planet-scattering scenarios are both consistent with observational constraints. Out of the hundreds of giant planets of mass above $2~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ that have been observed with semi-major axes ranging from 1 to 20~au, tens are known to belong to multi-planetary systems containing at least two giant planets\footnote{See \url{exoplanet.eu}. However, these statistics being incomplete due to observational biases, the multiplicity of giant planet systems is probably underestimated.}.
To explore these two scenarios, we performed $N$-body simulations of HIP\,65426-like systems after disc dispersal. We used the variable-step integrator \texttt{DOPRI}, whose behaviour for highly eccentric orbits was validated in a previous work \citep{LeRoCo2018}. We integrated the synthetic systems for $5\times 10^6$~years, which is comparable to the age of the system since disc dispersal (see Section~\ref{Theil:L-Kurven}).
Alternatively, integrations were stopped when only one planet remained in the system. The mass of the star was set to $m_\star = 2~\Msun$, while the mass of each planet was randomly picked in the interval $m_k=5$--15~${M_{\textnormal{J}}}$. The radius $R_k$ of each planet $k$ was set to $R_k=\left(1.1+0.06 \times m_k/{M_{\textnormal{J}}}\right)~{R_{\textnormal{J}}}$, which roughly fits the non-accreting hot population of \citet{morda12_II} %
at 3--5~Myr\footnote{This can be explored with data from the Data Analysis Centre for Exoplanets (DACE) platform at \url{https://dace.unige.ch}, in the `Evolution' section.}. Planets that entered the Roche limit of the star were removed from the simulation, with the Roche limit given by $R_{\star,\textrm{Roche}}\approx 2.2~R_\odot$ (the stellar radius is $R_{\star}=1.77~R_\odot$; \citealp{chauvin17}) for our considered range of planetary masses and radii. Collisions between planets were detected when the physical radii of the two objects intersect and were treated as completely inelastic, i.e.\ assuming perfect merging and conservation of total momentum and mass. Other collision models including possible hit-and-runs and energy dissipation might change the outcomes of the simulations slightly. However, they should not create a significant number of broader orbits as these collisions typically reduce the eccentricities of the bodies.
Initial eccentricities were set to ${e_{\rm p}}=0$ and will be excited though planet--planet
interactions. As we are primarily interested in the feasibility of raising the apocentre of a planet above $\sim100$~au, we restrict our study to the coplanar case and set all inclinations to $i=0$. All other angular orbital elements where chosen randomly within [0:$360^\circ$]. The initial distribution of semi-major axes depends on the considered scenario, but they are generally taken in the 10--15~au range as it is the upper limit for the typical formation of giants in the core accretion scenario as mentioned above. Taking large initial semi-major axis makes it possible, through angular momentum transfer with other planets, to raise the apocentre of a given planet to greater values without being too close to ejection.
\subsection{Two-planet scattering}
\label{sec:2ps}
\subsubsection{Conservative case}
\label{sec:2ps konservativ}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.99\linewidth]{sphere_2pscat_notides2_10au_Deck3p2_PDF1p4.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:scat2p_notides} Outcome of the scattering of two giant planets initially on circular orbits with semi-major axes near 10~au in the conservative (i.e.\ non-dissipative) case. The few systems that kept their two planets over $5\times 10^6$~years are displayed in grey ($\lesssim 1\,\%$ of the systems). Other systems evolved into one-planet systems typically after $10^5$~years, either through planet--planet collision ($\approx 63\,\%$; red), ejection of the other planet ($\approx 36\,\%$; blue), or collision of the other planet with the star ($\approx 1\,\%$; orange). The yellow line is the predicted orbit of the remaining planet after an ejection for typical values (see Eq.~\ref{eq:2pEAMej}).
To the right of the black line are planets whose apocentre is above $90$~au (projected distance of HIP\,65426\,b) and the grey line shows the orbits whose pericentres are at 15~au, which is the detection limit of an eventual companion of mass ${m_{\rm p}} \gtrsim 5~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ to HIP\,65426\,b\ \citep{chauvin17}.}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In the two-planet-scattering scenario, the inner planet was positioned at ${a_{\rm p}}=10$~au, while the outer one was positioned slightly inside the instability domain (Eq.~\ref{eq:deck}), at $a_2=a_1\left(1+1.42 ((m_1+m_2)/m_\star\right)^{2/7}$. We integrated 500~systems with this set of initial conditions; the final outcomes are plotted in Figure~\ref{fig:scat2p_notides}.
In the conservative case, two planets on intersecting orbits will continue to experience close encounters until one of the three following outcomes happens: planet--planet collision, planet--star collision, or planet ejection. These events occurred within a few $10^5$~years, which is significantly shorter than the estimated age of the system. We now discuss each in turn.
Planet--planet collisions tend to decrease the eccentricity that the planets acquired during their stay in the unstable domain, while energy conservation ensures that the semi-major axis of the resulting planet $a_{\rm r}$ lies between the semi-major axes of the initial ones \citep{FoRa2008}: %
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:2pEcoll}
a_{\rm r}= \frac{a_1a_2(m_1+m_2)}{m_1a_2+m_2a_1}.
\end{equation}
This is the most common outcome ($\approx63\,\%$ of all systems), leading to the red clump between 10 and 15~au in Fig.~\ref{fig:scat2p_notides}. These semi-major axes are too small to correspond to HIP\,65426\,b.
In the case of ejection, the escaping planet typically leaves the system with a very low (positive) energy \citep{MoAd2005}. The orbit of the remaining planet is hence predictable using angular momentum and energy conservation, yielding
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:2pEAMej} %
\begin{align}
a_{\rm r} &= \frac{a_1a_2 m_{\rm r}}{m_1a_2+m_2a_1}, \label{eq:2pEAMej a} \\
e_{\rm r} &=\sqrt{1-\left( \frac{m_1 \sqrt{a_1}+m_2 \sqrt{a_2}-m_{\rm ej}\sqrt{2q_{\rm ej}}}{m_{\rm r} \sqrt{a_{\rm r}}}\right)^2 }, \label{eq:2pEAMej b}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where the subscripts `r' and `ej' refer to the remaining and ejected planet, respectively, and where $q_{\rm ej}$ is the ejected planet's minimal distance to the star on its parabolic orbit. This scenario represents almost all other cases ($\approx36\,\%$ of the systems). The range of possible orbits for the typical values $m_1+m_2=20~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ and $q_{\rm ej}=10$~au is shown by the yellow line in Figs.~\ref{fig:scat2p_notides} and \ref{fig:scat2p_tides}. It closely matches the distribution from the $N$-body integrations.
This scenario again leads to planets with orbital distances too small in comparison to HIP\,65426\,b.
The last outcome, planet--star collisions, is less likely for our range of initial conditions ($\approx1\,\%$), but yields a wider range of final configurations. To fall onto the star, a planet initially on a circular orbit at $10$~au needs to give most of its angular momentum to the other planet. Depending on the mass ratio of the planets, this might not be enough to eject the outer planet, which therefore would remain on a wider orbit. Figure~\ref{fig:scat2p_notides} shows that most of these remaining planets are consistent with the observed projected distance of HIP\,65426\,b.
In this set-up (two planets, no tides) HIP\,65426\,b\ would be on a highly eccentric orbit, and it would be the only body in the system. We show later, when tides are included in the two-body scenario, that the outcomes explaining HIP\,65426\,b\ can again only contain the scattered body alone (the other was sent into the star), but also configurations with two remaining bodies, with the second companion very close to the star, circularised by tides.
\subsubsection{Effect of dynamical tides}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\Bildbreite{0.99}\linewidth]{sphere_2pscat_Mtides2_10au_Deck3p2_PDF1p4.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=\Bildbreite{0.99}\linewidth]{sphere_2pscat_tides2_10au_Deck3p2_PDF1p4.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:scat2p_tides}%
As in Fig.~\ref{fig:scat2p_notides}, but with tidal dissipation.
\textit{Top panel:} Weak tides (Eq.~\ref{eq:Wtides}). Outcomes: planet--planet collision ($\approx 62\,\%$; red), ejection of the other planet ($\approx 33\,\%$; blue), collision of the other planet with the star ($\approx 5\,\%$; orange). The systems displayed in grey ($\approx 1\,\%$) retain two planets until the end of the simulation (5~Myr), but will eventually evolve into one of the other three configurations.
\textit{Bottom panel:} Strong tides (Eq.~\ref{eq:Stides}).
Outcomes: planet--planet collision ($\approx 62\,\%$; red), ejection of the other planet ($\approx 25\,\%$; blue), collision of the other planet with the star ($\approx 13\,\%$; orange).}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In the conservative case, we saw that almost all systems with two planets initially at $\approx 10$~au underwent close encounters and ended up in the planets colliding or one of them being ejected. However, even after gas dispersal, a planet that gets close enough to the star on its orbit, typically with a pericentre $q=a(1-e)\sim R_\star \sim 0.01~\textrm{au}$,
will undergo tidal circularisation \citep{IvPa2004}. This process has the main effect of lowering the apocentre of an eccentric planet, while keeping the pericentre roughly constant, which can stop the orbits from intersecting before the ejection of the outer planet.
Since the planets that experience tidal effects will be on wide eccentric orbits, we consider dynamical tides, which are a succession of tidal excitation (when the planet is close to its pericentre) and relaxation (during the rest of the orbit) \citep{IvPa2004}. For giant planets, the migration and eccentricity timescales of these tides can be below $10^5$ years \citep{NaIdBe2008} and hence can be comparable to the lifetime of the two-planet systems integrated in the conservative case. To take these tides into account, we adopt the formula of \cite{IvPa2004} who calculated analytically the strongest normal modes, the $l=2$ fundamental modes, of the tidal deformation. Depending on the rotation of the planet that undergoes tidal circularisation, they derived the tidally gained angular momentum ($\Delta L_{\rm tide}$) and energy ($\Delta E_{\rm tide}$) during a single pericentre passage in two extreme cases:
\begin{itemize}
\item an initially non-rotating planet, which tends to maximise the effect of the tides, with
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:Stides}
\begin{align}
\Delta L_{\rm tide} & \approx - \frac{32\sqrt{2}}{15} \omega_0^2 Q^2\zeta_k \exp\left( - \frac{4\sqrt{2}}{3}\omega_0\zeta_k \right) L_k, \\
\Delta E_{\rm tide} & \approx - \frac{16\sqrt{2}}{15} \omega_0^3 Q^2\zeta_k \exp\left( - \frac{4\sqrt{2}}{3}\omega_0\zeta_k \right) E_k,
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $L_k=m_k(Gm_kR_k)^{1/2}$ and $E_k=Gm_k^2/R_k$ are the angular momentum and energy scales, $\zeta_k=(m_k q_k^3)^{1/2}(m_\star R_k^3)^{-1/2}$, $\omega_0$ is the dimensionless frequency of the fundamental mode (normalised by the internal dynamical frequency $[G m_kp/R_k^3]^{1/2}$), and $Q$ is a dimensionless overlap integral that depends on the planetary interior model;
\item a planet that is spinning at the critical rotation rate, for which the passage at pericentre does not provide an increase in angular momentum. This minimises the effect of the tides:
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:Wtides}
\begin{align}
\Delta L_{\rm tide} & = 0, \\
\Delta E_{\rm tide} & \approx - \frac{1}{5\sqrt{2}} \frac{\omega_0 Q^2}{\zeta_k} \exp\left( - \frac{4\sqrt{2}}{3}\omega_0\zeta_k \right) E_k.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
\end{itemize}
We translate either of these two expressions for $\Delta L_{\rm tide} $ and $\Delta E_{\rm tide}$ into migration and eccentricity damping timescales using respectively \citep{NaIdBe2008}
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:taus}
\begin{align}
\tau_a & = -\frac{a_k}{\dot a_k}= \frac{Gm_k m_\star}{2a_k} \frac{P}{-\Delta E_{\rm tide}}, \\
\tau_e & = -\frac{e_k}{\dot e_k}= Gm_k m_\star P \left( -a_k \gamma_k \Delta E_{\rm tide} + \sqrt{\frac{\gamma_k G m_\star}{a_k {e_k}^2}} \Delta L_{\rm tide}\right)^{-1},
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
with $\gamma_k=(1-e_k^2)/{e_k}^2$ and where $P$ is the orbital period of the planet.
We note that for these tidal models to be realistic, it is necessary that the normal modes arising near the pericentre passage be fully dissipated before the next pericentre passage, which is typically the case for a semi-major axis above a few astronomical units \citep{IvPa2004}. Moreover, the actual spin of the planet evolves over time, which causes the effectiveness of the tides to vary. As a result, we assume that this model allows us to correctly represent the evolution of the orbit of an inner planet during the early stages of its apocentre lowering, but does not represent correctly the final state of the inner planet. This is however not of concern as we are primarily interested in the final orbit of the outer planet.
To estimate the effect of the tides on the systems that were integrated in the conservative case, we re-ran the same set of initial conditions as in Fig.~\ref{fig:scat2p_notides} in two cases: for weak tides, using the set of equations (\ref{eq:Wtides}), and for strong tides, using the set of equations (\ref{eq:Stides}). The results are presented in the top and bottom panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:scat2p_tides}, respectively. We assumed that $\omega_0=1.2$ and $Q=0.56$ for all planets, as these dimensionless parameters tend to be independent of the radius of the planet for $m_k=5~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$, and we assume that it remains the case for more massive planets \citep{IvPa2004}.
In both cases, the majority of the systems still evolve towards the two main outcomes of the conservative case: either ejection of one of the planets or planet--planet collision, leaving a single planet with a semi-major axis below 15~au. The relative occurrences are very similar to the conservative case. The similarity with the conservative case is easily understandable as the tides affect systems for which the pericentre of one of the planets goes below a few hundredths of an astronomical unit, which is relevant only for a few systems. Nevertheless, including tides increases the number of systems that exhibit a planet--star collision or that retain two planets until the end of the simulation.
The `weak tides' model produced more planets with large semi-major axes than did the `strong tides' model. The reason is that the latter tends to lower the apocentre of the inner planet before it can exchange enough angular momentum with the outer planet. %
It is important to note that the number of planet--star collisions is considerably overestimated due to our continuous application of dynamical tides even when the apocentre of the inner planet goes below a few astronomical units. In that sense, most of these systems are more likely to retain a close-in circularised giant planet in addition to the outer ones displayed in orange in Fig.~\ref{fig:scat2p_tides}. Although the tides allow for a broader diversity of outcomes for the scattering of two giant planets, only a small fraction of the systems contain planets with apocentres above 90~au.
\subsection{Three-planet scattering}
\label{sec:3ps}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\Bildbreite{0.99}\linewidth]{sphere_scat_t2solo2_PDF1p4.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=\Bildbreite{0.99}\linewidth]{sphere_scat_t2duo2_PDF1p4.pdf}\\
\caption{\label{fig:scat3p_notides} Outcome of the scattering of three giant planets initially on circular orbits with semi-major axes near 10~au in the conservative (tide-free) case. Only the systems that lost at least one planet ($\approx46\,\%$ of the initial 1000) are represented.
The black and grey lines are as in Figs.~\ref{fig:scat2p_notides} and~\ref{fig:scat2p_tides}.
\textit{Top panel:} Systems that ended up with a single planet at the end of the run ($\approx23\%$ of the systems that underwent a strong instability). Blue dots represent planets whose two companions were ejected, purple for the systems that underwent both planet--planet collision and ejection, orange %
for those that underwent both ejection and collision with the star, and red when two planet--planet collisions occurred.
\textit{Bottom panel:} Systems that ended up with two planets at the end of the run ($\approx77\%$ of the systems that underwent a strong instability). The colour-coding is the same as in Figs.~\ref{fig:scat2p_notides} and~\ref{fig:scat2p_tides}, with open circles for the inner planet and filled circles for the outer one.
}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\Bildbreite{0.99}\linewidth]{sphere_3pscat_tidessolo2_PDF1p4.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=\Bildbreite{0.99}\linewidth]{sphere_3pscat_tidesduo2_PDF1p4.pdf}\\
\caption{\label{fig:scat3p_tides}
As in Fig.~\ref{fig:scat3p_notides}, but with strong tidal dissipation (Eq.~\ref{eq:Stides}). The top and bottom panel includes respectively $\approx 27\,\%$ and $\approx 73\,\%$ of systems that underwent strong instability.
}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
As mentioned previously, in the three-planet case there is no sharp stability condition regarding the initial semi-major axes of the giant planets. Following \cite{MaWe2002}, we initially position $m_2$ at 10~au, and $m_1$ and $m_3$ at four mutual Hill radii inside and outside the orbit of $m_2$, respectively (this corresponds to spacings $\approx5$--7~au). This initial spacing does not necessarily ensure instability in the system within the $5\times 10^6$~years of integration, and on the other hand these systems can become unstable even for much wider initial spacings, but the timescale of first encounter will increase as well \citep{ChaWeBo1996}. We chose this spacing in order to have a good probability of close encounters within the age of the system (see next paragraph).
We point out that our results are probably more general than our restricted set of initial conditions might suggest, since the time until instability for a particular set of initial conditions does not affect the statistical properties of final outcomes in this kind of study \citep{Cha2008}.
Out of 1000 initial conditions, the planets strongly interacted in $46\,\%$ of the systems, which resulted in the loss of at least one planet within $5\times 10^6$~years. These systems are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:scat3p_notides}. In the remaining systems, the planets oscillated around their initial semi-major axis without significant increase of eccentricity and will not be discussed further. Out of the systems that interacted, we separated those resulting in single-planet systems (top panel) and two-planet systems (bottom panel).
Single-planet systems generally underwent two ejections, a planet--planet collision and an ejection, or a planet--star collision and an ejection. Although the outcomes are less predictable than in the two-planet case, it is still planet--star collisions that tend to allow a single planet to remain on a wide orbit after the removal of its companions.
Systems that lost only one planet (bottom panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:scat3p_notides}) end up with two planets on well separated orbits, generally after an ejection or a planet--planet collision. As the eccentricity of these orbits is significant, the stability criterion used previously (Eq.~\ref{eq:deck}) is not valid. Instead, we check if the system are angular momentum deficit (AMD) stable \citep{LaPe2017,PeLaBo2017}. For coplanar orbits, the AMD of a two-planet system is given by
\begin{align}
\label{eq:AMD}
\textrm{AMD}=\sqrt{G m_\star}\Bigg( & m_1\sqrt{a_1}\left(1-\sqrt{1-{e_1}^2}\right) \notag\\
&+m_2\sqrt{a_2}\left(1-\sqrt{1-{e_2}^2}\right) \Bigg). %
\end{align}
A given system is AMD stable if the orbits of the two planets cannot intersect through free exchange of AMD between the two planets \citep{LaPe2017}. This criterion is valid as long as the two planets are not in mean-motion resonance. For completeness, we also check if the systems are in the chaotic area due to the overlap of first-order MMRs, which is given by \citep{PeLaBo2017}
\begin{equation}
\frac{a_{\rm int}}{a_{\rm out}} < 1-1.36\left(\frac{m_1+m_2}{m_\star}\right)^{1/5} c_{\rm min}^{1/10},
\label{eq:overlap MMR}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
c_{\rm min} < 2 \left(2- \sqrt{1-e_1^2} -\sqrt{1-e_2^2}\right).
\end{equation}
For our considered range of masses, this criterion (Eq.~\ref{eq:overlap MMR}) is valid when both eccentricities $e_k\gtrsim 0.2$. We find that more than 99\,\% of the resulting systems with two planets are AMD stable.
The two-planet systems represented in Fig.~\ref{fig:scat3p_notides} are significantly more diverse than in the two-planet scattering case (cf.\ Fig.~\ref{fig:scat2p_notides}). They generally have an inner planet with a semi-major axis comparable to or lower than the initial innermost planet, while the outer planets (filled circles) have their pericentre distributed around 15~au (grey curve). This means that, roughly, their pericentre remains near their initial semi-major axis. However, the departure from this curve can be significant.
For comparison, we re-ran the same initial conditions with strong tides (Equations~\ref{eq:Stides}). The result is displayed in Figure~\ref{fig:scat3p_tides}. The effect on the final ${e_{\rm p}}$--${a_{\rm p}}$ distribution is clearly less important than in the two-planet scattering case (cf.\ Figs.~\ref{fig:scat2p_notides} and~\ref{fig:scat2p_tides}), which implies that the ejections or planet--planet collisions tend to occur before the pericentre of the innermost planet reaches a few hundredths of an astronomical unit. In fact, only approximately 1\%\ of the inner planets see their pericentre drop below 0.1~au throughout their orbital evolution.
In total, a significant fraction of the systems ends up with a planet on a wide orbit, with an apocentre several times higher than the initial semi-major axis. If we compare this to the projected distance of HIP\,65426\,b\ (92~au), with our choice of initial conditions $\approx 18\,\%$ of the systems ended up with a planet whose apocentre is above 90~au after $5\times 10^6$~years in the conservative case ($7\,\%$ of the single planets and $21\,\%$ of the two-planet systems), against $\approx 16\,\%$ when strong tides are modelled.
\subsection{Conclusion about giant planet scattering}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\Bildbreite{0.99}\linewidth]{sphere_scat_t2arVSeo2_PDF1p4.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=\Bildbreite{0.98}\linewidth]{sphere_scat_t2histoer_PDF1p4.pdf} %
\caption{\label{fig:inner} Comparison of the orbits of the inner and outer planets of each system represented in Figure \ref{fig:scat3p_notides}. In the top panel, the colour indicates which planet is the more massive: the inner one (red dots) or the outer one (blue dots). Axes show the ratio of the semi-major axes and of the eccentricity, respectively. The bottom panel displays the distribution of $e_{\textrm{out}}/e_{\textrm{int}}$. We note the logarithmic horizontal axis.}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Both two-planet and three-planet scattering scenarios are able to create systems with giant planets on wide orbits, with
semi-major axes
above 100~au, even starting with planets in the vicinity of 10~au. In both cases, these planets tend to be highly eccentric (${e_{\rm p}}\gtrsim 0.5$, and generally more) as they retain a pericentre close to their initial semi-major axis. However, the occurrence rate of these orbits, as well as the presence and properties of an eventual giant planet companion, greatly depend on the studied scenario:
\begin{itemize}
\item In two-planet scattering, we have found that at most a small fraction of the systems (depending on the chosen tidal model) end up with a planet on a stable orbit with an apocentre significantly raised with respect to their initial semi-major axis. However, the instability between two planets may occur while at least a partial disc is remaining, which may lead to a broader range of outcomes (see Sect.~\ref{sec:formationscenario}). Although most of the systems that
ended up with a planet on a wide orbit (with an apocentre significantly larger than its initial one) were single-planet
systems, a proper model of the tides can circularise an inner planet on a tight orbit instead of letting it migrate all the way into the star. This would cause HIP\,65426\ to have another giant planet on a much shorter orbital period, possibly observable using the radial-velocity method.
However, it would not be observable with current direct-imaging techniques
such as Sparse Aperture Masking,
which push down to a few~au for this system \citep{cheetham19}.
\item In the three-planet case, the outcomes are much more diverse. In $\sim 3/4$ of the cases, two planets remain in the system on stable orbits. Most of these systems have a planet with a semi-major axis significantly higher than initially and an inner planet with a semi-major axis comparable to the initial one or lower (see Figs.~\ref{fig:scat3p_notides} and~\ref{fig:scat3p_tides}). Figure~\ref{fig:inner} shows the ${a_{\rm p}}$ and ${e_{\rm p}}$ ratios between the inner and outer planets of Fig.~\ref{fig:scat3p_notides}, and which planet of the pair is more massive. There is no tendency for either the inner or the outer planet to be the more massive one, and both planets tend to have comparable eccentricities (histogram in Fig.~\ref{fig:inner}, bottom panel). If directly imaged planets such as HIP\,65426\,b\ obtained their wide orbit through planet--planet scattering of three giant planets initially in the 3--20~au range, it is probable that these systems also contain an eccentric inner planet with a semi-major axis of or greater than a few astronomical units. Observations are not yet constraining enough to confirm or refute the existence of such a planet around HIP\,65426\, as the current limits only exclude a planet more massive than $5~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ outside of 15~au \citep{chauvin17}, or a planet more massive than $16~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ outside of 3~au \citep{cheetham19}, and we recall that in the three-planet scattering case the remaining inner planet would not necessarily be more massive than HIP\,65426\,b\ (see Fig.~\ref{fig:inner}).
\end{itemize}
\section{Conclusion}
\label{Theil:Zus}
\subsection{Summary}
The planet imager SPHERE \citep{beuzit08,beuzit19} recently revealed a companion to the 2~$\Msun$, $14\pm4$~Myr Lower Centaurus-Crux
group member HIP\,65426.
The initial analysis by \citet{chauvin17}
showed it to be of planetary mass, with ${m_{\rm p}}=6$--12~${M_{\textnormal{J}}}$, while located at a separation from its host star
(projected: 92~au) at which formation by core accretion is not expected to be efficient.
Combined with the star's unusually high rotation rate ($v_\star\approx300$~km\,s$^{-1}$),
this motivated us to take a closer look at the system to
(i)~infer joint constraints on the mass and initial (post-formation) entropy,
(ii)~explore the formation of wide-orbit (directly imaged) planets by core accretion,
and (iii)~derive predictions about the presence of further companions in the system.
While we focused on HIP\,65426\,b, it is an excellent representative for the relatively
recent and modestly populated class of directly imaged exoplanets in terms of mass, age, and separation from its host star.
First, we derived constraints on the mass and initial entropy of HIP\,65426\,b\ from its age
and luminosity (Section~\ref{Theil:MSi}).
Assuming it formed by core accretion (CA), we argued that HIP\,65426\,b\ should be
roughly ${\Delta t_{\rm form}}\approx2$~Myr younger than its host.
We considered different priors on the mass
and entropy, including for the first time
the mass and post-formation entropy distribution of the \citet{3M} population synthesis.
The simple but robust 2D fits for ${\rm d}^2 N/({\rm d} {m_{\rm p}}\,\ds_{\textrm{pf}})$
in Eqs.~(\ref{Gl:Prior beide})--(\ref{Gl:MPrior}) may be useful in other work.
Flat priors yielded ${m_{\rm p}}=9.8 ^{+ 1.5 }_{- 2.0 }~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$, whereas
the priors from the hot and cold population from the population synthesis
lead to
${m_{\rm p}}=9.9^{+1.1}_{-1.8}~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ %
and
${m_{\rm p}}=10.9^{+ 1.4}_{- 2.0}~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$, %
respectively.
Independently of the priors, the minimal post-formation entropy could be constrained
to $s_{\textrm{pf}}\gtrsim9.2~k_{\textrm{B}}\,\textrm{baryon}^{-1}$.
Using the population synthesis priors made a large difference,
providing an upper bound and yielding
$s_{\textrm{pf}}=10.4 ^{+ 0.7 }_{- 0.2 }$ %
in the hot-population case and
$s_{\textrm{pf}}=10.2 ^{+ 0.3 }_{- 0.7 }$ %
for the cold one.
Next, we studied the formation of wide-orbit gas giants by core accretion (Sect.~\ref{sec:formationscenario}).
The idea is to let a core that formed
in the inner disc be scattered by a companion into the outer disc,
where it can undergo runaway accretion. If this scattering
happens late enough, the finite lifetime of the disc
combined with the slower type~II migration rate should
allow the planet to stay at large semi-major axes.
To counter the fast type I migration while the core forms,
we included, as in \citet{ColemanNelson16b}, a specific radial structure
which acts as a planet trap and could be due to zonal flows.
This scenario was seen to work well, producing HIP\,65426\,b-like planets in a
number of cases (Fig.~\ref{fig:all_mva_ecc}). In almost all systems, they were
accompanied by interior giant companions that could be detectable %
in long-baseline radial-velocity surveys.
Another possibility is of instabilities after disc dispersal. This too was
shown to be a possible origin for HIP\,65426-like systems, again with the prediction
of further interior companions
Finally, we focused on the post-disc phase with $N$-body integrations
of two- or three-planet systems including tides (Section~\ref{sec:Gps}).
Systems with two planets usually ($\sim2/3$ of the time) featured a planet--planet collision,
with almost all other cases ending up with a planet ejection.
For both outcomes, the remaining planet still retained too small a semi-major axis (${a_{\rm p}}\sim10$~au)
to explain HIP\,65426\,b.
In the case of three planets initially, roughly half of the systems did not
interact significantly within 5~Myr.
Of the others, about~1/4 lost two planets, with the remaining planet
matching HIP\,65426\,b\ only a small fraction of the time.
Systems with two remaining planets however had more diverse configurations
in the ${a_{\rm p}}$--${e_{\rm p}}$ plane.
For our choice of initial conditions, $\sim1/5$ of the systems ended up
with a planet with an apocentre above 90~au (HIP\,65426\,b's projected separation).
We also looked at the effect of tidal circularisation, which
can affect the orbit of highly eccentric planets that pass close to the star.
We showed, however, that in both the two- and three-planet scenarios
the outcomes are changed only slightly (Figs.~\ref{fig:scat2p_tides}
and~\ref{fig:scat3p_tides}).
\subsection{Discussion}
The main implications of our study are the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item We estimate a mass of
%
${m_{\rm p}}=9.9^{+1.1}_{-1.8}~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ %
using the hot population and
%
${m_{\rm p}}=10.9^{+ 1.4}_{- 2.0}~{M_{\textnormal{J}}}$ %
with the cold-nominal population
for HIP\,65426\,b. %
\item As for almost all other directly imaged planets, we find that HIP\,65426\,b\ is
not consistent with the extreme cold starts \`a la \citet{marley07}.
This is also in agreement with recent theoretical work \citep{berardo17,mkkm17}.
\item A more precise mass determination is hindered here less
by systematics between the different atmospheric models (see Fig.~\ref{Abb:c21-Kurven})
than by the large relative uncertainty on the stellar age.
The uncertain formation time ${\Delta t_{\rm form}}$ is subdominant to this.
\item Both runaway accretion at a large separation after outward scattering
of the core as well as post-disc-phase scattering of inner gas giants
were seen as viable scenarios to explain HIP\,65426\,b-like objects.
%
%
%
%
\item Our simulations show that if it formed through core accretion, HIP\,65426\,b\ likely has some eccentricity.
This eccentricity arises from scattering with other planets in the system.
If these scattering events occur before the end of the disc lifetime, damping with the gas disc can act to reduce the eccentricity.
In this case the planet would have a modest eccentricity, $0\le{e_{\rm p}}\le0.5$, where the time of scattering with respect to the end of the disc lifetime determines how much eccentricity can be damped.
If the scattering event took place after the end of the disc lifetime, then the eccentricity can be higher, depending on the scattering conditions.
Therefore, if future observations revealed the eccentricity to be ${e_{\rm p}}<0.5$,
this would not rule out the scenario of scattering before disc dispersal.
It would, however, make scattering at the end of or after the disc phase unlikely,
unless we could invoke another kind of eccentricity-damping mechanism.
The high-eccentricity cases are in contrast with the very tentative result that directly imaged planets might tend to have low eccentricities.
However, this is mostly based on a relatively small number of upper limits \citep{bowler18}, and the few cases with more robust determinations
are not likely candidates for the scenario presented here.
For example, several authors have favoured ${e_{\rm p}}\lesssim0.2$ for $\beta$~Pic~b
\citep{wang16,lagrange18}, which might suggest it did not form by the scenario shown here.
While \citet{dupuy19} recently excluded ${e_{\rm p}}<0.1$ at $>2\,\sigma$,
their derived eccentricity was only ${e_{\rm p}}=0.24\pm0.06$.
Independently of the (modest) eccentricity of $\beta$~Pic~b, however,
its low semi-major axis ${a_{\rm p}}\approx12$~au makes it a somewhat unlikely candidate
for formation by scattering. Also, the presence of a debris disc
makes any speculation about its dynamical origin more challenging.
As for the specific case of the HR~8799 planets, it is unlikely that
a scenario such as that studied here is responsible for their formation,
irrespective of their exact eccentricities (which appear to be low
to moderate; \citealp{wang18}).
Indeed, this would require an unlikely series of interactions without
ejections, for example four times in a row.
In any case, a longer coverage of the orbits will be necessary
to improve the statistics of the eccentricity determinations.
\item If directly imaged planets such as HIP\,65426\,b\ obtained their wide orbit through planet--planet scattering of three giant planets initially in the 3--20~au range, it is probable that these systems also contain an eccentric inner planet with a semi-major axis equal to or greater than a few astronomical units.
Some previous studies have put upper limits to the existence of inner companions
in systems with wide-orbit planetary-mass companions
(see \citealp{bryan16} and references therein). However, these limits
typically reach down to several tens of astronomical units for several Jupiter masses,
and thus
leave open a parameter space consistent with our tentative prediction. This
could be tested by future radial-velocity surveys or further direct-imaging observations.
\end{enumerate}
We can wonder whether the inferred initial entropy %
will reveal clues to the location of the runaway gas accretion phase.
In the absence of detailed studies of this question, the answer seems complex since
several effects are relevant at the same time:
\begin{itemize}
\item For a given planet mass, radius (or entropy), and accretion rate,
it is easy to show that the properties of the accretion shock onto the planet
will not depend, at least not directly, on its location in the disc (\citealp{mkkm17},
Marleau et al., subm.).
\item The Core Mass Effect \citep{morda13} predicts higher post-formation entropies for
higher planetesimal surface density, as should be found closer in to the star.
\item Berardo et al. (2017) showed that the important quantity determining
the influence of the shock is the pre-runaway entropy of the protoplanet.
This in turn might be different for planets formed at different locations,
but the magnitude of the effect is challenging to assess without dedicated simulations.
\end{itemize}
Further factors might come into play, such as the metallicity of the gas.
Depending on which way the different effects go, the location of runaway gas accretion
may or may not be imprinted in the post-formation entropy.
Clearly, a global dedicated study is warranted here.
Thanks to the large separation and super-Jupiter mass of the companion,
HIP\,65426\ represents an important system to explore the dynamical interactions of (proto)planets and the limits of planet formation by core accretion.
Recent studies have reached contrasting results about gravitational instability (GI),
arguing that it must be an intrinsically rare process \citep{forgan13,vigan17}
or rather that it is common but associated with very fast migration of the clumps
(see \citealp{nayakshin17} and discussion therein as well as \citealp{vorobyov18}). %
However, these studies looked mainly at FGK stars, whereas the planet occurrence rate
seems to increase with stellar mass \citep{bowler16}.
In any case, it would be interesting also to perform a study similar to the present one
in the context of GI, following self-consistently the formation of the central star
(see e.g.\ \citealp{nixon18}) and trying to explain its high spin frequency.
Also, predictions of the post-formation entropies and luminosities
in GI formation models (e.g.\ \citealp{forgan13,forgan15}) would be
a welcome counterpart to those of core accretion \citep{3M}.
With an orbital period $P\approx 400$--2000~years \citep{cheetham19}, approximately five to ten years are required until
the eccentricity of HIP\,65426\,b\ can be robustly determined if orbital curvature begins to be resolved
(G.\ Chauvin 2019, priv.\ comm.).
However, this -- and more generally for other systems too -- will be an important constraint on the formation model. Similarly, further
radial-velocity monitoring of the host to reveal or rule out
the presence of further companions would also help confirm or exclude
some of the formation pathways discussed here.
\begin{acknowledgements}
We thank G.~Chauvin for helpful comments about the manuscript
and answers to observational questions, A.-M.\ Lagrange for the interesting discussions,
and the referee for the comments and questions that helped clarify the manuscript.
G.-D.M.\ and C.M.\ acknowledge support from the Swiss National Science Foundation under grant BSSGI0\_155816 `PlanetsInTime'.
G.-D.M. acknowledges the support of the DFG priority program SPP 1992 `Exploring the Diversity of Extrasolar Planets' (KU 2849/7-1).
Parts of this work have been carried out within the framework of the NCCR PlanetS supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation.
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{aa}
|
\section{Introduction}
Internet Protocol (IP) network has become a universal communication network that will accommodate all types of traffic, including images, voice, video, and data. An elementary and challenging component among them is the transmission of voice frames. The transmission of frame voice over IP (VoIP) networks, is gaining much attention as a future alternative to conventional public switched telephone networks (PSTN). The ability to reduce the cost of long-distance telephone calls and provide additional capabilities is attracting customers to this tool.
However, coded speech frames are transmitted through the IP network on the best-effort basis, without any guarantee of performance for real-time multimedia applications. The three main problems occurring in real-time VoIP applications are \cite{1}:
1) End-to-end delay: is the total delay experienced by the frame from the sender till it reaches the receiver. For example, if the frame network is congested frame delivery is delayed beyond predefined thresholds and thus resulting in frame arriving late.
2) Jitter: Refers to the variation in frame inter arrival time. This difference is between when the frame is expected and when it is actually received is jitter.
3) Packet loss: Loss of voice frames from sender to receiver.
The total packet loss can be seen either packets lost over the network due to congestion or packets arriving late after their expected playout time that are discarded by the receiver. The jitter caused by variable delays in the network is ultimately translated into the effect of frame loss in the network, as the frames arriving after the playout time are considered as lost.
Research on the quality of audio transmission has focused on designing frame loss concealment (FLC) system which dynamically adapts the behavior of the audio application to maximize the audio quality under the constraints of restricted bandwidth, frame loss, delay and jitter present in the network.
The FLC system can consist of varying mixtures of sender-based and receiver-based strategies. Sender-based schemes require the contribution of the transmitter, while receiver-based schemes are limited to the receiver. Sender-based schemes are mainly based on transmission of redundant information such as the forward error correction \cite{2}, which is an attractive way to increase the reliability of speech frames and to reduce the necessary time to recover the lost frame. Another common approach is to transmit two descriptions representing the same speech signal portion, where the first one is a high quality description and the second redundant has a low bit-rate description onto one of the neighboring frames \cite{3}. Multiple description coding can be seen as a bandwidth efficient generalization of these techniques \cite{4}.
Other researchers propose to add some extra information in the next frame such as linear prediction coding (LPC) coefficients \cite{5},energy and zero crossing ratio \cite{6}, voicing and fundamental frequency information (F0) \cite{7}, excitation parameters added to the preceding frame \cite{8} to protect only important frames. The use of additional side information as a means for improving concealment performance has been demonstrated for code excited linear prediction (CELP)-based coders such as G.729 \cite{9} and AMR-WB \cite{10}.
Receiver-based FLC techniques attempt to recover the speech signal content of a lost frame from its neighbors.
A common and simple method to recover lost frames is inserting a stand-in frame. This stand-in could be: a silence frame or a noise frame, or the repetition of the last received frame. The simplicity and the low latency requirement are a big advantage for this method, but the inevitable artifacts and the sudden noticeable transition between natural and synthesized speech introduced by those methods make the perceptual quality of speech is not significantly improved \cite{11}. Another approach is to use interpolation techniques where the parameters of neighboring frames are exploited to produce the replacement for the lost frame \cite{12}. Such methods are based on a statistical interpolation (SI) algorithm \cite{13}, which applies an interpolation in the compressed modified discrete cosine transform (MDCT) domain, by treating each time-trajectory of the coefficients for a given frequency bin as a separate signal with missing samples. Or, the discrete short time Fourier transform (DSTFT) domain \cite{14}\cite{15} those methods use a complex spectral domain, where the signal representation is less fluctuating, whereas in the MDCT domain, the coefficients typically show rapid sign changes from frame to frame in each frequency bin \cite{16}. Interpolation in the DSTFT domain requires the conversion from MDCT to DSTFT. Such conversions add complexity to the decoder, and even though efficient conversions were developed and used in \cite{14}, the overall complexity is still quite high in addition to the low efficiency against consecutive losses. Unlike the above cited methods, time scale modification is a packet loss concealment technique based on time domain processing; the packets above the missing packet are extended without modifying the pitch frequency of speech signal. Almost all the TSM methods use the overlap and add (OLA) algorithm that does not analyze the content of the input signal just overlap and add the signal. Synchronous overlap and add (SOLA) algorithm is the enhanced version of the OLA algorithm. But SOLA does not maintain maximum local similarity. Waveform similarity and overlap add (WSOLA) is the technique that ensures sufficient signal continuity at segment joins that existed in original signal \cite{17}\cite{18}.
Waveform substitution is another approach to overcome the packet loss problem; those methods are based on speech signal stationary characteristic. It uses the frames prior to the lost frames and tries to use the most recent ones. It examines buffered frames and searches for the best match \cite{19}.
Another interesting technique is to exploit both, past and future frames present in the jitter buffer such as using hidden Markov models (HMM) for estimating lost frame parameters is presented in \cite{20}; or using audio inpainting to reconstruct missing parts of audio signal basing on the good received parts, in condition that the duration of missing parts is lower than 50ms \cite{21}. Sparsity based techniques \cite{22} or, based on self-content \cite{23}. In this paper we propose an algorithm that exploits the bit representation of G.722.2 coded frames to insert a part of the previous frames to recover them in case of their lost.\\
We structure the remainder of this paper as follows. We begin by describing the bit representation in the G.722.2 codec and outline the limitation provided by this representation. Then, we introduce our proposed frame loss concealment method. Then, we show how this improves the robustness of the G.722.2 codec to frame losses, where the wideband Perceptual Evaluation of Speech Quality Mean Opinion Score (WB-PESQ MOS), Enhanced Modified Bark Spectral Distance (EMBSD), and MUltiple Stimuli with Hidden Reference and Anchor (MUSHRA) are used as the subjective and objective quality metrics for performance evaluation. After that, we compare our proposed method with the forward error correction (FEC) scheme to evaluate its performance. Finally we conclude.
\section{Bit representation in G.722.2 codec}
With the wider passband of 50-7000 Hz, wideband speech provides much better quality and naturalness compared to narrowband telephone bandwidth speech. The G.722 codec encodes wideband speech by first decomposing it into two subbands, and then using backward adaptive differential pulse code modulation (ADPCM) to code each subband. At the receiver, the coded speech in each subband is decoded using an ADPCM decoder, and reconstructed to give the decoded wideband speech \cite{24}. This simple coding and decoding operation causes an algorithmic delay of only 3 ms and provides good performance at rates of 48, 56 and 64 kbps \cite{25}\cite{26}. The low delay, low complexity and high quality of the G.722 wideband speech codec have resulted in its adoption by several VoIP and Voice over Wireless LAN (VoWLAN) phones \cite{27}\cite{28}.
We notice that the G.722.2 codec uses a Word16 (16 bit) to code a single bit of the frame (7F 00 to represent 1 and 81 FF to represent 0). For example, the G.722.2 codec uses 135 bits to code a single frame. But in reality, it uses 270 bytes to code it \cite{29}. And we consider that, this is a big waist of sender resource.
Fig.~\ref{fig01} represents the first 20 bytes of a frame encoded with G.722.2 codec mode 0 and represented in a hexadecimal format where each character represents 4 bits; the first 6 bytes represent the frame’s header. Then, we notice that the bit 1 is represented by “7F00” and the bit 0 is represented by “81FF”.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{figures/im1.PNG}
\caption{The first 26 bytes of a G.722.2 frame}
\label{fig01}
\end{figure}
\section{The proposed algorithm
}
\label{sec:2}
In order to exploit effectively the resource of the sender and protect the sent frames against loss; we propose to replace the even bytes of the current frame by the even bytes of the previous frame, those even bytes will be used to reconstruct the previous frame in case of their lost. The proposed method will be detailed in Figs.~\ref{fig02} and~\ref{fig03}.
\subsection{At the sender}
\label{sec:1}
After the generation of the Nth frame, the coder has to replace every even byte (that has the value 00 or FF) of this frame by the even byte of the Nth-1 frame (that has the value 7F or 81), which means:
\begin{equation}
frame (N ,j) = frame (N-1,j+1)
\label{eq01}
\end{equation}
where:
\begin{itemize}
\item $frame$ : represents a G.722.2 frame.
\item $N$ : represents the number of the last generated frame.
\item $j$ : represents the byte number of the Nth frame, and $j = 8, 10, 12, …, 270$ in mode 0.
\end{itemize}
After that, the coder has to put the Nth-1 frame in a FIFO buffer of one frame size (270 bytes in G.722.2 codec mode 0).
\subsection{At the receiver}
\label{sec:1}
After receiving the Nth frame, we check if the Nth-1 frame has been received.
If not, we recover the Nth-1 frame, by inserting the even bytes of the Nth frame to the even bytes of the Nth-1 frame. This means:
\begin{equation}
frame (N-1 ,j) = frame (N,j)
\label{eq02}
\end{equation}
Then, we recover the odd bytes of the Nth-1 frame by inserting the values “7F” or “81”:
\begin{equation}
if frame (N-1 ,j)= FF: frame (N-1 ,j-1) = 81
\label{eq03}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
if frame (N-1 ,j)=00: frame (N-1 ,j-1) = 7F
\label{eq04}
\end{equation}
After recovering the Nth-1 frame, we have to normalize the Nth frame to avoid any errors by inserting the values “00” or “FF” in the even bytes:
\begin{equation}
if frame (N-1 ,j)= FF: frame (N-1 ,j-1) = 81
\label{eq05}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
if frame (N-1 ,j)=00: frame (N-1 ,j-1) = 7F
\label{eq06}
\end{equation}
Now, if the Nth-1 frame is not lost, we execute just the previous step.
The advantage of this method is that we could protect the frames against loss without adding any extra information. Moreover, the modified G.722.2 decoder is compatible with non modified G.722.2 coder and in this particular case the decoder will insert the Nth frame to conceal the loss of the Nth-1 frame (which is the common repetition method \cite{30}).
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figures/im2.PNG}
\caption{Algorithm at Sender side}
\label{fig02}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{figures/im3.PNG}
\caption{Algorithm at Receiver side}
\label{fig03}
\end{figure}
\section{Simulation results}
\label{sec:3}
In this section, we assess the performance of our proposed method using WB-PESQ MOS, EMBSD and MUSHRA as the subjective and objective quality metrics. The experiments were performed using speech files of male and female speech as input. Each segment is comprised of two sentences by the same speaker and is 8 seconds in duration. The default operating rate of 6.60 kbps is used for the G.722.2 codec. Each frame comprises a G.722.2 coded speech frame of duration 20 ms and size of 264 bytes. The frame loss rates (FLRs) considered were 0\%, 2\%, 4\%, 6\%, 8\%, 10\%, 12\%, 14\%, 16\%, 18\% and 20\%. For each FLR, 10 runs of the experiment were performed to simulate different frame loss patterns in the speech files. The loss simulation were performed using Gilbert Extended Model (EGM), this extended model allows us to describe loss bursts of up to $m$ frames \cite{31}.
The average WB-PESQ calculated over the 10 different frame loss patterns corresponding to each FLR has been used as the quality measure in our experiments. The use of WB-PESQ is based on the results in \cite{32} that have verified the suitability of using WB-PESQ for evaluating wideband speech quality coded using G.722.2 for FLRs up to 10\%, and to assess the distortion between the original and the decoded signals we used the EMBSD as the distortion evaluation metric. Finally, for subjective test, we used the MUSHRA for listening quality evaluations. Ten listeners gave score according to quality of decoded by original and improved algorithm. The test sentences were presented to listeners at a randomized order.
\section{Comparing our proposed method with the forward error correction scheme
}
\label{sec:4}
In order to evaluate our proposed method, we compared it with firstly, the original G.722.2 codec, this comparison is fair because our proposed method doesn't modify the bit rate of the sender neither the number of sent packets. Secondly,
we compared it with an existing method which is the FEC parity coding scheme.
A number of FEC techniques have been developed to conceal losses of data during transmission \cite{33}. These schemes rely on the addition of conceal data to a stream, from which the contents of lost frames may be recovered. In parity coding, the exclusive-or (XOR) operation is applied across groups of frames to generate corresponding parity frames. An example of this has been implemented by Rosenberg \cite{34}. In this scheme, one parity frame is transmitted after every 4 data frames. Provided there is just one loss in every 5 frames, that loss is recoverable. This is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig04}.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{figures/im4.PNG}
\caption{FEC scheme}
\label{fig04}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig05} shows a comparison between our proposed method and the Parity FEC scheme using PESQ metric.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{figures/im5.PNG}
\caption{Comparison between our proposed method and the FEC parity scheme using PESQ metric}
\label{fig05}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig06} shows a comparison between our proposed method and the FEC parity scheme using EMBSD metric.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{figures/im6.PNG}
\caption{Comparison between our proposed method and the FEC parity scheme using EMBSD metric}
\label{fig06}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig07} shows a comparison between our proposed method and the FEC parity scheme using MUSHRA metric.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.37]{figures/im7.PNG}
\caption{Comparison between our proposed method and the FEC parity scheme using MUSHRA metric}
\label{fig07}
\end{figure}
The metrics values are slightly higher for our proposed method than the FEC parity due to the limitation of FEC schemes where consecutive frames are lost and where just one loss in every 5 consecutive frames is allowed to achieve the recovery. On the other hand, the FEC parity scheme implement an additive redundancy traffic (20\% of the original traffic), plus the additive delay needed to recover the lost frames, unlike our proposed method which wait the reception of the subsequent frame to recover the lost frame, all that without adding any redundancy traffic. The disadvantage of our proposed method is that it recovers just the last lost frame in a sequence of frame loss.
\section{Conclusion}
We have proposed and investigated the performance of a new FLC scheme for the standard G.722.2 speech codec. While the experiments have been performed on the G.722.2 speech codec mode 0, the proposed scheme is clearly applicable to other modes or codecs as well. Our results show a significant improvement in the performance of the G.722.2 speech codec. The proposed algorithm achieves a PESQ value higher than 2 at 20\% frame erasure rate and ensure the compatibility between our modified decoder and the non-modified G.722.2 coder.
|
\section{Introduction}
Our ultimate purpose is to explore transformations that map a sequence $(\Lambda_k)$ to $(\Lambda\textprime_k)$ so that every term $\Lambda\textprime_{p+1}$ is the sum of previous or later terms of $\Lambda_p$. Therefore, it is convenient to use sequences whose domain are the integers, namely bi-infinite sequences or doubly infinite sequences, who do not have an initial nor a last element:
\begin{equation*}
(\Lambda_k)^{\infty}_{k=-\infty}=(\ldots,\Lambda_{-3},\Lambda_{-2},\Lambda_{-1},\Lambda_0,\Lambda_1,\Lambda_2,\Lambda_{3},\ldots)
\end{equation*}
Before we define any ultra-recursive sequence, it is necessary to remind some properties of the sequences defined by traditional recurrence relations. Let's consider the following transformation $\textsc{G}$:
\begin{equation}
\textsc{G}\circ(\Lambda_k)\equiv (\Lambda\textprime_k) \colon \ \Lambda\textprime_q=P*\Lambda_{q-1}-Q*\Lambda_{q-2}
\end{equation}
where $P$ and $Q$ are integers.
For a given sequence of sequences $((\Lambda_{j,k})^{\infty}_{k=-\infty})^{\infty}_{j=-\infty}\equiv\boldsymbol{\Lambda}$, we can define the transformation $\textsc{\textbf{G}}_l$ that maps any sequence $(\Lambda_{j,k})$ to the element $(\Upsilon_{j+l,k})$ of $\boldsymbol{\Upsilon}$ as follows
\begin{equation}
\textsc{\textbf{G}}_l\circ\boldsymbol{\Lambda}\equiv\boldsymbol{\Upsilon}\colon\ (\Upsilon_{j+l,k})=\textsc{G}\circ(\Lambda_{j,k})
\end{equation}
If $\boldsymbol{\Upsilon}=\boldsymbol{\Lambda}$, it means that $\textsc{\textbf{G}}_l$ maps $\boldsymbol{\Lambda}$ to itself. Moreover, if $r$ is the least number that satisfy $\textsc{\textbf{G}}^r_l\circ\boldsymbol{\Lambda}=\boldsymbol{\Lambda}$, we know the sequence remains invariant after applying (any multiple of) $r$ times the transformation; in that case, we say that $\boldsymbol{\Lambda}$ is an eigen-sequence of the transformation $\textsc{\textbf{G}}^r_l$. There are several ways to find such sequences of sequences, some of them are rather complicated. For $l=0$, $\textsc{\textbf{G}}^r_0\circ\boldsymbol{\Lambda}=\boldsymbol{\Lambda}$ implies $\textsc{G}^r\circ(\Lambda_{j,k})=(\Lambda_{j,k})$, and this can take place if and only if each element satisfy the relation\footnote{In equation (1.3), $\Lambda_{j,q}$ and $\Lambda_{j,q-r-i}$, which are elements of any $j$-th sequence in $\boldsymbol{\Lambda}$ where substituted just by $\Lambda_{q}$ and $\Lambda_{q-r-i}$ for a clearer exposition of the main idea.}
\begin{equation}
\Lambda_{q}=\sum^{r}_{i=0}(-1)^i\binom{r}{i}P^{r-i}Q^i*\Lambda_{q-r-i}
\end{equation}
For the sequences who do ``have a beginning'', this equation admits $2r$ initial values, the next elements are a combination of the previous ones. But even those sequences can be extended ``to the left'', meaning that it is possible to calculate predecessors of the initial values and make it a bi-infinite sequence so that (1.3) is still valid throughout the sequence.
Equation (1.3) is a linear homogeneous recurrence relation of degree $r+1$ with constant coefficients. It allow us to find eigen-sequences of the transformation $\textsc{G}^r$ by doing some calculations;\footnote{It can also be proved that given $({\Lambda}_k)$ that remains invariant under $\textsc{G}^r$, and $(\dot{\Lambda}_k)$ that remains invariant under $\textsc{G}^s$, then its sum $(\ddot{\Lambda}_k)\equiv (\Lambda_k)+(\dot{\Lambda}_k)$ has the property $\textsc{G}^t\circ(\ddot{\Lambda}_k)=(\ddot{\Lambda}_k)$, where $t$ is the least common multiple of $r$ and $s$ and in general $\textsc{G}^n\circ(\ddot{\Lambda}_k)\neq(\ddot{\Lambda}_k)$ for $n<t$.} in this paper, the purpose of its presence is merely to expose how easy and mechanical it is to find eigen-sequences of the transformation (1.1) and to show that when $r=1$, (1.3) is exactly the recurrence relation of the Lucas sequence.
It's is well known that the Lucas sequence has as complementary instances the Fibonacci sequence $(F_n)^\infty_{n=0}=(0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,\ldots)$ and the Lucas numbers $(L_n)=(2,1,3,4,7,11,18,\ldots)$, \cite{koshy} both satisfying the recurrence relation
\begin{equation}
\Lambda_p=\Lambda_{p-1}+\Lambda_{p-2}
\end{equation}
That is (1.3) when $r=P=-Q=1$. Any closed form solution for this kind of sequences is expressed in terms of the numbers $\varphi=\frac{1}{2}(1+\sqrt{5})$ and $\psi=1-\varphi=-\varphi^{-1}$, who are the roots of the second order equation $x^2=x+1$, both having the property
\begin{equation}
\phi^{n+2}=\phi^{n+1}+ \phi^{n}
\end{equation}
The closed-form expression for the Fibonacci sequence is
\begin{equation}
F_n=\frac{1}{\sqrt{5}}(\varphi^n-\psi^n)
\end{equation}
For Lucas numbers, it is
\begin{equation}
L_n=\varphi^n+\psi^n
\end{equation}
Any sequence defined by (1.4) has an infinite number (all equivalent) of closed-form expressions
\begin{equation}
\Lambda_k=\beta_e\varphi^{k-e}+\gamma_e\psi^{k-e}
\end{equation}
where $\beta_e$ and $\gamma_e$ are the constants that, when substituted, generate the two consecutive values $\Lambda_e$ and $\Lambda_{e+1}$. Thus
\begin{equation}
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & 1\\\phi & \psi
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
\beta_e\\\gamma_e
\end{pmatrix}=
\begin{pmatrix}
\Lambda_e\\\Lambda_{e+1}
\end{pmatrix}\\
\iff
\begin{pmatrix}
\beta_e\\\gamma_e
\end{pmatrix}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{5}}\begin{pmatrix}
A_{e}\varphi^{-1}+A_{e+1}\\A_e\varphi-A_{e+1}
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
These results will be useful in the following sections.
\subsection{Sequences satisfying strange recurrence relations}
In his famous book \textit{G\"odel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid} \cite{hofstadter}, Douglas R. Hofstadter introduced the sequence $(Q_n)^\infty_{n=1}$ with the initial values $Q_1=Q_2=1$ and the following relation:
\begin{equation*}
Q_n=Q_{n-Q_{n-1}}+Q_{n-Q_{n-2}}\quad \text{for} \ n>2
\end{equation*}
which he called a ``strange'' recursion because each value depends on two previous elements, but not the immediately previous two values, like in the Fibonacci sequence. The first elements of $(Q_n)$ are
\begin{equation*}
(Q_n)=(1,1,2,3,3,4,5,5,6,6,6,8,8,8,10,9,10,\ldots)
\end{equation*}
Hofstadter's $Q$ sequence has been studied both analytically and numerically, it is studied in \cite{pinn1} but little is known about it and it's chaotic behaviour; it's thought that there are an infinite number numbers that does not appear on $(Q_n)$!
Inspired by $(Q_n)$, other recursions were introduced. For example, the Conway sequence:
\begin{equation*}
C_n=C_{C_{n-1}}+C_{n-C_{n-1}} \quad \text{for} \ n>2
\end{equation*}
with the initial values $C_1=C_2=1$. The first elements of $C_n$ are
\begin{equation*}
(C_n)=(1,1,2,2,3,4,4,4,5,6,7,7,8,8,8,8,9,\ldots)
\end{equation*}
\subsection{The general ultra-recursive transformation}
In the next two sections, we'll study some particular cases of this type of transformation of sequences of numbers
\begin{equation}
\textsc{H}(F_1,F_2,\ldots,F_6)\circ(u_k)\equiv(\nu_k)\colon \ \nu_{p+1}=\sum^{F_2-1}_{i=F_1}[F_3* u_{p F_4-i F_5(\sign u_p)}+F_6]
\end{equation}
where $(u_k)$ is a bi-infinite sequence, $p$ is the position of any of it's elements and $F_1,...,F_6$ are any kind of functions.\footnote{In (1.10), the upper bound of the summation was chosen by simplicity, so that $F_2-F_1$ is the number of summands.} The relevant property of this transformation is that $\nu_{p+1}$ can be a sum of the successors of $u_p$.
\section{Ultra-recursive sequences}
We are now going to study the eigen-sequences of one of the simplest non-trivial cases of (1.10): the transformation $\textsc{H}(0,|u_p|,1,1,\sign{u_p},1)$. From now on, we will refer to it just as $\textsc{O}$:
\begin{equation}
\textsc{O}\circ(u_k)\equiv(\nu_k)\colon \ \nu_{p+1}=\sum^{|u_p|-1}_{i=0}[u_{p-i\sign u_p}+1]
\end{equation}
A sequence that remains invariant under this transformation must satisfy a strange recurrence formula, we will refer to it as ultra-recursive sequence.
\begin{definition}
We call ultra-recursive sequence $(u_k)_{k\in\mathbb{Z}}$ to any sequence whose elements satisfy the formula
\begin{equation}
u_{p+1}=\sum^{|u_p|-1}_{i=0}[u_{p-i\sign u_p}+1]
\end{equation}
By definition, $(u_k)$ is an eigen-sequence of $\textsc{O}$. This is: $\textsc{O}\circ(u_k)=(u_k)$.
\end{definition}
There are two interesting interpretations of Definition 2.1, both arise from the equivalent equation:
\begin{equation}
u_{p+1}=|u_p|+\sum^{|u_p|-1}_{i=0}u_{p-i\sign u_p}
\end{equation}
\textbf{Interpretation 1.} In $(u_k)$, every term generates its successor according to the following rules: $u_{p+1}$ is equal to $|u_p|$ plus another $|u_p|$ elements: $u_p$ and the previous $[u_p-1]$ elements (if $u_p$ is \textbf{positive}) or $u_p$ and the next $[|u_p|-1]$ elements (if $u_p$ is \textbf{negative}). If $u_p=0$, no other value would be added.
\textbf{Interpretation 2.} $(u_k)$ is a self-descriptive sequence since any two consecutive members give information about the sum of a subset of the sequence: $u_{p+1}-|u_p|=\sum u_{p \pm i}$. Specifically: if $u_p$ is positive, $(u_{p+1}-u_p)$ will always be the sum of the $u_p$ predecessors of $u_{p+1}$; if $u_p$ is negative, $(u_{p+1}+u_p)$ will be the sum of the $|u_p|$ successors of $u_{p-1}$.
What kind of collection of numbers satisfy an equation of this nature? Note that we didn't define any initial terms and we won't do it in the near future because, roughly speaking, it is not possible to give any value we desire to a set of terms. If we say $u_0=3$ and $u_1=5$, for example, we're saying the first generates the second by the sum $|3|+(3+u_{-1}+u_{-2})$, but the last two elements are not defined yet, all we know is $u_{-1}+u_{-2}=-1$ and $u_{-1}$ must generate $u_0=3$ by (2.2) and it is not evident that there exist two values that can satisfy all those requirements.\\
Till this moment, it is unclear what combination of elements can be an ultra-recursive sequence. Let's see what happens if the value $1$ exists in the position $p$.
\begin{corollary}
According to (2.3), if there exists an ultra-recursive sequence $(u_k)$ with $u_p=1$, it's successors would be
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&u_{p+1}=1+\sum^{0}_{i=0}u_{p-i}=1+u_p=1+1=2\\
&u_{p+2}=2+\sum^1_{i=0}u_{p+1-i}=2+u_{p+1}+u_p=2+2+1=5
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Meaning $u_p=1 \implies (u_k)=(\ldots,u_{p-2},u_{p-1}, \ \boldsymbol{1} \ , \ \boldsymbol{2} \ , \ \boldsymbol{5} \ ,u_{p+3},u_{p+4}\ldots)$.
\end{corollary}
We didn't give a universal value to $u_{p+3}$ because it is dependent on its 5 predecessors and $u_{p-1}$ and $u_{p-2}$ are undefined. In general, it is hard to propose \textit{manually} possible values for $(u_k)$, but we can find more about the restrictions imposed by Definition 2.1.
\subsection{Cases of Definition 2.1}
Given a presumably ultra-recursive sequence $(u_k)$ with an arbitrary element $u_p$
\begin{equation*}
(u_k)=(\ldots, u_{p-3}, u_{p-2}, u_{p-1}, \boldsymbol{u_p}, u_{p+1}, u_{p+2}, u_{p+3} \ldots)
\end{equation*}
there are three possible cases: $u_p>0, \ u_p<0$ \ and \ $u_p=0$.
\begin{case}
When $u_p$ is positive,
\begin{equation*}
u_p>0 \iff |u_p|=u_p \iff \sign u_p=1
\end{equation*}
and (2.3) will be equivalent to:
\begin{equation}
u_{p+1}=u_p+\sum^{u_p-1}_{i=0}u_{p-i}=2u_p+\sum^{u_p-1}_{i=1}u_{p-i}
\end{equation}
and also equivalent to the following equations
\begin{equation}
u_{p+1}=2u_p+\sum^{p-1}_{i=p+1-u_p}u_i
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
u_{p+1}=2+\sum^{p-1}_{i=p+1-u_p}(u_i+2)
\end{equation}
\end{case}
\begin{case}
If $u_p$ is negative,
\begin{equation*}
u_p<0 \iff |u_p|=-u_p \iff \sign{u_p}=-1
\end{equation*}
and by (2.3):
\begin{equation*}
u_{p+1}=-u_p+\sum^{-u_p-1}_{i=0}u_{p+i}=-u_p+u_p+\sum^{-u_p-1}_{i=1}u_{p+i}=\sum^{p-1-u_p}_{i=p+1}u_i
\end{equation*}
Extracting the first element from the sum (when $i=p+1$), gives
\begin{equation}
u_{p+1}=u_{p+1}+\sum^{p-1-u_p}_{i=p+2}u_{i}
\end{equation}
And this can only be true if the sum is equal to zero. We have found the first important conclusion about $(u_k)$.
\begin{corollary}
In a u-sequence $(u_k)$, if the element $u_p$ is negative, then
\begin{equation}
\sum^{p-1-u_p}_{i=p+2}u_i=0
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
\end{case}
As we shall see later, this Corollary also means that given any sequence $(\upsilon_k)$, if there are consecutive elements whose sum is zero, that is if $\sum^\beta_{i=\alpha}\upsilon_{i}=0$ and if $\upsilon_{\alpha-2}=\alpha-\beta-3$, then the element $\upsilon_{\alpha-1}$ will remain invariant under the transformation $\textsc{O}$ ($\upsilon^\prime_{\alpha-1}=\upsilon_{\alpha-1}$).\\
\begin{corollary}
From (2.2) and by the definition of summation, it's clear that
\begin{equation*}
u_p=0\implies u_{p+1}=0
\end{equation*}
consecutively
\begin{equation}
u_p=0\implies u_q=0 \ \ \forall \ \ q>p
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
But this is evident. According to Interpretation 1, if every term produces the next by adding as many numbers as it's value, zero must produce another zero or a bored infinite sequence of zeros to its right. But why didn't we use the logical operator for \textbf{bi-implication} in Corollary 2.3? What other elements can generate a zero, apart from zero?
It's time to ask ourselves seriously: at what point it is a lose of time to study an equation as arbitrary as (2.2)? The following example will partially solve this concerns and will lead us to the discovery of an interesting number that will allow us to create, manipulate or propose ultra-recursive sequences with unexpected properties.
\begin{example}
Corollary 2.2 predicts the existence of a member of $(u_k)$ equal to zero. The summation has only one summand, when its lower and upper bound are equal:
\begin{equation*}
\sum^{p-1-u_p}_{i=p+2}u_i=\sum^{\eta}_{i=\eta}u_i=u_\eta \iff p+2=p-1-u_p \iff u_p=-3
\end{equation*}
There is only one summand when $u_p=-3$ and it has to be $0$, according to Corollary 2.2: $u_p=-3 \implies u_{p+2}=0$. And according to Corollary 2.3: $u_p=-3 \implies u_q=0 \ \ \forall \ \ q>p+1$
Although $-3$ implies an infinite sequence of zeros two places at its right, it does not produce them; what produces is any number that has the audacity to produce a zero. Since $ \sum^{p+3+m}_{i=p+3}u_i=0$ for an arbitrary $m>0$, the Corollary 2.2 establishes that in this case, $u_{p+1}$ can have any negative value $-m$: this means that $u_p=-3$ can generate any negative number.\\
Finally, let's see that both $u_{p+1}=-1$ and $u_{p+1}=-2$ can produce the element $u_{p+2}=0$ without the necessity a large amount of elements equal to zero.
\begin{corollary}
$u_p=-1\implies u_{p+1}=0$ as a consequence of (2.2):
\begin{equation*}
u_p=-1 \implies u_{p+1}=\sum^0_{i=0}(u_{p-i}+1)=-1+1=0
\end{equation*}
\end{corollary}
\begin{corollary}
$u_p=-2\implies u_{p+1}=u_{p+1}$ \textsc{(?)}. According to (2.3):
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
u_p=-2 \implies u_{p+1}&=|-2|+\sum^{1}_{i=0}u_{p+i}\\
&=|-2|+(-2)+u_{p+1}\\
&=u_{p+1}
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
\end{corollary}
This means that $u_p=-2$ generates $u_{p+1}$ without any restriction! A $-2$ in $(u_k)$ allow us to generate any value without compromising any other element in the sequence (although its mere existence can influence the magnitude of other elements).\\
Now, we have an element $u_{p-1}=-2$ that can generate $u_p=-3$, which can generate any negative value $u_{p+1}=-m$ which generate $u_{p+2}=0$ and so on.
\begin{corollary}
There exists an ultra-recursive sequence $(u_k)$ with $u_z=-2$ for $z<0$, $u_0=-3$, $u_1=-m$ with $m \in \mathbb{N}$ and $u_n=0$ for $n>1$:
\begin{equation*}
(u_k)=(\ldots,-2,-2,-2,-3,-m,0,0,0,\ldots)
\end{equation*}
\end{corollary}
\end{example}
\subsection{Some ultra-recursive sequences}
The following affirmations are easily demonstrated with the results obtained throughout this section.
\begin{itemize}
\item $\exists \ (u_k) \colon u_p=0 \ \ \forall \ \ p \in \mathbb{Z}$
\item $\exists \ (u_k) \colon u_p=-2 \ \ \forall \ \ p \in \mathbb{Z}$
\item $\exists \ (u_k) \colon u_z = -2 \ \ \forall \ \ z<p \ \ \wedge \ \ u_{n} = 0 \ \ \forall \ \ p+1 \leq n$
\begin{equation*}
(u_k)=(\ldots,-2,-2,-2,u_p,u_{p+1},\ldots,0,0,0,\ldots)
\end{equation*}
There are countless combinations of values for $u_p$ and its closest successors.
\item $\exists \ (u_k) \colon u_z=-2 \ \ \forall \ \ z<0 \ \ \wedge \ \ u_0=m \colon m \in \mathbb{Z}^+$. We'll define $\boldsymbol{\Pi}$ to the sequence containing all the possible sequences $(\pi_{m,k})$: alluding the number $m$ in position $0$ (i.e. $\pi_{m,0}=m$).\\
The elements $\pi_{m,n}$ for $n\geq0$ will be studied in the next section.
\end{itemize}
\section{$\boldsymbol{\Pi}$ sequence}
We've generated some eigen-sequences of the transformation $\textsc{O}$, but we aren't calculating values with an explicit formula, instead we are \textbf{discovering} values that satisfy our definitions.
Nevertheless, there are ultra-recursive sequences that are partially periodic. In the past section we found sequences $(u_k)$ with infinite terms equal to $-2$ through the left.
\begin{definition}
The sequence of sequences $\boldsymbol{\Pi}$ has elements $(\pi_{m,k})$ who are eigen-sequences of the transformation $\textsc{O}$.
\begin{equation*}
\boldsymbol{\Pi} \equiv ((\pi_{m,k})_{k\in\mathbb{Z}})_{m\in\mathbb{Z}^+} \colon \quad \pi_{m,z}=-2 \ \ \forall \ \ z<0 \ \ \ \textit{and} \ \ \ \pi_{m,0}=m
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
We can generate the terms $\pi_{m,n}$ for $n>0$ iteratively using equation (2.2) or (2.3). The correspondent matrix for $\boldsymbol{\Pi}$ is
\setcounter{MaxMatrixCols}{20}
\begin{equation*}
\begin{pmatrix}
\ldots & -2 & -2 & -2 & 1 & 2 & 5 & 9 & 16 & 27 & 45 & 74 & \ldots\\
\ldots & -2 & -2 & -2 & 2 & 2 & 6 & 10 & 18 & 30 & 50 & 82 & \ldots\\
\ldots & -2 & -2 & -2 & 3 & 2 & 7 & 11 & 20 & 33 & 55 & 90 & \ldots\\
\ldots & -2 & -2 & -2 & 4 & 2 & 8 & 12 & 22 & 36 & 60 & 98 & \ldots\\
\ldots & -2 & -2 & -2 & 5 & 2 & 9 & 13 & 24 & 39 & 65 & 106 & \ldots\\
\ldots & -2 & -2 & -2 & 6 & 2 & 10 & 14 & 26 & 42 & 70 & 114 & \ldots\\
\ldots & -2 & -2 & -2 & 7 & 2 & 11 & 15 & 28 & 45 & 75 & 122 & \ldots\\
\ldots & -2 & -2 & -2 & 8 & 2 & 12 & 16 & 30 & 48 & 80 & 130 & \ldots\\
\reflectbox{$\ddots$} &
\vdots & \vdots &\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots &\vdots & \vdots & \ddots
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation*}
What patterns or properties can you find just by looking?
\begin{definition}
The summation of the first $n$ successors of $\pi_{m,-1}$ and the summation of the first $n$ predecessors of $\pi_{m,0}$
\begin{equation*}
S^m_n\equiv\sum^{n-1}_{i=0}\pi_{m,i}, \ \ \ R^m_n\equiv \sum^{-1}_{i=-n}\pi_{m,i}
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
\begin{corollary}
From Definition 3.1, we know that $R^m_n=n(-2)$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{theorem}
For every $\pi_{m,n+1}$ with $n\geq0$
\begin{equation}
\pi_{m,n+1}=2+\sum^{n-1}_{i=0}(\pi_{m,i}+2)=S^m_n+2n+2
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
If $\pi_{m,n}>n>0$, we can use (2.6) as follows:
\begin{equation*}
\pi_{m,n+1}=2+\sum^{n-1}_{i=n+1-\pi_{m,n}}(\pi_{m,i}+2) = 2+\sum^{n-1}_{i=0}(\pi_{m,i}+2)+\sum^{-1}_{i=n+1-\pi_{m,n}}(\pi_{m,i}+2)
\end{equation*}
by Definition 3.1, we know $\pi_{m,z}=-2$ for $z<0$. Therefore:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\pi_{m,n+1}&=2+\sum^{n-1}_{i=0}(\pi_{m,i}+2)+\sum^{-1}_{i=n+1-\pi_{m,n}}(-2+2)\\
&=2+\sum^{n-1}_{i=0}(\pi_{m,i}+2)=S^m_n+2n+2\\
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
If $S^m_n>\pi_{m,n}$, the last equation gives $\pi_{m,n+1}$ a positive value and it can be used for $\pi_{m,n+2}$ (since $\pi_{m,n+1}>n+1>0$ was the first condition of the proof) and for induction it can be used for all next elements. Since $S^m_0$ is exactly zero and $\pi_{m,0}$ is always greater than zero, this theorem is valid for $\pi_{m,n+1}$ with $n\geq 0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
In $(\pi_{m,n})$, all the successors of $\pi_{m,0}$ are positives and the first ones are
\begin{equation*}
\pi_{m,1}=2, \ \pi_{m,2}=m+4, \ \pi_{m,3}=m+8, \ \pi_{m,4}=2m+14, \ldots
\end{equation*}
\end{corollary}
Note that $\pi_{m,1}=2$ is the only constant value or the only element independent of $m$ in $(\pi_{m,k})$.
It's natural to wonder if there is a more organic relation between one element and the previous ones.
\begin{theorem}
Any element of $(\pi_{m,k})$ except from $\pi_{m,0}$ and $\pi_{m,1}$ is equal to the sum of the two previous elements plus two.
\begin{equation}
\pi_{m,p}=\pi_{m,p-1}+\pi_{m,p-2}+2 \ \ \forall p \neq 0, 1
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
For $z<0$, from Definition 3.1
\begin{equation*}
\pi_{m,z+1}=-2=-2-2+2=\pi_{m,z-1}+\pi_{m,z-2}+2
\end{equation*}
For $n+1\geq2$, we can use Theorem 3.1 as follows
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\pi_{m,n+1}&=S^m_n+2n+2=(S^m_{n-1}+\pi_{m,n-1})+2n+2\\
&=(S^m_{n-1}+2(n-1)+2)+\pi_{m,n-1}+2\\
&=\pi_{m,n}+\pi_{m,n-1}+2
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
Theorem 3.2 tell us that an infinite subset of $(\pi_{m,k})$ (actually the totality of it minus two values) satisfies not only (2.2) but also a recurrence relation in the traditional fashion. The next natural step is to find the closed form expression for any sequence in $\boldsymbol{\Pi}$.
\begin{theorem}
For $n\geq0$, the function that generates $\pi_{m,n}$ is:
\begin{equation}
\pi_{m,n}=B_m\varphi^n+C_m\psi^n-2
\end{equation}
or equivalently with $b_m=\sqrt{5}B_m$ and $c_m=\sqrt{5}C_m$
\begin{equation*}
\pi_{m,n}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{5}}(b_m\varphi^n+c_m\psi^n)-2
\end{equation*}
Where the constants $B_m$ and $C_m$ are defined as follows
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&B_m \equiv \frac{(m+2)\varphi+2-m}{\sqrt{5}}=\frac{2\varphi^2+m\varphi^{-1}}{\sqrt{5}},\\
&C_m \equiv \frac{(m+2)\varphi-4}{\sqrt{5}}=B_m+\frac{m-6}{\sqrt{5}}
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
In Complementary Information, we've established that for the recurrence relation $\Lambda_n=\Lambda_{n-1}+ +\Lambda_{n-2}+\varepsilon$, exists the closed form solution
\begin{equation*}
\Lambda_n=\beta \varphi^n+ \gamma \psi^n - \varepsilon
\end{equation*}
Therefore, we only need to find the constants that generate the two initial terms: $B_m+C_m-2=m, \ B_m\varphi+C_m\psi-2=2$. After solving this by the same method mentioned in the Introduction, we get:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{pmatrix}
B_m\\C_m
\end{pmatrix}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{5}}\begin{pmatrix}
(m+2)\varphi^{-1}+4\\(m+2)\varphi-4
\end{pmatrix}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{5}}\begin{pmatrix}
(m+2)\varphi+2-m\\(m+2)\varphi-4
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
The relation between the $n$th term of any two sequences in $\boldsymbol{\Pi}$: $(\pi_{m,k})$ and $(\pi_{t,k})$
\begin{equation}
\pi_{m,n}=\pi_{t,n}+(m-t)F_{n-1}
\end{equation}
Where $F_{n-1}$ is a term from the Fibonacci sequence
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} Theorem 3.3 and the closed form formula of the Fibonacci sequence imply
\begin{equation*}
\pi_{t,n}+(m-t)F_{n-1}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{5}}\Biggl[\Biggl(b_t+\frac{m-t}{\varphi}\Biggr)\varphi^n+\Biggl(c_t+\frac{t-m}{\psi}\Biggr)\psi^n\Biggr]
\end{equation*}
but
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
b_t+\frac{m-t}{\varphi}&=[(t+2)\varphi+2-t]\ + \ (m-t)(\varphi-1)=(m+2)\varphi+2-m=b_m\\
c_t+\frac{t-m}{\psi}&=[(t+2)\varphi-4]\ + \ (t-m)(-\varphi)=(m+2)\varphi-4=c_m
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Therefore
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\pi_{t,n}+(m-t)F_{n-1}&=\frac{1}{\sqrt{5}}[b_m\varphi^n+c_m\psi^n]\\
&=\pi_{m,n}
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
We are now able to express any element of $(\pi_{m,n})$ as a function of two consecutive values of a given sequence $(\pi_{t,n})$
\begin{theorem}
The element $\pi_{m,n}$ in function of $\pi_{t,e}$ and $\pi_{t,e+1}$.
\begin{equation}
\pi_{m,n}=\pi_{t,e} F_{n-e-1}+\pi_{t,e+1} F_{n-e}+2F_{n-e+1}+(m-t)F_{n-1}-2
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
From (1.6), we know there are several ways to express the closed-form solution for any sequence in terms of two consecutive values. In the case of $(\pi_{m,n})$, the equation will be similar to (3.3)
\begin{equation}
\pi_{t,n}=B_{t,e}\varphi^{n-e}+C_{t,e}\psi^{n-e}-2
\end{equation}
Where $e=0$ is exactly (3.3) with $B_{t,0}=B_t$ and $C_{t,0}=C_t$. For any $e$
\begin{equation*}
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & 1\\\varphi & \psi
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
B_{t,e}\\C_{t,e}
\end{pmatrix}=
\begin{pmatrix}
\pi_{t,e}+2\\\pi_{t,e+1}+2
\end{pmatrix}\\
\end{equation*}
and the constants $\begin{pmatrix}B_{t,e}\\C_{t,e}\end{pmatrix}$ are
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{5}}\begin{pmatrix}
\pi_{t,e}\varphi^{-1}+\pi_{t,e+1}+2\varphi\\\pi_{t,e}\varphi-\pi_{t,e+1}-2\psi\end{pmatrix}=\frac{\pi_{t,e}}{\sqrt{5}}\begin{pmatrix}
\varphi^{-1}\\-\psi^{-1}
\end{pmatrix}+\frac{\pi_{t,e+1}}{\sqrt{5}}\begin{pmatrix}
1\\-1
\end{pmatrix}+\frac{2}{\sqrt{5}}\begin{pmatrix}
\varphi\\-\psi
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation*}
This gives (3.6) a new expression
\begin{equation}
\pi_{t,n}=\pi_{t,e} F_{n-e-1}+\pi_{t,e+1} F_{n-e}+2F_{n-e+1}-2
\end{equation}
Applying Theorem 3.4 to (3.7) leads directly (3.5).
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
From (3.7), for $e=0$, we have a new way to view equation (3.3)
\begin{equation}
\pi_{m,n}=mF_{n-1}+2F_{n+2}-2
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
\subsection{The $k$th difference sequence of $(\pi_{m,n})$ and their relations with other sequences}
\begin{definition}
The first difference sequence for $(\pi_{m,n})$:
\begin{equation}
\Delta (\pi_{m,n})=\Delta^1 (\pi_{m,n})\equiv \pi_{m,n+1}-\pi_{m,n}
\end{equation}
And for $k>1$, the $k$th difference of $(\pi_{m,n})$:
\begin{equation}
\Delta^k(\pi_{m,n})\equiv\Delta^{k-1}(\pi_{m,n+1})-\Delta^{k-1}(\pi_{m,n})
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
\begin{corollary}
From Corollary 3.3, if $n>0$:
\begin{equation}
\Delta^k (\pi_{m,n})=mF_{n-1-k}+2F_{n+2-k}
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proposition}
From (3.11), it can be proved that the $k$th difference sequence for $\pi_{m,n}$ satisfies the recurrence relation (1.3)
\begin{equation}
\Delta^k (\pi_{m,n})=\Delta^k (\pi_{m,n-1})+\Delta^k (\pi_{m,n-2})
\end{equation}
If $\ 1\leq k\leq n-1$, the $n$th term of the $k$th difference sequence is related with an element of $(\pi_{m,n})$ by:
\begin{equation}
\Delta^k(\pi_{m,n})=\pi_{m,n-k}+2
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}
Some relations between the $k$th difference sequences and other sequences:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\Delta^k(\pi_{1,n})&=L_{n+2-k}\\
\Delta^k(\pi_{2,n})&=4F_{n-k}\\
\Delta^k(\pi_{6,n})&=4L_{n-k}\\
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}
\subsection{A different u-recursive sequence}
Let's consider the finite sequence $(q_j)^3_{j=-5}$
\begin{equation*}
(q_j)=(\boldsymbol{-2},-2,-2,-2,-2,1,2,5,9)
\end{equation*}
This sequence is a sub-sequence of $(\pi_{1,k})$, all of its elements (except for $q_{-5}$, the minus two written in bold) are produced by their predecessor by the formula (2.3)
\begin{equation*}
q_{p+1}=|q_p|+\sum^{|q_p|-1}_{i=0}q_{p-i\sign{q_p}}
\end{equation*}
It's possible to expand the sequence by generating the next element $q_4$ using the previous formula
\begin{equation*}
q_4=9+\sum^8_{i=0}q_{3-i}=9+9-2+\sum^2_{i=-4}q_i=16
\end{equation*}
The sequence contains exactly the 9 elements the summatory is asking for. Notice that the sum of 7 consecutive elements of the sequence is equal to $0$, this is exactly the requisite for the existence of a negative number in the sequence (Corollary 2.2): $q_p \implies \sum^{p-1-q_p}_{i=p+2}q_i=0$. In this case, $\sum^2_{i=-4}q_i$, so the position is $p=-4-2=-6$ and it's value $q_p=-6-1-2=-9$.
This allow us to expand the sequence, by adding another element on the left.
\begin{equation*}
(q_j)=(-9,-2,-2,-2,-2,-2,1,2,5,9,16)
\end{equation*}
We are able to add as many $-2$ to the left as we want without violating (2.2), so there's enough elements in the sequence to generate the next term to the right. Furthermore, we can also try to find the similar conditions that allowed $-9$ to exist in the first place: $R_n=S_{n^{\prime}}$.
After repeating this procedure, we get the following ultra-recursive sequence:
\begin{equation*}
(\ldots,-86_{_{-77}}|-42_{_{-35}}|-20_{_{-15}}|-9_{_{-6}}|-2_{_{-1}},1,2,5,9,16,20,38,42,82,86,\ldots)
\end{equation*}
where the sub-indices allude to the position in which the value is located. The omitted values in between are $-2$.
It is not a coincidence that the magnitude of all the negative values in the sequence also appears as positive. The following theorem explains that and also the fact that $q_{-n}\neq-2 \implies q_{q_{-n}-n}=-2q_{-n}-2$.
\begin{theorem}
For $m>0$, there exists an ultrarecursive sequence $(\pi^*_k)$ with $\pi^*_n=\pi_{m,n}$ for $-m-4\leq n \leq 3$; $\pi^*_{2n}=2(\pi^*_{2n-1}-1)$, $\pi^*_{2n+1}=2(\pi^*_{2n-1}+1)$ for $n>1$; and for $t<0$, if $t=-(\pi^*_{2n-1}-2n+1)$ for some $n>1$, it implies $\pi^*_t=-\pi^*_{2n-1}$, otherwise $\pi^*_t=-2$.
\begin{equation*}
(...,|-(2m+18)_{_{-(2m+13)}}|-(m+8)_{_{-(m+5)}}|-2_{_{-1}},m,2,m+4,m+8,...)
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let's suppose that the sum of the $\pi^*_n-2$ predecessors of $\pi^*_n$ is zero:
\begin{equation*}
\sum^{n-1}_{i=-(\pi^*_n-n-2)}\pi^*_i=0\\
\end{equation*}
This allows, according to Corollary 2.2, the existence of the element $-(\pi^*_n-n-2)-(n-1)-3=-\pi^*_n$ in the position $\pi^*_{-(\pi^*_n-n)}$; we also know that $\pi^*_{-(\pi^*_n-n-1)}=-2$ is allowed.
The next element in the sequence will be:
\begin{equation*}
\pi^*_{n+1}= 2\pi^*_{n}+\sum^{n-1}_{i=n+1-\pi^*_n}\pi^*_i=2\pi^*_n+\pi^*_{-(\pi^*_n-n-1)}+\sum^{n-1}_{i=-(\pi^*_n-n-2)}\pi^*_i=2\pi^*_n-2
\end{equation*}
Since $\pi^*_{-(\pi^*_n-n)}+\pi^*_{-(\pi^*_n-n-1)}+\pi^*_n+\pi^*_{n+1}=2\pi^*_n-4$, it's clear that
\begin{equation*}
\sum^{n+1}_{i=-(2\pi^*_n-n-2)}\pi^*_i=\sum^{n+1}_{i=-(\pi^*_{n+1}-n)}=0
\end{equation*}
if the $\pi^*_n-2$ predecessors of $\pi^*_{-(\pi^*_n-n)}$ have value $-2$. Therefore, the next element in the sequence:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\pi^*_{n+2}&=\pi^*_{n+1}+\sum^{n+1}_{i=n+2-\pi^*_{n+1}}\pi^*_i=\pi^*_{n+1}+\sum^{n+1}_{i=-(\pi^*_{n+1}-n-2)}\pi^*_i\\
&=\pi^*_{n+1}-\pi^*_{-(\pi^*_{n+1}-n)}-\pi^*_{-(\pi^*_{n+1}-n-1)}+\sum^{n+1}_{i=-(\pi^*_{n+1}-n)}\\
&=\pi^*_{n+1}+4
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Now, let us notice that the sum of the $\pi^*_{n+1}+2=\pi^*_{n+2}-2$ predecessors of $\pi^*_{n+2}$ is zero. This is the same condition that started the proof, which allow us to demonstrate by induction that this behavior will remain for the successors of $n$. It is easy to proof that for $n=3$
\begin{equation*}
\sum^{n-1}_{i=n-(\pi_{m,n}-2)}\pi_{m,i}=0
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
We have found an infinite number of ultra-rrecursive sequences that are not periodic nor partially periodic.
\begin{definition}
The sequences of sequences $\boldsymbol{\Pi^*}$ has elements $(\pi^*_{m,k})$ that are eigen-sequences of the transformation $\textsc{O}$.
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\boldsymbol{\Pi^*} \equiv ((\pi^*_{m,k})_{k\in\mathbb{Z}})_{m\in\mathbb{Z}^+} \colon \quad & \pi^*_{m,n}=\pi_{m,n} \ \ \forall \ \ 0\leq n\leq3 \\
&\pi^*_{m,2n}=2\pi^*_{2n-1} -2\ \ \forall \ \ n>2 \\
&\pi^*_{m,2n+1}=\pi^*_{m,2n}+4\ \ \forall \ \ n>1 \\
& r\neq \pi^*_n-n \implies \pi^*_{-r}=-2\ \ \forall \ \ n>2 \\
& r=\pi^*_n-n \implies \pi^*_{-r}=-r-n\ \ \forall \ \ n>2 \\
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}
For $(\pi^*_{m,n})$, there is the following solution
\begin{equation}
\pi^*_{m,2n}=2^{n-1}(m+10)-6
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By Definition 3.4,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\pi^*_{m,2n}&=2\pi^*_{m,2(n-1)}+6\\
\implies \pi^*_{m,2n}&=2(2\pi^*_{m,2(n-2)}+6)+6\\
\implies \pi^*_{m,2n}&=2(2(2\pi^*_{m,2(n-3)}+6)+6)+6\\
\implies \pi^*_{m,2n}&=2^{n-2}\pi^*_{m,4}+6\sum^{n-3}_{i=0}{2^i}=2^{n-2}(2\pi^*_{m,3}-2)+6*(2^{n-2}-1)\\
&=2^{n-1}(\pi^*_{m,3}+2)-6=2^{n-1}(m+10)-6
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
\section{Periodic ultra-recursive sequences}
We are now going to examine periodic sequences with elements that satisfy the equation (2.3).
Let's consider the sequence
\begin{equation*}
(\dot{u}_n)=(-6,-2,-2,-2,6,-2)
\end{equation*}
Here, $\dot{u}_0=-2$, $\dot{u}_1=-6$ and so on. It isn't hard to prove that there exists an ultra-recursive sequence $(u_k)$ with $u_n=\dot{u}_n\colon \ 0 \leq n \leq 5$ and $u_k=u_{k+6n} \ \forall \ n\in\mathbb{Z}$.
\begin{definition}
For any sequence $(a_k)$ with period $p$, we call the unitary sequence to the sub-sequence containing the element $a_1$ and its $p-1$ successors:
\begin{equation*}
(\dot{a}_n)^p_{n=1}\colon \quad \dot{a}_m=a_m \ \ \forall \ \ 1\leq m \leq p
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}
For all $m\geq0$, there exists an ultra-recursive sequence $(\tau_k)$ with period $4m+2$ whose unitary sequence contains exactly $m$ elements with value $-4m-2$, $m$ elements with value $4m+2$ and $2m+2$ elements with value $-2$. If $\tau_k\neq-2$, then $\tau_{k-1}=-2$ and $\tau_{k+1}=-2$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Since, $(\tau_k)$ is periodic, the sum of any $4m+2$ consecutive elements is equal to
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
S_m &\equiv\sum^{(4m+2)+\alpha-1}_{i=\alpha} \tau_{i}=\sum^{4m+2}_{i=1}\dot{\tau}_{i}\\
&=m(-4m-2)+m(4m+2)+(2m+2)(-2)=-4m-4
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
If $\tau_k\neq-2$, then $\tau_k=\pm(4m+2)\implies |\pm(4m+2)|=4m+2$ and by (2.3)
\begin{equation*}
\tau_{k+1}=(4m+2)+\sum^{4m+1}_{i=0}\tau_{\mp i}=(4m+2)+S_m=-2
\end{equation*}
Thus, $\tau_k\neq-2\implies \tau_{k+1}=-2$. By Corollary 2.5, we know that $\tau_k=-2\implies \tau_{k+1}=\tau_{k+1}$, so we know every element generates its successor according to equation (2.2) independently of the position of the elements $\tau_k\neq-2$ in the sequence.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}
The sequence of sequences $\boldsymbol{T}$ has elements $(\tau^{\textsc{P},\textsc{N}}_{m,k})$ that have period $4m+2$ and are eigen-sequences of the transformation $\textsc{O}$.
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\boldsymbol{T}\equiv((\tau^{\textsc{p},\textsc{n}}_{m,k})_{k\in\mathbb{Z}})_{m\in\mathbb{Z}^+}\colon \quad & |\textsc{P}|=|\textsc{N}|=m, \ \textsc{P}\cap \textsc{N}=\varnothing, \\
& \textsc{Q}\equiv\textsc{P}\cup \textsc{N}\implies \textsc{Q} \subset\{1,2,...,4m+2\}\\
&\forall q_i,q_j\in\textsc{Q}\colon \ q_i\neq q_j+1 \ \bmod{(4m+2)}\\
&\forall q\notin \textsc{Q}, \dot{\tau}^{\textsc{p},\textsc{n}}_{m,q}=-2\\
&\forall p\in\textsc{P}, \dot{\tau}^{\textsc{p},\textsc{n}}_{m,p}=4m+2\\
&\forall n\in\textsc{N},\dot{\tau}^{\textsc{p},\textsc{n}}_{m,n}=-(4m+2)\\
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
There are several sets \textsc{P} and \textsc{N} that satisfy the requirements, all those are contained in $\boldsymbol{T}$ even though some of them are redundant because they are ``the same sequence with different subindexes''.
\end{definition}
In section 3, we studied the sequence $\boldsymbol{\Pi}$, which is periodic on the left side: the period is $1$ and its unitary sequence is the element $-2$. It is possible to \textit{construct} more sequences of this nature with the periodic ultra-recursive sequences we just found.
\begin{definition}
For any sequence $(a_k)$ with period $p$, we denote as $(\breve{a}_z)^{\beta}_{z=-\infty}$ to the infinite subsequence of $(a_k)$ whose last element is $\breve{a}_\beta=a_0=a_p$. Here, $\beta$ can be any number, depending on the context.
\begin{equation*}
(\breve{a}_z)^\beta_{z=-\infty}\colon \ \breve{a}_{\beta-n}=a_{-n} \ \forall \ n\in\mathbb{N}
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
Let's consider the sequence $(\breve{\tau}^{5,1}_{1,z})$:
\begin{equation*}
(\breve{\tau}^{5,1}_{1,z})=(...,-2,-2,6,-2,-6,-2,-2,-2,6,-2)
\end{equation*}
Notice that it is partially an ultrarrecursive sequence because every term generates the next by (2.3) except for the last element who does not have a successor. Since this element is $-2$, we can \textit{propose} any positive value as we did with $\boldsymbol{\Pi}$. The calculation of the first elements of first sequences is showed below:
\setcounter{MaxMatrixCols}{20}
\begin{equation*}
\begin{pmatrix}
(\breve{\tau}^{5,1}_{1,z})& 1 & 2 & 5 & 17 & 24 & 47 &93&174&321& \ldots\\
(\breve{\tau}^{5,1}_{1,z})& 2 & 2 & 6 & 18 & 34 & 62 &118&218&398& \ldots\\
(\breve{\tau}^{5,1}_{1,z})& 3 & 10 & 19 & 35 & 60 & 113 &215&398&731& \ldots\\
(\breve{\tau}^{5,1}_{1,z})& 4 & 10 & 20 & 36 & 70 & 128 &240&442&820& \ldots\\
(\breve{\tau}^{5,1}_{1,z})& 5 & 10 & 21 & 33 & 68 & 127 &229&426&793& \ldots\\
(\breve{\tau}^{5,1}_{1,z})& 6 & 10 & 22 & 34 & 66 & 122 &234&430&798& \ldots\\
\vdots & \vdots &\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots &\ddots
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation*}
The first thing that catches the eye is that, not like in $\boldsymbol{\Pi}$ nor $\boldsymbol{\Pi}^*$, in some cases, the properties $\tau_{m,n}<\tau_{m+1,n}$ and $\Delta{(\tau_{m,n})}<\Delta{(\tau_{m,n+1})}$ are not satisfied.\\
As we shall see later, the chaotic behavior of this sequence of sequences can represent an application in cryptography.
Before we aim to give an approximation of the $n$-th element of such a sequence, it is necessary to introduce the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}
For any sequence $(a_k)$ with two consecutive elements that satisfy $0<a_n<a_{n+1}$ it's true that
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\sum^{n-a_n}_{i=n+2-a_{n+1}}a_i=(a_{n+1}-a_n-1)(-2)+R\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
for some $R$, which implies $\sum^{n-a_n}_{i=n+2-a_{n+1}}(a_i+2)=R$. Therefore, the sequence $(a^\prime_k)\equiv\textsc{O}\circ(a_k)$, has the element $a^\prime_{n+2}$:
\begin{equation}
a^\prime_{n+2}=a^\prime_{n+1}+a_n+R+2
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By equation (2.6):
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
a^\prime_{n+2}&=2+ \sum^{n}_{i=n+2-a_{n+1}}(a_i+2)\\
&=2+a_n+2+\sum^{n-1}_{i=n+1-a_n}(a_i+2)+\sum^{n-a_n}_{i=n+2-a_{n+1}}(a_i+2)\\
&=2+a_n+a^\prime_{n+1}+R
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
For any ultrarecursive sequence $(u_k)$, if $0<a_n<a_{n+1}$, it's true that
\begin{equation}
a_{n+2}=a_{n+1}+a_n+R+2
\end{equation}
with $R=\sum^{n-a_n}_{i=n+2-a_{n+1}}(a_i+2)$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{corollary}
In $(\pi_{m,n})$, every term $\pi_{m,n}$ is greater than $n$. Therefore:
\begin{equation*}
\pi_{m,n+2}=\pi_{m,n+2}+\pi_{m,n}+2
\end{equation*}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Since $\pi_{m,k}=-2$ for $k<0$, by Corollary 4.1:
\begin{equation*}
R=\sum^{n-\pi_{m,n}}_{i=n+2-\pi_{m,n+1}}(\pi_{m,i}+2)=\sum^{n-\pi_{m,n}}_{i=n+2-\pi_{m,n+1}}(0)=0
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
Equation (4.1) can be explained as follows: for any sequence $(a_k)$, it's possible to interpret any element $a_n$ as $-2+r_n$. Therefore, the sum of consecutive elements of the sequence is:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\sum^\beta_{i=\alpha}a_i=\sum^\beta_{i=\alpha}(-2+r_i)&=(\beta+1-\alpha)\Biggl{(}-2+\frac{1}{\beta+1-\alpha}\sum^\beta_{i=\alpha}r_i\Biggr{)}\\
&=(\beta+1-\alpha)(-2+\bar{r})
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where $\bar{r}$ is the average of that set of consecutive elements and in (4.1) $R=(a_{n+1}-a_n-1)\bar{r}$. In the following theorem, we'll assume that the average of a large set of consecutive elements of a periodic sequence is near to the average of the unitary sequence:
\begin{equation}
\beta-\alpha\ggg1\implies\bar{r}\equiv\frac{1}{\beta+1-\alpha}\sum^\beta_{i=\alpha}r_i\thickapprox\frac{1}{p}\sum^p_{i=1}\dot{r}_i
\end{equation}
\begin{theorem}
For every ultrarecursive sequence $(u_k)$ periodic through the left with $(\breve{\tau}^{\textsc{P},\textsc{N}}_{m,z})^\alpha_{z=-\infty}$. Given two elements $0<n-\alpha\lll u_n<u_{n+1}$, the next element of the sequence is:
\begin{equation}
u_{n+2}\thickapprox u_{n+1}(\xi_m)+u_n(2-\xi_m)+3-\xi_m
\end{equation}
with $\xi_m=2-\frac{1}{2m+1}$. Therefore, the approximate solution for any $u_{n+r}$ would be:
\begin{equation}
u_{n+r}=\kappa^+_{m,n} \phi^r_m + \kappa^-_{m,n} (\xi_m-\phi_m)^r
\end{equation}
where $\phi_m=\frac{1}{2}\bigl{(}\xi_m+\sqrt{(\xi_m-2)^2+4}\bigr{)}$ and the $\kappa$ constants:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{pmatrix}
\kappa^+_{m,n}\\\kappa^-_{m,n}
\end{pmatrix}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{(\xi_m-2)^2+4}}\begin{pmatrix}
(\xi_m-\phi_m)u_n-u_{n+1}\\u_{n+1}-\phi_m u_n
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
First, we find the sum of all the residues $r_n$ in $(\dot{\tau}^{\textsc{P},\textsc{N}}_{m,n})$:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\sum_{p\in\textsc{P}}\dot{\tau}^{\textsc{P},\textsc{N}}_{m,p}+\sum_{n\in\textsc{N}}\dot{\tau}^{\textsc{P},\textsc{N}}_{m,n}+\sum_{q\notin\textsc{Q}}\dot{\tau}^{\textsc{P},\textsc{N}}_{m,q}=\sum_{p\in\textsc{P}}(4m+2)+\sum_{n\in\textsc{N}}(-4m-2)+\sum_{q\notin\textsc{Q}}(-2)\\
=\sum_{p\in\textsc{P}}(-2+r_p)+\sum_{n\in\textsc{N}}(-2+r_n)+\sum_{q\notin\textsc{Q}}(-2+r_q)=-4m-4\\
\implies\sum{r_i}=(-4m-4)+(2m)+(2m)+(4m+4)=4m \quad \quad\\
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Therefore, the average $\bar{r}_m$ for the $4m+2$ elements of the unitary sequence is $\bar{r}_m=\frac{2m}{2m+1}$. By equation (4.3):
\begin{equation*}
u_{n+2}\thickapprox u_{n+1}+u_n+(u_{n+1}-u_n-1)\Biggl{(}\frac{2m}{2m+1}\Biggr{)}+2
\end{equation*}
This is (4.5) if $\xi_m\equiv 1+\bar{r}_m=1+\frac{2m}{2m+1}$. The following step is to find the closed-form expression of $(u_k)$ for every $m$.
\end{proof}
Lets consider the sequence $(\breve{\tau}^{\textsc{P},\textsc{N}}_{2,k})$ with $\textsc{P}=\{6,9\}$ and $\textsc{N}=\{1,3\}$:
\begin{equation*}
(...,-10,-2,\textbf{-10},-2,-2,10,-2,-2,10,-2)
\end{equation*}
Again, this is partially an ultrarecursive sequence because almost every term generate the next by the definitions, except for the minus $10$ written in bold text and the last term (which does not have any successor to generate). For $\textbf{-10}$ it is not possible to generate the next term because there are not enough elements in the sequence: two elements to the right are needed and its sum must be $-12$. For these reasons, it seems impossible to expand the sequence with a positive element as in $\boldsymbol{\Pi}$, the unitary sequences of $\boldsymbol{T}$ for $m=2$ are the only u-recursive sequences we know that have two consecutive elements whose sum is $-12$. Of course, we can combine elements $\ldots(\dot{\tau}^{\textsc{P}_i,\textsc{N}_i}_{2,k})(\dot{\tau}^{\textsc{P}_{i+1},\textsc{N}_{i+1}}_{2,k})(\dot{\tau}^{\textsc{P}_{i+2},\textsc{N}_{i+2}}_{2,k})\ldots$ but this is kind of boring, it doesn't worth further analysis and does not give us more valuable information about the properties of the ultra-recursive sequences. Moreover, we need to find those sequences Theorem 4.3 talks about.
\begin{definition}
We say that $(a_n)^{\beta}_{n=\alpha}$ is a \textit{free} ultra-recursive sequence (or just free u-recursive sequence) if it satisfies the following three conditions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\alpha\leq n+\sign{a_n}-a_n\leq\beta$ for $\alpha\leq n<\beta$.
\item Every term $a_n$ for $n<\beta$, generates its successor by equation (2.2).
\item $a_\beta=-2$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
A notable example of a free u-recursive sequence is $(-2_n)^{0}_{n=\alpha}$ for $\alpha\in(-\infty,0]$.\
The sub-indexes here are irrelevant, we just care about the size of the free u-recursive sequence, which can be infinite.
\begin{corollary}
If $(a_n)$ and $(b_n)$ are free u-recursive sequences, then $((a_n),(b_n))$ is also free if $(b_n)$ is not infinite.
\end{corollary}
\begin{theorem}
Exists an ultrarecursive sequence $(\omega_k)$ whose elements different from $-2$ are $\omega_{(2n+1)}=-\omega_{-2n}=(4n+2) \ \ \forall \ \ n>0$
\begin{equation*}
(...,-14,-2,-10,-2,-6,-2,-2,-2,-2,6,-2,10,-2,14,...)
\end{equation*}
And every subsequence $(\omega_k)^{2n+2}_{i=-2n}$ is free.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that for some $4n+2$, there exists a free u-recursive sequence $(u_m)$ of $4n-1$ elements such that $\sum^{4n-1}_{i=1}\dot{u}_i=-4n-2$.\\
For $n=2$, $(-6,-2,-2,-2,-2,6,-2)$ is a free sequence with those properties. The proof is complete by induction if we prove that
\begin{equation}
(u^*_m)=(-4n-2,-2,(u_m),4n+2,-2)
\end{equation}
is also free, and it has $4(n+1)-1$ elements such that $\sum^{4(n+1)-1}_{i=1}\dot{u}^*_i=-4(n+1)-2$.
First, we prove that $\dot{u}^*_1=-4n-2$ generates $\dot{u}^*_2=-2$ according to Corollary 2.2:
\begin{equation*}
\sum^{4n+2}_{i=3}\dot{u}^*_i=\sum^{4n-1}_{i=1}\dot{u}_i+(4n+2)=(-4n-2)+(4n+2)=0
\end{equation*}
We can use this same result to prove that $\dot{u}^*_{4n+2}=4n+2$ generates $\dot{u}^*_{4n+3}=-2$ by equation (2.5)
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\dot{u}^*_{4n+2}+\sum^{4n+2}_{i=1}\dot{u}^*_i&=(4n+2)+\dot{u}^*_1+\dot{u}^*_2+\sum^{4n+2}_{i=3}\dot{u}^*_i\\
&=(4n+2)+(-4n-2)+(-2)+0=-2
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
Note that $(\omega_n)^6_{n=-4}=(-10,-2,-6,-2,-2,-2,-2,6,-2,10,-2)$ has the properties we were looking for before: the sum of its first two elements is $-12$. Now, we can generate a whole new group of sequences with $((\breve{\tau}^{\textsc{P},\textsc{N}}_{2,k}),(\omega_n)^6_{n=-4},m)$ where $\textsc{P}=\{6,9\}$, $\textsc{N}=\{1,3\}$ and $m>0$. For $m=1$, the following sequence takes place:
\begin{equation*}
((\breve{\tau}^{\textsc{P},\textsc{N}}_{2,k}), (\omega_n)^6_{n=-4},1 , 2 , 5 , 21 , 48 , 83 ,169,302,589,1121,2128 ,4075,7753,\ldots)
\end{equation*}
Finally, lets consider the infinite subsequence $(\breve{\tau}^{\textsc{P},\textsc{N}}_{3,k})$ for $\textsc{P}=\{8,11,13\}$ and $\textsc{N}=\{1,3,6\}$:
\begin{equation*}
(\ldots,-14,-2,\boldsymbol{-14},-2,-2,\boldsymbol{-14},-2,14,-2,-2,14,-2,14,-2)
\end{equation*}
Again, this is not a free u-recursive sequence because the two bold $-14$ can't generate its successors: there are not enough elements in the sequence. It is needed to add to the right a finit free u-recursive sequence $(a_n)$ so that $\dot{a}_1+\dot{a}_2=-16$ and $\sum^5_{i=1}\dot{a}_i=-34$. Fortunately, we can use again a free subsequence of $(\omega_k)$, since the first terms of $(\omega_n)^8_{n=-6}$ are $(-14,-2,-10,-2,-6,\ldots)$. Lets compute the following terms of the sequence if we also add the element $1$.
\begin{equation*}
((\breve{\tau}^{\textsc{P},\textsc{N}}_{3,k}),(\omega_n)^8_{n=-6},1,2,5,25,60, 103, 201, 402, 749, 1477, 2852, 5495, 10641,\ldots)
\end{equation*}
\section{Periodic eigen-sequences of the transformation $\textsc{O}^n$}
Several examples of eigen-sequences of the transformation $\textsc{O}$ have been found. In this section we discuss briefly the existence of sequences $(A_k)$ that remain invariant only after applying $r(>1)$ times $\textsc{O}$; the easiest way of start looking for such sequences is to imagining that $\textsc{O}$ has the same effect in $(A_k)$ as the following transformation:
\begin{equation}
\textsc{L}\circ(A_k)\equiv(A^\prime_k)\colon \ A^\prime_{p+1}=A_p
\end{equation}
if $(A_k)$ is periodic with period $r$, it is clear that $\textsc{L}^r\circ(A_k)=(A_k)$. Combining (5.1) and (2.3) leads to the following equation for $|A_p|>0$:
\begin{equation}
A^\prime_{p+1}=A_p=|A_p|+\sum^{|A_p|-1}_{i=0}A_{p-i\sign{A_p}}
\end{equation}
This can be interpreted as if every term generates itself instead of its next term. This is always true for $A_p=0$. Equation (5.2) is true if and only if
\begin{equation}
|A_p|=-\sum^{|A_p|-1}_{i=1}A_{p-i\sign{A_p}}
\end{equation}
Since this sequences has period $r$, equation (5.3) is equivalent to:
\begin{equation}
|A_p|=-n\sum^r_{i=1}\dot{A}_i-\sum^{|A_p|-1 \bmod{(r)}}_{i=1}A_{p-i\sign{A_p}}
\end{equation}
for some integer $n$.
\begin{theorem}
Given a sequence $(A_k)$ with period $r$ such that $|A_p|\neq0\implies |A_p|=r+1$ and $\sum^{r}_{i=1}\dot{A}_i=-(r+1)$, it is an eigen-sequence of $\textsc{O}^r$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Equation (5.4) is satisfied under the conditions stated above:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
|A_p|&=|r+1|=r+1=-1*(-r-1)+0\\
&=-1*\sum^r_{i=1}{\dot{A}_i}-\sum^{r \bmod{r}}_{i=1}A_{p-i\sign{A_p}}\\
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
For every $m>0$ there exists an eigen-sequence of $\textsc{O}^{2m+1}$ such that $m$ elements have value $2m+2$ and $m+1$ elements have value $-2m-2$.
\end{corollary}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
Polymers are extensively used in industrial applications, particularly in the aerospace and automotive industry due to their physical and mechanical properties. Polymeric composites are highly complex and their mechanical properties depend on many variables such as temperature, strain rates, etc. and the physics of plastic deformations in amorphous polymers has not been well understood. Attempts were made to understand, especially, temperature and strain rate dependent yielding in polymers, see \cite{Mayr:1998,Cook:1998} for a concise review. Nevertheless, these models tend to rely on experiments whose constitutive parameters are not physically motivated and can only be used to predict behavior of a specific material. In engineering practice, a visco-plastic model based on the pressure-modified von- Mises criterion is commonly used for thermoplastic polymers \cite{Rottler:2001,Vogler:2007}. However, these polymers behave differently under tensile, compressive and shear deformations. Hence, the von-Mises yield criterion is no longer appropriate. A number of theoretical studies have been done to find proper yield surface for the prediction of thermoplastics \cite{Vogler:2007,Kolupaev:2007}. Multisurface yield functions seem a suitable candidate to describe the yield behavior for a wide range of polymers \cite{Vogler:2007}. However, calibration (fitting) procedures are not always possible for multiaxial loading conditions especially, due to loss of data.
To accurately predict macroscopic properties the molecular feature associated with the plastic mechanism must be understood \cite{Bouvard:2009}. Molecular theories of plastic behavior in amorphous polymers were reviewed by Stachurski \cite{Stachurski:1997}. However, the behavior at nano length scales was not explained within scope of these theories.
Along with the development of accurate inter-atomic potentials using quantum mechanics, molecular dynamics (MD) simulations are a powerful tool in visualizing molecular mechanisms of yielding \cite{Sundararaghavan:2013}. MD simulations offer a promising way to develop new theories and models for glassy polymers as they can reduce the need for ad-hoc experiments.
Fully atomistic models based on force fields and chemical structure of materials allow us to physically interpret their complex physical phenomena \cite{LiLiu:2012}, the length and time scales, nevertheless, limit the mechanism associated with viscoelastic/plastic behavior of the material, since interactions between single atoms are explicitly considered. Coarse graining methods, such as united atom (UA) models, can increase the length scales though the time scale has been still limited \cite{Bouvard:2009}. Rottler et al. \cite{Rottler:2001} studied shear yielding of glassy polymers under multiaxial loading conditions using MD simulations and relate them to the pressure-modified von-Mises criterion, but just at nanoscale as the simulation time is prohibitive.
However, macroscopic continuum mechanics models can be employed to study large domains and realistic time-scales. Therefore, a multiscale model passing the nanoscale descriptions to the continuum is very important. In other words, macroscopic constitutive parameters describing the evolution of macroscopic properties can be obtained from MD simulations \cite{NamLiu:2015}.
Due to high strain rates involved in MD simulations, which are not experimentally encountered, an appropriate scaling law for the yield surface \cite{NamLiu:2015} is essential to reconcile the different strain rates of MD simulations and experiments. In this article, the quasi-static simulations are employed to extract yield stresses at quasi-static strain rates from MD simulations. Furthermore, Bayes' theorem is used to construct an upscaling technique. In particular, Bayesian approach considering \emph{prior information} of the parameters (i.e. strain rate) upon which the \emph{posterior distribution} is updated given a set of observations, leading to an identification of constitutive parameters.
The article begins with the nanoscale model of the PE. Temperature dependence of the elastic and yield behavior is subsequently accounted for. Also, the Bayesian updating used to study the strain rate scaling laws is briefly depicted. The following Section describes the macroscopic continuum model whose constitutive properties are obtained from nanoscale model. Numerical results will be presented before we conclude with a discussion in Section \ref{sec:conclusion}.
\section{Nanoscale model} \label{sec:nanoscale}
\subsection{Model system and simulations} \label{subsec:model_system}
The material is described by a united atom (UA) model using the DREIDING force field \cite{Mayo:1990} with harmonic covalent potential functions and the truncated Lennard-Jones (LJ) 6-12 for non-bonded van der Waals interactions whose parameters are adopted from \cite{NamRabczuk:2012}. The functional form and parameters are presented in Table \ref{ta:dreiding_force_field}.
\begin{table}[!htb]
\centering \caption{Functional form and parameters of the Dreiding force field}\label{ta:dreiding_force_field}
\scalebox{0.9}{
\newcommand*{\TitleParbox}[1]{\parbox[c]{6cm}{\raggedright #1}}%
\begin{tabular}{l l l}
\hline
Interaction & Form & Parameters \\
\hline
Bond & $E_b = \frac{1}{2} k_b({r-r_{eq}})^2$ & \TitleParbox{$k_b=350~kcal/mol {\AA{}}^2,~r_{eq}=1.53~{\AA{}}^2$} \\
Angle & $E_a = \frac{1}{2} k_{\theta}(cos(\theta)-cos(\theta_{eq}))^2$ & \TitleParbox{$k_{\theta} = 60~kcal/mol/rad^2,~\theta_{eq} =109.5^0$} \\
Dihedral & $E_d = \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=0}^{3} d_i cos^i (\phi)$ & \TitleParbox{$d_0 = 1.736,~d_1 = -4.490,~d_2 = 0.776,~d_3 = 6.990~(kcal/mol)$} \\
Non-bonded & $E_{nb} = \left \{\begin{array}{l l}
4 \xi \left[ \left( \frac{\delta}{r} \right)^{12} - \left( \frac{\delta}{r} \right)^{6} \right] & \quad r \leq r_{cut} \\
0 & \quad r > r_{cut}
\end{array} \right.$
& \TitleParbox{$\xi = 0.112~kcal/mol, \delta = 4.01~\AA{}, r_{cut} = 10.5~\AA{}$} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{table}
The initial polymer structure was generated by using a Monte Carlo self-avoiding random walks algorithm as described by Binder \cite{Binder:1995}. A face-centered cubic (FCC) is used when generating initial configuration within a simulation box. Molecules were added to the lattice in a step-wise manner based on a method to make the appropriate selection of neighboring lattice sites. For each polymer chain, the first atom is added to an available site on the lattice. Then, the polymer chain is grown in certain directions on the bond angle and the density of the region where sites are not occupied in the probability context. LAMMPS \cite{Plimpton:1995} is employed to equilibrate the PE system through four sequential steps: (1) the PE structure was equilibrated for $10^5$ timesteps ($\Delta t = 1$fs) at $500$K using a Nose-Hoover thermostat ($NVT$) \cite{Nose:1984,Hoover:1985}; (2) a Nose-Hoover barostat ($NPT$) at the temperature of $500$K and the pressure of $1$atm condition was conducted for $5 \times 10^5$ timesteps ($\Delta t = 1$fs); (3) the structure was then cooled down to the desired temperature with a cooling rate of $0.4$K/ps followed by further $5 \times 10^5$ timesteps ($\Delta t = 1$fs) where the structure is in equilibrium. During the cooling process, the glass transition temperature ($T_g$) is determined as the intersection of two linear fitted lines to the volume versus temperature curve, see Figure \ref{fig:PE_structure}(b). Three cooling rates $0.8$ K/ps, $0.4$ K/ps and $0.2$ K/ps are used herein to take the effect of cooling rate on the glass transition temperature ($T_g$) into consideration. As observed, volume-temperature plots and the resultant $T_g$ corresponding with various cooling rates are almost identical. It is shown that $T_g = 300$K and density $\rho \approx 0.87 \div 0.91$ g/cm$^3$ are in good agreement with previous simulation and experiment results ($T_g = 250 K ~\text{and} ~\rho = 0.95 g/cm^3$ are experimentally measured value) on high density polyethylene (HDPE), see \cite{Capaldi:2004,Hossain:2010,Brandrup:1989}. Furthermore, the influence of aging time on the stress-strain response was studied where the tensile stress-strain curves deformed at strain rate of $10^{10} ~s^{-1}$ and temperature of $300$ K for three different polymer structures which are equilibrated by $500$ ps, $1000$ ps and $2000$ ps after the cooling process, respectively, are illustrated. As shown in Figure \ref{fig:PE_structure}(c), in MD simulations when polymer systems are equilibrated long enough, the ageing time insignificantly influence on the stress-strain response as the curves are nearly the same for the initial stages. Deformation simulations will be described in the sequel.
\begin{figure}[htbp] \centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.4\textwidth]{simulation_box_undeformed.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{compare_Tg_diff_cooling_rates.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{compare_stress_strain_response.pdf}}
\caption{(a) Undeformed system of polyethylene (PE) and boundary conditions, (b) plot of volume as a function of temperature and the glass transition temperature ($T_g$) for different cooling rates and (c) stress-strain response for different aging times at strain rate of $10^{10} ~s^{-1}$ and temperature of $300$ K: structure 1, structure 2 and structure 3 are equilibrated by $500$ ps, $1000$ ps and $2000$ ps after the cooling process, respectively.}
\label{fig:PE_structure}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Deformation simulations} \label{subsec:deformations_simulation}
In order to study the yield behavior of PE, the PE system was loaded in uni- and biaxially tensile/compressive strains at constant strain rates along the deformed directions. The pressure on the remaining two (uniaxial strain) or one (biaxial strain) lateral surfaces is maintained at $1$atm under \emph{NPT} dynamics. As proposed previously \cite{Bauwens:1969,Bowden:1972}, the yield stress was taken as the maximum of stress-strain responses.
The Young's modulus obtained from uniaxial tension at room temperature ($300$K) is $1.32$GPa, and the Poisson's ratio is $0.32$, see Figure \ref{fig:stress_strain_responses}. These results are in good agreement with experimental results: Young's modulus $E = 1.38$GPa (obtained from testing method ASTM D368) and Poisson's ratio $\nu = 0.3$ \cite{hdpe,Hartmann:1986}. Note that the mechanical properties are averaged for three different initial PE structures to take entropic effects into account as suggested by \cite{Hossain:2010}. Furthermore, the quasi-static tensile stress-strain response is simulated by using MD simulations as proposed by Capaldi et al. \cite{Capaldi:2004}. The system was uniaxially stretched at a constant strain rate of $10^{9} ~s^{-1}$ for $1000$ steps followed by equilibration for $10000$ steps ($\Delta t = 1$fs) with the axial dimension kept fixed to stabilize the energy in the system. This process is iterated until the desired strain is obtained. It is shown in Figure \ref{fig:stress_strain_responses}(c) that the quasi-static tensile yield stress ($\bullet$) is in a good agreement with experimental result reported by \cite{Hartmann:1986}.
\begin{figure}[htbp] \centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{tensile_stress_strain_responses.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{compressive_stress_strain_responses.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{Compare_quasi_dynamics_temp300K.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{tensile_poisson_ratio_pe.pdf}}
\caption{Stress-strain responses under uniaxial (a) tension, (b) compression at strain rate of $10^{10} ~s^{-1}$ for different temperatures, (c) quasi-static and dynamics simulations in tension, and (d) tensile Poisson's ratio. The quasi-static tensile yield stress is indicated by ($\bullet$).}
\label{fig:stress_strain_responses}
\end{figure}
As the chain entanglement evolution is considered as important information that affects the deformation mechanisms of polymer, we have studied the chain entanglement evolution by using the geometric technique presented by Yashiro et al. \cite{Yashiro:2003}. As illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:entanglement}(a), the interior angle $\theta$ between two vectors, i.e. one vector that is drawn from atom $i$ (A) to atom $(i-10)$ (B) and the other one that is drawn from atom $i$ (A) to atom $(i+10)$ (C), is measured. An example histogram of the distribution of the angles is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:entanglement}(b). The atoms, at which the angle $\theta$ is less than $90^0$, are classified as entangled or flexion nodes as indicated by \cite{Hossain:2010}. Furthermore, the evolution of the entanglement parameter, which is obtained by dividing the number of atoms classified as entangled by the total number of applicable atoms, as a function of strain is plotted in Fig. \ref{fig:entanglement}(c). As can be seen, the entanglement parameter, which represents the percent of entangled atoms within the system, is nearly constant for the initial stages of deformation. At lager deformation ($\varepsilon \approx 0.5$), the entanglement parameter decreases nearly linearly with an increase in strain. These results are in good agreement with previous results reported by \cite{Hossain:2010}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.4\textwidth]{eval_flex_node.pdf}} \\
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{histogram_entanglement_temp250.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{entanglement_parameter_temp250.pdf}}
\caption{(a) Schematic of technique used to estimate flexion node \cite{Yashiro:2003}, (b) Histogram of distribution of the angles estimated by the flexion node method at $250$ K and (c) plot of entanglement parameter as a function of strain for different strain rates.}
\label{fig:entanglement}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Evaluation of yield stress in multiaxial stress states} \label{subsec:multi_stress_states}
The principal stress components $\sigma_i$ are extracted from biaxially tensile and compressive deformations as proposed by \cite{Rottler:2001}. Note that the stresses obtained from biaxial loadings have to be plotted versus the equivalent strain $\bm{\varepsilon}_e$ defined by \cite{Simo:2000}:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:equivalent_strain}
\bm{\varepsilon}_e = \sqrt{\frac{1}{2}} \sqrt{(\varepsilon_{11} - \varepsilon_{22})^2+ (\varepsilon_{22} - \varepsilon_{33})^2 + (\varepsilon_{11} - \varepsilon_{33})^2 + \frac{4}{3} \gamma^2_{12} + \frac{4}{3} \gamma^2_{23} + \frac{4}{3} \gamma^2_{13}},
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\varepsilon_{ii} ~\text{and} ~\gamma_{ij}, i,j = 1,...,3$ are three normal and shear components of the strain tensor. The equivalent strain rate applied to the PE system is provided by Equation \ref{eq:equivalent_strain}.
\begin{equation} \label{eq:equivalent_rate}
\bm{\dot{\varepsilon}}_e = \sqrt{\frac{1}{2}} \sqrt{(\dot{\varepsilon}_{11} - \dot{\varepsilon}_{22})^2+ (\dot{\varepsilon}_{22} - \dot{\varepsilon}_{33})^2 + (\dot{\varepsilon}_{11} - \dot{\varepsilon}_{33})^2 + \frac{4}{3} \dot{\gamma}^2_{12} + \frac{4}{3} \dot{\gamma}^2_{23} + \frac{4}{3} \dot{\gamma}^2_{13}},
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[htbp] \centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{bitens_stress_strain_alpha2.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{bicomp_stress_strain_alpha2.pdf}}
\caption{Principal stress components $\sigma_y ~\text{and} ~\sigma_x$ are obtained from biaxial tension and compression at $T = 300$K with the rates $\dot{\varepsilon}_y = 2 \dot{\varepsilon}_x$. The maximum stresses ($\bullet$) on the curves are indicated as the yield stresses.}
\label{fig:biax_principal_stresses}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:biax_principal_stresses} shows the stresses in $x$ and $y$ directions versus the equivalent strain computed by Equation (\ref{eq:equivalent_strain}) and the corresponding yield peaks for biaxial tension and compression. The yield peaks ($\bullet$) occurring at the same equivalent strain are evaluated as maximum stresses.
\subsection{Temperature dependence of elastic moduli}
In order to predict the dependence of the Young's modulus on the temperature the following Williams, Landel and Ferry (WLF) model \cite{Williams:1955} is used:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:wlf_model_modified}
log a_T = \frac{-C_1 (T - T^{ref} - 140)}{C_2 + (T - T^{ref} - 140)}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $T^{ref}$ is the reference temperature, $C_1$ and $C_2$ are adjustable WLF constants which are calibrated to fit the modulus data. Figure \ref{fig:thermo_elastic} shows that the Young's moduli obtained from MD simulations are well explained by the WLF model.
\begin{figure}[htbp] \centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.5\textwidth]{wlf_model_temp_dependent_elastic.pdf}
\caption{Plot of the tensile Young's modulus versus the temperature. The Young's modulus values are fitted by the solid line formulated in Equation (\ref{eq:wlf_model_modified}).}
\label{fig:thermo_elastic}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Temperature dependence of yield stresses} \label{subsec:temp_dependence_of_yield_stresses}
Many studies have tried to account for the temperature and strain rate dependence of the yield behavior of polymers. The logarithm law \cite{Eyring:1936}, suggesting the stress-activated jumps of molecular segments results in yielding, is a good candidate to study the dependence of the yield stress on the temperature:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Eyring_model}
\sigma = \frac{\Delta H}{V^*} + \frac{R T}{V^*} \ln \frac{2 \dot{\gamma}}{\dot{\gamma}_0}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\Delta H$ and $V^*$ are the respective activation energy and the activation volume; $\dot{\gamma}$ is the deformation rate, $\dot{\gamma}_0$ is a constant ($\dot{\gamma}_0 \gg \dot{\gamma}$) \cite{Mayr:1998}. The temperature dependent yielding law in Equation (\ref{eq:Eyring_model}) can be approximately substituted by a linear fit (yield stress is considered as a linear function of the temperature) that is used hereafter. Cook et al. \cite{Cook:1998} also reported that the laws used to account for the dependence of yield behavior on the temperature for polymers are mostly linear.
\begin{figure}[htbp] \centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.5\textwidth]{temp_dependent_tens_plastic_at_diffsrates_v1.pdf}
\caption{Plot of tensile yield stress obtained from MD simulations as a function of the temperature at different strain rates. The data points are fitted by linear fits according to Equation (\ref{eq:Eyring_model}). The quasi-static tensile yield stress ($\bigstar$) at $T = 300$K is obtained from MD simulations for quasi-static rates in Figure \ref{fig:stress_strain_responses}(c) as presented in Section \ref{subsec:deformations_simulation}. The experimental data are obtained from \cite{Hartmann:1986}.}
\label{fig:temp_dependent_tens_yield_stress}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:temp_dependent_tens_yield_stress} shows the curves fitting the yield stress versus temperature for different strain rates are parallel. It means that the slope of the linear fits is nearly rate independent (even at quasi-static conditions). This has also been observed by Rottler et al. \cite{Rottler:2003}. Hence, we are able to predict the yield behavior for different temperatures at quasi-static conditions, if the quasi-static yield stress value at any temperature is provided. Consequently, given the tensile yield stress ($25.92$MPa) at $T = 300$K ($\bigstar$) obtained from MD simulations for quasi-static conditions, see Figure \ref{fig:stress_strain_responses}(c), the temperature dependent yielding law can be constructed at quasi-static strain rates (dash dot black line). A good agreement between this quasi-static linear fit and the experimental yield stresses extracted from \cite{Hartmann:1986} (with strain rate of $2 ~\text{min}^{-1}$) for different temperatures is quite clear. The predicted quasi-static tensile yield stress is related to the tensile yield stress obtained from MD simulations at the temperature of $300$K is expressed by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:tens_yield_stress_scaling_at_T300K}
\left.\sigma^\text{static}_{t}\right|_{_{T^{ref}}}=\frac{\left.\sigma_{t}\right|_{_{T^{ref}}}}{\gamma} \approx 25.92 ~\text{MPa} \Rightarrow \gamma \approx 0.23
\end{equation}
The compressive and shear yield stresses as a function of the temperature for different strain rates are illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:temp_dependent_comp_shear_yield_stress}. The rate dependent the compressive and shear yielding laws obtained from MD simulations also show a parallel behavior. Furthermore, the tensile, compressive and shear laws (fitted lines) at different strain rates approximately change with the same rate suggesting the use of the same scaling factor $\gamma$ to predict the quasi-static compressive and shear yield stresses at the temperature of $300$K. The predicted quasi-static law for compression agrees well to experimental results obtained from ASTM tesing method \cite{QuadrantHDPE,hdpe}, as depicted in Figure \ref{fig:temp_dependent_comp_shear_yield_stress}.
\begin{equation} \label{eq:comp_shear_yield_stress_scaling_at_T300K}
\left.\sigma^\text{static}_{c}\right|_{_{T^{ref}}}=\frac{\left.\sigma_{c}\right|_{_{T^{ref}}}}{\gamma} \approx -37.6 ~\text{MPa}; \qquad \left.\sigma^\text{static}_{s}\right|_{_{T^{ref}}}=\frac{\left.\sigma_{s}\right|_{_{T^{ref}}}}{\gamma}a \approx 16.34 ~\text{MPa}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[htbp] \centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.485\textwidth]{temp_dependent_comp_plastic_at_diffsrates.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.485\textwidth]{temp_dependent_shear_plastic_at_diffsrates.pdf}}
\caption{Temperature dependent (a) compressive yield stress and (b) shear yield stress obtained from MD simulations at different strain rates. The data points are fitted by linear fits. The respective quasi-static compressive ($\bigstar$) and shear yield stresses ($\bigstar$) at $T = 300$K are predicted by scaling the compressive and shear yield stresses obtained from MD simulations by the value given in Equation (\ref{eq:comp_shear_yield_stress_scaling_at_T300K}). The experimentally compressive strength ($\color{OliveGreen}{\blacklozenge}$) obtained from the testing method \emph{Compressive Strength, ASTM D695, $73$F} is $31.7$MPa \cite{QuadrantHDPE,hdpe}.}
\label{fig:temp_dependent_comp_shear_yield_stress}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Strain rate dependence of the yield stress based on Bayesian approach} \label{subsec:srate_law_based_bayes}
\subsubsection{Bayesian updating}
In this article, Bayesian approach is employed to calibrate the parameters of the plasticity constitutive models from the yield stress data obtained from MD simulations and existing experiments. The advantage of this method is that the naturally uncertain properties of the constitutive parameters existing in the multiscale model for polymers are taken into account. In the Bayes' theorem the random variable $\bm{\theta}$ is expressed by a \emph{prior distribution} $p(\bm{\theta})$. The uncertain parameters being estimated are then directly considered in the model evidence.
\begin{equation} \label{eq:bayes}
p(\bm{\theta}|\bm{z}) = \frac{p(\bm{z}|\bm{\theta}) p(\bm{\theta})}{p(\bm{z})},
\end{equation}
\noindent with $\bm{\theta},~\bm{z}$ being the vector of model parameters and the vector of observations. For parameter identification purpose, the denominator $p(\bm{z})$ can be ignored and the posterior $p(\bm{\theta}|\bm{z})$is proportionally expressed by a combination of likelihood $p(\bm{z}|\bm{\theta})$ and the prior $p(\bm{\theta})$ as follows:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:posterior}
\underbrace{p(\bm{\theta}|\bm{z})}_{posterior} \propto \underbrace{p(\bm{z}|\bm{\theta})}_{likelihood} \underbrace{p(\bm{\theta})}_{prior}.
\end{equation}
Subsequently, the parameters yielding the maximum a posterior (MAP) probability of the parameters given the data is identified by:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:MAP}
\bm{\theta}_{MAP} = \underset{\bm{\theta}}{argmax} p(\bm{z}|\bm{\theta}) p(\bm{\theta}_i)
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Scaling law constructed based on Bayesian approach}
The strain rate in engineering practice is much lower than the one in MD simulations. Consequently, the respective yield stresses obtained from MD simulations and experiment can differ significantly. Hence, a scaling law is needed to upscale the yield behavior from nanoscale to macroscale. The good agreement between the predicted quasi-static yield stress ($\bullet$) and the experimental results at $T=300$K in Figure \ref{fig:stress_strain_responses}(c) implies that it is possible to rescale the high strain rate involved in MD simulations to macroscopic significant strain rate. Using the above-mentioned Bayesian approach, we can identify parameters of the strain rate dependent law when yield points at different strain rates obtained at molecular and continuum levels are determined. As suggested by earlier researchers \cite{Rottler:2003,Richeton:2006,YangGhosh:2012}, the dependence of the tensile yield stress $\sigma_t$ on the strain rate $\dot{\varepsilon}$ can be described by a logarithm or a power law form. In this article an exponential dependence of the yield stress $\sigma_t$ on the strain rate $\dot{\varepsilon}$ is adopted.
\begin{equation} \label{eq:scaling_law}
\sigma_t = \theta_1 e^{\theta_2 \dot{\varepsilon}} + \theta_3 e^{\theta_4 \dot{\varepsilon}}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\theta_i, ~i=1,.., 4$ are constitutive parameters calibrated and updated on data points obtained from MD simulations and experimental data.
Since the temperature and strain rate are not correlated with respect to (w.r.t.) the yield stress as reported in \cite{NamRabczuk:2012}, a linear transformation of the strain rate dependent yielding law (the numerical fit) for different temperatures is proposed. Richeton et al. \cite{Richeton:2006} also suggested that the fitted law can be linearly transformed in vertical and horizontal directions when considering the effect of temperature and strain rate, respectively. Rate dependence of the yielding law is studied for different temperatures at the nanoscale model. Interestingly, as can be seen in Figure \ref{fig:srate_dependent_tens_yield_stress}, fitted curves to the yield points at different temperatures are parallel. This supports the assumption that the rate dependent yielding law has also parallel behavior even at low strain rates. It means that under this assumption the rate dependence of yield stress for different temperatures can be predicted on a large ranges of strain rate (from low rate in practical application to high rate involved in MD simulations). As shown in Figure \ref{fig:scaling_law_srate}, predictions for the rate dependence of the yield stress at $T=250$K and $T=200$K are possible. The functional form in Equation (\ref{eq:scaling_law}) provides a good fit to the data. Good agreement of the predicted law with quasi-static yield stresses at $T=250$K and $T=200$K is observed. Hence, the model parameters can be identified in the case of limited experimental data from a Bayesian perspective. Note that the predicted quasi-static tensile yield stresses at $T = 250$K ($\blacktriangledown$) and $T = 200$K ($\blacklozenge$) correspond to the values illustrated by the same symbols ($\blacktriangledown$ and $\blacklozenge$) on the quasi-static fitted curve (black dash dot curve) in Figure \ref{fig:temp_dependent_tens_yield_stress}, respectively.
\begin{figure}[htbp] \centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.5\textwidth]{srate_dependent_plastic_at_difftemps.pdf}
\caption{Predicted yield stress as a function of the strain rate for different temperatures at nanoscale model. The data points are fitted by linear functions.}
\label{fig:srate_dependent_tens_yield_stress}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htbp] \centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.5\textwidth]{scaling_exponental_law_difftemps_v2.pdf}
\caption{Tensile yield stress versus the logarithm of strain rate ($\log \dot{\varepsilon}$). The blue solid circles represent results obtained from MD simulations and experiments at $T = 300$K. The blue solid line represents the rate dependent yielding law at $T = 300$K obtained by Bayesian approach. The red dashed and green dash dot lines are constructed under the assumption of parallel behavior of the rate dependent yielding law. The black ($\bigstar$) were obtained from MD simulations at quasi-static loading rates, the black asterisk ($\blacktriangledown$) and the black diamond ($\blacklozenge$) are predicted values obtained from the rate dependent yielding law at quasi-static conditions, corresponding to the same symbols ($\blacktriangledown$ and $\blacklozenge$) for $T = 250$K and $T = 200$K in Figure \ref{fig:temp_dependent_tens_yield_stress}, respectively.}
\label{fig:scaling_law_srate}
\end{figure}
\section{Macroscopic Continum model} \label{sec:macroscale}
\subsection{Definition of yield surface}
The yield surface requires five constitutive properties: the uni- and biaxial tensile, compressive, and shear yield strength obtained from MD simulations. It is then constructed up to four Drucker-Prager-cones as suggested by Vogler \emph{et al.} \cite{Vogler:2007}:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:multisurf_yieldfuncs}
f (p, q, \varepsilon^p_e ) = q - \beta (\varepsilon^p_e) p -c (\varepsilon^p_e)
\end{equation}
\noindent where $q = \sqrt{ 3 J_2 } = \sqrt{ \frac{3}{2} \mathbf{s:s} }$ is the von-Mises equivalent stress; $p = -\frac{1}{3} I_1$ is the hydrostatic pressure, with ${I_1} = tr(\boldsymbol{\sigma})$ being the first stress invariant, and ${J_2}=\frac{1}{2} {\boldsymbol{s}}:{\boldsymbol{s}}$ being the second invariant of the deviatoric stress tensor $\boldsymbol{s}$ while $\varepsilon^p_e$ is the equivalent plastic strain. The parameter $\beta$ can be expressed in terms of the equivalent plastic strain \cite{Vogler:2007} as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:multsurf_params}
\begin{aligned}
\beta (\varepsilon^p_e) & = 3 \frac{\sigma_t - \sigma_{bt}}{2 \sigma_{bt} - \sigma_t}, \quad c (\varepsilon^p_e) = \sigma_t + \beta (\varepsilon^p_e) \frac{\sigma_t}{3} \quad \text{for} \quad p < - \frac{q}{3} \\
\beta (\varepsilon^p_e) & = 3 \frac{\sqrt{3} \sigma_s - \sigma_t}{\sigma_t}, \quad c (\varepsilon^p_e) = \sqrt{3} \sigma_s \quad \text{for} \quad - \frac{q}{3} \leq p < 0 \\
\beta (\varepsilon^p_e) & = 3 \frac{\sigma_c - \sqrt{3} \sigma_s}{\sigma_c}, \quad c (\varepsilon^p_e) = \sqrt{3} \sigma_s \quad \text{for} \quad 0 \leq p < \frac{q}{3} \\
\beta (\varepsilon^p_e) & = 3 \frac{\sigma_{bc} - \sigma_c}{2 \sigma_{bc} - \sigma_c}, \quad c (\varepsilon^p_e) = \sigma_c - \beta (\varepsilon^p_e) \frac{\sigma_c}{3} \quad \text{for} \quad p \geq \frac{q}{3}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\noindent where the parameters $\beta (\varepsilon^p_e)$ is extracted from the hardening uniaxial tensile ($\sigma_t$), uniaxial compressive ($\sigma_c$), shear ($\sigma_s$), biaxial tensile ($\sigma_{bt}$), and biaxial compressive ($\sigma_{bc}$) curves which are obtained from MD simulations for corresponding stress states. The piecewise linear yield surface (PLYS) is illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:PLYS}.
\begin{figure}[htbp] \centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.5\textwidth]{plys.pdf}
\caption{Plot of piecewise linear yield surface (PLYS) in invariant ($p,q$) plane.}
\label{fig:PLYS}
\end{figure}
In the proposed model, a non-associated flow rule is used to ensure the consistency with tensile test, leading to the plastic potential suggested by \cite{NamLiu:2015}:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:plas_pot}
g = q^2 + \alpha p^2
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\alpha$ is the flow parameter accounting for the change in material volume at yielding:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:flow_param}
\alpha = \frac{9}{2} \frac{1-2 \nu_p}{1+ \nu_p}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\nu_p$ denotes the plastic Poisson's ratio obtained from the MD simulations under uniaxial tension and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:matrix_nup}
\Delta \varepsilon^p_{22} = \Delta \varepsilon^p_{33} =-\nu_p\Delta \varepsilon^p_{11}
\end{equation}
The increment of plastic deformation is given by:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:plas_deform}
\Delta \bm{\varepsilon}^p = \Delta \lambda \frac{\partial g}{\partial \boldsymbol\sigma}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\Delta \lambda$ is the plastic multiplier, commonly updated via the return mapping algorithm under the Kuhn-Tucker consistency conditions. A more efficient approach based on Chen Mangasarian replacement functions which avoids a return mapping has been proposed by \cite{Areias:2012,Areias:2015}; $\frac{\partial g}{\partial \boldsymbol\sigma}$ represents the direction of plastic flow with $g$ being the plastic potential given in Equation (\ref{eq:plas_pot}). The equivalent plastic strain is given by \cite{Melro:2013a}:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:eq_plastic_strain}
\varepsilon^p_e= \sqrt{k \varepsilon^p \colon \varepsilon^p}
\end{equation}
\noindent with $k=\frac{1}{1+2\nu_p^2}$.
\subsection{Thermo-plastic hardening} \label{subsec:hardening_law}
The constitutive model is defined by uniaxial tension and compression, biaxial tension and compression and shear yield strengths. Thus, the hardening will be formulated to update these yield strengths. Commonly to other plasticity models, the hardening formulation depend on the equivalent plastic strain as follows:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:hardening_laws}
\sigma_t = \sigma_t \left( \varepsilon^p_e \right), \quad \sigma_c = \sigma_c \left( \varepsilon^p_e \right), \quad \sigma_s = \sigma_s \left( \varepsilon^p_e \right), \quad \sigma_{bt} = \sigma_{bt} \left( \varepsilon^p_e \right), \quad \sigma_{bc} = \sigma_{bc} \left( \varepsilon^p_e \right)
\end{equation}
We can directly extract stress and strain values from the uni- and biaxial tension and compression and shear from MD simulations. Then, the hardening laws were inserted into the material model in terms of table of values. Note that input data are presented in terms of plastic strain by decomposing the total strain increment by the elastic component as: $\Delta \varepsilon^p = \Delta \varepsilon - \Delta \varepsilon^{el}$ \cite{NamLiu:2015}. In each iteration the table lookups will provide the plastic strains $(\varepsilon^p_e)$ and corresponding yield stresses $(\sigma_y)$ as inputs. Subsequently, the tangents $\left( \frac{\partial \sigma_y}{\partial \varepsilon^p_e} \right)$ with respect to the plastic strain will be computed. These stress-plastic strain curves are then scaled to determine the hardening laws. In order to study the temperature dependent yield strength, the linear law fitted on data obtained from MD simulations is employed to scale the yield stress w.r.t. the hardening curve at the reference temperature as follows:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:temp_scaling}
\sigma_n=\sigma^{ref}_n + \beta_n \left(T-T^{ref}\right)
\end{equation}
\noindent with $\sigma_n$ and $\sigma^{ref}_n$ being the predicted yield stresses at the desired $T$ and reference $T^{ref}$ temperatures, respectively. The material constant $\beta_n$ is selected so that the yield stresses at the temperature $T$ are scaled back to the stresses' value at the reference temperature $T^{ref}$. An overview illustrating the algorithm that is applied to implement the PLYS constitutive model is shown in Table \ref{tab:algorithm}.
\bgroup
\def\arraystretch{1
\begin{table}[!ht]
\begin{threeparttable}
\caption{Multisurface constitutive model algorithm overview for PE.}
\label{tab:algorithm}
\begin{tabular}{|ll|}
\hline
(1) & Compute trial stress, \\
&$\quad \boldsymbol\sigma_{n+1}^{tr} = \boldsymbol\sigma_{n} +\boldsymbol D^e : \Delta \boldsymbol \varepsilon $ \\
& representing the stress in terms of the von-Mises equivalent $q_{n+1}^{tr}$ and hydrostatic $p_{n+1}^{tr}$ stresses: \\
&$q_{n+1}^{tr} = \sqrt{\frac{3}{2} \boldsymbol s_{n+1}^{tr}:\boldsymbol s_{n+1}^{tr}}$, $p_{n+1}^{tr} = p_{n} + K \Delta \varepsilon_v $ with $\quad \boldsymbol s_{n+1}^{tr} = \boldsymbol s_{n} + 2G \Delta \boldsymbol\varepsilon_d $ \\[5pt]
(2) & Consider the temperature dependent elastic and yield behavior: \\
& $\quad$ The temperature ($T$) dependence of the Young's modulus is explained by Equation (\ref{eq:wlf_model_modified}): \\
& $\qquad E(T) = E^{ref} \left( log a_T \right) $ \\
& $\quad$ The yield stresses and hardening laws dependent on the temperature ($T$) \\
& $\quad$ is described by Equation (\ref{eq:temp_scaling}): \\
& $\qquad \sigma_{n}=\sigma_{n}^{ref} + \beta_n \left(T-T^{ref}\right)$\\[5pt]
(3) & Check yield criterion given by Equation (\ref{eq:multisurf_yieldfuncs}): \\
& IF $f \left( p,q,\varepsilon^p_e \right)\leq 0$ THEN \\
& $\quad \boldsymbol\sigma_{n+1} = \boldsymbol\sigma_{n+1}^{tr} $, $ q_{n+1} = q_{n+1}^{tr} $, $ p_{n+1} = p_{n+1}^{tr} $ and EXIT \\[5pt]
&ELSE \\
& $\quad$ Perform return mapping algorithm to obtain plastic multiplier $\Delta \lambda$. \\
&ENDIF \\[5pt]
(4) &Update stress tensor \\
& $\quad q_{n+1} = \sqrt{ \frac{3 J^{tr}_2}{(1+6G \Delta \lambda)^2}}$, $ \boldsymbol s_{n+1} = \frac{\boldsymbol s_{n+1}^{tr}}{1+6G \Delta \lambda} $, $ p_{n+1} = \frac{p_{n+1}^{tr}}{1+2K \alpha \Delta \lambda} $ \\
& $\quad \boldsymbol\sigma_{n+1} = \boldsymbol\sigma_{n+1}^{tr} - 6G\Delta \lambda \boldsymbol s_{n+1} - \frac{2}{3} K \alpha \Delta \lambda p_{n+1} \boldsymbol I $ \\ [5pt]
(5) &EXIT \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tablenotes}
\item[\textdagger] The superscript $^{ref}$ is used to infer the quantities computed at the reference temperature.
\item[\textdagger] $\Delta \varepsilon_v$ and $\Delta \varepsilon_d$ are the volumetric and deviatoric plastic strain increments, respectively.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\end{table}
\egroup
\subsection{Yield surface at different temperatures} \label{subsec:yieldsurf_at_difftemp}
We perform multiaxial deformations (uni- and biaxial and shear loads) to obtain yield points at two different temperatures and the equivalent strain rate in Equation (\ref{eq:equivalent_strain}) is set as $\dot{\varepsilon}_e = 1 \times 10^{10} ~s^{-1}$. The PLYS characterized by Equation (\ref{eq:multisurf_yieldfuncs}) was adopted to fit yield points data in four Drucker-Prager cones as mentioned in Equation (\ref{eq:multsurf_params}). As can be seen in Figure \ref{fig:temp_dependt_multsurf}, the yield points are well described by the PLYS criterion
\begin{figure}[htbp] \centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.5\textwidth]{plys_difftemps.pdf}
\caption{Yield points for uni- and biaxial stress states and the fitted PLYS for different temperatures.}
\label{fig:temp_dependt_multsurf}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Yield surface at different strain rates} \label{subsec:yieldsurf_at_diffsrates}
Based on the scaling law proposed in Section \ref{subsec:srate_law_based_bayes}, given any known (predicted) yield stress of a specific load case, the entire multisurface yield functions can be isotropically scaled to quasi-static rates by assuming the scaling value is similar for general deformations. For example, a prediction for the entire quasi-static multisurface yield functions at $T = 300$K is obtained in Figure \ref{fig:srate_dependt_multsurf}(a). The uniaxially quasi-static tensile ($25.92$MPa) and compressive ($37.6$MPa) yield stresses are validated with experimental results. As observed in Figure \ref{fig:srate_dependt_multsurf}(a) and Table \ref{tab:validate_quasistatic_results}, good agreement between numerical results and experimental results is observed. Furthermore, the entire yield surface at any desired strain rate can also be predicted based on the law shown in Figure \ref{fig:scaling_law_srate} using Equations (\ref{eq:tens_yield_stress_scaling_at_T300K} + \ref{eq:comp_shear_yield_stress_scaling_at_T300K}). Also, the entire yield surfaces at $T = 250$K for different strain rates are obtained from MD simulations and the one at quasi-static rates is predicted using the same scaling law as illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:srate_dependt_multsurf}(b).
\begin{figure}[htbp] \centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{plys_diffrates_temp300K.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{plys_diffrates_temp300K_zoomin.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{plys_diffrates_temp250K.pdf}}
\caption{Yield points for uni- and biaxial stress states and the fitted PLYS (a) for $T = 300$K; (b) the predicted quasi-static tensile yield stresses in comparison with experimental data; (c) for $T = 250$K at different strain rates.}
\label{fig:srate_dependt_multsurf}
\end{figure}
\bgroup
\def\arraystretch{1
\begin{table}[!ht]
\caption{Validation of the predicted tensile and compressive yield stresses with experimental result at different strain rates.}
\label{tab:validate_quasistatic_results}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c }
Deformation & Strain rate & Quasi-static simulations & Experimental results \\
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Tension} & 0.2 $min^{-1}$ & 25.92 (MPa)& 25.0 (MPa) \cite{Hartmann:1986} \\
& 8.0 $min^{-1}$ & 28.84 (MPa) & 30.8 (MPa) \cite{Hartmann:1986} \\
\hline
Compression & ~ & - 37.61 (MPa) & -31.72 (MPa) \cite{QuadrantHDPE} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\egroup
The above-described elasto-plastic model is used to predict the thermoplastic behavior at (1) nanoscale and (2) the strain rate, which is rescaled from molecular to continuum levels through the constitutive law.
\bgroup
\def\arraystretch{2
\begin{table}[!ht]
\caption{Constitutive properties for the PE model obtained from MD simulations at the room temperature.}
\label{tab:PE_constitutive_props}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c}
$E$ & $\nu$ & $\nu_p$ & $\sigma^{\text{static}^{ref}}_{t}$ & $\sigma^{\text{static}^{ref}}_{c}$ & $\sigma^{\text{static}^{ref}}_{s}$ & $\beta_T$ & $\beta_C$ \\
\hline
1.32 GPa & 0.32 & 0.32 & 25.92 MPa & -37.61 MPa & 16.34 MPa & 0.55 & 0.93 \\
\hline
$\beta_S$ & $C_1$ & $C_2$ & $\theta_1$ & $\theta_2$ & $\theta_3$ & $\theta_4$ \\
\hline
0.58 & 0.44 & 82.5 & -0.66 & -0.35 & 0.01 & 6.04 \\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\egroup
The presented constitutive model in the aforementioned section was implemented as material parameters into ABAQUS to predict the macroscopic stress-strain responses. Comparison between the responses obtained from MD simulations and from the continuum model for different stress states in Figure \ref{fig:verify_stress_strain} shows a good agreement. The temperature dependence of the uniaxial and biaxial tensile, compressive and shear stress-strain responses is also illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:verify_tenscomp_stress_strain_difftemps} and good agreement between the responses obtained from the continuum model and those from MD simulations for different temperatures is observed. Furthermore, the consistency of the stress-strain responses for different stress states (e.g. the unequally biaxial tension and compression with $\dot{\varepsilon}_y = 2 \dot{\varepsilon}_x$ yield stresses) between MD simulations and the continuum model could be expected
\begin{figure}[htbp] \centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{verify_stress_strain_MD_Cont.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{verify_biaxial_stress_strain_MD_Cont.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{verify_bitens_diffsrt_stress_strain_MD_Cont.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{verify_bicomp_diffsrt_stress_strain_MD_Cont.pdf}}
\caption{Comparison of the stress-strain responses predicted by the continuum model and MD simulations (a) tension, compression and shear, (b) biaxial-tension and compression with equal rates applied in $x$ and $y$ directions, (c) biaxial-tension with rates applied in $x$ and $y$ directions $\dot{\varepsilon}_y = 2 \dot{\varepsilon}_x$, (d) biaxial-compression with rates applied in $x$ and $y$ directions $\dot{\varepsilon}_y = 2 \dot{\varepsilon}_x$.}
\label{fig:verify_stress_strain}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htbp] \centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.4\textwidth]{verify_tens_stress_strain_MD_Cont_difftemps_v1.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.4\textwidth]{verify_comp_stress_strain_MD_Cont_difftemps_v1.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.4\textwidth]{verify_shear_stress_strain_MD_Cont_difftemps.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.4\textwidth]{verify_biaxial_stress_strain_MD_Cont_difftemps.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.4\textwidth]{verify_bitens_diffsrt_MD_Cont_difftemps.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width = 0.4\textwidth]{verify_bicomp_diffsrt_MD_Cont_difftemps.pdf}}
\caption{Comparison of the stress-strain results in (a) tension, (b) compression, (c) shear, (d) equally biaxial tension and compression, the yield stresses (e) unequally biaxial tension ($\dot{\varepsilon}_y = 2 \dot{\varepsilon}_x$) and (f) unequally biaxial compression ($\dot{\varepsilon}_y = 2 \dot{\varepsilon}_x$) predicted by the continuum model and MD simulations at different temperatures. In Figures (d) the tensile and compressive yield stresses obtained from MD simulations are shown by the solid blue circles ({\color{blue}$\bullet$}) and red squares ({\color{red}$\blacksquare$}); the one obtained from the continuum model are shown by hollow blue circles ({\color{blue}$\circ$}) and red squares ({\color{red}$\square$}), In Figures (e) and (f), the solid blue circles and red squares indicate the unequally biaxially tensile and compressive yield stresses obtained from MD simulations and continuum model.}
\label{fig:verify_tenscomp_stress_strain_difftemps}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:compare_stress_strain_with_exptl} compares the predicted yield strength ($\sigma^{quasi}_t = 27.65$ MPa) with the experimental one reported in \cite{Hartmann:1986} ($\sigma^{exptl}_t = 29.3$ MPa) at strain rate of $2 ~\text{min}^{-1}$. Also, the continuum model accurately predicts the compressive yield stress at room temperature, see Table \ref{tab:validate_quasistatic_results}. This proves that the continuum model can be used to accurately predict the yielding occurring at low strain rate.
\begin{figure}[htbp] \centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.5\textwidth]{validate_tens_stress_strain_with_exptlresult_v1.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of the tensile yield stress predicted by the continuum model and experimental result at quasi-static strain rate.}
\label{fig:compare_stress_strain_with_exptl}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions} \label{sec:conclusion}
A hierarchical multiscale model was developed to study the thermo/visco-plastic behavior of the PE. At first, the PLYS and the temperature and strain rate dependent yielding laws were constructed where the constitutive parameters are calibrated from data (yield points for multiaxial stress states) obtained from MD simulations. Then, the scaling law for the entire yield surface was proposed based on the quasi-static tensile simulations at nanoscale. The yield behavior was upscaled to macroscopic level through an efficient continuum model. The consistency of the results demonstrates that the macroscopic continuum model accurately predicts the behavior achieved from MD simulations.
In addition, validation shows that the tensile and compressive yield stresses are accurately predicted at quasi-static rates by the proposed multiscale multisurface model despite the loss of ad-hoc experimentation. Hence, we believe that this study will open a new door for the design of polymer materials through multiscale simulations, leading to \emph{priori} predictions of yield behavior of polymers.
\section{Acknowledgements}
We gratefully acknowledge the support by ERC COMBAT project (project number 615132).
\clearpage
|
\section{Decomposition of a normalized vector field into constant and
oscillating parts \label{DecompApp}}
Let us consider a unit-vector field, $ \vec{s} $ with
$ | \vec{s} | = 1 $, and single out its zero mode and $ \pm q $ components:
\begin{equation}
\label{FieldDecomp}
\vec{s} = \vec{s}_0 + \vec{s}_c \cos(q x + \theta) + \vec{s}_s \sin(q x + \theta) \, .
\end{equation}
Here $ \theta $ is a constant phase shift; coefficients $ \vec{s}_{0,c,s} $ must be
smooth functions on the scale of $ 1 / q $.
The normalization of $ \vec{s} $ must hold true for arbitrary $ x $. This
{\it always} requires mutual orthogonality
\begin{equation}
(\vec{s}_0,\vec{s}_c) = (\vec{s}_0,\vec{s}_s) = (\vec{s}_c,\vec{s}_s) = 0 \, ;
\end{equation}
and proper normalizations:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{HelConf}
\mbox{generic $ q $}: & \quad & | \vec{s}_c | = | \vec{s}_s | , \
| \vec{s}_0 |^2 + | \vec{s}_c |^2 = 1 \, ; \\
\label{OneHalfConf}
\sin(q x+ \theta)=0: & \quad & | \vec{s}_0 |^2 + | \vec{s}_c |^2 = 1 \, , \qquad
\mbox{ or } \quad
\cos(q x+ \theta)=0: \qquad | \vec{s}_0 |^2 + | \vec{s}_s |^2 = 1 \, ; \\
\label{OneQuartConf}
e^{ i (q x+ \theta )} = \pm \frac{1 \pm i}{\sqrt{2}}:
& \quad &
| \vec{s}_0 |^2 + \frac{ |\vec{s}_c|^2 + |\vec{s}_s|^2}{2} = 1 \, .
\end{eqnarray}
There are no other configurations which are compatible with decomposition
Eq.(\ref{FieldDecomp}).
\section{Useful relations \label{UslRel}}
Using the matrix identities
\begin{equation}
\label{MatrId}
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\hat{A} = A^{(j)} \sigma_j, \quad A^{(j)} = \frac{1}{2} {\rm tr}[\sigma_j \hat{A}]; \\ \\
{\rm tr}[ \vec{\sigma} \hat{A}^{-1} \sigma_j \hat{A}] \, {\rm tr}[ \vec{\sigma} \hat{A}^{-1} \sigma_{j'} \hat{A}] =
4 \delta_{j,j'}
\end{array}
\right. \qquad
j, j' = x, y, z.
\end{equation}
and re-parameterizing the (real) orthogonal basis $ \vec{e}_{1,2,3} $ in terms of a matrix $ g \in \mbox{SU(2)} $:
\begin{equation}
\label{BasisFromSU2}
\vec{e}_{1,2,3} = \frac{1}{2} {\rm tr}[ \vec{\sigma} g \sigma_{x,y,z} g^{-1}] \, , \quad
\vec{e}_3 = [ \vec{e}_1 \times \vec{e}_2 ] \, , \quad
\sum_{a=1,2,3} ( \partial_\alpha \vec{e}_a)^2 = 4 {\rm tr} [ \partial_\alpha g^{-1} \partial_\alpha g ] \, ;
\end{equation}
we can re-write a scalar product $ ( \vec{\sigma}, e_j ) $ as follows:
\begin{equation}
\label{Vec_SU2}
( \vec{\sigma}, \vec{e}_{1,2} ) = \frac{1}{2} g \sigma_{x,y} g^{-1}
\quad \Rightarrow \quad
( \vec{\sigma}, [ \vec{e}_{1} \pm i \vec{e}_{1} ] ) = g \sigma_{\pm} g^{-1} \, ; \quad
\sigma_{\pm} \equiv ( \sigma_x \pm i \sigma_y ) / 2.
\end{equation}
One can also do an inverse step and express the SU(2) matrix via a unit vector
\begin{equation}
g = i (\vec{\sigma},\vec{n}), \ g^{-1} = - i (\vec{\sigma},\vec{n}) \,; \ | \vec{n} | = 1 \, \quad \Rightarrow \quad
g^{-1} \partial_\alpha g = i \bigr( \vec{\sigma}, [ \vec{n} \times \partial_\alpha \vec{n} ] \bigl) \, .
\end{equation}
\section{Ground state energy of the gapped 1D Dirac fermions \label{GSenergy}}
Consider 1D Dirac fermions with the inverse Green's function:
\begin{equation}
[\hat{G}(\Delta)]^{-1}
= \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\partial_+ & \Delta \\
\Delta & \partial_-
\end{array}
\right) \, \underrightarrow{\rm FT} \,
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-i \omega_n + v_F k & \Delta \\
\Delta & - i \omega_n - v_F k
\end{array}
\right) .
\end{equation}
Integrating out the fermions we find the partition function:
\begin{equation}
Z[\Delta] = Z_0 \frac{\det \left( [\hat{G}(\Delta)]^{-1} \right)} {\det \left( [\hat{G}_0]^{-1} \right) } =
Z_0 \exp\left( - {\rm Tr} \left( \log \left[ \hat{G}_0^{-1} \hat{G}(\Delta) \right] \right) \right) \simeq
Z_0 \exp\left( - {\rm Tr} \left[ \hat{G}_0^{-1} \hat{G}(\Delta) - 1 \right] \right) \, .
\end{equation}
Here $ Z_0 \equiv Z[\Delta=0] $, $ \hat{G}_0 \equiv \hat{G}[\Delta=0] $ and $ \Delta $ is assumed
to be small. Using the expression for the free energy $ {\cal F} = - T \log[Z] $, we find that the
gain of the energy, which is caused by the gap opening, reads as
\begin{equation}
\delta E _{\rm GS} = T \, {\rm Tr} \left[ \hat{G}_0^{-1} \hat{G}(\Delta) - 1 \right]
\end{equation}
At $ T = 0 $ and in the continuous limit, this expression reduces to
\begin{equation}
\delta E_{\rm GS} = - 2 \xi \int \frac{{\rm d}^2 \{ \omega, q \}}{(2 \pi)^2}
\frac{\Delta^2}{\omega^2 + (v_F q)^2 + \Delta^2} \, .
\end{equation}
The UV divergence must be cut by the band width $ D $. Thus, we obtain with the logarithmic accuracy:
\begin{equation}
\delta E_{\rm GS} \simeq - \frac{\xi}{\pi v_F } \Delta^2 \log\bigl( D / | \Delta | ) \, .
\end{equation}
\section{Smoothly oscillating backscattering \label{ShiftedGap}}
The theory close to the special commensurate filling can be formulated in terms of Dirac fermions
with a spatially oscillating backscattering described by Lagrangian:
\begin{equation}
\label{L_osc}
{\cal L}_{\rm osc} =
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\partial_+ & J e^{- i Q x} \\
J e^{i Q x} & \partial_-
\end{array}
\right) .
\end{equation}
The wave vector $ Q $ is a deviation of $ 2 k_F $ from its special commensurate value.
By rotating the fermions
\begin{equation}
R \to e^{-i Q x/ 2} R, \ L \to e^{i Q x/ 2} L,
\end{equation}
we reduce $ {\cal L}_{\rm osc} $ to the Lagrangian with the constant backscattering and with the shifted
chemical potential:
\begin{equation}
\label{Losc_rot}
\bar{{\cal L}}_{\rm osc} =
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
- i \omega_n + v_F k & J \\
J & - i \omega_n - v_F k
\end{array}
\right) - \frac{v_F Q}{2}.
\end{equation}
Backscattering opens the gap in the fermionic spectrum but at the energy level shifted from zero
by $ v_F Q / 2 $. Thus, the dispersion relation counted from the shifted chemical potential reads as
\begin{equation}
\label{EnOsc}
J \ne 0 \ \Rightarrow \ E_{\rm osc}^{\pm}(k) = \pm \sqrt{ \left( v_F k \right)^2 + J^2} \Bigl|_{v_F |q| \ll |J|}
\simeq \pm \left( |J| + \frac{\left( v_F k \right)^2}{2 |J|} \right) \, .
\end{equation}
\section{$ 4 k_F $-response of the helical metal on spinless disorder \label{Dis-4KF}}
Consider a $4k_F$-response of the helical metal on the spinless backscattering potential. It requires a fusion of two
$2k_F$-operators which is obtained in path integral by integrating out the high energy gapped modes. The effective
Lagrangian reads as:
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle {\cal L}_{\rm dis} \rangle & = & - \frac{1}{2} \int \mbox{d} x' \mbox{d} \tau' \ V\left(x+\frac{x'}{2} \right) V\left(x-\frac{x'}{2} \right)
\left\langle
\tilde{R}^\dagger_{\uparrow} \left( \tau + \frac{\tau'}{2}, x+\frac{x'}{2} \right) \tilde{L}_{\uparrow}\left( \tau + \frac{\tau'}{2}, x+\frac{x'}{2} \right)
\right. \times \cr
&& \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \times
\left.
\tilde{R}^\dagger_{\downarrow}\left( \tau - \frac{\tau'}{2}, x-\frac{x'}{2} \right) \tilde{L}_{\downarrow}\left( \tau - \frac{\tau'}{2}, x-\frac{x'}{2} \right)
\right\rangle + h.c. \approx \cr
&\approx & \frac{1}{2} V^2(x) \tilde{R}^\dagger_{\uparrow}(x,\tau) \tilde{L}_{\downarrow}(x,\tau) \times
\int \mbox{d} x' \mbox{d} \tau' \left\langle \tilde{R}^\dagger_{\downarrow}\left( \tau - \frac{\tau'}{2}, x-\frac{x'}{2} \right)
\tilde{L}_{\uparrow}\left( \tau + \frac{\tau'}{2}, x + \frac{x'}{2} \right) \right\rangle + h.c. \approx \cr
& \approx & 2 \frac{V(x)^2}{\Delta^{\rm (gen)}} \tilde{R}^\dagger_{\uparrow}(x,\tau) \tilde{L}_{\downarrow}(x,\tau) + h.c.
\end{eqnarray}
\section{Introduction \label{SecIntro}}
Protected states, which are important elements for nanoelectronics, spintronics and
quantum computers, attract evergrowing attention of physicists. A certain protection
strongly reduces effects of material imperfections, including backscattering and localization,
and provides a possibility to sustain the ballistic transport in relatively long samples.
The current progress in understanding protected transport develops in
two directions. The first one is related to time-reversal invariant topological insulators (TIs)
\cite{HasanKane,QiZhang,TI-Shen}. One dimensional (1D) {\it helical} edge modes
of two-dimensional TIs possess lock-in relation between electron spin and momentum
\cite{WuBernevigZhang,XuMoore}. Though
this locking may protect transport against disorder \cite{Molenkamp-2007,EdgeTransport-Exp0,EdgeTransport-Exp1},
the protection in realistic TIs is not perfectly robust; reasons for this remain an open and intensively debated question
\cite{Molenkamp-2007,EdgeTransport-Exp0,EdgeTransport-Exp1,EdgeTransport-Exp2,AAY_2013,Yevt-Helical,nichele_2016,vayrynen_2016,Klinovaja_Loss_2017,OYeVYu_2019}.
The second direction exploits the emergent helical
protected states in interacting systems which are not necessarily time-reversal invariant.
Numerous examples of suitable interactions include the hyperfine interaction between nuclei moments
and
conduction electrons \cite{braunecker_2009b,braunecker_2009a,jk_2013,hsu_2015,aseev_2017},
the spin-orbit interaction in combination with either a magnetic field \cite{streda_2003,pershin_2004} or
with the Coulomb interaction \cite{kainaris_2015,kainaris_2017}, to name just a few; see
Refs.\cite{braunecker_2010,kloeffel_2011,klinovaja_2011a,klinovaja_2011b,klinovaja_2012,pedder_2016}.
State-of-the-art experiments confirm the existence of helical states governed
by interactions \cite{quay_2010,scheller_2014,kammhuber_2017,heedt_2017}.
We focus on another recently predicted and very promising
possibility to realize protected transport in quantum wires functionalized by magnetic adatoms.
The corresponding theoretical model is a dense 1D Kondo lattice (KL): the 1D array of local
quantum moments -- Kondo impurities (KI) -- interacting with conduction electrons. KLs have been intensively studied
in different contexts, starting from the Kondo effect and magnetism to the physics of TIs and Tomonaga Luttinger
liquids (TLLs) \cite{tsunetsugu_1997,review-gulacsi,shibata_1999,doniach_1977,read_1984,auerbach_1986,fazekas_1991,sigrist_1992,tsunetsugu_1992,troyer_1993,ueda_1993,Tsvelik_1994,Shibata_1995,ZachEmKiv,shibata_1996,shibata_1997,Honner_1997,sikkema_1997,mcculloch_2002,xavier_2002,white_2002,novais_2002,Novais_2002b,xavier_2003,xavier_2004,yang_2008,smerat_2011,peters_2012,MaciejkoLattice,aynajian_2012,AAY_2013,Yevt-Helical,khait_2018}.
The physics of KL is determined by the competition between the Kondo screening
and the Ruderman-Kittel-Kosuya-Yosida (RKKY) interaction, as illustrated by the famous Doniach's
phase diagram \cite{doniach_1977}.
We have recently predicted that the 1D RKKY-dominated KL with magnetic
anisotropy of the easy-plane type will form a helix spin configuration which gaps out one helical sector of the electrons.
The second helical sector remains gapless. In the resulting helical metal (HM), the disorder induced localization is
parametrically suppressed and, therefore, the ballistic transport acquires a partial protection \cite{TsvYev_2015,Schimmel_2016}.
All previous studies, including the TIs and the interacting helical systems, revealed protection of transport
governed by the global helicity, i.e., helicity of the gapless electrons and/or the spiral spin configuration
were uniquely defined in the
entire sample. The global helicity always requires breaking the spin-rotation symmetry, either internally
(e.g., due to the spin-orbit interaction, or the magnetic anisotropy) or spontaneously (e.g. in relatively
short samples with a strong electrostatic interaction of the electrons). This certainly diminishes experimental
capabilities to fabricate the helical states, especially those governed by the interactions: one always needs
either specially selected materials or a nontrivial fine-tuning of physical parameters. For instance,
the prediction of Refs.\cite{TsvYev_2015,Schimmel_2016} remains practically useless for the experiments
because one can hardly control the magnetic anisotropy.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.475 \textwidth]{PhDiagr.pdf}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\caption{
\label{PhDiagr}
{\it Central Panel}: Phase diagram of the magnetically doped 1D quantum
wire for $ J_K \ll E_F $, see
explanations in the text; here $ | k_f - f \pi / \xi | \sim
J_K / v_F, \ f = 1/4, 1/2 $.
{\it Upper panel}: band structure of the
non-helical collinear metal with the renormalized Fermi-momentum,
$ k_F^*$. Green and red areas denote filled valence- and partially
occupied conduction- bands, respectively.
{\it Lower panel}: band structure and local
helicity of the novel metallic phase. At some space-time point ``1'',
the local spin ordering can open a gap, $ \Delta_h $, in the spectrum
of the fermions $ \{ R_\sigma, L_{-\sigma} \} $ with a given helicity, $ h $.
The second helical sector, $ \{ R_{-\sigma}, L_{\sigma} \} $ (not shown
on this illustration for simplicity), remains gapless at the point ``1''.
The gap of the fermions $ \{ R, L \} $ slowly varies in space-time due
to spin fluctuations described by the SU(2) matrix $ g $. There can
exist another space-time point ``2'' where $ \Delta_h \to 0 $,
$ | \Delta_{-h} | \to {\rm max} $ and, thus,
the gapped (gapless) helical sector becomes gapless (gapped). Hence,
the global helicity cannot be defined though transport remains protected
as in the case of the globally helical quantum wires.
}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
Thus, further progress in obtaining the helical quantum
wires, in particular by means of the magnetic doping, has been hampered by two open
questions: (i)~Is the global helicity accompanied by breaking
the spin-rotation symmetry really necessary to obtain HM?
(ii)~If the global helicity is not really needed, which parameters must be tuned for
detecting HM in the KLs (theoretically) and in the magnetically doped quantum wires
(experimentally)? We note that
numerical studies have never provided a reliable signature of the helical phase in the
KLs \cite{mcculloch_2002,smerat_2011,khait_2018}.
{\it In this Paper}, we answer both questions:
Protection of the ballistic transport can be provided by the local helicity
which, paradoxically, requires neither the global helicity nor breaking the spin-rotation
symmetry. We show that such a novel HM is the $ 4 k_F $ charge-density-wave (CDW) phase
\cite{Giamarchi} where all effects of disorder are parametrically suppressed. It
can be found in the isotropic KLs if the Kondo exchange coupling is much smaller
than the Fermi energy and the band width, $ J_K \ll E_F, D $, and the
band filling is far from special commensurate cases (1/4-, 3/4-, 1/2-fillings), see Fig.\ref{PhDiagr}.
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first prediction of the helicity-protected transport in the
quantum 1D system where the spin-rotation symmetry exists and cannot be spontaneously broken.
Our results pave the way towards novel numerical and experimental investigations of the HM.
\section{Theoretical model \label{SectModel}}
We start from the standard KL Hamiltonian:
\begin{equation}
\label{model}
\hat{H} = - \! \sum_n \Big[
t \, \psi^\dagger_{n}\psi_{n+1} + h.c. + \mu \, \rho_n - J_K\psi_n^+ \vec\sigma \vec{S}_n\psi_n
\Big].
\end{equation}
Here $ \psi_n \equiv \{ \psi_{n,\uparrow}, \psi_{n,\downarrow} \}^{\rm T} $ \ are electron annihilation
($ \psi^\dagger_n $ - creation) operators; $ \rho_n = \psi^\dagger_{n} \psi_{n} $;
${\vec S}_n$ are quantum spins with magnitude
$ s $; $ \vec\sigma \equiv \{ \sigma_x, \sigma_y, \sigma_z \} $ are Pauli matrices;
$ t $ and $ \mu $ are the electron hopping and the chemical potential;
summation runs over lattice sites. We assume that $ s J_K < D = 2 t $
and consider low temperatures, $ T \to 0 $.
\section{Method \label{SectMeth}}
We proceed in several steps. Firstly, we find classical
spin configurations minimizing the free energy. Secondly, we identify degrees
of freedom whose fluctuations are gapped, including gapped fermionic and spin
variables ($|{\bf m}|$ and $\alpha$ in Eq.(\ref{SpinDecomp}) below)
and integrate out the gapped variables perturbatively. Remaining spin fluctuations
[described by vectors $\vec{e}_a$ in Eq.(\ref{SpinDecomp})] receive the fully quantum
mechanical treatment. This approach is justified by the separation of scales:
the shortest scale is of order of the inverse Fermi momentum, $1/k_F $. It is
present in the spin ordering and must be much smaller then the coherence length $\zeta$
of the gapped variables. We have performed the self-consistency check which
confirms that $\zeta \gg 1/k_F$ and, thus, justifies the validity of our theory.
\subsection{Separating the slow and the fast variables}
To describe an effective low energy theory, it is convenient to
focus on the regime $ | J_K | < | \mu | \ll t $ where we can linearize the dispersion
relation and introduce right-/left moving fermions, $ \psi_\pm $, in the standard way
\cite{Giamarchi}. In the continuum limit, the fermionic Lagrangian reads
\begin{equation}
\label{Lf}
{\cal L}_F[\psi_\pm] = \sum_{\nu=\pm} \psi^\dagger_\nu \partial_\nu \psi_\nu \, ; \quad
\partial_\pm \equiv \partial_\tau \mp i v_F \partial_x \, .
\end{equation}
Here $ v_F $ is the Fermi velocity, $ \nu $ is the chiral index which indicates the direction
of motion, $ \partial_\nu $ is the chiral derivative, $ \tau $ is the imaginary time.
According to Doniach's criterion, the RKKY interaction wins in 1D when the distance
between the spins is smaller then a crossover scale:
$ \, \xi_s < \xi \sqrt{ \vartheta_0 J_K^2/T_K } \, $; here $ \, \xi \, $ is the lattice spacing, $ \vartheta_0 $
is the density of states at $ E_F $; $T_K$ is the Kondo temperature. We study
this RKKY-dominated regime. For simplicity, we assume
$ \xi_s = \xi $.
Following Refs.\cite{Tsvelik_1994,TsvYev_2015,Schimmel_2016}, we keep in the Lagrangian
of the electron-KI interaction only the backscattering terms governing the physics of the
dense 1D KL:
\begin{equation}
\label{Lbs}
{\cal L}_{\rm bs}(n) = J_K \left[ R^\dagger_n \vec\sigma \vec{S}_n L_n e^{-2 i k_F x_n} + h.c \right] ,
\ x_n \equiv n \xi \, ;
\end{equation}
where $ R \equiv \psi_+, \, L \equiv \psi_- $.
$ {\cal L}_{\rm bs} $ contains the fast $ 2 k_F $-oscillations which must be absorbed into the
spin configuration. We perform this step using the path integral approach where the spin operators
are replaced by integration over a normalized vector field decomposed as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{SpinDecomp}
\vec{S}_n/s = \vec{m} + b \Big(
& \vec{e}_1 & \, \cos(\alpha) \cos(q x_n + \theta) + \\
& \vec{e}_2 & \, \sin(\alpha) \sin(q x_n + \theta)
\Bigr) \sqrt{1 - \vec{m}^2 } \, .
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Here $ q \simeq 2 k_F $;
$ \{ \vec{e}_1, \vec{e}_2, \vec{m} \} $ is an orthogonal triad of vector fields whose coordinate
dependence is smooth on the scale $ 1 / k_F $, $ | \vec{e}_{1,2} | = 1 $. Angle $ \alpha $ and
constants $ b, \theta $ must be chosen to maintain normalization $ | \vec{S}/s | = 1 $. Eq.(\ref{SpinDecomp})
is generic; it allows for only three possible choices of the constants which, in turn,
reflect the band filling $ f $, see |
\section{Introduction}
A market can be thought of as an algorithm or mechanism that implements a social choice of redistribution of various goods between agents (as buyers and sellers for goods) via pricing.
In mathematical economics, \emph{exchange market} models were first proposed by Walras in 1874 and later by Arrow and Debreu in 1954 along with the concept of \emph{market equilibrium} \cite{arrow}.
These exchange market models are used to capture the essence of complicated real-world markets.
In the Arrow-Debreu market model, each agent has an initial endowment of divisible goods and a utility function for purchasing a bundle of goods that maximizes her utility when every agent uses the revenue from selling her initial endowment.
The Fisher market model \cite{birnbaum} can be seen as a special case of the Arrow-Debreu model. In it, each buyer is subject to her budget constraint instead of the revenue from selling her initial endowment.
There is a market equilibrium\footnote{Note that the concept of market equilibria is \emph{not} the same as the concept of Nash equilibria. A market equilibrium does not allow buyers to strategically report their interests in different goods in order to maximize their own utilities.} if two conditions are satisfied:
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Buyer Optimality}, in which every agent uses the revenue from selling her initial endowment to purchase a bundle of goods to maximizes her own utility
\item \emph{Market Clearance}, in which the total demand for every good equals the total supply
\end{itemize}
The celebrated theorem by Arrow and Debreu \cite{arrow} proved the existence of a market equilibrium under some mild necessary conditions for the utility functions.
The most common types of utility functions from this class, which are described in more detail in the section of preliminaries, are the \emph{linear}, \emph{Leontief}, and \emph{Cobb-Douglas} functions, and belong to the important class of \emph{Constant Elasticity of Substitution (CES)} functions \cite{solow,arrow:chenery}.
Given the convergence of distributed generalized gradient-descent algorithms (i.e., mirror-descent) to market equilibria in the Fisher and CCVF markets \cite{birnbaum,cheung},
it is natural for one to consider \emph{designing dynamics (specifically, iterative algorithms) for agents to arrive at market equilibria in Arrow-Debreu markets}.\footnote{We can even require the dynamics to be of the no-regret property to provide incentives for the agents if possible \cite{kleinberg:piliouras:tardos:load,CL14,CL15,CL16}.}
In this paper, instead of using generic algorithms for solving a convex program, i.e., convex program solvers,
we design iterative algorithms for solving the following convex program for \emph{bijective markets}
where everyone is a seller of only one good and a buyer for a bundle of goods:\footnote{Jain \cite{jain} reduced the equilibrium computation in linear Arrow-Debreu markets to the equilibrium computation in bijective markets.}
We give the formulation here for the following discussion.
Our algorithm for computing linear Arrow-Debreu market equilibria is based on solving the rational convex program
that captures buyer optimality and market clearance,
formulated by Devanur et al. in \cite{devanur:garg}.
\begin{eqnarray*}
&\min \quad \sum_{j} p_j \log\frac{p_j}{\beta_j} - \sum_{i,j}b_{ij}\log u_{ij} \\
& \nonumber \quad\quad\quad \sum_i b_{ij}=p_j \ \forall j \\
& \nonumber \quad\quad\quad \sum_j b_{ij}=p_i \ \forall i \\
& \nonumber \quad\quad\quad\,\, u_{ij}/p_j \leq 1/\beta_i\ \forall i,j \\
& \nonumber \quad\quad\quad\quad p_i \geq 1 \ \forall i \\
& \nonumber \quad\quad\quad\quad b_{ij}\geq 0 \ \forall i,j, \beta_i \geq 0 \ \forall i,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $b_{ij}$ is paid by agent $i$ to agent $j$ for good $j$, $p_i$ ``acts like" the endowed budget $B_i$ of agent $i$ in the Fisher model
(yet there is no actual budget but only the initial endowment of goods for agent $i$),
and $\beta_i$ is agent $i$'s inverse of ``best" bang per buck.
\subsubsection{Mirror Descents for Fisher Markets.}
Recall that when designing distributed algorithms via mirror descents for Fisher markets \cite{birnbaum},
each $\beta_i$ is endogenously set to $1$ in the convex program above (there is no concept of variable $\beta_i$ so there is no need for to update $\beta_i$).
The convex program is then as follows.
\begin{eqnarray*}
&\min \quad \sum_{j} p_j \log p_j - \sum_{i,j}b_{ij}\log u_{ij} \\
& \nonumber \quad\quad\quad \sum_i b_{ij}=p_j \ \forall j \\
& \nonumber \quad\quad\quad \sum_j b_{ij}=B_i \ \forall i \\
& \nonumber \quad\quad\quad\quad b_{ij}\geq 0 \ \forall i,j.
\end{eqnarray*}
The objective function becomes
\[\varphi(\mathbf{b})=\sum_j p_j\log p_j-\sum_{i,j}b_{ij}\log u_{ij}=\sum_{i,j}b_{ij}\log\frac{p_j}{u_{ij}},\] and the feasible space is
\[\mathcal{S}=\{\mathbf{b}\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times m}:\sum_j b_{ij}=B_i\forall i,b_{ij}\geq 0\forall i,j\}\]
where $p_j=\sum_i b_{ij}$.
The components of the gradient of $\varphi$ are thus
\[(\nabla\varphi(\mathbf{b}))(i,j)=1-\log\frac{u_{ij}}{p_j}.\]
The projection back to the feasible space is applied on vector $\mathbf{b}'' = (\mathbf{b}''_i)_i = (b''_{ij})_{ij}$ after the update such that $\mathbf{b}'' =\mathbf{b}-\eta\nabla\varphi(\mathbf{b})$ for a learning rate $\eta$ and $\mathbf{b}'$ is the feasible point after projection.
The choice of the regularization function and thereby the corresponding Bregman divergence decides the actual distance measure for projection.
The Proportional Response (PR) dynamics are the multiplicative updates that result from the Bregman divergence being the KL-divergence and $\eta=1$:
\[b'_{ij}=\frac{1}{Z_i}b_{ij}(\frac{u_{ij}}{p_j})\]
where $Z_i$ is chosen such that $\sum_j b_{ij}=B_i$.
The update of $b_{ij}$ does not need to depend on the information of any other agent
(given that any price $p_j$ is publicly known), so it can be done in a distributed way.\footnote{When the Bregman divergence is defined to be half the Euclidean distance, the algorithm becomes the gradient descent algorithm.
The projection can be applied to the whole vector $\mathbf{b}$ as in \cite{birnbaum}.
Alternately, one can apply mirror descents with respect to $b_i$ separately on the objective and
show that, jointly, the objective still converges to minimum (as has been done for congestion games
\cite{CL14,CL15,CL16}).}
\subsubsection{Alternating Algorithms for Bijective Markets.}
In the above formulation, other than $b_{ij}$, there is one more set of variables we need to consider: $\beta_i$ for Arrow-Debreu markets.
If we separate the updates of $b_{ij}$ and $\beta_i$, we can alternate between updating $b_{ij}$ and updating $\beta_i$.
Fixing one set of variables temporarily, we can update the other variable set to decrease the objective value. This can be done repeatedly.
One natural attempt is to update $b_{ij}$ using mirror-descent types of approaches and updating $\beta_i$ simply optimizing the objective value.
Careless updates of $\beta_i$ would defeat the purpose of optimizing the objective over $b_{ij}$ (in the manner described above).
Observe that $\beta_i\leq\frac{p_j}{u_{ij}}$ for all $i,j$ and that the objective is non-increasing with $\beta_i$ (since the derivative with respect to $\beta_i$ is $-\frac{p_i}{\beta_i}\leq 0$). Thus, we know that $\beta_i = \min_j p_j/u_{ij}$ is the best possible value if we fix the value of $b_{ij}$.
Note that mirror descents and the convergence analysis in \cite{birnbaum,CL14} will not work directly since we will modify $\beta_i$ before each modification of $b_{ij}$.
Nevertheless, we can show that \emph{a more flexible convergence analysis for gradient descents} will do the job.
Thus, our approach in this paper is to alternate between
\begin{enumerate}
\item a gradient-descent step of updating $b_{ij}$ (with the previously chosen $\beta_{i}$), and
\item an optimization step (instead of the gradient-descent step) of updating $\beta_i$ (with $p_j$ determined by the previously chosen $b_{ij}$ in Step (1)).
\end{enumerate}
Specifically, Step (2) is done by each agent $i$ computing $\beta_i=\min_j p_j/u_{ij}$ (the inverse of the best bang per buck given the previously fixed $p_j$ in Step (1)). This can be done distributedly for each agent $i$.
To prove the convergence, we have to ague the following.
\begin{itemize}
\item Each gradient step decreases the current objective value by some amount when using a new analysis for gradient descents with a convex objective other than those in \cite{birnbaum} and \cite{CL14}.
\item Step (2) does not increase the objective value given the previously chosen $b_{ij}$ in Step (1).
\end{itemize}
Note that we need such a new analysis because the convex function for which we perform the gradient-descent step keeps changing. It does so because it is the convex objective in which each $\beta_i$ is fixed to the value chosen in previous iteration.
\subsection{Related Work}
For Fisher market equilibria, the Eisenberg-Gale convex program \cite{eisenberg} can capture the equilibrium allocation for buyers with utility functions from the same class in the CES family.
The problem of equilibrium computation was introduced to the theoretical computer science community by Devanur et al. \cite{devanur}.
The proportional response dynamic is equivalent to a generalized gradient-descent algorithm with Bregman divergences on a convex program that captures the equilibria of Fisher markets with linear utilities \cite{zhang,birnbaum}.
The tatonnement process is a simple and natural rule for updating prices in markets.
Cheung et al. \cite{cheung} established that tatonnement is like a generalized gradient descent that uses the Bregman divergence for the class of Convex Conservative Vector Field (CCVF) markets.
Jain \cite{jain} reduced the equilibrium computation in linear Arrow-Debreu markets to the equilibrium computation in bijective markets.
Chen et al. \cite{chen:dai} showed that the problem of computing an Arrow-Debreu market equilibrium with additively separable utilities is PPAD-complete.
Devanur et al. \cite{devanur:garg} formulated a rational convex program for the linear Arrow-Debreu model to characterize a market equilibrium.
In almost all the market models we discussed previously, every buyer can shop for goods from every seller.
This implies that the agents (buyers/sellers) reside in an underlying network that is a complete graph.
In reality, trading may only happen between two immediate neighbors in a graph that is not necessarily complete.
Kakade et al. \cite{kakade} considered Arrow-Debreu markets with such generality and designed algorithms that compute approximate equilibria.
If buyers are allowed to strategically report their interests in different goods in order to maximize their own utilities,
the market becomes a market game \cite{adsul,branzei} in which Nash equilibrium can be used as the equilibrium concept.
The Fisher market game was first studied by Adsul et al. \cite{adsul} for buyers with linear utility functions.
Adsul et al. showed the existence of pure Nash equilibria under mild assumptions and provided the conditions necessary for a pure Nash equilibrium to exist.
Br\^{a}nzei et al. \cite{branzei} showed that a Fisher market game for buyers with linear, Leontief, and Cobb-Douglas utility functions always has a pure Nash equilibrium.
Br\^{a}nzei et al. also bounded the price of anarchy for Fisher market games.
\section{Preliminaries} \label{sec:prelim}
An Arrow-Debreu market $M$ consists of a set $A = \lbrace 1,...,n \rbrace$ of agents that trade a set $G=\lbrace 1,...,m \rbrace$ of divisible goods among themselves.
Each unit of good $g \in \lbrace 1,...,m \rbrace$ can be bought by an agent at price $p_g$. The vector of prices is $\mathbf{p} \in \mathbb{R}^m_+$ ($\mathbb{R}_+=\lbrace x \geq 0 \rbrace$).
Each agent $i$ purchases a consumption plan $\mathbf{x}_i \in \mathbb{R}^m_+$.
Each agent $i$ has an initial endowment $\mathbf{w}_i \in \mathbb{R}^m_+$ of the $m$ goods, where $w_{ij}$ is the amount of good $j$ initially held by $i$. These initial goods can be sold to other agents and thus provide agent $i$ with revenue. The revenue can in turn be used to purchase other goods.
Every agent $i$ has a utility function $U_i$ : $\mathbb{R}^m_+ \rightarrow \mathbb{R}_+$, where $U_i(\mathbf{x}_i)$ describes how much utility agent $i$ receives from the consumption plan $\mathbf{x}_i$.
An Arrow-Debreu market can then be described as $M=(A,G,u,w)$.
We now introduce the followin general Constant Elasticity of Substitution (CES) utility function family, which has the most widely used classes.
\begin{equation}
U_i(\mathbf{x}_i)=(\displaystyle\sum_{j=1}^m u_{ij}\cdot x_{ij}^\rho)^\frac{1}{\rho}
\end{equation}
where $- \infty < \rho \leq 1$, $\rho \neq 0$. The Leontief, Cobb-Douglas, and linear utility functions shown below are given when $\rho$ approaches $- \infty$, approaches $0$, and equals $1$, respectively.
\begin{equation}
Leontief: \, U_i(\mathbf{x}_i)=\min_{j \in m}\lbrace \frac{x_{ij}}{u_{ij}} \rbrace
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
Cobb-Douglas: \, U_i(\mathbf{x}_i) = \prod_{j \in m} x_{ij}^{u_{ij}}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
Linear: \, U_i(\mathbf{x}_i)= \sum_{j \in m}u_{ij}x_{ij}
\end{equation}
The Leontief function captures the utility of items that are perfect complements.
The Linear function captures the utility of items that are perfect substitutes.
The Cobb-Douglas function represents a perfect balance between complements and substitutes.
When $G=A$, i.e., $w_{ij}=1$ if $i=j$ and $0$ otherwise, the Arrow-Debreu market becomes a bijective market.
The utility of agent $i$ for the good of agent $j$ is $u_{ij} \geq 0$.
The directed graph $(A,E)$ has an arc $ij$ for every pair with $u_{ij} > 0$.
Jain \cite{jain} reduced Arrow-Debreu markets to bijective markets as follows.
If a good is included in the initial endowment of multiple agents, we give a different name to each good.
If an agent has $k$ goods in the endowment, we split the agent into $k$ copies that have the same utility function and each owns one of the goods.
Consequently, we can focus on the equilibrium computation for bijective markets since any solutions would also work for Arrow-Debreu markets.
In a market equilibrium, we have a set of prices $p : A\rightarrow\mathbb{R}_+$ and allocations
$x : E\rightarrow\mathbb{R}_+$ that satisfy the following conditions \cite{devanur:garg}.
First, agents use an optimal plan at price $\mathbf{p}$ if every agent is allocated a utility-maximizing bundle subject to their constraints.
This reduces to the following.
\begin{itemize}
\item For every $i\in A$, if $x_{ij} > 0$, then $u_{ij}/p_j$ is the maximal value over $j\in A$.
\item $p_i > 0$ for every $i\in A$.
\end{itemize}
The market clears if $\sum_{i\in A}x_{ij}=1$\footnote{W.l.o.g., we assume that $\sum_{i\in A}w_{ij}=1$ for every $j\in A$ since only $w_{ii}=1$ and $w_{ij}=0$ for $i\neq j$ in bijective markets.} for every $j\in A$, i.e., every good is fully sold,
and $p_i=\sum_{j\in A}x_{ij}p_j$ for every $i\in A$, i.e., the money spent by agent $i$ equals her income $p_i$.
\subsection{Convex Program for Linear Bijective Markets}
Our algorithm for computing linear Arrow-Debreu market equilibria is based on solving the rational convex program formulated by Devanur et al. in \cite{devanur:garg}.
Devanur et al. presented a rational convex program for the linear bijective market that guarantees the existence of a market equilibrium.
We need to formally introduce the convex program here before giving our alternating algorithm in the next section.
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:cp}
&\min \quad \sum_{j} p_j \log\frac{p_j}{\beta_j} - \sum_{ij}b_{ij}\log u_{ij} \\
& \nonumber \quad\quad\quad \sum_i b_{ij}=p_j \ \forall j \in A \\
& \nonumber \quad\quad\quad \sum_j b_{ij}=p_i \ \forall i \in A \\
& \nonumber \quad\quad\quad u_{ij}/p_j \leq 1/\beta_i\ \forall i,j \in E \\
& \nonumber \quad\quad\quad\quad p_i \geq 1 \ \forall i \in A \\
& \nonumber \quad\quad\quad\quad \mathbf{b},\mathbf{\beta} \geq 0
\end{eqnarray}
Note that $u_{ij}$ is the utility of agent $i$ for the item of agent $j$.
Variable $b_{ij}$ is the money paid by agent $i$ to agent $j$.
Variable $\beta_i$ represents the inverse \emph{best} bang-per-bucks of agent $i$.
Let $\mathbf{b}=(b_{ij})_{ij}$, $\mathbf{\beta}=(\beta_i)_i$, and $\mathbf{y}=(\mathbf{b},\mathbf{\beta})$.
The money spent by agent $i$ equals $i$'s income $p_i$ (revenue from selling her initial endowment) at market equilibrium, i.e.,
$p_i=\sum_{j\in A}x_{ij}p_j$. The allocation can be derived by $x_{ij}=b_{ij}/p_j$.
Therefore, we can focus on $\mathbf{y}$.
The objective function is
\[\Phi(\mathbf{y})=\min \quad \sum_{j} p_j \log\frac{p_j}{\beta_j} - \sum_{ij}b_{ij}\log u_{ij}.\]
The space of feasible solutions is
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathcal{S}&=&\{\mathbf{b}\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times m},\mathbf{\beta}\in\mathbb{R}^n:b_{ij}\geq 0\forall i,j,u_{ij}/\sum_i b_{ij} \leq 1/\beta_i\ \forall i,j,\\
&&\sum_j b_{ij}\geq 1 \forall i\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
The space of feasible $\mathbf{b}$'s fixing the values of $\mathbf{\beta}$ is
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathcal{S}_\mathbf{\beta}&=&\{\mathbf{b}\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times m}:b_{ij}\geq 0\forall i,j,u_{ij}/\sum_i b_{ij} \leq 1/\beta_i\ \forall i,j,\\
&&\sum_j b_{ij}\geq 1 \forall i\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
From \cite{devanur:garg}, the following condition is necessary for the existence of an equilibrium.
(The argument is provided in the appendix.)\\\\
(*) \emph{For every strongly connected component $S\subseteq E$ of the digraph $(A,E)$,
if $|S| = 1$, then there is a loop incident to the node in $S$.}\\
The result from \cite{devanur:garg} shows the feasibility of such a convex program.
\begin{theorem}[\textsc{Thm}~1.1 of \cite{devanur:garg}] \label{thm:existence}
Consider an instance of the linear Arrow-Debreu market given by graph $(A,E)$ and
the utilities $u : E\rightarrow\mathbb{R}_+$. The convex program (\ref{eq:cp}) is feasible if and
only if (*) holds, and, in this case, the optimum value is 0, and the prices $p_i$ in an
optimal solution give a market equilibrium with allocations $x_{ij} = b_{ij}/p_j$.
Further, if all utilities are rational numbers, then there exists a market equilibrium with all prices
and allocations also rational and of a bitsize polynomially bounded in the input size.
\end{theorem}
Instead of just using generic algorithms to solve a convex program, we aim to design other algorithms to solve this rational convex program.
\section{Alternating Algorithm} \label{sec:algo}
Let $\mathcal{K}$ be the convex feasible space with diameter $d$,
and the objective $\phi: \mathcal{K}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$ is a convex function satisfying the property that there exists positive $\lambda,\gamma\in\mathbb{R}$ such that for any $\xi\in\mathcal{K}$, $0\preceq\nabla^2\phi(\xi)\preceq\lambda I$, and $\|\nabla\phi(\xi)\|_2\leq\gamma$.
In our case, define $\phi_\mathbf{\beta}(\mathbf{b})=\Phi(\mathbf{b},\mathbf{\beta})$,
which is the objective function fixing a value of $\beta$;
$\mathcal{K}$ consists of the feasible solutions
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathcal{S}_{\mathbf{\beta}}&=&\{\mathbf{b}\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times m}:b_{ij}\geq 0\forall i,j,u_{ij}/\sum_i b_{ij} \leq 1/\beta_i\ \forall i,j,\\
&&\sum_j b_{ij}\geq 1 \forall i\},
\end{eqnarray*}
fixing the values of $\mathbf{\beta}$.
One can check that at each $t$,
$\mathcal{S}_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}$ and $\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}$ satisfy the diameter assumption and property with appropriate settings of $d$, $\lambda$, and $\gamma$.
We have the following proposition, whose proof is in Appendix~\ref{pro:hessian}.
\begin{proposition} \label{pro:hessian}
For $\mathcal{K}_t=\mathcal{S}_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}$ and $\xi\in\mathcal{K}_t$,
$0\preceq\nabla^2\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\xi)\preceq\lambda I$ with $\lambda:=n$.
\end{proposition}
We can obtain the gradient $\nabla\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{b})$ with respect to $\mathbf{b}$ by taking the derivative of $b_{ij}$ for each $i,j$, i.e.,
\begin{eqnarray}
\nabla\phi_{\mathcal{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{b})=(\frac{\partial\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{b})}{\partial b_{ij}})_{ij}
=(1-\log\frac{\beta_i u_{ij}}{p_j})_{ij}.
\end{eqnarray}
Let $\mathbf{b}_t\in\mathcal{K}_t$, $\mathbf{b}'=\mathbf{b}_t-\eta\nabla\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{b}_t)$, and $\mathbf{b}_{t+1}=\Pi_{\mathcal{K}_t}(\mathbf{b}')=\arg\min_{\mathbf{z}\in\mathcal{K}_t}\|\mathbf{z}-\mathbf{b}'\|_2^2$, for a positive $\eta\leq\frac{\lambda d^2}{\gamma^2}$.
The idea is to keep the current values of $\mathbf{\beta}_t$ but update $\mathbf{b}$ using the gradient with respect to $\mathbf{b}$.
We denote component $i,j$ of $\mathbf{b}$ at $t$ as $\mathbf{b}_t(i,j)$ and component $i$ of $\mathbf{\beta}$ at $t$ as $\mathbf{\beta}_t(i)$.
Thus,
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Alternating algorithm}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE $\mathbf{b}_{t+1}=\Pi_\mathcal{K}(\mathbf{b}_t-\eta\nabla\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{b}_t))$.
\STATE $\beta_{t+1}(i) = \min_j p_{t+1}(j)/u_{ij}$ for each $i$ where $p_{t+1}(j)=\sum_i b_{t+1}(i,j)$.
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
this is like (1) first moving from point $(\mathbf{b}_t,\mathbf{\beta}_t)$ to point $(\mathbf{b}_{t+1},\mathbf{\beta}_t)$ and (2) then moving from point $(\mathbf{b}_{t+1},\mathbf{\beta}_t)$ to point $(\mathbf{b}_{t+1},\mathbf{\beta}_{t+1})$.
Repeat these two steps, and we need to show that this alternating algorithm converges.
We have to show that Step (2) does not increase the objective value given $b_{t+1}(i,j)$'s,
and that each gradient step decreases the current objective value by some amount.
We do this by using a new analysis for gradient descents with a convex objective.
We derive a market equilibrium for a linear Arrow-Debreu market.
\subsection{Convergence}
We first introduce the following lemma that is a convergence result of standard gradient-descent dynamics.
Using this technical lemma whose proof will be shown in the next subsection,
we then obtain the convergence for our alternating algorithm.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:convergence}
Let $\mathbf{b}\in\mathcal{K}$, $\bar{\mathbf{b}}=\mathbf{b}-\eta\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b})$, and $\mathbf{b}'=\Pi_\mathcal{K}(\bar{\mathbf{b}})=\arg\min_{\mathbf{z}\in\mathcal{K}}\|\mathbf{z}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}\|_2^2$,
for a positive $\eta\leq\frac{\lambda d^2}{\gamma^2}$.
Whenever $\phi(\mathbf{b})-\phi(\mathbf{q})\geq d\gamma\sqrt{6\lambda\eta}$ for $q=\arg\min_{\mathbf{z}\in\mathcal{K}}\phi(\mathbf{z})$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b}),\mathbf{b}'-\mathbf{b}\rangle\leq-\frac{\eta}{3d^2}(\phi(\mathbf{b})-\phi(\mathbf{q}))^2.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{lemma}
With Lemma~\ref{lem:convergence}, we can show our main result of convergence for the alternating algorithm.
Intuitively, this main result means that when the current value of the objective function $\Phi$ is far away from the optimum, given a fixed value of $\mathbf{\beta}$, the gradient descents guarantee that the update of $\mathbf{b}$ decreases the objective value by a certain amount.
The update of $\mathbf{\beta}$ only speeds up the convergence process.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:convergence}
The alternating algorithm converges.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof
By Taylor's expansion at point $(\mathbf{b}_{t+1},\mathbf{\beta}_t)$ and the property of $\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}$ in terms of $\lambda$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{b}_{t+1})\leq\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{b}_t)&+
&\langle\nabla\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{b}_t),\mathbf{b}_{t+1}-\mathbf{b}_t\rangle\\
&+&\frac{\lambda}{2}\|\mathbf{b}_{t+1}-\mathbf{b}_t\|_2^2.
\end{eqnarray*}
The last term in the above inequality is at most,
by $\bar{\mathbf{b}}=\mathbf{b}_t-\eta\nabla\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{b}_t)$ and the definition of projection,
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\frac{\lambda}{2}\|\mathbf{b}_{t+1}-\mathbf{b}_t\|_2^2\leq\frac{1}{2}\lambda\eta^2\|\nabla\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{b}_t)\|_2^2
\leq\frac{1}{2}\lambda\eta^2\gamma^2.
\end{eqnarray*}
By Lemma~\ref{lem:convergence}, we know that whenever $\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{y}_t)-\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{q_t})\geq d\gamma\sqrt{6\lambda\eta}$ for $q_t=\arg\min_{\mathbf{z}\in\mathcal{K}_t}\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{z})$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\langle\nabla\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{b}_t),\mathbf{b}_{t+1}-\mathbf{b}_t\rangle
&\leq&-\frac{\eta}{3d^2}(\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{b}_t)-\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{q_t}))^2\\
&\leq&-2\lambda\eta^2\gamma^2
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\nabla\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{b}_t)=(\partial\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{b}_t)/\partial b_{ij})_{ij}$.
Therefore,
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\langle\nabla\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{b}_t),\mathbf{b}_{t+1}-\mathbf{b}_t\rangle+\frac{\lambda}{2}\|\mathbf{b}_{t+1}-\mathbf{b}_t\|_2^2\\
&\leq&-2\lambda\eta^2\gamma^2+\frac{\lambda\eta^2\gamma^2}{2}\\
&\leq&-\frac{3\lambda\eta^2\gamma^2}{2}.
\end{eqnarray*}
We obtain that
\begin{eqnarray}
\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{b}_{t+1})\leq\phi_{\mathbf{\beta}_t}(\mathbf{b}_t)-\frac{3\lambda\eta^2\gamma^2}{2},
\end{eqnarray}
which is exactly
\begin{eqnarray}
\Phi(\mathbf{b}_{t+1},{\mathbf{\beta}_t})\leq\Phi(\mathbf{b}_t,{\mathbf{\beta}_t})-\frac{3\lambda\eta^2\gamma^2}{2}.
\end{eqnarray}
Finally, the guarantee for Step (2) is not hard to see:
for each $i$, we know that $\beta_{t+1}(i)$ is the best possible value if we fix values of $b_{ij}$ to $b_{t+1}(i,j)$
so $\mathbf{\beta}_{t+1}$ never gives a larger objective value than $\mathbf{\beta}_t$.
We conclude that the value of the objective function $\Phi$ converges to the set of $(\mathbf{b},\mathbf{\beta})$ that give values within $d\gamma\sqrt{6\lambda\eta}$ from the minimum.
\end{proof}
\subsubsection*{Convergence time.} The value of the objective function has an upper bound, and the objective value decreases by at least $3\lambda\eta^2\gamma^2/2$ until the value of the objective function $\Phi$ reaches the set of $(\mathbf{b},\mathbf{\beta})$ that give values within $d\gamma\sqrt{6\lambda\eta}$ from the minimum.
Thus, one can upper bound the convergence time.
\subsection{Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:convergence}}
By Taylor's expansion and the property of $\phi$ in terms of $\lambda$,
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:taylor}
\phi(\mathbf{b}')\leq\phi(\mathbf{b})+\langle\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b}),\mathbf{b}'-\mathbf{b}\rangle+\frac{\lambda}{2}\|\mathbf{b}'-\mathbf{b}\|_2^2.
\end{eqnarray}
To bound the second term in (\ref{eq:taylor}), note that by the convexity of $\phi$,
\[\phi(q)\geq\phi(\mathbf{b})+\langle\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b}),\mathbf{q}-\mathbf{b}\rangle,\]
which implies that
\[-\langle\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b}),\mathbf{q}-\mathbf{b}\rangle\geq\phi(\mathbf{b})-\phi(\mathbf{q})\geq 0.\]
Let $\Delta=-\langle\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b}),\mathbf{q}-\mathbf{b}\rangle$,
and we know from above that $\Delta^2\geq(\phi(\mathbf{b})-\phi(\mathbf{q}))^2$.
Now we are ready to show that when $\Delta\geq 2\eta\gamma^2$,
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:inner}
\langle\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b}),\mathbf{b}'-\mathbf{b}\rangle\leq-\frac{\eta\Delta^2}{3d^2}.
\end{eqnarray}
Note that $\phi(\mathbf{b})-\phi(\mathbf{q})\geq d\gamma\sqrt{6\lambda\eta}$ implies that $\Delta\geq d\gamma\sqrt{6\lambda\eta}$.
By $\eta\leq\frac{\lambda d^2}{\gamma^2}$, we have $d\sqrt{6\lambda}\geq 2\gamma\sqrt{\eta}$,
and thus $\Delta\geq d\gamma\sqrt{6\lambda\eta}\geq 2\eta\gamma^2$, which satisfies the condition for Inequality~(\ref{eq:inner}).
Consider the triangle formed by $\mathbf{b},\mathbf{b}',\bar{\mathbf{b}}$.
Let $\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\alpha_3$ denote the angles that correspond to the points $\mathbf{b},\mathbf{b}',\bar{\mathbf{b}}$, respectively.
Since $\mathbf{b}'=\Pi_{\mathcal{K}}(\bar{\mathbf{b}})$ and $\mathbf{b}\in\mathcal{K}$,
we know that $\alpha_2\geq\frac{\pi}{2}$ and thus $\pi\leq\frac{\pi}{2}$.
(When $\mathbf{y}'=\mathbf{y}''$, we use the convention that $\alpha_2=\alpha_3=\frac{\pi}{2}$.)
As $\bar{\mathbf{b}}=\mathbf{b}-\eta\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b})$, we have that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\langle\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b}),\mathbf{b}'-\mathbf{b}\rangle&=&\|\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b})\|_2\|\mathbf{b}'-\mathbf{b}\|_2\cos(\pi-\alpha_1)\\
&=&-\|\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b})\|_2\|\mathbf{b}'-\mathbf{b}\|_2\cos\alpha_1,
\end{eqnarray*}
which is at most 0 since $\cos\alpha_1\geq 0$. Moreover, because $\alpha_2\geq\frac{\pi}{2}$, we have that
\[\|\mathbf{b}'-\mathbf{b}\|_2\geq\|\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}\|_2\sin\alpha_3=\eta\|\phi(\mathbf{b})\|_2\sin\alpha_3.\]
Thus, we derive that
\[\langle\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b}),\mathbf{b}'-\mathbf{b}\rangle\leq-\eta\|\phi(\mathbf{b})\|_2^2\cos\alpha_1\sin\alpha_3.\]
What is left to be shown are the lower bounds for $\cos\alpha_1$ and $\sin\alpha_3$.
Consider the triangle formed by $\mathbf{b}, \mathbf{q}, \mathbf{b}'$, and let $\alpha_4$ denote the angle at point $\mathbf{b}$.
Then, we need the following two claims, whose proofs will be provided in the following two subsections.
\begin{lemma} \label{lm:1}
If $\Delta\geq 2\eta\gamma^2$, $\alpha_4\geq\alpha_1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma} \label{lm:2}
If $\Delta\geq 2\eta\gamma^2$, $\sin\alpha_3\geq\frac{\cos\alpha_4}{3}$.
\end{lemma}
With these two claims, we obtain
\[\langle\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b},\mathbf{b}'-\mathbf{b})\rangle\leq-\frac{\eta\|\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b})\|_2^2\cos^2\alpha_4}{3}.\]
Recall that $-\Delta=\langle\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b}),\mathbf{q}-\mathbf{b}\rangle=\\
\|\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b})\|_2\|\mathbf{q}-\mathbf{b}\|_2\cos(\pi-\alpha_4)=\\
-\|\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b})\|_2\|\mathbf{q}-\mathbf{b}\|_2\cos\alpha_4$.
Thus,
\[\cos\alpha_4=\frac{\Delta}{\|\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b})\|_2\|\mathbf{q}-\mathbf{b}\|_2}\geq\frac{\Delta}{d\|\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b})\|_2},\]
and we have proven Inequality~(\ref{eq:inner}).
\subsubsection{Proof of Lemma~\ref{lm:1}}
Consider the triangle formed by $\mathbf{b},\bar{\mathbf{b}},\mathbf{q}$.
Let $\bar{\mathbf{b}}'$ be the point on plane $\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\mathbf{q}$ such that the triangles $\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\bar{\mathbf{y}}'$ and $\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\mathbf{b}'$ are identical. ($\bar{\mathbf{b}}'=\mathbf{b}'$ if the triangles $\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\mathbf{q}$ and $\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\mathbf{b}'$ are on the same plane.)
Clearly, angle $\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}'$ equals angle $\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\mathbf{b}-\mathbf{b}'$, which is $\alpha_1$.
Thus, we can consider triangle $\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}'$ instead of $\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\mathbf{b}'$.
Assume for the sake of contradiction that $\alpha_4 < \alpha_1$.
Note that since $\eta\leq\frac{\Delta}{2\gamma^2}\leq\frac{\Delta}{\gamma^2}$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}'\}_2&\leq&\|\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}\|_2=\eta\|\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b})\|_2\leq\frac{\Delta}{\gamma}\\
&\leq&\frac{|\langle\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b}),\mathbf{b}-\mathbf{q}\rangle|}{\|\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b})\|_2}\leq\|\mathbf{b}-\mathbf{q}\|_2.
\end{eqnarray*}
This implies that line $\mathbf{b}-\mathbf{q}$ must intersect the line $\bar{\mathbf{b}}'-\bar{\mathbf{b}}$ at some point $\mathbf{z}$ with $\|\mathbf{z}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}\|_2<\|\bar{\mathbf{b}}'-\bar{\mathbf{b}}\|_2$.
However, since $\mathbf{b},\mathbf{q}\in\mathcal{K}$ and $\mathcal{K}$ is convex, we know that $\mathbf{z}\in\mathcal{K}$,
we know that $\mathbf{z}\in\mathcal{K}$ and thus $\|\mathbf{z}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}\|_2\geq\|\bar{\mathbf{b}}'-\bar{\mathbf{b}}\|_2$ by the definition of $\mathbf{b}'$.
This is a contradiction as $\|\mathbf{b}'-\bar{\mathbf{b}}\|_2=\|\bar{\mathbf{b}}'-\bar{\mathbf{b}}\|_2$.
We can conclude that $\alpha_4\geq\alpha_1$.
\subsubsection{Proof of Lemma~\ref{lm:2}}
Since $\alpha_4\geq\alpha_1$ and $\|\mathbf{y}_t-\mathbf{q}\|_2\geq\|\mathbf{y}_t-\bar{\mathbf{y}}'\|_2$,
$\bar{\mathbf{b}}'$ must lie inside triangle $\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\mathbf{q}$,
which implies that the line passing through $\mathbf{q}$ and $\bar{\mathbf{b}}'$ must intersect line segment $\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}$ at some point $\mathbf{w}$.
Let $a_1,a_2,a_3$ denote angles $\mathbf{b}-\mathbf{q}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}'$, $\mathbf{q}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}'-\bar{\mathbf{b}}$, and $\mathbf{w}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}'$, respectively.
We first claim that $a_2\geq\frac{\pi}{2}$. To see that, we compare it with angle $\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\mathbf{b}'-\mathbf{q}$, denoted as $a'_2$,
which is at least $\frac{\pi}{2}$.
Since triangles $\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}'$ and $\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\mathbf{b}'$ are identical,
angle $\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}'$ (denoted as $\bar{\theta}$) is the same as angle $\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\mathbf{b}'$ (denoted as $\theta$), which implies that angle $\bar{\mathbf{b}}'-\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\mathbf{q}$ is at most angle $\mathbf{b}'-\mathbf{b}-\mathbf{q}$ since $\bar{\mathbf{b}}'$ lies on the same plane as $\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\mathbf{q}$.
Since $\|\mathbf{b}'-\bar{\mathbf{b}}\|_2=\|\bar{\mathbf{b}}'-\bar{\mathbf{b}}\|_2$,
if we rotate triangles $\mathbf{b}'-\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\mathbf{q}$ and $\bar{\mathbf{b}}'-\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\mathbf{q}$ along line $\mathbf{q}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}$ to make them lie on the same plane, $\bar{\mathbf{b}}'$ must lie inside of triangle $\mathbf{b}'-\bar{\mathbf{b}}-\mathbf{q}$.
As $a'_2\geq\frac{\pi}{2}$, we must have that $a_2\geq a'_2\geq\frac{\pi}{2}$.
Next, note that $\alpha_3=a_2-a_3\geq\frac{\pi}{2}-a_3$ and $a_3=a_1+\alpha_4$.
So, $\sin\alpha_3\geq\sin(\frac{\pi}{2}-a_1-\alpha_4)=\cos(a_1+\alpha_4)=\cos a_1\cos\alpha_4-\sin a_1\sin\alpha_4\geq\cos\alpha_4\sqrt{1-\sin^2 a_1}-\sin a_1$ as $\sin\alpha_4\leq 1$ and $\sin a_1\geq 0$. Moreover,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sin a_1&\leq&\frac{\|\mathbf{b}-\mathbf{w}\|_2}{\|\mathbf{b}-\mathbf{q}\|_2}\leq\frac{\|\mathbf{b}-\bar{\mathbf{b}}\|_2}{\mathbf{b}-\mathbf{q}}\\
&\leq&\frac{\eta\|\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b})\|_2}{(\frac{\Delta}{\|\nabla\phi(\mathbf{b})\|_2\cos\alpha_4})}
\leq\frac{\eta\gamma^2\cos\alpha_4}{\Delta}\leq\frac{\cos\alpha_4}{2}.
\end{eqnarray*}
As a result, we have that $\sin\alpha_4\geq\cos\alpha_4\sqrt{1-\frac{1}{4}}\geq\frac{\cos\alpha_4}{3}$.
\section{Future Work}
Agents may strategically report their interests in different services in order to maximize their own utilities in markets.
When we allow this and treat the market equilibrium computation as a mapping from a given report, we are studying market games.
As far as we know, it is still an open question Nash equilibria exist in ``Arrow-Debreu market games" (as in Fisher market games \cite{branzei}).
It would be also interesting to consider different classes of underlying social networks that describe crowd structures \cite{kakade}.
There are some price-of-anarchy results in Fisher market games \cite{branzei}.
Another interesting research direction might be better bounding the price of anarchy for Fisher/Arrow-Debreu market games.
\subsubsection*{Acknowledgements.}
We would like to thank Ling-Wei Wang for useful discussions.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
During the last decade, the main objective of wireless communications systems (WCS) is to ensure reliable content delivery and to enhance the quality of service. Hence, efforts in industry and academia have been made to improve the spectral efficiency (SE) and obtain higher throughput based on the Shannon capacity that describes the maximum amount of data which can be transmitted over a wireless channel.
The focus on maximizing the SE resulted in developing many technologies such as orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM), multiple-input and multiple-output (MIMO) and relaying techniques, to cite only a few.
Currently, the applications of the fifth generation (5G) WCS are expected to be very diverse; ranging from environmental monitoring to public safety. Consequently, the energy efficiency (EE) is becoming an important performance metric when designing such systems. One of the 5G requirements is to increase the energy efficiency by 100 times, as indicated by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) in its report~\cite{ITUreport2015}.
Such a metric is extremely important and crucial in multiple scenarios.
Firstly, for many battery-powered devices like the WSN and mobile devices, operation lifetime is a key parameter and is required to be as long as possible to ensure continuous and long-lasting services.
Secondly, for the cellular operators, the energy consumption constitutes an important part of the operating expenditure (OPEX). Consequently, reducing the energy consumption while conserving the same QoS is important to reduce the OPEX and enhance the profit given the increasing energy prices. The work in~\cite{Xu2015} describes how smart grids were used in cellular networks in order to improve the EE and reduce the related cost.
Thirdly, since most of the current electrical energy is generated via fossil processes, the CO$_2$ emission is another concern and a stringent constraint that must be respected by the service providers.
Finally, it is also important to evaluate the energy consumption of critical and low-latency applications by analyzing and maximizing the corresponding EE.
Previous works indicated that maximizing the EE and SE are conflicting objectives, that is, in order to increase the EE, we need to reduce the SE~\cite{Li2011}. In fact, since the focus is on maximizing the SE, many power allocations schemes, such as water-filling, were developed to improve the SE~\cite{Cover2006}. Hence, the corresponding EE was compromised when adopting such power control schemes. Therefore, several green projects have been introduced to cope with such a compromise, e.g.,~\cite{Han2011}. In some other works, e.g.,~\cite{Guo2014}, a joint energy and spectrum cooperation was presented to avoid this trade-off. Consequently, the resource allocation schemes using the EE as an objective function are becoming popular.
In fact, in the ITU report~\cite{ITUreport2015}, it was mentioned that in order to improve the EE, the transmit power and the circuit power should be reduced.
However, this approach did not seem to be promising since it undermines the SE. Indeed, it has been shown in~\cite{Li2011} that there is an EE-SE trade-off, in the sense that one cannot maximize both figures of merits at the same time, and in order to maximize one, the other needs to be reduced.
In this paper, and for the first time, we show that the trade-off highlighted by previous works is actually not fundamental. In particular, we present a new EE-SE relationship where both metrics concurrently increase.
In addition, we show that there exists a power control scheme that maximizes EE while having an increasing SE. In particular, in~\cite{Sboui2015}, it has been shown that a power control scheme that maximizes the EE also exhibits an increasing EE as a function of the SE.
In the rest of this article, we study different cases and scenarios; single-input-single-output (SISO), OFDM, and MIMO that cover the majority of current WCS. We also present some of the open research problems related to the EE of WCS.
\section{Background on the EE Metric}
The concept of EE for WCS was first studied from an information-theoretical perspective in~\cite{Verdu2002} by defining a metric called minimum energy per bit.
Then, the authors in~\cite{Prabhu2010} defined the energy-per-bit as the ratio of the consumed power to the achieved throughput expressed in J/bit.
Recently, the EE metric, defined as the ratio of the channel capacity $C$ to the power consumed to achieve this rate, was introduced in~[3], that is, $EE= \frac{C}{P_c+P_\textrm{Tx}}$,
where $P_{c}$ is the system's circuit power, and $P_\textrm{Tx}$ is the transmit power. Note that the spectral efficiency, $SE$ is defined as $SE= \frac{C}{B}$, where $B$ is the system bandwidth, meaning that $EE= B \frac{SE}{P_c+P_\textrm{Tx}}$. In the rest of this paper, we adopt a unit bandwidth analysis where the $EE$ is expressed as $EE= \frac{SE}{P_c+P_\textrm{Tx}}$ in bits/J.
Considering this relationship, it is clear that when SE is maximized for high values of $P_\textrm{Tx}$, EE is reduced, thus the existence of a trade-off between SE and EE.
\subsection{Circuit Power Model}
When defining the EE, the consumed power, which includes both the transmit power, $P_\textrm{Tx}$, and the circuit power, $P_{c}$, is required. The circuit power includes the power consumed by the communication chain (amplifiers, mixers, ADCs, DACs, filters, oscillators, etc) excluding the antenna as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_1_MAG}.a. Note that the EE does not consider the overall power consumption of the WCS as it may be related to services other than the communication such as data processing and data storing for WSN, cooling for BSs, transportation for drones, etc.
In Fig.~\ref{fig_1_MAG}.b, we highlight the impact of $P_c$ on the EE in various applications, that is, massive, consumer, and critical applications, as a function of the available transmit power budget. We show, clearly that $P_c$ has a negative impact on EE since as $P_c$ increases, the EE is degrading.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\figwidth]{SISO_chain.eps}\\
(a)\\[.5cm]
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{Fig_Massive.eps}\\
(b)\\[.5cm]
\includegraphics[width=\figwidth]{EE_types.eps}\\
(c)
\end{center}
\caption{(a) Circuit components involved in the circuit power; (b) various power profiles based on application type and circuit power value; (c) fairness degree of various different EE definitions\cite{Zappone2015}.}\label{fig_1_MAG}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Energy Efficiency of Multi-Dimension WCS}
In the case of multi-dimension WCS (MD-WCS) such as multiple antennas, multiple subcarriers or multiple users systems, the EE can have multiple expressions, depending on the target criteria.
For example, in OFDM communications, if all subcarriers are equivalent, the employed EE expression is defined as the ratio of the total SE to the total power. In the case of an uplink cellular network, if the fairness is to be considered, EE could be defined as the product of partial EE achieved by each user. This way, we avoid situations where some users with bad channels may never communicate.
In the rest of this paper, $N$ denotes the dimension of the MD-WCS and $i$ denotes the index of a given sub-system of~it.
As indicated in~\cite{Zappone2015}, there are mainly four different ways to define the EE:
\subsubsection{Global EE (GEE)}~\\
The GEE is defined as the ratio of global achievable rate to the total consumed power, that is, $GEE= \frac{\sum_i SE_i}{\sum_i P_{c,i}+P_{\textrm{Tx},i}}$. The GEE is simple to compute and characterizes the global performance of the WCS but does not allow sufficient fairness in MD-WCS. The GEE is wildly used in MIMO and OFDM applications where the fairness is not required among the antennas and the subcarriers, respectively.
\subsubsection{Weighted Sum EE (WSEE)}~\\
The WSEE is defined as the weighted sum of the partial EE's, that is, $WSEE= \sum_i \omega_i \frac{SE_i}{P_{c,i}+P_{\textrm{Tx},i}}$ where $\omega_i$ is the weight associated to the {i-th} dimension. The WSEE can ensure a priority to a subset of the system.
While the weights in the WSEE are chosen to highlight the importance of some parts of the MD-WCS, it does not guarantee total fairness.
The WSEE can be considered for heterogeneous networks (HetNets) applications where small cells have different weights than the macro cell when maximizing the EE.
\subsubsection{Weighted Product EE (WPEE)}~\\
The WPEE is defined as the weighted product of the partial EE's, that is, $WPEE= \prod_i \omega_i \frac{SE_i}{P_{c,i}+P_{\textrm{Tx},i}}$. The WPEE aims to ensure higher fairness among all system's subsets.
The WPEE can be employed for cases of multiple users with no priority and with high fairness. The WPEE might be used in cellular applications, where the power and resource allocation at the cell maximize the EE, considering all users' EE. Otherwise, if one user is not connected the overall WPEE is reduced to zero.
\subsubsection{Weighted minimum of the energy efficiencies (WMEE)}~\\
The WMEE is defined as the minimum of the weighted partial EE's, that is, $WMEE= \min_i \omega_i \frac{SE_i}{P_{c,i}+P_{\textrm{Tx},i}}$. The WMEE can ensure higher fairness by focusing on maximizing the lowest partial EE among all system's subsets.
This EE is employed for cases of multiple users with a certain minimal EE per each user. An application of the WMEE is the case of WSN where a failure of one node may cause an outage of the network performance.
In Fig.~\ref{fig_1_MAG}.c, we present the different types of the EE and their corresponding degree of fairness. Note that the fairness is formally defined according to the Max-Min fairness. In other words, as this fairness increases, the distribution of the EE among the multiple communications links is more balanced.
\section{Energy Efficiency of SISO Systems}
SISO communications cover a wide range of applications such as WSN, mobile systems and public safety communications.
Usually, the transmit power of SISO systems is designed to maximize the SE under a certain power budget. The resulting power control is called the water-filling power allocation (WPA). While the WPA ensures obtaining the maximum SE, the corresponding EE is compromised which urges the need to develop a new power allocation scheme focusing on maximizing the EE.
\subsection{ SISO EE Power Control}
Note that the EE function with respect to $P_\textrm{Tx}$ is not a convex but a pseudo-concave function, which is known to admit a unique maximizer~\cite{Zappone2015}. Therefore, many works in the literature used numerical methods to find the $P_\textrm{Tx}$ maximizing the EE~\cite{Isheden2012}. The most used method is the fraction programming method based on the Dinkelbach's algorithm~\cite{Zappone2015}. However, the reached solution is not entirely satisfactory as the lack of a closed-form solution does not allow to build sufficient insights into the problem. Recently, an explicit expression of the corresponding energy-efficient power allocation (EEPA) has been presented in~\cite{Sboui2015} as $P_{EE}(\gamma)=\frac{1}{\gamma} \left( {e}^{1+ W \left( \frac{\gamma P_c -1}{e} \right)}-1\right)$, where $\gamma$ is the channel realization modulus squared and $W$ is the main branch of W-Lambert function.
Interestingly, the EE expression, in~\cite{Sboui2015}, presented new insights on the EE performance and particularly on the EE-SE relationship.
\subsection{The SISO EE-SE Relationship}
\begin{figure*}[h]
\begin{mdframed}[linewidth=.6pt]
\centering
\subcaptionbox{}{%
\includegraphics[width=\figwidth]{Fig_WPA_EEPA.eps}
}\quad
\subcaptionbox{}{%
\includegraphics[width=\figwidth]{Fig_WPA_EEPA_SE_EE.eps}}
\bigskip
\subcaptionbox{}{%
\includegraphics[width=\figwidth]{SEvsEE_SISO.eps}}\quad
\subcaptionbox{}{%
\includegraphics[width=\figwidth]{SEvsEE_SISO_general.eps}}
\end{mdframed}
\caption{(a) EE and SE based power profile~\cite{Sboui2017AccessEE}; (b) SE and the EE of both EE and SE based power control~\cite{Sboui2017AccessEE};\\ (c) The new EE and SE relationship in SISO communications~\cite{Sboui2015}; (d) The EE-SE relationship with different $P_c$.}\label{fig_MAG_EE_SISO_1}
\end{figure*}
In order to capture the mentioned new EE insights, we present in Fig.~\ref{fig_MAG_EE_SISO_1} the variation of the EE with the channel realization when an EEPA is employed and the corresponding EE-SE variation.
In Fig.~\ref{fig_MAG_EE_SISO_1}.a, the EEPA, i.e., $P_{EE}(\gamma)$ is compared to the WPA, i.e., $P_{WPA}(\gamma)$. It is shown that both schemes behave oppositely as $\gamma$ increases. In fact, the WPA scheme is well-known to transmit when the channel is good and remains silent for bad channels in order to reach a high overall spectrum efficiency.
However, when the EE is maximized the EEPA scheme transmits with low power for good channels as the resulting SE divided by a low power corresponds to a high~EE.
In Fig.~\ref{fig_MAG_EE_SISO_1}.b, the EE and SE are presented for both EEPA and WPA schemes to have an idea of the resulting tradeoffs between maximizing the EE or SE. Interestingly, the SE of the EEPA is higher than the SE of the WPA for bad channels, in this case for $\gamma < 0.2$. However, the SE of the WPA overcomes the one of the EEPA which, gives in average, a maximum SE.
This EEPA scheme is the essence of the new EE-SE relationship highlighted in Fig.~\ref{fig_MAG_EE_SISO_1}.c.
In this figure, we notice that the variation of the transmit power shows a pseudo concave EE function that has global maxima at a certain value of $P$. This value matches the optimal power maximizing the EE, i.e., $P_{EE}(\gamma)$ as $\gamma$ varies given by the red circles in the figure. Interestingly, the SE is increasing with the EE when the transmit power exceeds this value, the EE decreases and reaches zero. Interestingly, the set of the EE-SE red circles, resulting from picking the $P_{EE}(\gamma)$ as $\gamma$ varies, presents a strictly increasing curve of the SE with respect to the EE. In other words, when the power is designed in a way to maximize the EE, the resulting SE is increasing with EE as shown by the blue curve in Fig.~\ref{fig_MAG_EE_SISO_1}.c for $P_c=1 W$
In Fig.~\ref{fig_MAG_EE_SISO_1}.d, we analyze the impact of the circuit power $P_c$ on the SISO performance. As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_MAG_EE_SISO_1}.c, the SE computed using the power resulting from the EE maximization is increasing with the EE. However, the EE is decreasing by around $50\%$ as the $P_c$ doubles while conserving the same value of the SE. This observation shows the high influence of $P_c$ on the overall EE. In fact, one of the ways to considerably enhance the EE, while conserving the same data rate, is to design systems with low circuit power. Hence, efforts need to be made in the direction of reducing the circuit power while designing future wireless devices and equipments (sensors, mobile stations and base stations, etc.)
\begin{figure*}[t]
\begin{mdframed}[linewidth=.6pt]
\centering
\subcaptionbox{}{%
\includegraphics[width=13cm]{OFDM_chain.eps}}
\bigskip
\subcaptionbox{}{%
\includegraphics[width=\figwidth]{EEvsNc_OFDM.eps}}\quad
\subcaptionbox{}{%
\includegraphics[width=\figwidth]{EEvsSE_OFDM.eps}}
\end{mdframed}
\caption{(a) The OFDM communication chain; (b) EE variation with the number of subcarriers~\cite{Sboui2016PIMRC}; (c) The new EE and SE relationship in OFDM communications.}\label{fig_MAG_EE_OFDM_1}
\end{figure*}
\section{Energy Efficiency of OFDM Systems}
\subsection{About the OFDM Technology}
The OFDM technique was introduced to avoid the channel variation and enhance the QoS by dividing the total bandwidth into $N$ subcarriers.
This technique is based on transforming a serial wideband stream to narrowband parallel streams. The resulting signals are then transmitted on multiple orthogonal subcarriers that have different channel gains as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_MAG_EE_OFDM_1}.a. The main advantage of OFDM is to overcome fading variations resulting in a robust and enhanced overall transmission used the correction codes~\cite{Li2011}.
The OFDM is currently part of many wireless communications protocols such as WiFi and WiMAX.
\subsection{OFDM EE Maximization}
Improving the EE of OFDM systems was performed, in previous works, based on minimizing the power consumption.
Then, the EE of the OFDM systems based on maximizing the EE metric was studied in~\cite{Venturino2015} and an explicit expression of the power was presented in~\cite{Sboui2016PIMRC} where the authors present analytical power allocation expressions in OFDMA cellular networks under unconstrained and constrained conditions regarding the power and rate requirements. These EEPA expressions, following the same insights of the SISO EEPA, present interesting results in terms of the EE of subcarriers scalability and the EE-SE relationship.
\subsection{OFDM EE-SE relationship}
In Fig.~\ref{fig_MAG_EE_OFDM_1}.b, we show that, for a given $P_c$, having more subcarriers, enhances the EE, meaning that considering an energy efficient transmission reduces the OPEX of cellular operators as the consumption is reduced for the same data rate. In addition, we notice that even if the circuit power increases, the slope of the EE curve is almost the same. This fact shows that the EE enhancement, when increasing the number of subcarriers, is highly predictable independently of the circuit power of the system.
A more interesting result related to the EE-SE relationship is presented in Fig.~\ref{fig_MAG_EE_OFDM_1}.c. We show that, for a fixed $P_c$, having more subcarriers enhances both the SE and the EE, which results again in an increasing SE with respect to the EE. Hence, the new EE-SE proportional relationship is also preserved in OFDM when EEPA schemes are adopted.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\begin{mdframed}[linewidth=.6pt]
\centering
\subcaptionbox{}{%
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{MIMO_chain.eps}}\quad
\bigskip
\subcaptionbox{}{%
\includegraphics[width=\figwidth]{EEvsNc_MIMO.eps}}\quad
\subcaptionbox{}{%
\includegraphics[width=\figwidth]{EEvsSE_MIMO.eps}}
\end{mdframed}
\caption{(a) The MIMO communication chain; (b) EE variation with the number of antennas; (c) The new EE and SE relationship in MIMO communications.}\label{fig_MAG_EE_MIMO_1}
\end{figure*}
\section{Energy Efficiency of MIMO systems}
\subsection{About the MIMO Technology}
To improve the spectral efficiency, the MIMO concept was introduced in \cite{Telatar1999} as an alternative to reach higher data rate using the same bandwidth and power resources. The MIMO is a promising technology to remarkably increase the wireless channel capacity and allow to reach higher throughput. The MIMO is based on using multiple antennas at the transmitter and receiver as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_MAG_EE_MIMO_1}.a.
The corresponding theoretical limit of the maximum data rate is proportional to the minimum between the transmit and receive antennas~\cite{Telatar1999} which presents a huge gain compared to SISO.
MIMO communications are based on two main techniques: multiplexing and beamforming. In multiplexing, the transmitter sends parallel streams of data at the same time in order to increase the overall data rate. In beamforming, the transmitter sends a narrow signals beam to the receiver and enhance the reliability.
MIMO technology is currently deployed in multiple IEEE 802.11n and the 3GPP LTE in the~4G.
\subsection{MIMO EE Maximization}
When the CSI is perfectly known, the singular value decomposition (SVD) of the channel matrix is employed in order to maximize the SE via leveraging parallel SISO channels. The MIMO-SVD is widely employed as it simplifies the power allocation procedure and results in high SE. Similarly, the EE of MIMO system can be maximized using the SVD~\cite{Zappone2015}.
The challenge of MIMO systems is again related to the non-convexity of the EE. Numerical fractional programming methods were presented as in~\cite{Zappone2015}, where the nonconvex problem is transformed into a subtractive one. Note that the EEPA of MIMO systems with the WSEE objective function is a natural extension of the SISO EEPA since each SVD parallel channel can be considered as a SISO system. However, in the case of the MIMO GEE objective function, a new scheme was presented in \cite{Sboui2017AccessEE} with the closed-form expression of the optimal power derived under certain conditions. As we mentioned before, the WPEE and WMEE are not widely used for MIMO systems since there is no fairness requirement among the different antennas.
\subsection{MIMO EE-SE relationship}
We first start, in Fig.~\ref{fig_MAG_EE_MIMO_1}.b, by exploring the effect of increasing the number of antennas $N$ on the EE with an EEPA scheme. We show that the EE increase is logarithmic with $N$ which gives a general insight about the EE gain of MIMO systems compared to the SISO systems. In particular, as the circuit power is lower, the gain in EE is higher as $N$ increases.
From another side, in Fig.~\ref{fig_MAG_EE_MIMO_1}.c, we analyze the EE-SE relationship when the number of antennas $N$ increases. We confirm again, in MIMO, that the EE-SE relationship is proportional, since an increasing $N$ results in higher EE and SE. In addition, we highlight the effect of the circuit power $P_c$ on the EE-SE relationship. For the same SE, as $P_c$ decreases, EE is increasing remarkably. For instance, for $N=4$, the MIMO system is twice more energy efficient with $P_c=0.25W$ than when $P_c=1W$. Which means, in this case, that mobile devices will have a double lifetime, or that mobile operators will pay half the electricity bill.
\section{Results Discussion and Related Research Problems}
We present in this part a discussion about the aforementioned results as well as suggestion of related research problems.
\subsection{Results Discussion}
After our analysis of the EE-SE relationship, we clearly show that the EE is an increasing function of SE for all technologies. In addition, in order to highlight the differences and similarities in SISO, OFDM, and MIMO, we present in Table~\ref{tab1} a summary of the EE and SE performance results. In particular, in MD-WCS, as we increase the dimension~$N$, the system becomes more energy efficient in addition to providing higher spectral efficiency. As a result, when OFDM is combined with MIMO, we expect to have even higher EE and SE. For example, for $P_c=1$W, the OFDM EE increases by more than three folds from~1 to~16 subcarriers (with one antenna) where as the MIMO EE is more than the double for~4 antennas compared to SISO (with on subcarrier). As a conclusion, the MIMO-OFDM EE, with~16 subcarriers and~4 antennas, is expected to reach more than six times the SISO EE. This observation reflects a high synergy between OFDM and MIMO in WCS which is already observed in terms of SE in high speed technologies such as WiMAX LTE, LTE-A, and IEEE 802.11n/ac/ax.
{\linespread{1}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{\label{tab1}Analysis summary for SISO, OFDM, and MIMO.}
\addtolength{\tabcolsep}{-3pt}
{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{2.5}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\textbf{WCS}&\textbf{\pbox{2.5cm}{Detailed\\power\\profile}}&\textbf{\pbox{1.7cm}{EE shape in\\MD-WCS}}&\textbf{\pbox{1.5cm}{EE-SE\\shape}}&\textbf{\pbox{1.5cm}{EE gain\\compared\\to SISO$^*$}}&\textbf{\pbox{1.5cm}{SE gain\\compared\\to SISO$^*$}}\\[2mm] \hline \hline
\textbf{ SISO } & \cite{Sboui2015} & - & \pbox{1.5cm}{increasing, \\parabolic } & - & - \\[1mm] \hline
\textbf{ OFDM } & \cite{Sboui2016PIMRC} & \pbox{1.5cm}{increasing, \\logarithmic} & \pbox{1.5cm}{increasing,\\linear} & \pbox{1.5cm}{3x (N=16)\\5x (N=64)} & \pbox{1.5cm}{4x (N=16)\\7x (N=64)} \\[1mm] \hline
\textbf{ MIMO } & \cite{Sboui2017AccessEE} & \pbox{1.5cm}{increasing, \\logarithmic} & \pbox{1.5cm}{increasing,\\logarithmic} & \pbox{1.5cm}{2x (N=4)\\5x (N=32)} & \pbox{1.5cm}{6x (N=4)\\84x (N=32)} \\[1mm] \hline
\end{tabular}
}{
\begin{flushleft}
$^*$: for $P_c= 1$W.
\end{flushleft}
}\vspace{-7mm}
\end{table}
}
As a result, the new EE-SE relationship has an important impact on the design of 5G systems from two perspectives. First, the transmit power profile is expected to be radically changed from the traditional WPA to the EEPA described in Fig.~\ref{fig_MAG_EE_SISO_1}.a. Second, the EE is expected to be the primary performance metric instead of the SE. In fact, EE considerations are mandatory for energy-sensitive applications in order to extend operation time, and is recommended in other applications to reduce operation costs.
\subsection{Related Research Problems}
We present some interesting research problems related to the EE requiring future investigations.
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{MIMO with CSI Unavailability:}
In some practical MIMO scenarios, the CSI is not available or imperfect. Hence, the EEPA is hard to obtain and further algorithms to find the maximal EE with imperfect CSI need to be developed. One possible method is to maximize an approximation of an average EE considering the channel gain statistics.
\item \textbf{Multi-Users:}
In 4G-LTE and 5G networks, there are multiple users. The corresponding EE problem is interesting to study. In fact, each user is trying to maximize its EE compared to the EE maximization of the global system. Hence, the WMEE objective function can be studied.
\item \textbf{Multi-Cells:}
Another interesting case would be the multi-cell scenario where interference from other cells is
considered. The case of rate constraints where a minimum rate (as a measure of QoS) for
each user must be guaranteed would be of interest.
\item \textbf{Massive MIMO:}
Massive MIMO is considered as an important part of the coming 5G networks. Hence, studying its EE is relevant as in massive MIMO, the consumption of the computations required for computing the precoder and decoder is relatively huge and should be included in the EE objective function.
Also, the proposed method requires channel state information. The overhead (spectrum efficiency loss) for obtaining such a channel state information increases with N, thus impacting the EE.
\item \textbf{HetNets:}
A heterogeneous network consists of multiple nodes that differ in radio access interfaces, transmit power, and coverage range. Since HetNets are considered as an enabling technology of the 5G which promotes more energy efficient communications, it is interesting to study the implications of utilizing several radio interfaces on the energy efficiency in multi-radio IoT/user applications.
\end{itemize}
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we presented a novel perspective regarding the EE-SE relationship. This new relationship is based on an increasing EE with SE. We presented multiple varieties of the EE metric and studied the corresponding performance for SISO, OFDM, and MIMO communications. Our study is based on a new power control scheme maximizing the EE rather than the SE. We highlighted that not only does the proposed scheme improve the EE, but it shows a new EE-SE proportional relationship. In addition, we highlighted the impact of this new relationship on the design of the future 5G systems. Finally, we presented some interesting research topics related to the EE.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
Radio detection of ultra-high energy ($>$PeV) particle cascades in media was proposed~\cite{Askaryan:1962hbi, KahnLerche1966} and detected~\cite{jelley} more than half of century ago.
Due to limitations of the data acquisition and data analysis with the technologies available at that time, the radio technique has been disregarded until the first decade of the 21st century.
Development and mass production of fast digital-analog converters, boards and computers enabled the installation of large wide-angle digital radio arrays for radio astronomy as well as for air-shower detection.
In the last years digital radio arrays operating in the MHz frequency band have proven their feasibility, hardware and software for them were developed and successfully applied.
The interest in radio detection of air-showers was rekindled due to the following features of this technique:
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Cost-efficiency}.
The cost of a single detection element (antenna) of a radio array are an order of magnitude lower than for particle detectors (scintillators) and optical detectors (PMTs).
At the same time, deployment and maintenance of radio arrays require less human, time and financial resources than for optical arrays or telescopes.
\item \emph{Duty-cycle}.
Since the air is transparent for MHz radio, the detection is almost unaffected by the atmospheric conditions (temperature, density and humidity, see Ref.~\cite{Corstanje:2017djm} for details) and can be performed around-the-clock except during thunderstorms.
\item \emph{Precision for energy and shower maximum}.
In the last years it was proven that the resolution of radio detectors can achieve 10-15\% for the energy and 20-40~g/cm\textsuperscript{2} for the depth of shower maximum~\cite{Buitink:2014eqa,Bezyazeekov:2018yjw} depending on energy and on the configuration of the detector.
These numbers are comparable with the precision achievable using optical methods of air-shower detection.
\item \emph{Sensitivity for inclined events}.
Since the secondary particles as well as Cherenkov and fluorescent light are absorbed during the propagation through the atmosphere, optical and particle setups have difficulties to detect very inclined air showers (with inclination $\theta>60^\circ$) with full efficiency.
Contrary to it, radio waves can propagate tens of kilometers in the atmosphere and be seen by an antenna array from a very far distance.
Although, the power of the emission falls with distance squared, the air-shower footprint increases as $1/\cos\theta$, which allows one to detect these air-showers with very sparse arrays.
\end{itemize}
The combination of these features makes the detection of ultra-high energy messengers ($>$\,EeV) the perfect science case for the radio technique.
For the time being most of the digital radio arrays serve as extensions for the existing cosmic-ray setups, and only few operate in stand-alone mode.
The main obstacle for large-scale stand-alone array is the high radio background.
To achieve high efficiency under this background one needs to select the optimal frequency band and develop sophisticated \emph{self-trigger}.
In the present paper I discuss the actual progress in solving this problem and have an overview of the proposed radio experiments which could contribute to ultra-high energy multimessenger.
\section{Progress in the detection of air-showers with radio}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.45\textwidth]{all_layouts.pdf}~~~~~~
\includegraphics[height=0.45\textwidth]{sens_grand_all.pdf}
\caption{\textit{Left:} Comparison of layouts of radio arrays discussed in the present paper (courtesy of A. Zilles).
\textit{Right:} Sensitivity of the present and proposed neutrino detectors compared to the predicted ultra-high energy neutrino fluxes~\cite{AlvesBatista:2018zui}.
IceCube limits and points are taken from~\cite{Aartsen:2015knd, Aartsen:2018vtx}.
The plot is adapted from the GRAND whitepaper~\cite{Alvarez-Muniz:2018bhp}.
}
\label{fig:all_layouts}
\end{figure}
The proof-of-principle of the detection of air showers with digital arrays was provided by LOPES~\cite{FalckeNature2005} and CODALEMA~\cite{Ardouin2005148} in the middle of the 2000s.
They had shown the possibility of the reconstruction of air-shower direction and primary energy with promising resolution.
For a more precise study of the phenomena, it was necessary to have simulation packages describing all known features with sufficient accuracy.
For this purposes CoREAS~\cite{Huege:2013vt}, a CORSIKA~\cite{HeckKnappCapdevielle1998} extension was developed and released in 2012.
From the experimental side a great contribution to the field was done with LOFAR~\cite{LOFAR_general}, a digital radio array designed for astronomy purposes and a cosmic-ray mode operating jointly with co-located particle detectors.
With its dense layout, LOFAR has confirmed good agreement between theory and observations for the 30-80 MHz band~\cite{Buitink:2014eqa}, as well as for higher frequencies~\cite{Nelles:2014dja}.
Unfortunately, such dense arrays cannot be used for the studying air showers produced by particles with energies higher than $10^{17.5}$~eV due to their small area.
To acquire sufficient data in the EeV energy domain, it is necessary to cover areas from tens to thousands of square kilometers, what implies the deployment of sparse arrays with distances between antenna stations from tens to thousands of meters.
The hardware and methods for the sparse antenna arrays were developed and successfully tested in AERA and Tunka-Rex~\cite{Abreu:2012pi,Aab:2018ytv,Aab:2015vta,Bezyazeekov:2015ica,Bezyazeekov:2015rpa,Kostunin:2015taa,Bezyazeekov:2018yjw}, which has shown that radio arrays for air-shower detection are ready for the installation on the large areas.
This success have brought a motivation to build large-scale radio arrays with areas of thousands square kilometers.
The first step will be done with the AERA setup which will be extended to the full area of the Pierre Auger Observatory, namely by attaching an antenna station to each water-Cherenkov tank.
The first successful stand-alone array ARIANNA aimed mainly for the neutrino detection is being deployed in Antarctica and has already shown that a self-trigger can be implemented and successfully used in very radio-quiet locations~\cite{Barwick:2016mxm}.
One can see the comparison of the sizes of arrays discussed above in the left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:all_layouts}.
\section{Towards next-generation radio arrays}
Open problems for the next generation of digital radio arrays are frequency band, self-trigger and size.
Nowadays there are different approaches to the solutions of these problems.
The experiments operating in Antarctica (ARIANNA, ARA~\cite{Allison:2015eky} and ANITA~\cite{Allison:2018cxu}) have lower requirements for a self-trigger system due to lower background level.
Moreover, these experiments use the ice as a target for the ultra-high energy neutrino interaction and measure radio emission from neutrino-induced cascade either inside the ice or from above.
Due to small dimensions of the cascades in the ice, the detection bands for the in-ice detection are shifted towards higher frequencies (from hundred MHz to GHz).
For the air-shower cascades the selection of the band is not obvious, because air-shower pulses feature a broad frequency signature and background contamination varies as a function of frequency.
Thus, the optimal signal-to-noise ratio does not only depend on the width of the band, but also on its lower and upper bounds.
Rough estimation of this band assuming only Galaxy and thermal background were performed~\cite{V.:2017kbm} for a potential surface radio array at IceCube~\cite{Schroder:2018dvb}.
For the regions with higher background (e.g. with anthropogenic RFI), one needs to use more sophisticated methods for a radio self-trigger.
One of them may be the application deep learning algorithms for real-time denoising of radio traces.
An artificial neural network with autoencoder architecture, a most natural selection for a denoising tool based on deep learning, shows promising results on Tunka-Rex background~\cite{Shipilov:2018wph}.
The achievements listed above are planned to be used in the proposed extremely-large scale setup GRAND, a distributed radio array tuned for the detection of very inclined air-showers for neutrinos, cosmic rays and gamma~\cite{Alvarez-Muniz:2018bhp}.
The predicted neutrino detection sensitivities of future experiments are given in the right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:all_layouts}.
Contrary to ultra-high energy neutrinos, which have unique signature (in-ice and upward-going cascades), the ultra-high energy gammas produce air-shower very similar to ones induced by cosmic rays.
When operating jointly with particle arrays (AERA or radio+IceTop), radio could detect inclined arrays showers induced by gamma in anti-coincidence with particle array, which does not detect such air-shower, since it is absorbed in the atmosphere.
In stand-alone mode gamma/hadron separation can be done by measuring the depth of the shower maximum (high energy gammas penetrate deeper in the atmosphere).
\section{Conclusion}
Nowadays there are two major approaches for detection of the neutrino with radio arrays: detecting ice- and air-showers in radio-quiet regions and building ultra-sparse radio arrays for the detection of inclined air-showers.
The first approach has higher costs per single antenna station (due to logistics and infrastructure), but lower threshold and requirements for the trigger.
Meanwhile the cost efficiency of the second approach has improved (especially with the mass production of antenna stations), but the triggering requires more sophisticated electronics and firmware.
The optimistic estimations predict first detection of EeV neutrinos by future radio arrays in the second half of 2020s.
The detection of the ultra-high energy gammas is possible only with ground arrays and is complicated by the necessity of high-quality gamma-hadron separation.
Nevertheless, already existing radio extensions of the surface arrays (e.g. AERA) increase the sensitivity to gammas arriving from the horizontal direction.
The sensitivity of the future stand-alone arrays to the gamma will mostly depend on their resolution of the depth of shower maximum.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The author thanks the organizers of the VLVNT2018 conference for the invitation.
A part of this work has been supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research
(grants No. 16-02-00738, 17-02-00905, 18-32-00460) and by the Helmholtz grant No. HRSF-0027.
|
\section{Introduction}
Nearly two decades after the first measurements of the accelerated expansion of space \citep[e.g.][]{Riess_etal_1998,Perlmutter_etal_1999,Schmidt_etal_1998} the fact that about $70\%$ of the Universe's energy content is in a form with a negative equation of state of $w\approx -1$ has been confirmed in numerous measurements \citep{wmap9,Planck_2015_XIII}.
Nevertheless, the nature of this `dark energy' is as puzzling as it has been since its discovery. Tremendous efforts in modern cosmology go into determining the amount and possible time-evolution of this unknown component. It is particularly problematic that few well-motivated frameworks for its physical nature exist -- apart from a cosmological constant. Many ideas \citep[e.g.][]{Dvali_Gabadadze_Porrati_2000} have by now been ruled out or shown to be intrinsically unstable. While there are still theories around (and always will be, since the parameter space of many of them is very flexible), they appear more or less contrived.
It is also important to recall that gravity is the `odd' fundamental force, and a lot of implicit assumptions are being made when extrapolating our knowledge over several orders of magnitudes to vastly different conditions and scales. These two points are, in fact, the main motivations behind a class of modified gravity theories \citep{Amendola2010deto.book.....A,2012PhR...513....1C}. Since general relativity as a theory of gravity is unique under very general assumptions \citep{Lovelock72}, any modification introduces new physical degrees of freedom. These can lead to accelerated expansion, but also tend to enhance gravity on a perturbative level as so-called fifth forces. To pass observational bounds, any of these models have to involve a `screening mechanism' leading to negligible deviations in, e.g., the solar-system where the predictions of general relativity have been confirmed to high precision \citep[e.g.][]{Berotti2003Natur.425..374B, Will2006LRR.....9....3W}.
In this work, we will circumvent the discussion of what characterizes a scientific theory (as opposed to, for instance, an effective one), and will instead treat the screened modified gravity models considered as examples of a (much) larger group of models. They all possess the common property that in addition to the Newtonian gravitational force $F_{\mathrm{N}}$, another \textit{fifth force} component $F_{\mathrm{Fifth}}$ exists, which is suppressed by some screening mechanism in high-density (or high-curvature) environments.
This choice is motivated by the fact that screening occurs in a range of scalar- and vector-field theories with different physical reasons, and is in fact essentially required by a large class of theories in order not to violate local gravity measurements.
Examples of screening mechanisms which are implemented in those theories include:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textit{Chameleon} \citep{Khoury_Weltman_2004} where the range of the fifth force is decreased in regions of high spacetime curvature, thus, effectively hiding the additional force,
\item \textit{Symmetron} \citep{Hinterbichler_Khoury_2010,Hinterbichler_etal_2011} in which the coupling of the scalar field is density dependent,
\item \textit{Vainshtein} screening \citep{1972PhLB...39..393V} where the screening effect is sourced by the second derivative of the field value, and
\item others such as screening through disformal coupling \citep{PhysRevD.48.3641}.
\end{itemize}
As already indicated above, a major problem in the search for a new theory of gravity is that $\Lambda$CDM gets so far only confirmed to higher and higher precision. While minor discrepancies between probes of the early and late Universe exist, especially in measurements of the Hubble parameter $H_0$ \citep[see e.g.][]{Riess_etal_2016, Planck_2015_XIII} and $\Omega_m$ or $\sigma_8$ \citep[e.g.][]{Hildebrandt_etal_2017}, no major tension between its predictions and the data has been found. Historically, however, we know that this does not mean that $\Lambda$CDM is correct but that either we have not yet found the right probe where tensions might arise, or we have to push the limits to higher precision. While the latter approach can well be fruitful (as shown by the high-precision measurements of, e.g., the perihelion precession of Mercury; \citealp{le1859lettre}) and is the preferred path taken by many next generation instruments such as EUCLID \citep{Euclid-y} and WFIRST \citep{WFIRST}, we will focus on the former path, and are thus interested in deviations on the $\gtrsim 10\%$ level.
Several observable signatures of screened modified gravity models have been suggested in the literature such as deviations in the halo mass function \citep{Schmidt_2010,Davis_etal_2012,Puchwein_Baldi_Springel_2013,Achitouv_etal_2016}, or the structure of the cosmic web \citep{2014JCAP...07..058F,2018A&A...619A.122H}.
However one concern raised by several authors \citep[e.g.,][]{Motohashi:2012wc,He_2013,Baldi_etal_2014} is that massive neutrinos and beyond-$\Lambda$CDM models might be degenerate.
In this work, we want to investigate how kinematic information can be used to break these degeneracies. This paper is structured as follows: in Sec.~\ref{sec:method} we introduce the screened modified gravity models studied, and briefly review the effect of neutrinos on structure formation. We will also describe our numerical simulations used to explore the joint effects numerically. In Sec.~\ref{sec:results} we present our results, before we conclude in Sec.~\ref{sec:conclucsion}.
\section{Method}
\label{sec:method}
This section briefly summarises the effects of modified gravity and massive neutrinos on the evolution of the density field. We also present the simulation suite used to study the combined effects in the fully non-linear regime.
\subsection{Review of modified gravity}
\label{sec:fR}
To work within a well-defined framework, in this paper we focus on $f(R)$ gravity. As a starting point we assume the generalised Einstein-Hilbert action\footnote{We adopt natural units $c = \hbar = 1$}
\begin{equation}
S = \int \mathrm d x^4 \sqrt{-g} \left( \frac{R + f(R)}{16 \pi G} + \mathcal{L}_m \right) \: ,
\end{equation}
where we introduced a function $f$ of the Ricci scalar $R$, the Lagrangian $\mathcal{L}_m$ contains all other matter fields and we recover standard general relativity (GR) if we choose the function to be a cosmological constant $f = - 2 \Lambda^\mathrm{GR}$. For this paper, we use instead the form established by \cite{Hu2007}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:f_R}
f(R) = - 2 \Lambda \frac{R}{R + m^2} \: ,
\end{equation}
with a constant suggestively named $\Lambda$ and an additional scale $m^2$ that both have to be fixed later on. Assuming $m^2 \ll R$ lets us expand the function
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:f_R_approx}
f(R) \approx -2 \Lambda - f_{R0} \frac{\bar R_0^2}{R} \: ,
\end{equation}
with the background value of the Ricci scalar $\bar R_0$ today, and we defined the dimensionless parameter $f_{R0} \equiv - 2 \Lambda m^2 / \bar R_0^2$ that expresses the deviation from GR. We will return to the characteristic scale of $f_{R0}$ later, but typically $|f_{R0}| \ll 1$. The constant $\Lambda = \Lambda^\mathrm{GR}$ is then fixed to the measured value of the cosmological constant by the requirement to reproduce the standard $\Lambda$CDM expansion history established by observations. However, note that it no longer has the interpretation of a vacuum energy. The phenomenology of the theory in this limit is then set by $f_{R0}$ alone. This particular choice of parameters also implies that the background evolution is indistinguishable from a $\Lambda$CDM universe, but the growth of perturbations will differ.
To work out the perturbation equations, we vary the action with respect to the metric to arrive at the modified Einstein equations
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:modified_Einstein_eq}
G_{\mu \nu} - f_R R_{\mu \nu} - \left( \frac{f}{2} - \Box f_R \right) g_{\mu \nu} - \nabla_\mu \nabla_\nu f_R = 8 \pi G T_{\mu \nu} \: .
\end{equation}
The new dynamical scalar degree of freedom $f_R \equiv \mathrm d f / \mathrm d R$ is responsible for the modified dynamics of the theory. To obtain the equation of motion for this scalar field, we consider the trace of Eq.~\ref{eq:modified_Einstein_eq}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:field_equation_fR}
\nabla^2 \delta f_R = \frac{a^2}{3} \Big( \delta R(f_R) - 8 \pi G \delta \rho_m \Big) \: ,
\end{equation}
where we assumed the field to vary slowly (the quasi-static approximation) and we consider small perturbations $\delta f_R \equiv f_R - \bar f_R$, $\delta R \equiv R - \bar R$ and $\delta \rho_m \equiv \rho_m - \bar \rho_m$ on a homogeneous background. To get a Poisson-like equation for the scalar metric perturbation $2\psi = \delta g_{00} / g_{00}$ we take the time-time component of Eq.~\ref{eq:modified_Einstein_eq} to arrive at
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Poisson_fR}
\nabla^2 \psi = \frac{16 \pi G}{3} a^2 \rho_m - \frac{a^2}{6} \delta R(f_R) \: ,
\end{equation}
that now also depends on the scalar field. Solving the non-linear Eqs.~\ref{eq:field_equation_fR} and \ref{eq:Poisson_fR} in their full generality requires $N$-body simulations, but it is interesting to consider two edge cases to get some insight into the phenomenology of the theory.
If the field is large, $|f_{R0}| \gg | \psi |$, we can expand
\begin{equation}
\delta R \simeq \left .\frac{\mathrm d R}{\mathrm d f_R} \right \rvert_{R = \bar R} \delta f_R \: ,
\end{equation}
and we can solve Eqs.~\ref{eq:field_equation_fR} and \ref{eq:Poisson_fR} in Fourier space to get
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Poisson_large_field}
k^2 \psi(k) = -4 \pi G \left( \frac{4}{3} - \frac{1}{3} \frac{\mu^2 a^2}{k^2 + \mu^2 a^2} \right) a^2 \delta \rho_m(k) \: ,
\end{equation}
with the Compton wavelength of the scalar field $\mu^{-1} = (3 \mathrm d f_R / \mathrm d R)^{1/2}$. For $k \gg \mu$ the second term vanishes and we obtain a Poisson equation with an additional factor $4/3$. On the other hand, for $k \ll \mu$ we recover standard gravity. The Compton wavelength $\mu^{-1}$ therefore sets the interaction range of an additional fifth force that enhances gravity by $1/3$. This is the maximum possible force enhancement in $f(R)$, irrespective of the choice of the function in Eq.~\ref{eq:f_R}.
For field values $| f_{R0} | \ll | \psi | $, the two terms on the right hand side of Eq.~\ref{eq:field_equation_fR} approximately cancel, so we arrive at
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:delta_R_unscreened}
\delta R \approx 8 \pi G \delta \rho_m
\end{equation}
and we also recover the standard Poisson equation from Eq.~\ref{eq:Poisson_fR}. This is the \textit{Chameleon} screening mechanism mentioned above to restore GR in regions of high curvature.
We can get an estimate of the scale where this screening transition occurs by solving Eq.~\ref{eq:field_equation_fR} formally with the appropriate Green's function
\begin{align}
\label{eq:f_R_solution}
\delta f_R(r) &= \frac{1}{4 \pi r} \frac{1}{3} \int_0^r \mathrm d^3 \mathbf{r^\prime} 8 \pi G \left( \delta \rho - \frac{\delta R}{8 \pi G} \right) \\
&= \frac{2}{3} \frac{G M_\mathrm{eff}(r)}{r}
\end{align}
where we defined the effective mass term $M_\mathrm{eff}$ acting as a source for the fluctuations in the scalar field $\delta f_R$. This definition requires $M_\mathrm{eff}(r) \leq M(r)$, and both contribution are equal in the unscreened regime, where Eq.~\ref{eq:delta_R_unscreened} implies $M_\mathrm{eff} = M$. In this case, $\delta f_R = 2/3 \psi_N$ with the Newtonian potential of the overdensity, $\psi_N = GM/r$. Since we assumed small perturbations on the homogeneous background, $\delta f_R \leq \bar{f_R}$, we arrive at the screening condition
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:thin_shell}
| f_{R}| \leq \frac{2}{3} \psi_N(r) \: .
\end{equation}
In other words, only the mass distribution outside of the radius where the equality $2/3 \psi(r) = |f_R|$ holds contributes to the fifth force. Note that screening for real halos is considerably more complex, since non-sphericity and environmental effects are also important for the transition. Nevertheless, Eq.~\ref{eq:thin_shell} gives a reasonable estimate for the onset of the transition between enhanced gravity and normal GR.
Since screening can function only for $\psi_N \sim f_R$, the condition implied by Eq.~\ref{eq:thin_shell} sets the scale for the free parameter $|f_{R0}|$. Typical values for the metric perturbation in cosmology range from $\psi_N \sim 10^{-5}$ to $\psi_N \sim 10^{-6}$, so $|f_{R0}|$ should be of the same order of magnitude to show any interesting phenomenology. For values of the scalar field $|f_{R0}| \gg \psi_N$, gravity is always enhanced so we can exclude this parameter space trivially, while in the opposite limit $|f_{R0}| \ll \psi$ the theory is always screened and does not offer any predictions to distinguish it from GR on cosmological scales.
\subsection{Neutrino effects on structure growth}
Cosmology allows to constrain the physics of neutrinos in unique ways. Assuming the standard thermal evolution and decoupling before $e^+/e^-$ annihilation, their temperature is related to the one of the CMB photons by
\begin{equation}
T_\nu = \left( \frac{4}{11} \right)^{1/3} T_\mathrm{CMB} \: ,
\end{equation}
which implies for neutrinos with mass eigenstates $m_\nu$ a total contribution to the Universe's energy budget of \citep{MANGANO2005221}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Omega_nu}
\Omega_\nu h^2 \approx \frac{\sum m_\nu}{93.14~\mathrm{eV}} \: ,
\end{equation}
where the sum runs over the three standard model neutrino states. Since their mass is constrained to be small, $\sum m_\nu \lesssim 1~\mathrm{eV}$, they decouple as highly relativistic particles in the early Universe. Their energy density therefore scales as an additional radiation component $\Omega_\nu \propto a^{-4}$ early on, but during adiabatic cooling with the expansion of the Universe they become non-relativistic and the energy density behaves like ordinary matter $\Omega_\nu \propto a^{-3}$ today. The small contribution from Eq.~\ref{eq:Omega_nu} to the overall energy budget also implies that their effect on the background expansion history is small.
Their weak interaction cross-section makes neutrinos a dark matter component. However, compared to the standard cold dark matter, they have considerable bulk velocities. This changes the growth of perturbations on scales smaller than the distance travelled by neutrinos up to today, the neutrino horizon, defined by
\begin{equation}
d_\nu(t_0) = \int_{t_\mathrm{ini}}^{t_0} c_\nu (t') \mathrm d t' \: ,
\end{equation}
with the average neutrino velocity $c_\nu$, which is close to the speed of light early on. The neutrino horizon itself is numerically closely related to the more commonly used free-streaming wavenumber at the time of the non-relativistic transition, $k_\mathrm{nr}$ \citep{Lesgourgues_neutrino_book}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:k_nr}
k_\mathrm{nr} \approx 0.0178 \: \Omega_m^{1/2} \left(\frac{m_\nu}{\mathrm{eV}} \right)^{1/2} \: \mathrm{Mpc}^{-1} \: h \: .
\end{equation}
On scales exceeding the neutrino horizon, velocities can be neglected and the perturbations consequently evolve identical to those in the cold dark matter component. For smaller scales $k \gg k_\mathrm{nr}$ within the neutrino horizon, however, free-streaming leads to slower growth of neutrino perturbations. Due to gravitational backreaction on the other species, this causes a characteristic step-like suppression of the linear matter power spectrum approximately given by \cite{Hu_1998}
\begin{equation}
\left. \frac{P_{\nu}}{P} \right|_{k \gg k_\mathrm{nr}} \approx 1 - 8 \frac{\Omega_\nu}{\Omega_m} \: .
\end{equation}
To compare the density power spectrum between cosmologies with and without neutrinos, we here assumed the same primordial perturbations and kept the total $\Omega_m$ (including neutrinos) fixed, resulting in equal positions of the peak of the power spectrum and ensuring that the spectra are identical in the super-horizon limit. The cosmologies for our neutrino simulations described in Sec.~\ref{sec:simulations} are chosen in the same way.
The interplay between neutrinos and $f(R)$ gravity is interesting due to a curious coincidence: the typical range of the fifth force given by the Compton wavelength $\mu^{-1}$ in Eq.~\ref{eq:Poisson_large_field} and the free-streaming scale of neutrinos in Eq.~\ref{eq:k_nr} are comparable for the relevant parameter space of neutrino masses and values of $|f_{R0}|$, such that the known standard model neutrinos might counteract signatures of boosted growth caused by modified gravity. This makes neutrinos important for constraints on $f(R)$, and this paper searches for ways to disentangle both effects.
\subsection{The DUSTGRAIN-{\em pathfinder} simulations}
\label{sec:simulations}
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lcccccccc}
Simulation Name & Gravity type &
$|f_{R0}| $ &
$\sum m_{\nu }$ [eV] &
$\Omega _{CDM}$ &
$\Omega _{\nu }$ &
$M^{p}_{CDM}$ [M$_{\odot }/h$] &
$M^{p}_{\nu }$ [M$_{\odot }/h$] & $\sigma_8$ \\
\hline \hline
$\Lambda $CDM & GR & -- & 0 & 0.31345 & 0 & $8.1\times 10^{10}$ & 0 & $0.842$\\
fR4 & $f(R)$ & $ 10^{-4}$ & 0 & 0.31345 & 0 & $8.1\times 10^{10}$ & 0 & $0.963$ \\
fR5 & $f(R)$ & $ 10^{-5}$ & 0 & 0.31345 &0 & $8.1\times 10^{10}$ & 0 & $0.898$ \\
fR6 & $f(R)$ & $ 10^{-6}$ & 0 & 0.31345 & 0 & $8.1\times 10^{10}$ & 0 & $0.856$ \\
fR4\_0.3eV & $f(R)$ & $ 10^{-4}$ & 0.3 & 0.30630 & 0.00715 & $7.92\times 10^{10}$ & $1.85\times 10^{9}$ & $0.887$ \\
fR5\_0.15eV & $f(R)$ & $ 10^{-5}$ & 0.15 & 0.30987 & 0.00358 & $8.01\times 10^{10}$ & $9.25\times 10^{8}$ & $0.859$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Summary of the main numerical and cosmological parameters characterising the subset of the DUSTGRAIN-{\em pathfinder} simulations considered in this work. In the table, $M^p_{\nu}$ represents the neutrino simulation particle mass, $M^p_{CDM}$ represents the CDM simulation particle mass, while $\Omega_{CDM}$ and $\Omega_{\nu}$ the CDM and neutrino density parameters, respectively. The listed $\sigma_8$ values represent the linear power normalisation attained at $z=0$, while all simulations are normalised to the same spectral amplitude ${A}_{s}=2.199\times 10^{-9}$ at the redshift of the CMB.}
\label{tab:simulations}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
Our analysis is based on a subset of the DUSTGRAIN-{\em pathfinder} simulations suite described in \cite{Giocoli_Baldi_Moscardini_2018}. The main purpose of the DUSTGRAIN-{\em pathfinder} simulations is to explore the degeneracy between neutrino and modified gravity (MG) effects by sampling the joint $f(R)-\sum m_{\nu }$ parameter space with combined $N$-body simulations that simultaneously implement both effects in the evolution of cosmic structures. To this end, the {\small MG-GADGET} code -- specifically developed by \citet{Puchwein_Baldi_Springel_2013} for $f(R)$ gravity simulations -- has been combined with the particle-based implementation of massive neutrinos described in \citet{Viel_Haehnelt_Springel_2010}, allowing to include a separate family of neutrino particles to the source term of the $\delta f_R$ field equation \ref{eq:field_equation_fR}, which then reads:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:field_equation_fR_nu}
\nabla^2 \delta f_R = \frac{a^2}{3} \Big( \delta R(f_R) - 8 \pi G \delta \rho_{CDM} - 8 \pi G \delta \rho_{\nu }\Big)\; .
\end{equation}
The DUSTGRAIN-{\em pathfinder} simulations follow the evolution of $(2\times )768^3$ particles of dark matter (and massive neutrinos) in a periodic cosmological box of $750\; h^{-1}$ Mpc per side from a starting redshift of $z_{i}=99$ to $z=0$, for a variety of combinations of the parameters $|f_{R0}|$ in the range $\left[ 10^{-6}, 10^{-4}\right] $ and $\sum m_{\nu }$ in the range $\left[ 0.0, 0.3\right]$ eV, plus a reference $\Lambda $CDM simulation (i.e. GR with $\sum m_{\nu }=0$). The cosmological parameters assumed in the simulations are consistent with the Planck 2015 constraints \citep[see][]{Planck_2015_XIII}: $\Omega _{M}=\Omega _{CDM}+\Omega _{b}+\Omega _{\nu} = 0.31345$, $\Omega _{\Lambda }=0.68655$, $h=0.6731$, $\sigma _{8}(\Lambda \mathrm{CDM})=0.842$. The dark matter particle mass (for the massless neutrino cases) is $M_{CDM}=8.1\times 10^{10}\; h^{-1}$ M$_{\odot }$ and the gravitational softening is set to $\epsilon _{g}= 25\; h^{-1}$kpc, corresponding to $(1/40)$ times the mean inter-particle separation.
Initial conditions for the simulations have been generated by following the Zel'dovich approximation to generate a random realisation of the linear matter power spectrum obtained with the Boltzmann code {\small CAMB}\footnote{www.cosmologist.info} \citep[][]{camb} for the cosmological parameters defined above and under the assumption of standard GR. For the simulations including massive neutrinos, besides updating the {\small CAMB} linear power spectrum used to generate the initial conditions accordingly, we also employ the approach described in \citet{Zennaro_etal_2017, Villaescusa-Navarro_etal_2018} which amounts to generating two fully correlated random realisations of the linear matter power spectrum for standard Cold Dark Matter particles and massive neutrinos based on their individual transfer functions. Neutrino thermal velocities are then randomly sampled from the corresponding Fermi distribution and added on top of gravitational velocities to the neutrino particles.
The same random seeds have been used to generate all initial conditions in order to suppress cosmic variance in the direct comparison between models. As the simulations start at $z_{i}=99$ when $f(R)$ effects are expected to be negligible, no modifications are necessary to incorporate them in the initial conditions and the standard GR particle distributions -- with and without neutrinos -- can be safely employed for both the GR and $f(R)$ runs.
A summary of the main parameters of the simulations considered in this work is presented in Table~\ref{tab:simulations}. We refer the interested reader to \cite{Giocoli_Baldi_Moscardini_2018} for a more detailed description of the DUSTGRAIN-{\em pathfinder} simulations.
\section{Cosmic Degeneracies}
\label{sec:results}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=1.\textwidth]{plots/degeneracy.pdf}
\caption[Caption]{\textbf{Left:} Relative deviation induced by $f(R)$ gravity and massive neutrinos in the matter power spectrum measured in a subset of our simulations at $z=0$. The large deviation caused by the additional growth in $|f_{R0}|=10^{-4}$ is almost completely counteracted by massive neutrinos with $\sum m_\nu = 0.3 \: \mathrm{eV}$. We find a similar case for $|f_{R0}| = 10^{-5}$ and $\sum m_\nu = 0.15 \: \mathrm{eV}$. \textbf{Right:} The same degeneracy in the simulated abundance of halos at $z=0$. Note that the degeneracy is non-trivial, the same $P(k)$ can lead to different cluster abundances in $f(R)$ since the collapse threshold is changed in modified gravity. The uncertainty for the cluster abundance is calculated with Poisson error bars. Shaded grey bands indicate the $10 \%$ deviation region in both plots.}%
\label{fig:degeneracy}
\end{figure*}
The first $N$-body simulation to investigate the joint effects of neutrinos and modified gravity was performed in \cite{Baldi_etal_2014} where the authors pointed out the degeneracy between the competing signals. This was confirmed by multiple recent papers based on simulations to study how neutrinos can mask $f(R)$ imprints in the kinematic Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect of massive galaxy clusters \citep{Roncarelli_Baldi_Villaescusa-Navarro_2016, Roncarelli_Baldi_Villaescusa-Navarro_2018}, in weak lensing statistics \citep{Giocoli_Baldi_Moscardini_2018, Peel_etal_2018} and in the abundance of galaxy clusters \citep{Hagstotz_2018}.
A first attempt to exploit Machine Learning techniques to separate the two signals was put forward by \cite{Peel_etal_2018b, Merten_etal_2018}.
All these studies confirm a degeneracy in observables that rely on structure growth, which makes the unknown neutrino masses an important nuisance parameter when constraining $f(R)$ gravity, as pointed out in \cite{Hagstotz_2018}. These papers also show that especially the redshift evolution can be a potentially powerful tool in distinguishing these models since the time evolution of the modifications induced by $f(R)$ and neutrinos differs in general. However, many large-scale structure data sets available today do not have sufficient redshift reach to set stringent constraints on deviations from general relativity while marginalising over neutrino mass.
We refer to the above cited papers for details how these degeneracies play out for various probes and how they can be broken with higher redshift data, but the main challenge is summarized in Fig.~\ref{fig:degeneracy}, where we show the relative change induced in the matter power spectrum (left) and the halo abundance (right). Note that even though the halo mass function is clearly derived from the matter power spectrum, the degeneracy in the cluster abundance demonstrated here is non-trivial since the threshold of collapse $\delta_c$ also changes in $f(R)$ gravity \citep[e.g.][]{Schmidt2009, Kopp2013, Cataneo2016, Braun_Bates2017}. Within current observational accuracy, the effect of modified gravity leading to additional structure growth and the suppression effect of neutrino free-streaming are thus difficult to distinguish. Therefore, extending the cosmological parameter space with free neutrino masses tends to weaken existing limits on $|f_{R0}|$.
Since the degeneracy is broken by the different redshift evolution of the density $\delta$ in $f(R)$ and neutrino cosmologies, it is interesting to consider the growth rate of structures to tell them apart. In linear theory, the continuity equation
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial \delta}{\partial t} + \frac{1}{a} \nabla \cdot \mathbf{v} = 0 \: ,
\end{equation}
relates the growth rate $f = \mathrm d \ln D_+ / \mathrm d \ln a$ directly to the velocity divergence
\begin{equation}
\theta = \frac{1}{H} \nabla \cdot \mathbf v = - a \delta f \: ,
\end{equation}
which we use as a probe of the different growth histories in GR, modified gravity and neutrino cosmologies. We then investigate the degeneracy between the latter in two regimes:
\begin{itemize}
\item The large-scale velocity divergence 2-point function in Fourier space $P_{\theta \theta}$ as a proxy for the growth rate. We present the detailed results in Sec.~\ref{sec:2-point}.
\item The velocity dispersion inside of non-linear collapsed structures in Sec.~\ref{sec:clusters}
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Velocity divergence 2-point functions}
\label{sec:2-point}
We compute the velocity dispersion $\theta = 1/H \: \nabla\cdot\mathbf{v}$ and interpolate it on a uniform, $512^3$-point grid, using the publicly available \texttt{DTFE} code \citep{Cautun_2011}.
This allows us to compare the power spectrum $P_{\theta \theta}$ in the $\Lambda$CDM simulation with the $f(R)$ and massive neutrino simulations in Fig.~\ref{fig:velocity_divergence_pk} where we plot (as in the left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:degeneracy} for the matter power spectrum) the relative deviation from the $\Lambda$CDM value.
Clearly, all modified gravity simulations show an increased velocity divergence -- and therefore growth rate -- on scales $\gtrsim 0.1\,\mathrm{Mpc}\,h^{-1}$, with the $|f_{R0}|=10^{-4}$ simulation showing the strongest enhancement since the fifth force becomes active first. Very large scales $k \ll \mu^{-1}$ exceeding the range of the force given by the Compton wavelength of the scalar field are not affected. These results confirm previous findings \citep[see e.g.][]{Jennings_etal_2012} that the velocity power spectrum provides a much stronger signature of modified gravity compared to the density power spectrum, thereby representing a more powerful tool to test gravity on cosmological scales. In principle it can be probed by redshift space distortion measurements sensitive to $f \sigma_8 / b$ with the tracer bias $b$ \citep{Peacock_2001, BOSS_DR12_2017}. However, the scale dependence of $f$ in modified gravity, changes in galaxy formation and subsequently the tracer bias and difficult modelling of the nonlinear effects in modified gravity make this analysis challenging \citep[see the discussion in][]{Jennings_etal_2012, Hernandez_2018}.
The addition of neutrinos (cf. the two $|f_{R0}|=10^{-5}$ runs in Fig.~\ref{fig:degeneracy}) dampens the velocity divergence field slightly overall, but unlike for the density power spectrum this effect is not sufficient to counteract the enhanced growth rate in $f(R)$. This confirms the redshift evolution of the degeneracy in the density field: at early times $z \gtrsim 0.5$, $f(R)$ effects are small, and neutrino suppression of the matter fluctuations dominates. As soon as the additional force enhancement becomes active, it tends to win out and we arrive at the approximate degeneracy observed in Fig.~\ref{fig:degeneracy} today. In the future evolution, $f(R)$ effects will dominate over the neutrino damping for the cases shown here.
The plot also demonstrates that hierarchical formation of collapsed objects in $f(R)$ proceeds faster than in a $\Lambda$CDM universe. Small structures form first, and this process proceeds to larger scales with time. Since the fifth force accelerates the collapse, cosmologies with higher values of $|f_{R0}|$ contain larger nonlinear structures at a given redshift $z$. The transition to these collapsed structures appears as a characteristic dip in the velocity divergence power spectrum \citep[see also the detailed explanation in][]{Li_etal_2013a}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{plots/pvv_rel.pdf}
\caption{Relative change in the velocity divergence power spectrum $P_{\theta \theta}$ compared to $\Lambda$CDM for various models with modified gravity, massive neutrinos, or both. The deviation from $\Lambda$CDM is more pronounced compared to the approximately degenerate density power spectra for combinations of $|f_{R0}|$ and $\sum m_\nu$ shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:degeneracy}. The dip in the spectra marks the onset of collapsed structures. The shaded band indicates a $10 \%$ deviation range.}
\label{fig:velocity_divergence_pk}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Cluster velocity dispersion}
\label{sec:clusters}
We now turn to the kinematics inside of non-linear structures. The velocity dispersion of galaxy cluster members is a long-established measure of the total gravitational potential via the virial theorem, and therefore it can serve as a mass proxy of the system \citep{Biviano_2006}. First studies of $f(R)$ effects on virialised systems were presented by \cite{Lombriser_2012_virial}, and recently efforts have been made to use the phase space dynamics of single massive clusters to constrain modified gravity \citep[e.g.][]{Pizzuti2017}.
Here we focus on the change in the mean observable velocity dispersion instead of detailed studies of single objects. Starting point is the virial theorem, which itself is a consequence of phase-space conservation expressed by the Liouville equation and holds for any system obeying Hamiltonian dynamics. It is therefore unchanged by $f(R)$ gravity, and states in its scalar form
\begin{equation}
2 E_\mathrm{kin} + E_\mathrm{pot} = 0 \: ,
\end{equation}
with kinetic and potential energy of the system respectively. From there, we can get a rough estimate for the velocity dispersion
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sigma_sq_}
\sigma^2 \approx \frac{G M(r)}{r}
\end{equation}
for a virialised system of size $r$. This makes the velocity dispersion a direct measurement of the gravitational potential of a bound system. For an unscreened cluster in $f(R)$, Eq.~\ref{eq:Poisson_large_field} leads to an enhancement of the gravitational force and potential by a factor $4/3$ -- we therefore expect the velocity dispersion to be boosted by $(4/3)^{1/2}$ compared to the standard prediction.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{plots/cluster_veldisp_binned_fR5.pdf}
\caption{Velocity dispersion $\sigma$ within clusters of a given mass $M_{200m}$ for a subset of the studied cosmologies at $z=0$. Shaded region shows the standard deviation found in our simulations. Note that most systems are virialised, either to the $\Lambda$CDM value or the boosted unscreened $f(R)$ equilibrium. Neutrinos do not have any detectable effect on the velocity dispersion inside of clusters, and we just show the case with $|f_{R0}| = 10^{-5}$ and $\sum m_\nu = 0.15~\mathrm{eV}$ for clarity. The relative deviations are shown separately in Fig.~\ref{fig:rel_velocity_dispersion_sim}.}
\label{fig:velocity_dispersion}
\end{figure}
However, the screening mechanism of $f(R)$ gravity outlined in Sec.~\ref{sec:fR} is crucial to understand the full phenomenology of the theory. We can estimate the mass scale of objects with potential wells deep enough to activate the screening mechanism with the condition set by Eq.~\ref{eq:thin_shell}. In order to do that, we consider the force enhancement caused by $f(R)$
\begin{equation}
g(r) \equiv \frac{\mathrm d \psi / \mathrm d r}{\mathrm d \psi_N / \mathrm d r}
\end{equation}
relative to the Newtonian potential $\psi_N$. We can from there calculate the average \textit{additional} potential energy of the system
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:force_enhancement}
\bar g = \frac{\int \mathrm d r r^2 w(r) g(r)}{\int \mathrm d r r^2 w(r)} \: ,
\end{equation}
which varies between 1 (for the screened case) and $4/3$ (for the unscreened case), with the weighting function
\begin{equation}
w(r) = \rho(r) r \frac{\mathrm d \psi_N}{\mathrm d r} \: .
\end{equation}
Following \cite{Schmidt_2010}, we assume that the additional force is only sourced by the mass distribution beyond the \textit{screening radius} $r_\mathrm{screen}$, which is defined by the equality in condition Eq.~\ref{eq:thin_shell}, i.e.
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:r_screen}
\frac{2}{3} \psi_N(r_\mathrm{screen}) = \bar f_{R}(z) \: .
\end{equation}
This implies for the force enhancement
\begin{equation}
g(r) = 1 + \frac{1}{3} \frac{M(<r) - M(<r_\mathrm{screen})}{M(<r)} \: ,
\end{equation}
and by assuming NFW density profiles we can solve the equations above to determine $\bar g$. We use the concentration-mass relation by \cite{Bullock2001} to fix the density profiles, but the overall results for $\bar g$ are rather insensitive to the specific choice of $c(M, z)$. From the modified potential energy, the virial theorem then suggests the scaling of the velocity dispersion $\sigma$ in $f(R)$ as
\begin{equation}
\frac{\sigma^{f(R)}}{\sigma^{\Lambda \mathrm{CDM}}} \propto \bar g^{1/2} \: .
\end{equation}
The screening radius $r_\mathrm{screen}$ itself depends on time via the evolution of the density profile $c(M, z)$ and the background evolution of the scalar field
\begin{equation}
\bar f_R(z) = | f_{R0} | \frac{1 + 4\frac{\Omega_\Lambda}{\Omega_m}}{(1+z)^3 + 4 \frac{\Omega_\Lambda}{\Omega_m}} \: .
\end{equation}
The velocity dispersion measured in our simulations at $z=0$ is plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig:velocity_dispersion}, where the width of the contours represents the standard deviation found among the objects. Most of the clusters virialise either to the $\Lambda$CDM equilibrium or the boosted $f(R)$ value, and since the maximum force enhancement is identical for all models, $|f_{R0}|$ merely determines at which mass scale the transition between the two cases occurs. We also show results for the simulation with $|f_{R0}| = 10^{-5}$ and $\sum m_\nu = 0.15~\mathrm{eV}$ as an example of a cosmology with both modified gravity and massive neutrinos, but note that neutrinos have no detectable effect on the cluster velocity dispersion. Therefore the dynamics of galaxies within clusters are an excellent way to break the degeneracy found in measurements relying on the amplitude of the matter fluctuations.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{plots/sigma_rel_baseline_sim.pdf}
\caption{Relative velocity dispersion within clusters of a given mass in the extended cosmologies, normalised to the mean value of the $\Lambda$CDM simulation. The (propagated) error bar of the ratio $\Delta \sigma / \sigma$ is showcased for the $|f_{R0}| = 10^{-4}$ model as shaded region, and has a similar magnitude for all curves. The other error bars are suppressed for clarity. Also shown is the empirical relation (blue) with propagated error bars as described in the text. Dashed lines show the expectation $\Delta \sigma / \sigma \approx \bar g^{1/2}$ from the simplified force enhancement model in Eq.~\ref{eq:force_enhancement}. For unscreened clusters, the velocity dispersion is larger by a factor $\sqrt{4/3} \approx 1.15$ as expected from the virial theorem in $f(R)$.}
\label{fig:rel_velocity_dispersion_sim}
\end{figure}
We focus on the relative deviations from $\Lambda$CDM in Fig.~\ref{fig:rel_velocity_dispersion_sim}, where we normalise the curves to the values measured in our fiducial simulation. Dashed lines show the prediction $\Delta \sigma / \sigma \approx \bar g^{1/2}$ from Eq.~\ref{eq:force_enhancement}.
Clusters for $|f_{R0}| = 10^{-4}$ are all unscreened, and virialise to the $f(R)$ equilibrium value boosted by a factor $(4/3)^{1/2} \approx 1.15$. On the other hand $|f_{R0}| = 10^{-6}$ is almost completely screened, and just shows slight deviations for low mass systems with $M_{200m} \sim 10^{13} M_\odot h^{-1}$. The intermediate case $|f_{R0}| = 10^{-5}$ demonstrates how the screening mechanism becomes active for clusters with $M_{200m} \sim 2 \times 10^{14} M_\odot h^{-1}$ with a long transition tail towards the fully screened regime. This also implies that single very massive clusters are not well suited to constrain $f(R)$ models \citep[see e.g.][for a case study]{Pizzuti2017}.
The simple model from Eq.~\ref{eq:force_enhancement} somewhat overestimates the efficiency of the screening mechanism, in agreement with findings by \cite{Schmidt_2010}. It therefore only serves as a conservative estimate for the transition region. In addition, even clusters that are screened today can still carry the imprint of the fifth force if parts of the progenitor structures were unscreened in their past. The relaxation time of a galaxy cluster of richness $N$ is approximately given by \citep{Binney_Tremaine_book}
\begin{equation}
t_r \approx \frac{0.1 N}{\ln N} t_\mathrm{cross}
\end{equation}
with typical crossing times $t_\mathrm{cross}\approx 1~\mathrm{Gyr}$, this leads to relaxation timescales of order $t_r \approx 2~\mathrm{Gyr}$ for a richness $N \sim 100$ and can range up to the Hubble time $t_r \approx 14.5~\mathrm{Gyr}$ for very massive clusters with $N\sim 1000$ member galaxies.
We also compare the results found in the simulations to an empirical $\sigma(M)$ relation which we obtained by combining the mass-richness relation of \cite{Johnston_2007} and the $\sigma$-richness relation of \cite{Becker_2007}. Both studies used the catalog of the Sloan Digital Sky survey \citep[SDSS;][]{2009ApJ...703.2217S} which allowed us to combine the two empirical relations.
The uncertainty shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:rel_velocity_dispersion_sim} is the (propagated) uncertainty quoted in \cite{Johnston_2007} and \cite{Becker_2007}.
Even without giving a quantitative upper limit on $f_{R0}$ here, we note that the $|f_{R0}| = 10^{-5}$ results seem to be incompatible with the observed cluster velocity dispersion irrespective of neutrino effects. This is comparable to current upper limits obtained from large-scale structure data \citep[e.g.][]{Cataneo2014}.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclucsion}
Neutrinos are of great interest for modified gravity searches in the large-scale structure since they suppress the growth of structures on scales comparable to the range of the fifth force expected in deviations from GR. The uncertainty in the neutrino mass scale leads to an uncertainty in the size of this suppression, which can mask the characteristic additional growth of structures in $f(R)$ gravity. This degeneracy was studied before in the context of the amplitude of matter fluctuations and found to be time dependant, since the modifications in the growth of structures induced by neutrinos and the fifth force have different redshift dependencies.
Therefore, in this paper we studied the velocity divergence power spectrum $P_{\theta \theta}$ in Sec.~\ref{sec:2-point} as a proxy for the linear growth rate. Compared to $\Lambda$CDM it is strictly enhanced in our simulations at $z=0$, also in cosmologies including both modified gravity and massive neutrinos that show a comparable amplitude of matter fluctuations at that time. We conclude that for combinations of parameters that show approximate degeneracy in the matter power spectrum today, neutrino suppression dominates in the past, while in the future evolution the additional growth induced by the fifth force will win out. This effect can be probed by redshift-space distortion measurements, but an analysis accounting for the scale dependant growth in $f(R)$ remains challenging \citep{Jennings_etal_2012, Hernandez_2018}.
As a second step, we studied the kinematics inside of clusters in Sec.~\ref{sec:clusters}. The velocity dispersion found in our simulations agrees well with the expectations from the virial theorem, and it is enhanced in the unscreened $f(R)$ regime by a factor $(4/3)^{1/2}$ proportional to the the maximum force enhancement. Neutrinos on the other hand do not have any detectable effect on the velocity dispersion. Since the free-streaming length is larger than the typical cluster size, they behave as a smooth background component. So while they suppress the overall cluster abundance, the kinematics inside of halos are completely unaffected. We also compare the simulated dynamics to the empirical $\sigma - M$ relation found by combining the results from \cite{Johnston_2007} and \cite{Becker_2007} and find good agreement with the $\Lambda$CDM simulation. While we do not quote a stringent upper limit on the modified gravitiy parameter $|f_{R0}|$, we point out that the observed relation is in strong tension with expectations from an $|f_{R0}| = 10^{-5}$ model for clusters of mass $M_{200m} \approx 10^{-14} M_\odot h^{-1}$ -- independent of the neutrino mass.
Overall, kinematic information is an excellent observable to detect fifth force effects irrespective of the unknown neutrino mass.
Using kinematic information could also be potentially useful in order to break other degeneracies with (screened) modified gravity theories such as baryonic feedback processes stemming, e.g., from AGNs which also reduce clustering \citep{Arnold_Puchwein_Springel_2014,2018A&A...615A.134E}.
\begin{acknowledgements}
Many cosmological quantities in this paper were calculated using the Einstein-Boltzmann code \texttt{CLASS} \citep{CLASS}.
We appreciate the help of Ben Moster with cross-checks for our simulation suite and helpful discussions with Raffaella Capasso on cluster dynamics. SH acknowledges the support of the DFG Cluster of Excellence ”Origin and Structure of the Universe” and the Transregio programme TR33 ”The Dark Universe”.
MG was supported by by NASA through the NASA Hubble
Fellowship grant \#HST-HF2-51409 awarded by the Space Telescope Science
Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for
Research in Astronomy, Inc., for NASA, under contract NAS5-26555.
MB acknowledges support from the Italian Ministry for Education, University and Research (MIUR) through the SIR individual grant SIMCODE (project number RBSI14P4IH), from the grant MIUR PRIN 2015 ”Cosmology and Fundamental Physics: illuminating the Dark Universe with Euclid”, and from the agreement ASI n.I/023/12/0 “Attivita` relative alla fase B2/C per la missione Euclid”. The DUSTGRAIN-pathfinder simulations discussed in this work have been performed and analysed on the Marconi supercomputing machine at Cineca thanks to the PRACE project SIMCODE1 (grant nr. 2016153604, P.I. M. Baldi) and on the computing facilities of the Computational Centre for Particle and Astrophysics (C2PAP) and the Leibniz Supercomputing Centre (LRZ) under the project ID pr94ji.
We thank the Research Council of Norway for their support. Some computations were performed on resources provided by UNINETT Sigma2 -- the National Infrastructure for High Performance Computing and Data Storage in Norway. This paper is partly based upon work from the COST action CA15117 (CANTATA), supported by COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology).
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{aa}
|
\section{Conclusions \label{sec:conclusions}}
The introduced method is able to determine in one-shot all the intersection points between a line and a curve or surface. It can be applied to curves or surfaces given in any polynomial basis, like the Lagrange or Bernstein, after a straightforward conversion to the power basis. Aspects requiring further research include cases for which the eigenvalue problem~\eqref{eq:preimagesDelta} is degenerate and the preconditioning of the eigenvalue problem~\eqref{eq:subEigproblem}. In the accompanying implementation several choices have been considered for both.
\section{Intersection of lines with curves \label{sec:curves}}
\subsection{Moving lines and intersections}
Let~\mbox{$\vec x (\theta) = \left ( x^1 (\theta), \, x^2 (\theta) \right)^\trans $} be a planar parametric curve, with~$\vec x(\theta) \in \mathbb R^2$, of degree~$q_x$ given either in Lagrange basis~$L_i(\theta)$ or power (monomial) basis~$P_j(\theta) $ with
\begin{equation} \label{eq:curve}
\vec x (\theta )= \sum_{i=1}^{q_x+1} L_i (\theta) \vec x_i = \sum_{j=1}^{q_x+1} P_j(\theta) \vec \alpha_j \, ,
\end{equation}
where~$\vec x_i \in \mathbb R^2$ are the nodal coordinates and~$\vec \alpha_j \in \mathbb R^2$ are the coefficients in the power basis. As usual, the power basis~$P_j(\theta)$ contains the consecutive powers of~$\theta$ from~$0$ up to~$q_x$. The two basis are related by
\begin{equation}
P_j(\theta) = \sum_{i=1}^{q_x+1} L_i(\theta) P_j(\theta_i) \, ,
\end{equation}
where~$P_j(\theta_i)$ is the Vandermonde matrix and~$\theta_i$ is the parametric coordinate of the $i$-th Lagrange node. Following a similar approach a curve given in any other polynomial basis can be re-expressed in the power basis.%
To define a point~$\vec x( \theta)$ on the curve as the intersection of several moving lines, or pencils of lines, consider
\begin{equation}~\label{eq:lines}
l (\theta, \, \vec x) =
\begin{pmatrix}
\vec x \\ 1
\end{pmatrix}
\cdot \vec g (\theta) = x^1 g^1(\theta) + x^2 g^2(\theta) + g^3(\theta)= 0 \, ,
\end{equation}
where~$\vec g (\theta) = \left ( g^1(\theta), \, g^2 (\theta), \, g^3(\theta)
\right)^\trans$ is an auxiliary vector collecting the parameters of the line. For a fixed~$\theta$ equation~\eqref{eq:lines} describes a line and the line moves with the parameter~$\theta$, see Figure~\ref{fig:movingLines2} . The three parameters of the line are assumed to be polynomial functions given by
\begin{equation}~\label{eq:aux}
\vec g (\theta) = \sum_{l=1}^{q_g+1} \widetilde{P}_l (\theta) \vec g_l \, .
\end{equation}
The degree~$q_g$ of the power basis~$\widetilde P (\theta)$ has to be chosen sufficiently high in order to be able to compute all the intersection points (real, complex, multiple ones and ones at infinity). The number of intersection points is equivalent to the algebraic degree of the curve~$\vec x(\theta)$. A curve~$\vec x(\theta)$ of degree~$q_x$ has~$q_x$ intersection points with a line. As will become clear, the number of intersections implies a constraint on the minimum possible degree~$q_g$ for~$\widetilde P(\theta)$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfloat[Two linear moving lines ($q_g = 1$) defining a quadratic curve ($q_x=2$)]
{
\includegraphics[scale = 0.98]{movingLines2.pdf}
\label{fig:movingLines2}
}
\hfill
\subfloat[Four of the five cubic moving lines ($q_g=3$) for a cubic curve ($q_x=3$) at $\theta = 0.4$
and $\theta = 0.8$] {
\includegraphics[scale = 0.99]{curveMovingLines.pdf}
\label{fig:curveMovingLines}
}
\caption{Moving lines and their intersections.}
\end{figure}
Next, the aim is to find several lines~\eqref{eq:lines}, or more specifically their coefficients~$\vec g_l$ in~\eqref{eq:aux}, with a common intersection point which is a point on the curve~$\vec x(\theta)$. It is required that each line satisfies at the common intersection point
\begin{equation}~\label{eq:linesDisc}
l (\theta, \, \vec x(\theta) ) =
\begin{pmatrix}
\vec x (\theta) \\ 1
\end{pmatrix}
\cdot \vec g (\theta) =
\begin{pmatrix}
\vec x (\theta) \\ 1
\end{pmatrix}
\cdot
\left ( \sum_{l=1}^{q_g+1}
\widetilde{P}_l (\theta) \vec g_l \right )
= 0 \, .
\end{equation}
After introducing the definition of the curve~\eqref{eq:curve} this yields
\begin{equation}~\label{eq:linesDisc2}
\sum_{l=1}^{q_g+1} \left ( \sum_{j=1}^{q_x+1} \begin{pmatrix} \vec \alpha_j \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} P_j(\theta) \widetilde{P}_l (\theta) \right) \vec g_l = 0 \, .
\end{equation}
The bracketed term can be expressed in a new power basis~$\widehat P_k$ of dimension~$q_x+q_g+1$ with
\begin{equation}
\sum_{k=1}^{q_x+q_q+1} \widehat P_k (\theta) C_{kl} = \sum_{j=1}^{q_x+1} \begin{pmatrix} \vec \alpha_j \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} P_j(\theta) \widetilde{P}_l (\theta) \, ,
\end{equation}
where the matrix components~$C_{kl}$ contain the known coefficients~$\vec \alpha_j$. Equation~\eqref{eq:linesDisc2} can now be rewritten as
\begin{equation}~\label{eq:moveLineDesc}
\sum_{l=1}^{3(q_g+1)} \left ( \sum_{k=1}^{q_x+q_g+1} \widehat P_k (\theta) C_{kl} \right ) h_l = 0 \, ,
\end{equation}
where the array~$\vec h$ contains the components of the yet unknown vectors~$\vec g_l$ sorted (by choice) in the following way
\begin{equation}
\setcounter{MaxMatrixCols}{12}
\vec{h} =
\begin{pmatrix}
g_1^1 & g_2^1 & \dotsc & g_{q_g+1}^1 &
g_1^2 & g_2^2 & \dotsc & g_{q_g+1}^2 &
g_1^3 & g_2^3 & \dotsc & g_{q_g+1}^3
\end{pmatrix}^\trans \, .
\end{equation}
It is required that~\eqref{eq:moveLineDesc} is always satisfied irrespective of~$\theta$, which is the case for the right null vectors of the matrix~$C_{kl}$. The right null vectors are determined with a SVD, see e.g.~\cite{strangLinAlg}, yielding the set of null vectors~$\vec g_l^{(i)} $, where the index~$(i)$ denotes the number of the null vector.
The number of null vectors of~$C_{kl}$ depends on the degrees~$q_x$ and~$q_g$ of the basis~$P_j(\theta)$ and~$\widetilde{P}_l(\theta)$, and the coefficients~$\vec \alpha_j$ of the specific curve considered. For subsequent computations the number of null vectors must be more than the number of intersections of the curve with a line (or its algebraic degree). The non-square matrix~$C_{kl}$ has~$q_x+q_g+1$ rows and~$3(q_g+1)$ columns. Hence, its number of right null vectors must be equal or greater than~$3(q_g+1)-(q_x+q_g+1) = 2 q_g - q_x+2$.\footnote{
The number of right null vectors is larger then, for instance, a quadratic curve is described with a cubic polynomial (i.e. $q_x=3$ but $\alpha_4=0$).
More precisely, if $n$ is the largest integer such that $\vec \alpha_n \neq 0$ then the number of right null vectors of~$C_{kl}$ is exactly~$2q_g- n +3$.
}
In order to obtain the~$q_x$ intersections it is necessary to have~
\begin{equation}
2 q_g - q_x+2 \ge q_x \quad \Rightarrow \quad q_g \ge q_x -1 \, .
\end{equation}
%
The set of null vector denoted with~$ \vec g^{(i)} $ introduced in~\eqref{eq:lines} yields a set of moving lines
\begin{equation}~\label{eq:moveLinesFinal}
l^{(i)} (\theta, \, \vec x) =
\begin{pmatrix}
\vec x \\ 1
\end{pmatrix}
\cdot
\left ( \sum_{l=1}^{q_g+1}
\widetilde{P}_l (\theta) \vec g_l^{(i)} \right )
= 0
\end{equation}
with a common intersection point on the curve~$\vec x(\theta)$. As an example, in Figure~\ref{fig:movingLines2} the description of a quadratic curve with~$q_x=2$ by two moving lines~$l^{(1)} (\theta, \, \vec x)$ and~$l^{(2)} (\theta, \, \vec x)$ with~$q_g=1$ is shown.
Next, the intersection of a given parametric line
\begin{equation}
\vec r(\xi) = \begin{pmatrix} r^1 (\xi) \\ r^ 2 (\xi) \end{pmatrix}= \begin{pmatrix} c_1^1 \\ c_1^2\end{pmatrix} \xi + \begin{pmatrix} c_0^1 \\ c_0^2 \end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
with the curve~$\vec x(\theta)$ is considered, where $\vec c_1= (c_1^1, \, c_1^2 )^\trans $ and $\vec c_0= (c_0^1, \, c_0^2 )^\trans $ are two given vectors. We require that the determined set moving lines~$\{ l^{(i)} (\theta, \, \vec x) = 0 \}$ and~$\vec r(\xi)$ intersect at the same point to be yet determined. According to~\eqref{eq:linesDisc} at the common intersection point it is required that
\begin{equation}
l^{(i)} (\theta, \, \vec r (\xi)) =
\begin{pmatrix}
\vec r(\xi) \\ 1
\end{pmatrix}
\cdot
\left ( \sum_{l=1}^{q_g+1}
\widetilde{P}_l (\theta) \vec g_l^{(i)} \right )
= 0 \, .
\end{equation}
These equations describe the intersection of each moving line~$l^{(i)}(\theta, \, \vec x)=0$ with the given line~$\vec r(\xi)$ and can be rewritten as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:intersects}
\sum_{l=1}^{q_g+1}
\widetilde{P}_l (\theta)
\left [
\begin{pmatrix}
\vec r(\xi) \\ 1
\end{pmatrix}
\cdot
\left ( \vec g_l^{(i)} \right ) \right ]
= 0 \, .
\end{equation}
As discussed the number of moving lines satisfies~$\max (i) \ge q_x$ and all of them can be combined in one homogenous equation system
\begin{equation} \label{eq:intersects}
\sum_{l=1}^{q_g+1}
\widetilde{P}_l (\theta)
\left [
A_{li} - \xi B_{li} \right ]
= 0 \, .
\end{equation}
with~$A_{li}$ and~$ B_{li}$ representing the components of two matrices~$ \vec A$ and~$\vec B $. Both matrices have~\mbox{$q_g+1$} rows and~\mbox{$2q_g-q_x+2$} or more columns. To obtain~$\widetilde{P}_l (\theta)$ and~$\xi$ that satisfy~\eqref{eq:intersects} the following generalised eigenvalue problem is considered
\begin{equation}~\label{eq:eigval}
\vec \phi \left ( \vec A - \xi \vec B \right ) = \vec 0 \, .
\end{equation}
That is, the eigenvalues~$ \xi^{(j)}$ are the parametric coordinates of the intersection points on the line~$\vec r(\xi)$ and the eigenvectors are (up to a multiplicative constant) the basis functions~$\widetilde P_l(\theta^{(j)})$ evaluated at the intersection points~$\theta^{(j)}$.
Unfortunately, the matrices~$\vec A$ and~$\vec B$ are not always square and computing~the values $ \xi^{(j)}$ that satisfy this equation requires non-standard linear algebra techniques. However, for the purposes of intersection computation it is sufficient to consider a square eigenvalue problem obtained from~\eqref{eq:eigval} by taking only some of its columns. The non-complex eigenvalues of this square eigenvalue problem contain all the intersection points between the given line and the curve. As will be discussed further below, some of these non-complex eigenvalues may not be actual intersection points, but they can easily be identified.
A non-complex eigenvalue $\xi^{(j)}$ of~\eqref{eq:eigval}, or its corresponding square eigenvalue problem, gives the potential intersection point~$\vec r(\xi^{(j)})$. The respective unknown parameter value $\theta^{(j)}$ on the curve satisfies the equation~\mbox{$\vec x(\theta^{(j)}) = \vec r (\xi^{(j)})$}, which is a hard to solve nonlinear problem. According to~\eqref{eq:intersects} and~\eqref{eq:eigval}, however, the left null vector~$\vec \phi^{(j)}$ corresponding~$\xi^{(j)}$ is proportional to the vector~$\widetilde{P}_l (\theta^{(j)})$, which is exploited to determine~$\theta^{(j)}$. More precisely, if there is a single parameter value $\theta^{(j)}$ the ratio of any two consecutive components yields
\begin{equation} \label{eq:paramtericEigvec}
\theta^{(j)} = \frac{\widetilde P_{i+1}}{ \widetilde P_i} = \frac{\phi_{i+1}^{(j)}}{\phi_i^{(j)}} \, .
\end{equation}
It is assumed here that the monomials in~$\widetilde P_i$ are sorted in increasing order so that the ratio of two consecutive entries is simply~$\theta$. If there are~$p$ parameter values $( \theta^{(j,1)},\, \dotsc,\theta^{(j,p)})$ corresponding to the eigenvalue $\xi^{(j)}$, then the corresponding left null vector space is given by a matrix $\vec K$ with $p$ rows. Keeping the previous assumption on the ordering of the monomials in~$\widetilde P_i$, we define the \mbox{$p\times p$} matrices $\vec \Delta_i$ by taking the columns $i$ to $p+i$ of $\vec K$. Then, the parameter values $(\theta^{(j,1)}, \, \dotsc,\theta^{(j,p)})$ are obtained by solving a generalised eigenvalue problem
\begin{equation}\label{eq:preimagesDelta}
( \vec \Delta_{i+1}-\theta \vec \Delta_i ) \vec \psi = \vec 0.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Illustrative example}
The intersection of a cubic Lagrange curve with a line depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:curveIntersection} is considered next. The cubic curve~$\vec x(\theta)$ interpolating the points \mbox{$\vec{x}_1 = (0, \, 0)^\trans$,} \mbox{$\vec{x}_2 = (1, \, 1)^\trans$,} \mbox{$\vec{x}_3 = (2, \, -0.5)^\trans$} and \mbox{$\vec{x}_4 = (4, \, 0)^\trans$} is expressed in power basis with
\begin{equation}
\vec{x}(\theta) = \sum_{j=1}^{4} P_j(\theta) \vec \alpha_j =
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 4 & -4.5 & 4.5 \\
0 & 11.25 & -31.5 & 20.25 \\
\end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix}
P_1(\theta) \\ P_2(\theta) \\ P_3(\theta) \\ P_4(\theta)
\end{pmatrix}\, .
\end{equation}
The intersections between the given line
\begin{equation} \label{eq:lineEquation}
\vec{r}(\xi) =
\begin{pmatrix}
0 \\ 1
\end{pmatrix}
+ \xi
\begin{pmatrix}
4 \\ -2
\end{pmatrix}
=
\begin{pmatrix}
4\xi \\ 1 - 2\xi
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
and the curve~$\vec x(\theta)$ are sought.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfloat[Intersection points given by~\eqref{eq:eigenvalues1}]
{
\includegraphics{curveIntersect1.pdf}
\label{fig:curveIntersect1}
}
\hfill
\subfloat[Intersection points given by~\eqref{eq:eigenvalues2}]
{
\includegraphics{curveIntersect2.pdf}
\label{fig:curveIntersect2}
}
\caption{Intersection points between a cubic Lagrange curve and a line.}
\label{fig:curveIntersection}
\end{figure}
As discussed, the degree $q_g$ of the auxiliary polynomial needs to satisfy $q_g \geq q_x - 1 = 2$. In this example choosing~$q_g=2$ yields matrices $\vec{A}$ and $\vec{B}$ that have the dimensions $3\times3$ and it is straightforward to compute the eigenvalues~$\xi$ of the generalised eigenvalue problem~\eqref{eq:eigval}. To illustrate the more challenging case with non-square matrices~$\vec{A}$ and~$\vec{B}$, which turns out to be inevitable in the case of surfaces, we choose here~$q_g = 3$ such that
\begin{equation}
\vec{g}(\theta) = \sum_{l=1}^{4} \widetilde{P}_l (\theta) \vec g_l \, .
\end{equation}
The right null vectors~$\vec g_l^{(i)}$ that define the moving lines are obtained from~\eqref{eq:moveLineDesc} with~$\vec C$ and the components
{\normalsize
\begin{equation}
\vec{C} =
\setcounter{MaxMatrixCols}{12}
\begin{pmatrix*}[r]
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
4 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 11.25 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
-4.5 & 4 & 0 & 0 & -31.5 & 11.25 & 0 &
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
4.5 & -4.5 & 4 & 0 & 20.25 & -31.5 & 11.25 & 0 &
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 4.5 & -4.5 & 4 & 0 & 20.25 & -31.5 & 11.25 & 0 &
0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 4.5 & -4.5 & 0 & 0 & 20.25 & -31.5 & 0 & 0 &
0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 4.5 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 20.25 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0
\end{pmatrix*} \, .
\end{equation}
}
This matrix has the dimensions~$7 \times 12$, its rank is seven and the dimension of its right null space is five. Each of the corresponding five independent null vectors $\vec{g}_l^{(i)}$ defines one moving line.
Figure~\ref{fig:curveMovingLines} depicts the first four moving lines $l^{(1)}(\theta, \, \vec x)=0$, $l^{(2)}(\theta, \, \vec x)=0$, $l^{(3)}(\theta, \, \vec x)=0$ and $l^{(4)}(\theta, \, \vec x)=0$ at the parameter values $\theta=0.4$ and $\theta=0.8$.
Substituting the line~\eqref{eq:lineEquation} as in~\eqref{eq:intersects} gives the two non-square matrices (with four significant digits)
{\normalsize
\begin{equation} \label{eq:curveMatrixA}
\vec{A} =
\begin{pmatrix*}[r]
0.08710 & 0.08740 & 0.04298 & 0.05767 & 0.01708 \\
-0.2222 & -0.02814 & 0.8999 & -0.01814 & 0.03355 \\
0.04655 & -0.07068 & -0.03786 & 0.9989 & 0.01874 \\
-0.03786 & 0.1289 & -0.01752 & -0.001102 & 1.010
\end{pmatrix*}
\end{equation}
}
and
{\normalsize
\begin{equation} \label{eq:curveMatrixB}
\vec{B} =
\begin{pmatrix*}[r]
1.046 & 1.101 & 1.499 & 0.7322 & 0.2201 \\
-3.351 & -1.347 & -0.1816 & 0.04373 & 0.1881 \\
2.390 & -2.402 & -0.1053 & 0.2525 & 0.3777 \\
-0.1302 & 2.987 & -0.3424 & 0.1006 & 0.3987
\end{pmatrix*} \, .
\end{equation}
}
One approach to obtaining the generalised eigenvalues of matrices $\vec{A}$ and $\vec{B}$ is to use pencil reduction, see \cite{xiaoXiao:2018, BL10, BD}, which is not a widely used linear algebra operation and may introduce additional numerical issues because of several numerical rank estimations. Alternatively, the eigenvalue problems defined by square submatrices $\vec{A}^{\Box}$ and $\vec{B}^{\Box}$ of the largest size, e.g.~the first four columns of~$\vec A$ and~$\vec B$, can be considered
\begin{equation}\label{eq:subEigproblem}
\vec \phi^{\Box} \left ( \vec A^{\Box} - \xi \vec B^{\Box} \right ) = \vec 0 \, .
\end{equation}
Although there can only be three intersection points for a cubic curve this problem has four eigenvalues and eigenvectors. Notice that each column $i$ of~\mbox{$\vec A-\xi \vec B$,} i.e \mbox{$\sum_l \phi_l (A_{li} - \xi B_{li}) =0$,} represents the intersection between the line~$\vec r(\xi)$ and the moving line~$l^{(i)}(\theta, \, \vec x) =0$. Taking a different couple of submatrices $\vec{A}^{\Box}$ and $\vec{B}^{\Box}$ of largest size, like the last four columns of~$\vec A$ and~$\vec B$, yields a different set of intersection points. Both sets of intersection points contain the three true intersection points in addition to one fictitious intersection point.
To demonstrate this observation, the intersection points with two different pairs of largest square submatrices $\vec A^{\Box}$ and $\vec B^{\Box}$ are computed. The eigenvalues for the problem defined by the first four columns of~$\vec A$ and~$\vec B$ are
\begin{equation} \label{eq:eigenvalues1}
\xi^{(1)} = 0.8113\, , \quad \xi^{(2)} = 0.3594\, , \quad \xi^{(3)} =0.08875\, , \quad
\xi^{(4)} = 0.05326 \, ,
\end{equation}
and the eigenvalues for the problem defined by the last four columns~$\vec A$ and~$\vec B$ are
\begin{equation} \label{eq:eigenvalues2}
\xi^{(1)} = 28.05\, , \quad \xi^{(2)} = 0.8112\, , \quad \xi^{(3)} = 0.3594\, , \quad
\xi^{(4)} = 0.08875 \, .
\end{equation}
It is evident that $\xi^{(4)}$ for the first problem and $\xi^{(1)}$ for the second problem correspond to fictitious intersection points while the other three eigenvalues correspond to the true intersection points, see Figure~\ref{fig:curveIntersection}. The coordinates of the three true intersection points are computed by introducing~$\xi^{(j)}$ in the line equation~\eqref{eq:lineEquation} yielding
\begin{equation}
\vec{x}^{(1)} = (3.245, \, -0.6225)^\trans \, , \quad \vec{x}^{(2)} = (1.438, \, 0.2813)^\trans \, , \quad \vec{x}^{(3)} = (0.3550, \, 0.8225)^\trans \, .
\end{equation}
The fictitious points can also be detected without computing several eigenvalue problems and comparing their eigenvalues. This is accomplished by determining the parametric coordinates of the intersection points $\theta^{(j)}$ on the curve~$\vec x(\theta)$. As indicated in~\eqref{eq:paramtericEigvec} the parametric coordinates are computed using the eigenvectors. As an example, consider the eigenvalue problem~\eqref{eq:subEigproblem} defined by first four colums of~$\vec A$ and~$\vec B$. Its eigenvalues are given on~\eqref{eq:eigenvalues1} and the coordinates of the intersection points are
\begin{equation} \label{eq:curvePoints}
\begin{aligned}
\vec{x}^{(1)} &= (3.245, \, -0.6225)^\trans , \quad \vec{x}^{(2)} = (1.438, \, 0.2813)^\trans , \quad
\vec{x}^{(3)}= (0.3550, \, 0.8225)^\trans , \quad \\ \vec{x}^{(4)} &=
(0.2130, \, 0.8935)^\trans \, .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The respective parameters $\theta^{(j)}$ of the intersection points are
\begin{equation}
\theta^{(1)} = 0.9014\, , \quad \theta^{(2)} = 0.5\, , \quad \theta^{(3)} = 0.09861 \, , \quad \theta^{(4)} = 0.03932 \, .
\end{equation}
A point is a true intersection point if and only if $\vec{x}(\theta^{(j)}) = \vec{x}^{(j)}$; otherwise, it is a fictitious point. It can easily be found $\vec{x}(\theta^{(4)}) = (0.1506, \, 0.3949) \neq \vec{x}^{(4)}$ such that the fourth point is not an intersection point. Thus, in practice the intersection points are computed from a single couple of square matrices $\vec{A}^{\Box}$ and $\vec{B}^{\Box}$.
\section{Introduction \label{sec:intro}}
There has recently been an increased academic and industrial interest in high-order finite elements due to their efficiency advantages over classical low-order elements, see e.g.\cite{Hughes:2005aa,karniadakis2013spectral}. To achieve their full potential high-order methods require the curved domain boundaries to be approximated with non-planar elements. The intersection between the curved elements and a given line is required in a wide range of applications, including contact~\cite{wriggers2004computational}, mesh generation~\cite{xie2013generation,turner2018curvilinear} and immersed finite elements~\cite{Ruberg:2011aa}. As known, intersection computations lead to an easy to formulate, but hard to solve, nonlinear root-finding problem. The prevalent technique in computational mechanics for solving such problems is Newton-Raphson iteration, which is in general not very robust.
In computer-aided geometric design (CAD) and manufacturing (CAM) intersection computation is a recurring task and, to this end, a number of ingenious methods have been developed~\cite{patrikalakis2009shape}. Especially promising are the non-iterative methods with a origin in algebraic geometry, which are for the most part unknown in computational mechanics. Algebraic geometry deals with systems of polynomial equations and geometric objects defined by them and provides the most rigorous framework for intersection computations~\cite{sederbergCN:2012}. The specific technique considered in this paper is the implicisation technique proposed by Bus\'e~\cite{laurent2014implicit}, which shares some commonalities with the method of moving lines/planes introduced by Sederberg and Chen~\cite{sederberg1995implicitization}. Different from the original work, in this paper we derive the method from a purely linear algebra viewpoint. To follow the presented derivations it is sufficient to only know the notion of the algebraic degree of a curve or surface. The algebraic degree of a curve or surface is defined as its number of intersections with a line. Counting all intersections (real, complex, multiple ones and ones at infinity), the algebraic degree of a polynomial curve of degree~$q$ and the corresponding tensor-product surface are~$q$ and~$2q^2$, respectively. As will become clear, adopting a linear algebra viewpoint has the added benefit that many linear algebra techniques, like preconditioning and various matrix decompositions, become readily available for intersection computations.
In the following, we first discuss the intersection between a planar Lagrange curve and a line and provide an easy to follow illustrative example. This simple case is sufficient to introduce and discuss the key aspects of the proposed non-iterative technique. Its extension to the surface case is straightforward and is discussed last.
\section{Intersection of lines with surfaces \label{sec:surfaces}}
The extension of the introduced method to surfaces is straightforward. Let \mbox{$\vec{x} (\theta) = (x^1 (\vec \theta), \, x^2 (\vec \theta), \, x^3(\vec \theta) )^\trans$} be a parametric surface, with~$\vec x(\vec \theta) \in \mathbb R^3$, of bi-degree $(q_x^1, \, q_x^2)$ given either in Lagrange basis $L_{\vec{i}}(\theta^1, \,\theta^2)$ or power basis~$P_{\vec{j}}(\theta^1, \, \theta^2)$ with
\begin{equation}
\vec{x}(\vec{\theta}) = \sum_{\vec{i}}L_{\vec{i}}(\vec{\theta})\vec{x}_{\vec{i}} = \sum_{\vec{j}}P_{\vec{j}}(\vec{\theta})\vec{\alpha}_{\vec{j}} \, ,
\end{equation}
where $\vec{i} = (i^1, \, i^2)$ and $\vec{j} = (j^1, \, j^2)$ are multi-indices, $\vec{\theta} = (\theta^1, \, \theta^2) $ are the parametric surface coordinates, and $\vec{x}_{\vec{i}} \in \mathbb R^3$ and $\vec{\alpha}_{\vec{j}} \in \mathbb R^3$ are the coefficients in the two basis. Usually, in finite element applications the degrees~$q_x^1$ and~$q_x^2$ of the surface~$\vec x(\vec \theta)$ are the same.
In line with the curve case, a point $\vec{x}(\vec{\theta})$ on the surface is defined as the intersection of several moving planes of the form
\begin{equation} \label{eq:movingPlane}
l(\vec \theta, \, \vec x) =
\begin{pmatrix}
\vec{x} \\ 1
\end{pmatrix}
\cdot \vec{g}(\vec{\theta})
= x^1g^1(\vec{\theta}) + x^2g^2(\vec{\theta}) + x^3g^3(\vec{\theta}) + g^4(\vec{\theta}) = 0 \, ,
\end{equation}
where $\vec{g}(\vec{\theta}) = \left(g^1(\vec{\theta}), \, g^2(\vec{\theta}), \, g^3(\vec{\theta}), \, g^4(\vec{\theta})\right)^\trans$ is an auxiliary vector collecting the parameters of the plane. Although~$l(\vec \theta, \, \vec x) = 0$ is now a plane instead of a line, it is still denoted with the same symbol to keep the notation simple. The parameters~$\vec g(\vec \theta)$ are assumed to be of the following form
\begin{equation}
\vec{g}(\vec{\theta}) =
\sum_{\vec{l}}\widetilde{P}_{\vec{l}}(\vec{\theta})\vec{g}_{\vec{l}} \, .
\end{equation}
The bi-degree~$(q_g^1, \, q_g^2)$ of the power basis~$\widetilde{P}(\vec \theta)$ has to be sufficiently high to describe all the intersection points of the surface~$\vec x(\vec \theta)$ with a line.
The planes describing the surface~$\vec x(\vec \theta)$ have to satisfy
\begin{equation}
l(\vec \theta, \, \vec x (\vec \theta)) =
\begin{pmatrix}
\vec{x}(\vec{\theta}) \\[2pt] 1
\end{pmatrix}
\cdot
\vec{g}(\vec{\theta}) = \left[ \sum_{\vec{j}}P_{\vec{j}}(\vec{\theta})
\begin{pmatrix}\vec{\alpha}_{\vec{j}} \\[2pt]
1
\end{pmatrix}\right]
\cdot
\left( \sum_{\vec{l}}\widetilde{P}_{\vec{l}}(\vec{\theta})\vec{g}_{\vec{l}}
\right) = 0 \, ,
\end{equation}
which can be rearranged to
\begin{equation}
\sum_{\vec{l}}\sum_{\vec{k}}\widehat{P}_{\vec{k}}(\vec{\theta})C_{\vec{k}\vec{l}}h_{\vec{l}} = 0
\end{equation}
with a new power basis $\widehat{P}_{\vec{k}}$ of bi-degree~$(q_x^1 + q_g^1+1, \, q_x^2 + q_g^2 +1)$ and the array $\vec{h}$ containing the sorted components of the vectors $\vec{g}_{\vec{l}}$. The matrix $C_{\vec{k}\vec{l}}$ has \mbox{$(q_x^1 + q_g^1 + 1)(q_x^2 + q_g^2 + 1)$} rows and \mbox{$4(q_g^1 + 1)(q_g^2 + 1)$} columns. It has at least $4(q_g^1 + 1)(q_g^2 + 1) - (q_x^1 + q_g^1 + 1)(q_x^2 + q_g^2 + 1)$ right null vectors, i.e. the difference between the number of columns and rows. The surface~$\vec x(\vec \theta)$ has the algebraic degree~$2q_x^1q_x^2$, which is equal to its number of intersections with a line. In order to obtain all the intersections the following condition has to be satisfied
\begin{equation} \label{eq:minDeg2D}
4(q_g^1 + 1)(q_g^2 + 1) - (q_x^1 + q_g^1 + 1)(q_x^2 + q_g^2 + 1) \geq 2q_x^1q_x^2 \, .
\end{equation}
As in the curve case, the degree of~$\widetilde P (\vec \theta)$ along the $\theta^2$ direction can be chosen as~$q_g^2 \geq q_x^2 - 1$ yielding
\begin{equation}
q_g^1 \geq 2q_x^1 - 1.
\end{equation}
By symmetry, it is also valid to choose $q_g^1 \geq q_x^1 - 1$ and $q_g^2 \geq 2q_x^2 - 1$. After the right null vectors of~$C_{\vec{k}\vec{l}}$ are computed the subsequent steps in computing the intersections are identical to the curve case.
\medskip
Finally, for the sake of completeness, we mention that the introduced intersection algorithm also applies to triangular finite elements. If $\vec x(\vec \theta)$ is a triangular parametric surface of degree $q_x$ then the degree $q_g$ of the auxiliary vector $\vec{g}(\vec{\theta})$ has to be chosen to satisfy $q_g\geq 2(q_x-1)$; see also \cite[\S 3]{laurent2014implicit}.
|
\subsection*{Growth and structural/photoluminescence properties}
The growth of Cu$_2$O microcrystals relied on a scalable single-step thermal oxidation process schematically depicted in Fig.\ref{fig1:sub1}. Copper films (thickness $\sim$700\,nm) were deposited by electron beam evaporation on silicon substrates covered with a thermal SiO$_2$ layer. Thermal oxidation in a tube furnace resulted in Cu$_2$O films with microcrystalline morphology, which can be seen in the top-view and cross-sectional scanning electron microscopy images. The Cu$_2$O microcrystals showed terrace-like structures on the surface (Supplementary Fig.S1) and faceted grains with sizes in the $\mu$m range. As-deposited copper and samples after thermal oxidation to Cu$_2$O were characterized by X-ray diffraction (XRD) measurements (Fig.\ref{fig1:sub2}) to determine their phase composition. For as-deposited copper, the expected face-centered cubic structure and texturing along the [111] direction was found. The presented single-step thermal oxidation method resulted in phase-pure Cu$_2$O with cubic cuprite structure. For samples fabricated with different growth conditions comparable microcrystal morphology as well as similar XRD results were obtained (Supplementary Fig.S2).
\floatsetup[figure]{style=plain,subcapbesideposition=top}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{pics/Fig1a.png}\label{fig1:sub1}}%
\vspace{8mm}
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{pics/Fig1b.png}\label{fig1:sub2}}%
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{pics/Fig1c.png}\label{fig1:sub3}}%
\caption{\textbf{Fig.1 \textbar Growth and characterization of Cu$_2$O microcrystals. a}, Schematics of sample layer structure before and after the thermal oxidation process (left). Top-view scanning electron micrograph of Cu$_2$O microcrystals after thermal oxidation at 850$^\circ$C for 1\,h at pressures of 1\,mbar synthetic air (right); the bottom inset shows a corresponding cross-sectional image (scale bars 1\,$\mu$m). \textbf{b}, X-ray diffraction of as-deposited copper film (top) and Cu$_2$O film after thermal oxidation (bottom). \textbf{c}, Room-temperature photoluminescence spectroscopy of Cu$_2$O microcrystal under continuous-wave laser excitation (532\,nm). The emission around 2\,eV is due to the recombination of free excitons.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
Thermal oxidation of copper can lead to different oxide phases \cite{Meyer2012}; Cu$_2$O growth was reported to proceed via the random nucleation of islands, which exhibit a cube-on-cube epitaxial relationship at the metal-oxide interface (low oxygen partial pressures) \cite{Zhou2013} or non-epitaxial orientations (above critical oxygen partial pressures depending on the copper surface) \cite{Luo2012}. For the range of experimental parameters corresponding to the growth conditions used in this study (800-850$^\circ$C, p$\sim$1\,mbar of synthetic air) the initial stages of copper oxidation include epitaxial oxide formation accompanied by rapid two-dimensional growth \cite{Gattinoni2015}. The XRD results before and after thermal oxidation (Fig.\ref{fig1:sub2}) show pronounced texturing in \{111\} direction in both cases, indicating that the oxidation proceeds via an epitaxial relationship of Cu$_2$O \{111\} $\parallel$ Cu \{111\}. This relationship is in accordance with literature reports on the thermal oxidation of copper thin films \cite{Zhou2013} and nanoparticles with sizes down to few nanometers \cite{LaGrow2017}. Similar to a previous report on epitaxial Cu$_2$O growth on MgO \cite{Yin2005}, the observed terrace-like structures on the Cu$_2$O surfaces are suggesting a two-dimensional growth mode for individual microcrystals.
The optical material quality of the Cu$_2$O microcrystals was initially assessed by means of room-temperature photoluminescence spectroscopy. Distinct free exciton emission was observed (Fig.\ref{fig1:sub3}), exhibiting a characteristic lineshape resulting from multiple phonon-assisted recombination processes with spectral overlap \cite{Li2013}. At photon energies attributed to copper vacancies or single/double-charged oxygen vacancies \cite{Meyer2012} no marked luminescence was observed. Additional data for microcrystalline Cu$_2$O films from different batches and grown under different conditions can be found in Supplementary Fig.S3, which shows spectra with very similar characteristics. Hence, the presented single-step thermal oxidation process is a robust method for the realization of microcrystalline Cu$_2$O films with excellent optical material quality.
\subsection*{Point defects, bound excitons and yellow 1\textit{\textbf{s}} excitons}
Local deviations from the ideal cuprite crystalline structure, e.g. vacancy point defects, extrinsic impurities or microscopic strain, have a significant impact on the relaxation of excitons in Cu$_2$O and the related photon emission. Photoluminescence spectroscopy experiments were conducted in a dilution refrigerator (sample stage base temperature around 40\,mK) to assess the optical material quality of Cu$_2$O microcrystals at milli-Kelvin temperatures. The results were compared to natural bulk Cu$_2$O as benchmark (crystal originates from a geological sample used in previous literature \cite{Mysyrowicz1979}). Spectra normalized to the yellow 1\textit{\textbf{s}} orthoexciton emission that were acquired at a laser power of 50\,$\mu$W (corresponding to a peak intensity of 3\,kW/cm$^2$) and an excitation wavelength of 532\,nm are presented in Fig.\ref{fig2:sub1}, showing considerably reduced emission related to oxygen vacancies for the case of Cu$_2$O microcrystals. An emission feature around 1.95\,eV was observed for both Cu$_2$O microcrystals and the natural bulk sample, which has been reported repeatedly in literature. It was attributed to phonon-assisted transitions and defect emission in close spectral proximity \cite{Kracht2016,Frazer2017,Takahata2018} with the latter potentially being correlated with local strain in the sample \cite{Frazer2015}. Additional data for different samples and natural bulk crystal positions can be found in Supplementary Fig.S4. Low point defect densities are highly important for efficient cooling of the exciton gas in Cu$_2$O as trapping at defects is a limiting factor for exciton lifetimes. The latter were found to be significantly shortened for increasing oxygen vacancy concentrations \cite{Koirala2013}. Furthermore, it has been suggested that relaxation processes involving vacancies can lead to heating due to phonon emission \cite{Frazer2017}, which is detrimental for achieving cold exciton gas temperatures. In addition to intrinsic point defects, excitons and their luminescence properties may be influenced by the presence of extrinsic impurities. The latter can lead to the formation of bound excitons, which show multiple emission lines in the energy range around $\sim$2.00\,eV, below the phonon-assisted orthoexciton transition \cite{Jang2006}. In Fig.\ref{fig2:sub2} we directly compare photoluminescence spectra obtained from synthetic Cu$_2$O microcrystals and from the natural bulk crystal under identical experimental conditions (excitation power 50\,nW). It is evident that all peak-like features related to excitons bound to extrinsic impurities are absent in Cu$_2$O microcrystals, once more validating the excellent purity and material quality of our samples. Moreover, we assess the energy level structure of yellow 1\textit{\textbf{s}} excitons in Cu$_2$O microcrystals by monitoring luminescence from different phonon-assisted transitions (Fig.\ref{fig2:sub3}). The emission features were assigned according to previous literature \cite{Mysyrowicz1983} and the energy splitting of 1\textit{\textbf{s}} excitons into orthoexcitons and paraexcitons separated by 12\,meV in unstrained Cu$_2$O was validated. The influence of strain on the luminescence spectra of Cu$_2$O microcrystals is discussed in Supplementary Fig.S5. Exciton relaxation was further studied by assessing its excitation power dependence. For this purpose, the incident laser power was varied and the luminescence spectra were integrated in an energy range covering bound excitons, phonon-assisted transitions and the direct quadrupole line (Fig.\ref{fig2:sub4}). The integrated intensity of the Cu$_2$O microcrystal is in excellent agreement with a linear relationship (slope 0.995 $\pm$ 0.008) for excitation powers spanning over more than two orders of magnitude, showing slight sub-linear behaviour at elevated excitation levels. On the other hand, deviations from a linear power dependence were significantly more pronounced for the natural bulk crystal. Sub-linear power dependence of excitonic emissions in Cu$_2$O has been previously observed in experiments using natural bulk samples \cite{Ohara1999,Jang2006,Trauernicht1986,Stolz2012} and synthetic crystals grown by the floating zone method \cite{Karpinska2005} using various types of laser excitation. It has been attributed to an efficient non-radiative two-body recombination process, which can be explained by Auger decay \cite{Wolfe2014}, by the formation of short-lived biexcitons \cite{Jang2006b} or by exciton interconversion via spin exchange \cite{Kavoulakis2000}. The estimated recombination rates reported in literature vary considerably as the process is expected to be sensitive to Cu$_2$O crystal symmetry and the resulting band structure; hence it has been anticipated that Auger recombination is associated with broken band symmetries in the vicinity of impurities \cite{Snoke2014}, which would explain the less pronounced two-body decay in low-defect-density Cu$_2$O microcrystals. Hence, we consider the latter an ideal platform for studying high-density exciton gases and their quantum statistics, which will be detailed in the next section.
\floatsetup[figure]{style=plain,subcapbesideposition=top}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{pics/Fig2a.png}\label{fig2:sub1}}%
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{pics/Fig2b.png}\label{fig2:sub2}}%
\vspace{1mm}
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{pics/Fig2c.png}\label{fig2:sub3}}%
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{pics/Fig2d.png}\label{fig2:sub4}}%
\caption{\textbf{Fig.2 \textbar Photoluminescence spectroscopy of Cu$_2$O microcrystals at milli-Kelvin temperatures benchmarked to measurements on a natural bulk crystal. a}, Normalized photoluminescence of excitons and point defects (excitation power 50\,$\mu$W). \textbf{b}, Emission from different excitonic transitions and bound excitons at low excitation power of 50\,nW (spectra normalized to direct transition). \textbf{c}, Phonon-assisted transitions of ortho- and paraexcitons (spectra normalized to direct transition; excitation power 50\,$\mu$W). \textbf{d}, Excitation power dependence of integrated emission in an energy range covering bound excitons, phonon-assisted transitions and the direct quadrupole line. Solid lines are a linear fit (Cu$_2$O microcrystal, left) and a linear curve as guide to the eye (natural bulk crystal, right), respectively.}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\subsection*{Quantum-degeneracy of 1\textit{\textbf{s}} ortho- and paraexcitons}
Cu$_2$O has been considered the prime candidate for excitonic Bose-Einstein condensation in three-dimensional semiconductors due to several favourable properties, including large exciton binding energies of 150\,meV, small Bohr radii around 0.7\,nm leading to high Mott transition densities, as well as the same positive parity of the highest valence band and the lowest conduction band decoupling the exciton ground state (paraexciton) from photon interactions. Paraexcitons are thus particularly relevant for experiments related to Bose-Einstein condensation and have been predominantly studied using strain-induced confining potentials realized by the Hertzian stress technique of pressing a spherical object against a flat Cu$_2$O crystal surface \cite{Trauernicht1986,Yoshioka2011,Schwartz2012,Froehlich2018}. Decades of research on natural bulk samples have resulted in several reports of quantum degeneracy and Bose-Einstein condensation, which have been questioned by competing models assuming efficient two-body Auger recombination, inhomogeneous exciton distributions and exciton diffusion effects in macroscopic crystals \cite{Snoke2014}. We address this controversy by studying the exciton gas properties in Cu$_2$O microcrystals as a new experimental configuration providing confined geometries.
Photoluminescence spectroscopy was performed on single Cu$_2$O microcrystals in a dilution refrigerator using continuous-wave green laser excitation (532\,nm), in particular analyzing the lineshape of the X$_O-\Gamma^-_{12}$ phonon-assisted orthoexciton transition. Three spectra acquired at laser input powers of 50\,nW, 5\,$\mu$W and 500\,$\mu$W are presented in Fig.\ref{fig3:sub1} together with fits using a Bose-Einstein distribution function in excellent agreement with the experimental lineshape. Extracted fit parameters for the chemical potential $\mu$ and the exciton gas temperature $T$ are shown in Fig.\ref{fig3:sub2} for excitation powers covering four orders of magnitude. Up to laser input powers of 10\,$\mu$W, the chemical potential was very close to zero ($\mu$=0 corresponds to the phase transition to a Bose-Einstein condensate), while the exciton gas temperature remained almost constant with values around 9\,K. The orthoexciton gas was gradually leaving the quantum-degenerate regime above excitation levels of 10\,$\mu$W, which coincides with deviations from the linear power dependence of orthoexciton luminescence (cf. Fig.\ref{fig2:sub4}). Additional data obtained from a different Cu$_2$O microcrystal with consistent orthoexciton gas characteristics is presented in Supplementary Fig.S6. Most interestingly, the extracted fit parameters suggest a different exciton gas behaviour compared to previous literature, where a quantum saturation effect was repeatedly observed with the exciton gas moving along adiabats parallel to the phase boundary of Bose-Einstein condensation \cite{Snoke1987,Lin1993,Snoke1990}. It was argued that the continuous temperature increase with increasing exciton density is associated with heating via two-body Auger decay. Here, the extracted fit parameters suggest increasing levels of quantum degeneracy and hence higher exciton densities for decreasing laser excitation at almost constant exciton gas temperatures. For natural bulk crystals, lineshapes suggesting quantum-degenerate statistics were attributed to a superposition of classical Maxwell-Boltzmann distributions as a result of exciton diffusion over several tens of micrometers \cite{OHara2000}. In our case, we can exclude this potential explanation due to the small sizes of the Cu$_2$O microcrystals. Further experimental and theoretical work will be required to assess if the presented orthoexciton gas characteristics are linked with Bose-Einstein condensation and to exclude possible alternative explanations, such as density-dependent recombination mechanisms or deviations from the ideal Bose gas theory. Our surprising results provide important new insights stimulating the use of Cu$_2$O microcrystals as experimental platform in future studies, which will be required to unambiguously solve the enigma of quantum-degenerate statistics and Bose-Einstein condensation of orthoexcitons in Cu$_2$O.
Furthermore, we demonstrate that paraexcitons are also in the quantum-degenerate regime by analyzing the lineshape of the phonon-assisted X$_P-\Gamma^-_{25}$ transition. Three spectra acquired under laser input powers of 10\,$\mu$W, 20\,$\mu$W and 40\,$\mu$W and the corresponding Bose-Einstein fits are shown in Fig.\ref{fig3:sub3}. We obtained high degrees of quantum degeneracy with fit values of the chemical potential $\mu$ around -0.1$\,k T$ and the temperature $T$ around 5\,K (10\,$\mu$W excitation). For increasing laser input powers, $\mu$ gradually decreased whereas $T$ increased. Note that deviations from the fit can be attributed to a phonon-assisted orthoexciton transition at higher energies (see also Fig.\ref{fig2:sub3}). Considering our results on orthoexcitons described above, Cu$_2$O microcrystals are capable of hosting quantum gas mixtures with intricate coupling between their components (spin-flip and spin-exchange processes \cite{Kavoulakis2000,Jang2004} of ortho- and paraexcitons) in confined geometries, providing new directions for future theoretical and experimental work. Moreover, the demonstration of quantum-degenerate paraexcitons in Cu$_2$O microcrystals render the latter a promising platform for exploring excitonic Bose-Einstein condensation in unprecedented device architectures, e.g. employing configurations for dynamic strain tuning by means of piezoelectric substrates \cite{Zeuner2018}.
\floatsetup[figure]{style=plain,subcapbesideposition=top}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{pics/Fig3a.png}\label{fig3:sub1}}%
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{pics/Fig3b.png}\label{fig3:sub2}}%
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{pics/Fig3c.png}\label{fig3:sub3}}%
\caption[\textbf{Fig.3 \textbar Quantum-degenerate exciton gas in Cu$_2$O microcrystals. a}, Photoluminescence spectra of phonon-assisted X$_O-\Gamma^-_{12}$ orthoexciton emission for three different excitation powers. The solid lines correspond to fits using a Bose-Einstein distribution function (spectra were offset vertically for clarity). \textbf{b}, Extracted fit parameters for the chemical potential $\mu$ and the temperature \textit{T} of the orthoexciton gas for excitation powers covering four orders of magnitude. The parameters for the spectra shown in a, are annotated in the graph. \textbf{c}, Phonon-assisted X$_P-\Gamma^-_{25}$ paraexciton transition for three different excitation powers with fits using a Bose-Einstein distribution function (spectra were offset vertically for clarity). Details related to the obtained fit parameters are described in the text.]{\textbf{Fig.3 \textbar Quantum-degenerate exciton gas in Cu$_2$O microcrystals. a}, Photoluminescence spectra of phonon-assisted X$_O-\Gamma^-_{12}$ orthoexciton emission for three different excitation powers. The solid lines correspond to fits using a Bose-Einstein distribution function (spectra were offset vertically for clarity). \linebreak \textbf{b}, Extracted fit parameters for the chemical potential $\mu$ and the temperature \textit{T} of the orthoexciton gas for excitation powers covering four orders of magnitude. The parameters for the spectra shown in a, are annotated in the graph. \textbf{c}, Phonon-assisted X$_P-\Gamma^-_{25}$ paraexciton transition for three different excitation powers with fits using a Bose-Einstein distribution function (spectra were offset vertically for clarity). Details on the obtained fit parameters are described in the text.}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
\subsection*{Rydberg excitons - the yellow \textit{\textbf{np}} series}
After initial experiments in the middle of the last century, Rydberg excitons in Cu$_2$O have recently attracted considerable attention due to the experimental demonstration of principal quantum numbers up to \textit{n}=25 in absorption measurements using natural bulk crystals \cite{Kazimierczuk2014}. The question arises if Rydberg states can also be observed in the Cu$_2$O microcrystals presented here, which was assessed by means of photoluminescence experiments. Results obtained for varying incident laser powers are presented in Fig.\ref{fig4:sub1} (spectra normalized to their respective maxima). Emission peaks corresponding to Rydberg excitons up to \textit{n}=6 were identified at low and intermediate excitation, which can also be seen in the exemplary spectrum shown in Fig.\ref{fig4:sub2}. The high energy tail approaching the band gap could indicate the presence of higher-lying Rydberg excitons, which exhibit considerable spectral overlap due to their broadened luminescence linewidth. The 2\textit{p} peak showed a markedly asymmetric lineshape consistent with previous literature on bulk Cu$_2$O crystals \cite{Takahata2018,Kitamura2017,Reimann1989}, whereas the relative emission intensities from \textit{np} states differed in our case. The minor peak between the 2\textit{p} and 3\textit{p} energy level is attributed to \textit{s}-type excitons \cite{Takahata2018}. Rydberg exciton emission showed broadening for increasing excitation power, which can be explained by a combination of phonon scattering and density-dependent effects \cite{Kitamura2017}; the red shift indicates a bandgap decrease due to laser-induced sample heating. Most importantly, the power-dependent measurements verify the robustness of Rydberg excitons in Cu$_2$O microcrystals as their emission was detected in a wide range of excitation conditions. Additional photoluminescence spectroscopy data is shown in Supplementary Fig.S7, validating that Rydberg excitons could be consistently observed in Cu$_2$O microcrystal samples.
Furthermore, site-controlled Cu$_2$O microstructures (Fig.\ref{fig4:sub3}) were achieved by lithographic patterning of the copper film before oxidation. We demonstrate luminescence from excited Rydberg states in a circular Cu$_2$O microstructure with 5$\mu$m diameter (Fig.\ref{fig4:sub4}). The intensity ratio of \textit{np} states was different compared to Cu$_2$O microcrystals, which could be explained by variations in microscopic strain \cite{Reimann1989}. The Rydberg exciton energies were evaluated as a function of $n^{-2}$ for results obtained from site-controlled microstructures, from not site-controlled microcrystals and from a natural bulk crystal (Fig.\ref{fig4:sub5}). Excellent agreement with a linear relation was found and exciton binding energies of 98\,meV and 97\,meV were deduced for the synthetic samples and the natural bulk crystal, respectively. The extracted exciton binding energies concur with previous findings using bulk crystals, obtained from both photoluminescence (97\,meV\cite{Kitamura2017}; 98.5\,meV\cite{Reimann1989}) and absorption measurements (98\,meV\cite{Matsumoto1996}). Hence our results demonstrate the realization of site-controlled, micrometer-sized Cu$_2$O structures as host platform for Rydberg excitons on silicon, opening up opportunities for unprecedented photonic device architectures. For instance, our technology will enable applications in nonlinear quantum optics relying on interactions between Rydberg states \cite{Firstenberg2016}, as clear signatures of the Rydberg blockade effect have been recently reported for principal quantum numbers around \textit{n}=6 \cite{Heckotter2018}. We expect that in the presented synthetic Cu$_2$O samples the observation of Rydberg states with higher principal quantum number \textit{n} is not limited by material quality but is hampered by luminescence broadening, similar to previous reports on natural crystals \cite{Kitamura2017}, suggesting future experiments in an absorption geometry.
\floatsetup[figure]{style=plain,subcapbesideposition=top}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[height=5.2cm]{pics/Fig4a.png}\label{fig4:sub1}}%
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[height=5.2cm]{pics/Fig4b.png}\label{fig4:sub2}}%
\hspace{1.0mm}
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[height=5.2cm]{pics/Fig4c.png}\label{fig4:sub3}}%
\hspace{1.0mm}
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[height=5.2cm]{pics/Fig4d.png}\label{fig4:sub4}}%
\hspace{1.0mm}
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[height=5.2cm]{pics/Fig4e.png}\label{fig4:sub5}}%
\caption{\textbf{Fig.4 \textbar Rydberg excitons in Cu$_2$O microcrystals and site-controlled structures. a}, Normalized photoluminescence of \textit{np} Rydberg exciton emission from Cu$_2$O microcrystal for varying excitation powers. The white dashed line indicates the spectrum presented in \textbf{b}, which was acquired at an excitation power of 1\,mW and a cryostat stage temperature around 1.8\,K. \textbf{c}, Scanning electron micrograph of site-controlled circular Cu$_2$O microstructures with 5$\mu$m diameter (scale bar 2\,$\mu$m; sample tilt 45$^\circ$). \textbf{d} Photoluminescence spectrum of site-controlled Cu$_2$O microstructure that was acquired under identical experimental conditions as in b. \textbf{e}, Rydberg exciton energies as a function of $n^{-2}$ and the corresponding linear fits to extract the exciton binding energy E$_B$.}
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
\subsection*{Conclusion}
We have presented the growth of Cu$_2$O microcrystals on silicon substrates, showing excellent optical material quality with exceedingly low point defect and impurity levels. The fabrication method for obtaining high-quality Cu$_2$O films via a scalable thermal oxidation process has guiding significance for diverse areas where this low-cost, non-toxic material is employed, such as photovoltaics and photocatalysis. Cu$_2$O microcrystals were identified as ideal host material for dense exciton gases at milli-Kelvin temperatures, in particular 1\textit{\textbf{s}} ortho- and paraexcitons exhibiting kinetic energy distributions obeying Bose-Einstein statistics. Excitons in the quantum-degenerate regime were obtained through continuous-wave laser excitation of confined micrometer-sized geometries, which constitutes an entirely new approach for assessing the feasibility of excitonic Bose-Einstein condensation in this material. Furthermore, the demonstration of Rydberg excitons in Cu$_2$O microcrystals and their integration on silicon have far-reaching implications for future applications in photonic quantum information processing. For instance, Rydberg states in Cu$_2$O have been proposed for the realization of novel solid-state single-photon sources \cite{Khazali2017} and giant optical nonlinearities \cite{Walther2018}. Hence our work lays the foundation for a platform technology enabling solid-state Rydberg excitations on-chip, which is envisioned to result in integrated devices capable of generating and manipulating light at the single photon level.
\small
\section*{Methods}
\subsection*{Growth of Cu$_2$O microcrystals on silicon substrates}
The deposition of copper films (thickness $\sim$700\,nm) was performed by electron beam evaporation onto pieces of silicon wafers with 150\,nm thermal SiO$_2$. A thin intermediate titanium layer (thickness $\sim$5\,nm) was employed to improve the film adhesion on the substrate surface. Samples with structured Cu$_2$O were realized by patterning the copper film using an electron beam lithography lift-off process. Thermal oxidation was carried out in a tube furnace connected to a vacuum pump. Before growth experiments the system was evacuated and purged multiple times using high-purity synthetic air (Air Liquide Alphagaz 2). Cu$_2$O samples were grown by thermal oxidation at a a pressure around 1\,mbar and setpoint temperatures of 800$^\circ$C or 850$^\circ$C. The temperature was kept constant for 1\,h or 5\,h after reaching the setpoint value, followed by natural sample cool-down.
\subsection*{Sample characterization}
The morphologies of Cu$_2$O films and microstructures were characterized by scanning electron microscopy imaging of the sample surfaces and of cross-sections obtained by mechanical cleaving. X-ray diffraction measurements were performed by specular scans using a PANalytical Empyrean system. Radiation from a sealed copper tube was used in combination with a secondary graphite monochromator in Bragg–Brentano geometry. Phase analysis was carried out relying on powder patterns from the database PDF2, International Center for Diffraction Data, using 004-0836 for Cu and 005-0667 for Cu$_2$O.
\subsection*{Photoluminescence spectroscopy and data evaluation}
All photoluminescence spectroscopy experiments were performed using a Horiba iHR550 spectrometer and a continuous-wave, diode-pumped solid-state laser emitting at 532\,nm. Room-temperature spectra were acquired using an objective (NA=0.82) for excitation and collection. Spectroscopy at milli-Kelvin temperatures was performed relying on a cryogen-free dilution refrigerator (Bluefors) with a base temperature around 10\,mK. Optical side-access windows with anti-reflective coatings were used for laser excitation of the samples mounted on a dedicated stage controlled by piezoelectric actuators, which had a base temperature around 40\,mK. The laser was focused by a lens (NA=0.50) inside the cryostat to a spot diameter around 1.2\,$\mu$m (full width at half maximum); the power was measured at the outermost cryostat window. Spectroscopy results on phonon-assisted ortho- and paraexciton emission at milli-Kelvin temperatures were fitted using a Bose-Einstein distribution function. Convolution with a Gaussian function (orthoexcitons $\sigma$=0.20\,meV; paraexcitons $\sigma$=0.12\,meV) was considered to account for additional broadening by the linewidth of the direct orthoexciton transition and by the spectrometer resolution.
\input{ms.bbl}
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors thank Roland Resel for helpful discussions. The Quantum Nano Photonics Group at KTH acknowledges financial support from the Linnaeus Center in Advanced Optics and Photonics (ADOPT). M.A.M.V. acknowledges funding from the Swedish Research Council under grant agreement No. 2016-04527. V.Z. acknowledges funding by the European Research Council under grant agreement No. 307687 (NaQuOp) and the Swedish Research Council under grant agreement \mbox{No. 638-2013-7152}. The project was co-funded by Vinnova and FP7 (GROWTH 291795).
\section*{Author contributions statement}
S.S., M.A.M.V. and V.Z. conceived the experiments, with input from A.M. M.A.M.V. designed and built the milli-Kelvin photoluminescence spectroscopy setup. S.S. performed material growth, SEM characterization and photoluminescence experiments. Data analysis and interpretation was performed by S.S. with support from M.A.M.V., A.M. and V.Z. XRD characterization and the corresponding analysis was performed by B.K. The project was supervised by M.A.M.V. and V.Z. The manuscript was written by S.S. with inputs from all authors.
\section*{Additional information}
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
\include{supplementary}
\end{document}
\section*{Supplementary Figures}
\vspace{10mm}
\floatsetup[figure]{style=plain,subcapbesideposition=top}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{pics/FigS1.png}\label{figS1:sub1}
\caption*{\textbf{Fig.S1 \textbar High-resolution scanning electron microscope image of Cu$_2$O microcrystal surface.} Extended terrace-like structures suggest a two-dimensional growth mode for the individual microcrystals (scale bar 500\,nm).}
\label{figS1}
\end{figure}
\vspace{32mm}
\floatsetup[figure]{style=plain,subcapbesideposition=top}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{pics/FigS2a.png}\label{figS2:sub1}}%
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{pics/FigS2b.png}\label{figS2:sub2}}%
\caption*{\textbf{Fig.S2 \textbar Characterization of Cu$_2$O microcrystal samples grown at different conditions. a}, X-ray diffraction of films obtained through thermal oxidation at 800$^\circ$C for 1\,h and at 850$^\circ$C for 5\,h at pressures around 1\,mbar of synthetic air. The former sample showed residual Cu$_4$O$_3$ and CuO phases, whereas in the latter sample phase-pure Cu$_2$O was found (database PDF2, International Center for Diffraction Data, using 005-0667 for Cu$_2$O, 049-1830 for Cu$_4$O$_3$ and 045-0937 for CuO). \textbf{b}, The corresponding cross-sectional scanning electron microscope images (left: 800$^\circ$C / 1\,h, right: 850$^\circ$C / 5\,h) show comparable Cu$_2$O microcrystal morphology (scale bars 1\,$\mu$m). For the longer growth time a higher degree of intergrain connectivity was observed.}
\label{figS2}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\vspace*{21mm}
\floatsetup[figure]{style=plain,subcapbesideposition=top}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{pics/FigS3.png}
\caption*{\textbf{Fig.S3 \textbar Room-temperature photoluminescence spectroscopy of excitons and point defects.} The comparison of three samples obtained from different batches (850$^\circ$C / 1\,h) and two samples grown under different conditions (800$^\circ$C / 1\,h; 850$^\circ$C / 5\,h) show very similar excitonic emissions and no marked luminescence from point defects in all cases (spectra were offset vertically for clarity).}
\label{figS3}
\end{figure}
\vspace{28.5mm}
\floatsetup[figure]{style=plain,subcapbesideposition=top}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{pics/FigS4a.png}\label{figS4:sub1}}%
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{pics/FigS4b.png}\label{figS4:sub2}}%
\caption*{\textbf{Fig.S4 \textbar Photoluminescence spectroscopy of excitons and point defects at milli-Kelvin temperatures. a}, Comparison of emission from Cu$_2$O microcrystals on three different samples (850$^\circ$C / 1\,h), which all show exceedingly low point defect levels. \textbf{b}, Comparison of three different sample positions on the natural bulk crystal, exhibiting comparable emission from oxygen vacancies. All measurements were performed at an excitation power of 50\,$\mu$W.}
\label{figS4}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\vspace*{21mm}
\floatsetup[figure]{style=plain,subcapbesideposition=top}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{pics/FigS5.png}
\caption*{\textbf{Fig.S5 \textbar The influence of microscopic strain on excitons in Cu$_2$O microcrystals.} Comparison of phonon-assisted and direct orthoexciton emission for strained Cu$_2$O microcrystal, low-strain Cu$_2$O microcrystal and the natural bulk crystal (excitation power 50\,$\mu$W; spectra vertically offset for clarity). Strained Cu$_2$O microcrystals exhibited a lifted energy degeneracy of the triplet orthoexciton state, similar to strained bulk crystals \cite{Lin1993}, with energy splittings around 1.5\,meV, which is considerably smaller compared to previous reports on Cu$_2$O thin films epitaxially grown on MgO substrates \cite{Sun2002,Aihara2015}. Stress values around 50\,MPa were estimated from the experimental data assuming rhombohedral stress along the [110] direction \cite{Trebin1981}.}
\label{figS5}
\end{figure}
\vspace*{21.5mm}
\floatsetup[figure]{style=plain,subcapbesideposition=top}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{pics/FigS6a.png}\label{figS6:sub1}}%
\sidesubfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{pics/FigS6b.png}\label{figS6:sub2}}%
\caption*{\textbf{Fig.S6 \textbar Quantum-degenerate orthoexciton gas in another Cu$_2$O microcrystal.} Additional measurements were performed on a different sample grown under identical conditions. \textbf{a}, Photoluminescence spectra of phonon-assisted X$_O-\Gamma^-_{12}$ orthoexciton transition for three different excitation powers. The solid lines correspond to fits using a Bose-Einstein distribution function (spectra were offset vertically for clarity). \textbf{b}, Extracted fit parameters for the chemical potential $\mu$ and the temperature \textit{T} of the orthoexciton gas for excitation powers covering four orders of magnitude. The parameters for the spectra shown in a, are annotated in the graph (The fit obtained for 500\,$\mu$W excitation resulted in Maxwell-Boltzmann-like statistics and hence the value for the chemical potential is outside the plot range).}
\label{figS6}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\vspace*{25mm}
\floatsetup[figure]{style=plain,subcapbesideposition=top}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=5.7cm]{pics/FigS7.png}
\caption*{\textbf{Fig.S7 \textbar Luminescence from Rydberg excitons in Cu$_2$O microcrystals.} Comparison of results obtained from three different samples (850$^\circ$C / 1\,h), exhibiting very similar characteristics (excitation power 1\,mW; spectra vertically offset for clarity).}
\label{figS7}
\end{figure}
\vspace{30mm}
\input{supplementary.bbl}
|
\section{Introduction}
Given a manifold $M$ and a constant $d$, ${\mathcal{H}}_d(M)$ is the linear space of harmonic functions of polynomial growth at most $d$. Namely,
$u \in {\mathcal{H}}_d (M)$ if $\Delta u = 0$ and for some $p \in M$ and a constant $C_u$ depending on $u$
\begin{align}
\sup_{B_R(p)} |u| \leq C_u\, (1 + R)^d {\text{ for all }} R \, .
\end{align}
In 1974, S.T. Yau conjectured that ${\mathcal{H}}_d (M)$ is finite dimensional for each $d$ when ${\text{Ric}}_M\geq 0$.
The conjecture was settled in \cite{CM2}; see \cite{CM1}--\cite{CM5} for more results.\footnote{For Yau's 1974 conjecture see:
page $117$ in \cite{Ya2}, problem $48$ in \cite{Ya3}, Conjecture $2.5$ in \cite{Sc}, \cite{Ka}, \cite{Kz}, \cite{DF}, Conjecture $1$ in \cite{Li1}, and problem (1) in \cite{LiTa}, amongst others.} In fact, \cite{CM2}--\cite{CM4} proved finite dimensionality under much weaker assumptions of:
\begin{enumerate}
\item A volume doubling bound.
\item A scale-invariant Poincar\'e inequality or meanvalue inequality.
\end{enumerate}
The natural parabolic generalization is a polynomial growth ancient solution of the heat equation.
Given $d>0$, $u \in {\mathcal{P}}_d (M)$ if $\partial_t u = \Delta u$ and for some $p \in M$ and a constant $C_u$
\begin{align}
\sup_{ B_R(p) \times [-R^2,0]}\, |u| \leq C_u \, \left( 1 + R \right)^d {\text{ for all $R$}} \, .
\end{align}
In her 2006 thesis, \cite{Ca1}, \cite{Ca2}, Calle initiated the
study of dimension bounds for these spaces. They play a fundamental role in geometric flows, see \cite{CM6}--\cite{CM8}.
On ${\bold R}^n$, these functions are the classical caloric polynomials that generalize the Hermite polynomials.
A manifold has polynomial volume growth if there are constants $C$ and $d_V$ so that
${\text{Vol}} (B_R(p)) \leq C \, (1+R)^{d_V}$ for some $p \in M$, all $R>0$.\footnote{A volume doubling space with doubling constant $C_D$ has polynomial volume growth of degree ${\log_2 C_D}$.}
Our main result is the following sharp inequality, which is an equality on ${\bold R}^n$:
\begin{Thm} \label{t:main2}
If $M$ has polynomial volume growth and $k$ is a nonnegative integer, then
\begin{align} \label{e:0p4}
\dim {\mathcal{P}}_{2k }(M)\leq \sum_{i=0}^k\,\dim {\mathcal{H}}_{2i }(M) \, .
\end{align}
\end{Thm}
Since ${\mathcal{H}}_{d_1}\subset {\mathcal{H}}_{d_2}$ for $d_1\leq d_2$, Theorem \ref{t:main2} implies:
\begin{Cor} \label{t:CMPd1}
If $M$ has polynomial volume growth, then for all $k \geq 1$
\begin{align}
\dim {\mathcal{P}}_{2k}(M) \leq (k+1) \, \dim {\mathcal{H}}_{2k}(M) \, .
\end{align}
\end{Cor}
Combining this
with the bound $ \dim {\mathcal{H}}_d (M) \leq C \, d^{n-1}$ when ${\text{Ric}}_{M^n} \geq 0$ from \cite{CM3} gives:
\begin{Cor} \label{t:CMPd}
There exists $C=C(n)$ so that if ${\text{Ric}}_{M^n} \geq 0$, then for $d\geq 1$
\begin{align} \label{e:cmpd}
\dim \, {\mathcal{P}}_d (M) \leq C \, d^n \, .
\end{align}
\end{Cor}
The exponent $n$ in \eqr{e:cmpd} is sharp: There is a constant $c$ depending on $n$ so that for $d\geq 1$
\begin{align} \label{e:cpdrn}
c^{-1} \, d^n \leq \dim {\mathcal{P}}_d ({\bold R}^n) \leq c \, d^n \, .
\end{align}
Recently, Lin and Zhang,
\cite{LZ}, proved very interesting related results, adapting the methods of \cite{CM2}--\cite{CM4} to get the bound $d^{n+1}$.
An immediate corollary of the parabolic gradient estimate of Li and Yau, \cite{LiY},
is that if $d < 2$ and ${\text{Ric}} \geq 0$, then ${\mathcal{P}}_d(M) = {\mathcal{H}}_d(M)$ consists only of harmonic functions of polynomial growth. In particular, ${\mathcal{P}}_d (M) = \{ {\text{Constant functions}} \}$ for $d<1$ and,
moreover,
$\dim {\mathcal{P}}_1 (M) \leq n+1$, by Li and Tam, \cite{LiTa}, with equality if and only if $M = {\bold R}^n$ by \cite{ChCM}.
The exponent
$n-1$ is also sharp in the bound for $\dim {\mathcal{H}}_d$ when ${\text{Ric}}_{M^n} \geq 0$. However, as in Weyl's
asymptotic formula, the coefficient of $d^{n-1}$ can be
related to the volume, \cite{CM3}:
\begin{equation} \label{e:cm15a}
\dim {\mathcal{H}}_d (M)\leq C_n \, {\text{V}}_M \, d^{n-1} + o (d^{n-1}) \, .
\end{equation}
\begin{itemize}
\item
${\text{V}}_M$ is the ``asymptotic volume ratio'' $\lim_{r\to \infty} \,
{\text{Vol}} (B_r)/ r^n$. \item $o(d^{n-1})$ is a function of $d$ with
$\lim_{d\to \infty} \, o(d^{n-1})/d^{n-1} = 0$.
\end{itemize}
Combining \eqr{e:cm15a} with Corollary \ref{t:CMPd1} gives $\dim \, {\mathcal{P}}_d (M) \leq C_n \, {\text{V}}_M \, d^{n} + o (d^{n})$ when ${\text{Ric}}_{M^n} \geq 0$.
An interesting feature of these dimension estimates is that they
follow from ``rough'' properties of $M$ and are therefore
surprisingly stable under perturbation. For instance,
\cite{CM4} proves finite dimensionality of ${\mathcal{H}}_d$ for manifolds
with a volume doubling and a Poincar\'e inequality, so we also get finite dimensionality for ${\mathcal{P}}_d$ on these spaces.
Unlike
a Ricci curvature bound, these properties are stable under
bi--Lipschitz transformations. Moreover, these properties make sense also for discrete spaces, vastly extending the theory and methods out of the continuous world.
Recently Kleiner, \cite{K}, (see also Shalom-Tao, \cite{ST}, \cite{T1}, \cite{T2}) used, in part, this in his new proof of an important and foundational result in geometric group theory, originally due to Gromov, \cite{G}. We expect that the proof of Corollary \ref{t:CMPd1} extends to many discrete spaces, allowing a wide range of applications.
\section{Ancient solutions of the heat equation}
The next lemma gives a reverse Poincar\'e inequality for the heat equation.
\begin{Lem} \label{l:RPh}
There is a universal constant $c$ so that if $u_t=\Delta\,u$, then
\begin{align}
r^2 \, \int_{ B_{ \frac{r}{10} } \times [ - \frac{r^2}{100} , 0] }|\nabla u|^2 + r^4 \, \int_{ B_{ \frac{r}{10} } \times [ - \frac{r^2}{100} , 0] } u_t^2 &\leq c \, \int_{B_r \times [-r^2 , 0]} u^2 \, .
\end{align}
\end{Lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $Q_R$ denote $B_R \times [-R^2,0]$ and $\psi$ be a cutoff function on $M$. Since $u_t = \Delta\, u$, integration by parts and the absorbing inequality $4ab \leq a^2 + 4b^2$ give
\begin{align}
\partial_t \, \int u^2 \, \psi^2 &= 2 \, \int u\, \psi^2 \, \Delta u = - 2 \int |\nabla u|^2 \, \psi^2 - 4 \int u\, \psi\, \langle \nabla \psi , \nabla u \rangle \notag \\
&\leq - \int |\nabla u|^2 \, \psi^2 + 4 \int u^2 \, |\nabla \psi |^2 \, .
\end{align}
Integrating this in time from $-R^2$ to $0$ gives
\begin{align}
\int_{t=0} u^2\, \psi^2 - \int_{t=-R^2} u^2\, \psi^2 & \leq \int_{-R^2}^0 \, \left( - \int |\nabla u|^2 \, \psi^2 + 4 \int u^2 \, |\nabla \psi |^2 \right) \, dt \, .
\end{align}
In particular, we get
\begin{align}
\int_{-R^2}^0 \, \int |\nabla u|^2 \, \psi^2 \, dt \leq \int_{t=-R^2} u^2\, \psi^2 + 4 \, \int_{-R^2}^0 \, \int u^2 \, |\nabla \psi |^2 \, dt \, .
\end{align}
Let $|\psi | \leq 1$ be one on $B_{R/2}$, have support in $B_R$, and satisfy $|\nabla \psi | \leq 2/R$, so we get
\begin{align} \label{e:R1}
\int_{Q_{ R/2}} |\nabla u|^2 \leq \int_{B_R \times \{ t=-R^2 \} } \, u^2 + \frac{16}{R^2} \, \int_{Q_R} u^2 \, .
\end{align}
Next, we argue similarly to get a bound on $u_t^2$. Namely, differentiating, then integrating by parts and using that $u_t = \Delta\, u$ gives
\begin{align} \label{e:e1p7}
\partial_t \, \int |\nabla u|^2\, \psi^2 &= 2 \int \langle \nabla u , \nabla u_t \rangle\, \psi^2 = - 2 \int u_t^2\, \psi^2 - 4 \int u_t\, \psi \, \langle \nabla u , \nabla \psi \rangle \notag \\
&\leq - \int u_t^2\, \psi^2 + 4 \int | \nabla u|^2\, | \nabla \psi|^2 \, .
\end{align}
Integrating \eqr{e:e1p7} in time from $-R^2$ to $0$ gives
\begin{align}
\int_{t=0} |\nabla u|^2\, \psi^2 - \int_{t=-R^2} |\nabla u|^2\, \psi^2 \leq \int_{-R^2}^0 \left( - \int u_t^2\, \psi^2 + 4 \int | \nabla u|^2\, | \nabla \psi|^2 \right) \, dt \, .
\end{align}
Letting $\psi$ be as above, we conclude that
\begin{align} \label{e:R2}
\int_{ Q_{ R/2} } u_t^2 \leq \frac{16}{R^2} \int_{Q_R} |\nabla u|^2 + \int_{B_R \times \{ t=-R^2 \} } |\nabla u|^2 \, .
\end{align}
Next, choose some $r_1 \in [4r/5 , r]$ with
\begin{align} \label{e:atr1}
\int_{ B_r \times \{ t = - r_1^2 \} } \, u^2 \leq \frac{25}{9\,r^2} \, \int_{-r^2}^0 \, \left( \int_{B_r} u^2 \right) \, dt=\frac{25}{9\,r^2} \, \int_{Q_r} u^2 \, .
\end{align}
Applying \eqr{e:R1} with $R = r_1$ and using the bound \eqr{e:atr1} at $r_1$ gives
\begin{align} \label{e:R1a}
\int_{Q_{ \frac{2\,r}{5}} } |\nabla u|^2 \leq \int_{Q_{ \frac{r_1}{2}} } |\nabla u|^2 \leq \int_{B_{r_1} \times \{ t=-r_1^2 \} } \, u^2 + \frac{16}{r_1^2} \, \int_{Q_{r_1}} u^2 \leq \frac{20}{r_1^2} \int_{Q_r} u^2 \, .
\end{align}
For simplicity, $c$ is a constant independent of everything that can change from line to line.
It follows from \eqr{e:R1a} that there must exist some $\rho \in [r/5 , 2r/5]$ so that
\begin{align} \label{e:R1b}
\int_{B_{\frac{2\,r}{5}} \times \{ t = -\rho^2 \} } \, |\nabla u|^2 \leq \frac{25}{3r^2} \, \int_{-\frac{4\,r^2}{25}}^0 \left( \int_{B_{ \frac{2\,r}{5}} } |\nabla u|^2 \right) \, dt
=\frac{25}{3r^2} \, \int_{Q_{ \frac{2\,r}{5}} } |\nabla u|^2 \leq \frac{c}{r^4} \,
\int_{Q_r} u^2 \, .
\end{align}
Now applying \eqr{e:R2} with $R = \rho$ and using \eqr{e:R1a} and \eqr{e:R1b} gives
\begin{align}
\int_{ Q_{ \rho/2} } u_t^2 &\leq \frac{16}{\rho^2} \int_{Q_{\rho}} |\nabla u|^2 + \int_{B_{\rho} \times \{ t=-\rho^2 \} } |\nabla u|^2 \leq \frac{c}{r^4} \,
\int_{Q_r} u^2 \, .
\end{align}
\end{proof}
\begin{Cor} \label{c:tpolynomial}
If ${\text{Vol}} (B_R) \leq C \, (1+R)^{d_V}$ and $u \in {\mathcal{P}}_d(M)$, then $\partial_t^k u \equiv 0$ for $4k > 2d+d_V+2$.
\end{Cor}
\begin{proof}
Since the metric on $M$ is constant in time, $\partial_t - \Delta$ commutes with $\partial_t$ and, thus, $(\partial_t - \Delta) \partial^j_t u=0$ for every $j$.
Let $Q_R$ denote $B_R \times [-R^2,0]$. Applying
Lemma \ref{l:RPh} to $u$ on $Q_r$ for some $r$, then to $u_t$ on $Q_{ \frac{r}{10} }$, etc., we get a constant $c_k$ depending just on $k$ so that
\begin{align}
\int_{ Q_{ \frac{r}{10^k} }} \left| \partial^k_t u \right|^2 \leq \frac{c_k}{ r^{4k} } \, \int_{ Q_r } u^2
\leq \frac{c_k}{ r^{4k} } \, r^2 \, {\text{Vol}} (B_r) \, \sup_{Q_r} u^2 \leq C\, c_k \, r^{2-4k} \, (1+r)^{2d+d_V} \, .
\end{align}
Since $4k > 2d+d_V+2$, the right-hand side goes to zero as $r \to \infty$, giving the corollary.
\end{proof}
We will prove Corollary \ref{t:CMPd1} next, though it will eventually be a corollary of Theorem \ref{t:main2}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Corollary \ref{t:CMPd1}]
Choose an integer $m$ with $4m > 2k+d_V+2$.
Corollary \ref{c:tpolynomial} gives that $\partial_t^m u=0$ for any $u \in {\mathcal{P}}_{2k}(M)$.
Thus, any $u \in {\mathcal{P}}_{2k} (M)$ can be written as
\begin{align} \label{e:decompou}
u = p_0 + t \, p_1 + \dots + t^{m-1} \, p_{m-1} \, ,
\end{align}
where each $p_j$ is a function on $M$. Moreover, using the growth bound
$u \in {\mathcal{P}}_{2k}(M)$ for $t$ large and $x$ fixed, we see that $p_j \equiv 0$ for any $j> k$. (See theorem $1.2$ in \cite{LZ} for a similar decomposition under more restrictive hypotheses.)
We will show next that the functions $p_j$ grow at most polynomially of degree $d$. Fix distinct values $-1<t_1 < t_2 < \dots < t_k < t_{k+1}=0$. We claim that the $k+1$-vectors
\begin{align}
(1, t_i , t_i^2 , \dots , t_i^k)
\end{align}
are linearly independent in ${\bold R}^{k+1}$ for $i=1 , \dots , k+1$. If this was not the case, then there would be some (non-trivial) $(a_0 , \dots , a_k) \in {\bold R}^{k+1}$ that is orthogonal to all of them.
But this means that there would be $k+1$ distinct roots to the degree $k$ polynomial
\begin{align}
a_0 + a_1 t + \dots + a_k t^k \, ,
\end{align}
which is impossible, and the claim follows. Let $e_j \in {\bold R}^{k+1}$ be the standard unit vectors.
Since the
$(1, t_i , t_i^2 , \dots , t_i^k)$'s span ${\bold R}^{k+1}$, we can choose coefficients $b^j_i$ so that for each $j$
\begin{align} \label{bijej}
e_j = \sum_i b^j_i \, (1, t_i , t_i^2 , \dots , t_i^k) \, .
\end{align}
It follows from \eqr{e:decompou} and \eqr{bijej} that
\begin{align} \label{e:ply2k}
p_j(x) = \sum_i b^j_i u(x , t_i) \, .
\end{align}
Since $u \in {\mathcal{P}}_{2k} (M)$, \eqr{e:ply2k} implies that each $p_j$ is a linear combination of functions that grow polynomially of degree at most $2k$ and, thus, $p_j$ grows polynomially of degree at most $2k$.
Since $u$ satisfies the heat equation, it follows that $\Delta p_{k} = 0$ and
\begin{align} \label{e:deco1}
\Delta p_j = (j+1) \, p_{j+1} \, .
\end{align}
Thus, we get a linear map $\Psi_0 : {\mathcal{P}}_{2k} (M) \to {\mathcal{H}}_{2k} (M)$ given by $\Psi_0 (u) = p_k$. Let ${\mathcal{K}}_0 = {\text{Ker}} (\Psi_0)$. It follows from this that
\begin{align} \label{e:cK01}
\dim {\mathcal{P}}_{2k}(M) \leq \dim {\mathcal{K}}_0 + \dim {\mathcal{H}}_{2k}(M) \, .
\end{align}
If $u \in {\mathcal{K}}_0$, then $p_k =0$ and $\Delta p_{k-1} = 0$, so we get a linear map $\Psi_1 : {\mathcal{K}}_0 \to {\mathcal{H}}_{2k} (M)$ given by $\Psi_1 (u) = p_{k-1}$. Let ${\mathcal{K}}_1$ be the kernel of $\Psi_1$ on ${\mathcal{K}}_0$. It follows as above that
\begin{align} \label{e:cK11}
\dim {\mathcal{K}}_0 \leq \dim {\mathcal{K}}_1 + \dim {\mathcal{H}}_{2k}(M) \, .
\end{align}
Repeating this $k+1$ times gives the theorem.
\end{proof}
\begin{Lem} \label{l:strati}
If $u \in {\mathcal{P}}_{2k}(M)$ can be written as $u=p_0(x) + t \, p_1(x) + \dots + t^k \, p_k(x)$, then
\begin{align} \label{e:strati}
|p_j(x)| \leq C_j \, \left( 1 + |x|^{2(k-j)} \right) \, .
\end{align}
\end{Lem}
\begin{proof}
By assumption, there is a constant $C$ so that
\begin{align} \label{e:defcpd1}
|u(x,t)| \leq C \, \left( 1 + |t|^k + |x|^{2k} \right) \, .
\end{align}
Following the proof of Corollary \ref{t:CMPd1}, fix $-1<t_1 < t_2 < \dots < t_k < t_{k+1}= - \frac{1}{2}$ and coefficients $b^j_i$ so that \eqr{bijej} holds for each $j$.
Observe that \eqr{bijej} gives for each $j$
\begin{align}
\sum_i b_i^ju(x,R^2\, t_i) = \sum_i \sum_{\ell} b_i^j \, p_{\ell}(x) \, R^{2j} \, t_i^{\ell} = \sum_{\ell} \sum_i b_i^j \, p_{\ell}(x) \, R^{2j} \, t_i^{\ell} =R^{2j} \, p_j(x) \, .
\end{align}
Thus, given $R> 2$ and $x \in B_R$, we get that
\begin{align} \label{e:ply2k}
\left| R^{2j} \, p_j(x) \right| &= \left| \sum_i b^j_i u(x , R^2\, t_i) \right| \leq \max_{i,j} \, |b^j_i| \, \sum_i |u(x,R^2\, t_i)| \notag \\
&\leq \tilde{C} \, \left( 1 + |x|^{2k} + \max_i |R^2 \, t_i |^{ k} \right) \leq 3 \, \tilde{C} \, R^{2k} \, .
\end{align}
From this, we conclude that
$\sup_{B_R} \, |p_j| \leq 3 \, \tilde{C} \, R^{2k-2j}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}
(of Theorem \ref{t:main2}). Following the proof Corollary \ref{t:CMPd1}, each $u \in {\mathcal{P}}_{2k}(M)$, can be expanded as
$
u=p_0(x) + t \, p_1(x) + \dots + t^k \, p_k(x)$. By Lemma \ref{l:strati}, the linear map $\Psi_0 : {\mathcal{P}}_{2k} (M) \to {\mathcal{H}}_{2k} (M)$ given by $\Psi_0 (u) = p_k$ actually maps into ${\mathcal{H}}_0 (M)$ and, thus,
\begin{align} \label{e:cK01}
\dim {\mathcal{P}}_{2k}(M) \leq \dim {\mathcal{H}}_{0}(M) + \dim {\text{Ker}} (\Psi_0) \, .
\end{align}
Similary, Lemma \ref{l:strati} implies that the map $\Psi_1$ maps the kernel of $\Psi_0$ to ${\mathcal{H}}_2(M)$. Applying this repeatedly gives the theorem.
\end{proof}
\section{Caloric polynomials}
It is a classical fact that $ {\mathcal{P}}_d({\bold R}^n)$ consists of caloric polynomials, i.e., polynomials in $x,t$ that satisfy the heat equation. We compute the dimensions of these spaces.
Given a polynomial in $x$ and $t$, define its {\emph{parabolic degree}} by considering $t$ to have degree two. Thus, $x_1^{m_1} x_2^{m_2} t^{m_0}$ has parabolic degree $m_1 + m_2 + 2m_0$. A polynomial in $x,t$ is homogeneous if each monomial has the same parabolic degree. Let $A_p^n$ denote the
homogeneous degree
$p$ polynomials on ${\bold R}^n$. The parabolic homogeneous degree $p$ polynomials ${\mathcal{A}}^n_p$ are
\begin{align}
{\mathcal{A}}^n_p = A_p^n \oplus t\, A_{p-2}^n \oplus t^2 \, A_{p-4}^n \oplus \dots
\end{align}
\begin{Lem} \label{l:gotit}
For each positive integer $p$, we have $\dim \left( {\mathcal{P}}_p ({\bold R}^n) \cap {\mathcal{A}}^n_p \right) = \dim A^n_p$ and
\begin{align}
\dim \, {\mathcal{P}}_p ({\bold R}^n) = \sum_{j=0}^{p} \, \dim A^n_j \, .
\end{align}
\end{Lem}
\begin{proof}
Observe that $\partial_t$ and $\Delta$ map ${\mathcal{A}}^n_p$ to ${\mathcal{A}}^n_{p-2}$. Moreover, given any $u \in {\mathcal{A}}^n_{p-2}$, we have
\begin{align}
(\partial_t - \Delta) \, \left[ t \, u - \frac{1}{2} \, t^2 (\partial_t - \Delta) u + \frac{1}{6} \, t^3 (\partial_t - \Delta)^2 u - \dots \right] = u \, .
\end{align}
Therefore, the map
$
(\partial_t - \Delta):{\mathcal{A}}^n_p \to {\mathcal{A}}^n_{p-2}
$
is onto. Since the kernel of this map is ${\mathcal{P}}_p ({\bold R}^n) \cap {\mathcal{A}}^n_p $, we conclude that
\begin{align}
\dim \left( {\mathcal{P}}_p ({\bold R}^n) \cap {\mathcal{A}}^n_p \right) = \dim {\mathcal{A}}^n_p - \dim {\mathcal{A}}^n_{p-2} = \dim A^n_p \, .
\end{align}
This gives both claims.
\end{proof}
\begin{Lem} \label{l:usingthis}
If $p \geq n$, then
\begin{align} \label{e:usingthis}
\frac{1}{(n-1)!} \, p^{n-1} \leq \dim \, A_p^n \leq \frac{2^{n-1}}{(n-1)!} \, p^{n-1} \, .
\end{align}
\end{Lem}
\begin{proof}
To get the upper bound, we use that $p \geq n$ to get
\begin{align}
\dim \, A_p^n = \frac{ (p+n-1)!}{p! \, (n-1)!} \leq \frac{(p+n-1)^{n-1}}{(n-1)!} \leq \frac{(2p)^{n-1}}{(n-1)!} = \frac{2^{n-1}}{(n-1)!} \, p^{n-1} \, .
\end{align}
The lower bound follows similarly since
$
\frac{ (p+n-1)!}{p! \, (n-1)!} \geq \frac{p^{n-1}}{(n-1)!}$.
\end{proof}
The dimension bounds for ${\mathcal{P}}_d ({\bold R}^n)$ in \eqr{e:cpdrn} follow by combining Lemmas \ref{l:gotit} and \ref{l:usingthis}.
\subsection{Harmonic polynomials}
For each $j$, the Laplacian gives a linear map $\Delta: A^n_{j} \to A^n_{j-2}$. The kernel $H^n_j \subset A^n_j$ of this map is the linear space of
homogeneous harmonic polynomials of degree $j$ on ${\bold R}^n$. The next lemma shows that this map is onto:
\begin{Lem} \label{l:deltaonto}
For each $d$, the map $\Delta: A^n_{d+2} \to A^n_{d}$ is onto.
\end{Lem}
\begin{proof}
Take an arbitrary $u \in A^n_{d}$. For each nonnegative $\ell \leq d/2$, define $u_{\ell}$ and $v_{\ell}$ by
\begin{align}
u_{\ell} &= |x|^{2\ell} \, \Delta^{\ell} u \, , \\
v_{\ell} & = |x|^2 \, u_{\ell} = |x|^{2\ell+2} \, \Delta^{\ell} u \, .
\end{align}
Note that $u_0 = u$.
We will use repeatedly that if $v \in A^n_k$, then homogeneity gives
\begin{align} \label{e:homogk}
\langle x , \nabla v \rangle = k \, v \, .
\end{align}
Using this and $\Delta \, |x|^2 = 2n$, we get for each $\ell$ that
\begin{align}
\Delta \, v_{\ell} &= (\ell +1) \, (2n + 4 \ell) \, |x|^{2\ell} \, \Delta^{\ell} u + 2 \, \langle \nabla |x|^{2(\ell +1)} , \nabla \Delta^{\ell} u \rangle +
|x|^{2(\ell +1)} \, \Delta^{\ell +1 } u \notag \\
&= (\ell +1) \, (2n + 4 \ell) \, |x|^{2\ell} \, \Delta^{\ell} u + 4 \, (\ell +1) \, (d-2\ell) \, |x|^{2\ell } \, \Delta^{\ell} u +
|x|^{2(\ell +1)} \, \Delta^{\ell +1 } u \\
&= (\ell +1) \, \left( 2n + 4d - 4\ell \right) \, u_{\ell} + u_{\ell +1 }
\notag
\, .
\end{align}
Thus, if we define positive constants $c_{\ell} = (\ell +1) \, \left( 2n + 4d - 4\ell \right)$, then we have that
\begin{align} \label{e:uppertriangular}
\Delta v_{\ell} = c_{\ell} \, u_{\ell} + u_{\ell +1} \, .
\end{align}
Let $k$ be the greatest integer less than or equal to $\frac{d}{2}$. Note that $u_{k+1}=v_{k+1} \equiv 0$.
It follows from this and \eqr{e:uppertriangular} that
\begin{align}
\Delta \, \left( v_k - c_{k} \, v_{k-1} + c_k \, c_{k-1} \, v_{k-2} - c_k \, c_{k-1} \, c_{k-2} \, v_{k-3} + \dots \right)
\end{align}
is a nonzero multiple of $u_0 = u$, giving the lemma.
\end{proof}
\begin{Cor} \label{l:harmR}
For each positive integer $k$, we have $\dim H^n_{k} = \dim A^n_{k} - \dim A^n_{k-2}$ and
\begin{align} \label{e:tscmf}
\dim \, {\mathcal{H}}_{k} ({\bold R}^n) = \dim A^n_{k} + \dim A^n_{k-1} \, .
\end{align}
\end{Cor}
\begin{proof}
Note that $\Delta: A^n_{j} \to A^n_{j-2}$ gives a linear map with kernel equal to $H^n_{j}$. The map is onto by Lemma
\ref{l:deltaonto}, giving the first claim. Summing the first claim gives \eqr{e:tscmf}.
\end{proof}
\begin{Cor}
For each $k$, \eqr{e:0p4} is an equality on ${\bold R}^n$.
\end{Cor}
\begin{proof}
Corollary \ref{l:harmR} and Lemma \ref{l:gotit} give
\begin{align} \label{e:hr1}
\sum_{j=0}^k \dim {\mathcal{H}}_{2j} ({\bold R}^n) = \sum_{j=0}^k \left( \dim A^n_{2j} + \dim A^n_{2j-1} \right) = \sum_{i=0}^{2k} \dim A^n_i = \dim \, {\mathcal{P}}_{2k} ({\bold R}^n)
\, .
\end{align}
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
The {\sc Hamiltonian Cycle} problem asks whether a given undirected graph has a cycle that visits each vertex exactly once. It is a central problem of graph theory, operations research, and computer science, with an early history that well predates these fields (see e.g.\ \cite{Knuth2018}).
Several conditions that guarantee the existence of a Hamiltonian cycle in a graph are known. Perhaps best known among these is Dirac's theorem from 1952~\cite{Dirac}. It states that a graph with $n$ vertices ($n \geq 3$) is Hamiltonian if every vertex has degree at least $n/2$. Various extensions and refinements of Dirac's theorem have been obtained, often involving further graph parameters besides minimum degree (see e.g.\ the book chapters~\cite[\S\,10]{Diestel}, \cite[\S\,11]{Lawler1985} and survey articles~\cite{gould2014recent, LiSurvey, kuhn2014hamilton} for an overview). We remark that a polynomial-time verifiable condition for Hamiltonicity cannot be both necessary and sufficient, unless \ensuremath{\mathsf{P=NP}}\xspace~\cite{Karp1972}. In its stated form, Dirac's theorem is as strong as possible. In particular, if we replace $n/2$ by $\lfloor n/2 \rfloor$, the graph may fail to be two-connected---a precondition for Hamiltonicity. (Consider two $\lceil n/2 \rceil$-cliques with a common vertex.)
In this paper we relax the conditions of Dirac's theorem and consider input graphs in which (1) at least $n-k$ vertices have degree at least $n/2$ (the degrees of the remaining vertices can be arbitrarily small), or (2) all vertices have degree at least $n/2 - k$.
For both relaxations we show that {\sc Hamiltonian Cycle} can be solved deterministically, in time $c^k \cdot n^{O(1)}$, for some fixed constant $c$. This establishes the fixed-parameter tractability of {\sc Hamiltonian Cycle} when parameterized by the distance from Dirac's bound, for two natural ways of measuring this distance.
The known exact algorithms for {\sc Hamiltonian Cycle} in general graphs have exponential running time (the problem is one of the original $21$ \ensuremath{\mathsf{NP}}\xspace-hard problems~\cite{Karp1972}). The best deterministic running time of $O(2^n \cdot n^2)$ is achieved by the dynamic programming algorithm of Bellman~\cite{Bellman1962}, and Held and Karp~\cite{HeldKarp1962}, and has not been improved since the 1960s. Among randomized algorithms, the current best running time of $O(1.657^n)$ is achieved by the more recent algorithm of Bj\"orklund~\cite{Bjorklund} based on determinants. Improving these bounds remains a central open question of the field.
Assuming the exponential-time hypothesis (ETH)~\cite{ImpagliazzoEtAl2001}, there is no algorithm for {\sc Hamiltonian Cycle} with running time $2^{o(n)}$. In both parameterizations considered in this paper, $k \leq n$ holds. Thus, under ETH, a running time of the form $2^{o(k)} \cdot n^{O(1)}$ is ruled out, and our algorithms are optimal, up to the base of the exponential.
Furthermore, there exists a fixed constant $\upalpha>0$, such that our parameterized bounds asymptotically improve the current best bounds for {\sc Hamiltonian Cycle}, if the value of $k$ is at most $\upalpha \cdot n$.
For the first parameterization, we show that {\sc Hamiltonian Cycle} admits a kernel with $O(k)$ vertices, computable in polynomial time. In other words, the input graph can be compressed (roughly) to the order of its sparse part, while preserving Hamiltonicity.
Our results show that checking Hamiltonicity becomes tractable as we approach the degree-bound of Dirac's theorem. The crude intuition behind Dirac's theorem (and many of its generalizations) is that \emph{having many edges} makes a graph Hamiltonian. It is a priori far less obvious why approaching the Dirac bound would make the \emph{algorithmic problem} easier; one may even expect that the more edges there are, the harder it becomes to certify \emph{non-Hamiltonicity}. To provide some intuition why this is not the case, we give a brief informal summary of the arguments.
When $n-k$ vertices have degree at least $n/2$, i.e.\ in the first case, our algorithm takes advantage of the fact that, by a result of Bondy and Chv\'atal, the subgraph induced by the high-degree vertices can be completed to a clique without changing the Hamiltonicity of the graph; all relevant structure is thus in the sparse part and its interconnection with the dense part. Then, we find a subset of the vertices in the clique that are well-connected to the sparse part (by solving a matching problem in an auxiliary graph), and we ignore the remainder of the clique. Finally, we show how a Hamiltonian cycle on this smaller, well-connected subgraph, can be extended to a Hamiltonian cycle of the entire graph, guided by the alternating paths of the matching. For this parameterization we are not aware of a comparable result in the literature.
When all vertices have degree at least $n/2 - k$, i.e.\ in the second case, a result of Nash-Williams implies that either a Hamiltonian cycle, or a sufficiently large independent set can be found in polynomial time. In the latter case, we certify non-Hamiltonicity by showing (roughly) that the complement of the independent set is not coverable by a certain number of disjoint paths. This argument is essentially the same as the one given by H\"aggkvist~\cite{haggkvist} towards his algorithm with running time $O(n^{5k})$ for the same parameterization. (H\"aggkvist states this algorithmic result as a corollary of structural theorems. He does not describe the details of the algorithm or its analysis, but these are not hard to reconstruct.) Here we improve the running time of H\"aggkvist's algorithm to the stated (asymptotically optimal) $c^k \cdot n^{O(1)}$ by more efficiently solving the arising path-cover subproblem.
\subsection{Statement of results}
Our first result shows that if a graph has a ``relaxed'' Dirac property, it can be compressed while preserving its Hamiltonicity.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm1}
Let $G$ be an $n$-vertex graph such that at least $n-k$ vertices of $G$ have degree at least $n/2$. There is a deterministic algorithm that, given $G$, constructs in time $O(n^3)$ a $3k$-vertex graph $G'$, such that $G$ is Hamiltonian if and only if $G'$ is Hamiltonian.
\end{theorem}
Equivalently stated in the language of parameterized complexity, the Hamiltonian cycle problem parameterized by $k$ has a \emph{kernel} with a linear number of vertices. To determine the Hamiltonicity of a graph $G$, we simply apply the algorithm of Theorem~\ref{thm1} to compress $G$, and use an exponential-time algorithm (for instance, the Held-Karp algorithm) to solve {\sc Hamiltonian Cycle} directly on the compressed graph. We thus obtain the following result.
\begin{corollary}
If at least $n-k$ vertices of an $n$-vertex graph $G$ have degree at least $n/2$, then {\sc Hamiltonian Cycle} with input $G$ can be solved in deterministic time $O(8^k \cdot k^2 + n^3)$.
\end{corollary}
As an alternative, we may also use an approach based on inclusion-exclusion~\cite{KarpIE} to solve the reduced {\sc Hamiltonian cycle} instance, achieving the overall running time $O(8^k \cdot k^3 + n^3)$, with \emph{polynomial space}.
Our result for the second relaxation of Dirac's theorem is as follows.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm2}
If every vertex of an $n$-vertex graph $G$ has degree at least $n/2 - k$, then {\sc Hamiltonian Cycle} with input $G$ can be solved in deterministic time $O(30^{6k} \cdot n^3)$.
\end{theorem}
The running time of the Bellman-Held-Karp algorithm for {\sc Hamiltonian Cycle} is $O(2^n \cdot n^2)$. Denoting $\upalpha = k/n$, our results represent an asymptotic improvement if $\upalpha < 1/3$ in the first parameterization, and if $\upalpha < 0.0339$ in the second parameterization.
As a counterpoint to our results, we mention that {\sc Hamiltonian Cycle} remains hard (in both parameterizations) for arbitrarily small values of $\upalpha$.
\begin{theorem}
Assuming ETH, {\sc Hamiltonian Cycle} cannot be solved in time $2^{o(n)}$ in $n$-vertex graphs with at least $(1 - \upalpha) \cdot n$ vertices of degree at least $n/2$, and in $n$-vertex graphs with minimum degree $(1 - \upalpha) \cdot n/2$, for arbitrary fixed $0 < \upalpha < 1/2$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
In both cases we construct a graph with the given degree-requirements that embeds a hard instance of {\sc Hamiltonian Path} with $\upalpha \cdot n$ vertices.
For the second statement we can use the construction from the NP-hardness proof of Dahlhaus, Hajnal, and Karpinski~\cite{dahlhaus}. For the first statement, consider an $\upalpha \cdot n$-vertex instance of {\sc Hamiltonian Path}, connected by two disjoint edges to an $(1-\upalpha) \cdot n$-vertex clique. \let\qed\relax\quad\raisebox{-.1ex}{$\qedsymbol$}
\end{proof}
\subsection{Related work}
In general, parameterized complexity~\cite{FG06, book4} allows a finer-grained understanding of algorithmic problems than classical, univariate complexity. No new insight is gained, however, if the chosen parameter $k$ is large in all interesting cases. For example, in planar graphs, the Four Color Theorem guarantees the existence of an independent set of size $n/4$. As a consequence, any exponential-time algorithm for maximum independent set trivially achieves fixed-parameter tractability in terms of the solution size.
To deal with this issue, Mahajan and Raman~\cite{MahajanRaman} introduced the method of parameterizing problems \emph{above} or \emph{below} a guaranteed bound. (Similar considerations motivate the ``distance from triviality'' framework of Guo, H\"uffner, and Niedermeier~\cite{Guo}.) In the example of planar independent set, an interesting parameter is the amount by which the solution size exceeds $n/4$. Similar ideas have successfully been applied to several problems (see e.g.\ \cite{MRS, IPEC09, Alon2011, EE, vertex_cover_param, BCDF}). Our results also fall in the framework of ``above/below'' parameterization, with the remark that our parameter of interest is not the value to be optimized but a structural property of the input, which we parameterize near its ``critical value''.
Perhaps closest to our work is the recent result of Gutin and Patel~\cite{TSPavg} on the Traveling Salesman problem, parameterized below the cost of the \emph{average} tour. Although it concerns Hamiltonian cycles (in an edge-weighted complete graph), the result of Gutin and Patel is not directly comparable with our results. In particular, averaging arguments do not seem to help when studying the \emph{existence} of Hamiltonian cycles, which is often determined by local structure in the graph. For instance, {\sc Hamiltonian Cycle} remains \ensuremath{\mathsf{NP}}\xspace-hard even in graphs with average degree $\upalpha n$ for any constant $\upalpha < 1$. (Consider a clique of $\sqrt{\upalpha} n$ vertices, connected by two non-incident edges to the remaining graph that encodes a hard instance of {\sc Hamiltonian Path}.)
\section{Preliminaries}
We use standard graph-theoretic notation (see e.g.~\cite{Diestel}). An edge between vertices $u$ and $v$ is written simply as $uv$ or $vu$. The \emph{neighborhood} of a vertex $v$ in graph $G$ is denoted by $N_G(x)$. The \emph{degree} of $v$ in $G$ is $d_G(v) = |N_G(v)|$, and the minimum degree of $G$ is $\delta_G = \min_{v \in V(G)}{d_G(v)}$. We conveniently omit the subscript $G$ whenever possible. For a set $S \subseteq V(G)$ of vertices, $G[S]$ denotes the subgraph induced by $S$ on $G$.
We state Dirac's theorem and a strengthened statement due to Ore. Let $G$ be an $n$-vertex undirected graph, with $n \geq 3$.
\begin{lemma}[Dirac~\cite{Dirac}]\label{lemdirac}
If $\delta \geq n/2$, then $G$ is Hamiltonian.
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}[Ore~\cite{Ore}]\label{lemore}
If $d(u) + d(v) \geq n$ for every non-adjacent pair of vertices $u$, $v$ of $G$, then $G$ is Hamiltonian.
\end{lemma}
We state a theorem of Bondy and Chv\'atal that we use in the proofs of both Theorem~\ref{thm1} and Theorem~\ref{thm2}.
\begin{lemma}[Bondy-Chv\'atal~\cite{BondyChvatal}]\label{bondy-chvatal}
Let $G$ be an $n$-vertex graph, and let $G'$ be obtained from $G$ by adding an edge $uv$ to $G$ for some pair of non-adjacent vertices $u,v$ such that $d_G(u) + d_G(v) \geq n$. Then $G'$ is Hamiltonian if and only if $G$ is Hamiltonian. Moreover, given a Hamiltonian cycle of $G'$, a Hamiltonian cycle of $G$ can be obtained in linear time.
\end{lemma}
It is easy to see that Lemma~\ref{bondy-chvatal} implies both Lemma~\ref{lemdirac} and Lemma~\ref{lemore}, as in both cases we can iterate the edge-augmentation step until obtaining a complete graph.
Finally, we state yet another strengthening of Dirac's theorem, due to Nash-Williams~\cite{nw}. We write this result in a slightly non-standard, explicitly algorithmic form. Our use of this result in proving Theorem~\ref{thm2} is the same as in the argument of H\"aggkvist~\cite{haggkvist}.
\begin{lemma}[Nash-Williams~\cite{nw}]\label{lemnw}
Let $G$ be a $2$-connected graph with $n$ vertices, with $\delta \geq (n+2)/3$. Then, we can find in $G$, in time $O(n^3)$, either a Hamiltonian cycle, or an independent set of size $\delta+1$.
\end{lemma}
The following proof of Lemma~\ref{lemnw} is due to Bondy~\cite{bondy}, sketched in~\cite[\S\,11]{Lawler1985}. We spell it out fully to make our discussion self-contained and to provide an explicitly algorithmic form (this requires only minor changes compared to the presentation in~\cite{Lawler1985}).
\begin{proof}
All cycles considered in the proof are simple. Denote $V = V(G)$. Start with an arbitrary cycle $C$ of $G$ (the fact that $G$ is $2$-connected guarantees the existence of a cycle, and we can easily find one in linear time). We extend $C$ into successively longer cycles until we either (1) reach a Hamiltonian cycle, or (2) find an independent set of the required size.
Unless we have already found a Hamiltonian cycle, $|C| \leq n-1$ holds. Suppose $V \setminus C$ is an independent set, and let $v \in V \setminus C$ be an arbitrary vertex. Due to the independence of $V \setminus C$, we have $N(v) \subseteq C$. If two neighbors of $v$ are connected by an edge of $C$, then we can immediately extend $C$ via $v$. Assume therefore, that this is not the case. Fix an arbitrary orientation of $C$, and let $N^{+}$ be the set of successors in $C$ of the vertices $N(v)$. Then, $|N^{+}| \geq \delta$. Again, if two vertices $x,y \in N^{+}$ are connected, then $C$ can be further extended (see Figure~\ref{fig1}(a) for illustration). Thus, we can assume that $N^{+} \cup \{v\}$ is an independent set of $G$, of the required size.
It remains to show that $C$ can be extended whenever $V \setminus C$ is \emph{not} an independent set. Then, $|V \setminus C| \geq 2$ must hold. Let us orient $C$ arbitrarily and label its vertices accordingly as $x_1, \dots, x_k$. Let $P = (x_1, p_1, p_2, \dots, x_{t+1})$, with $1 \leq t < k$, be a simple path of length at least $3$, that intersects $C$ only at the endpoints $x_1$ and $x_{t+1}$ (see Figure~\ref{fig1}(c)). We claim that the existence of such a path can be assumed without loss of generality (by suitably choosing the starting label $x_1$).
To see this, consider a path $(u,v,w)$ in $G$, where $u \in C$ and $v,w \in V \setminus C$. (Such a path must exist by the assumption that $V \setminus C$ is not independent and the fact that $G$ is $2$-connected: start with an arbitrary edge outside $C$ and consider a path from one of its endpoints to a vertex of $C$).
If there is a path, vertex-disjoint from $\{u,v\}$, from $w$ to an arbitrary vertex $x \in C \setminus \{u\}$, then we obtain the desired structure by labeling $x_1 = u$, $p_1 = v$, $p_2 = w$, and $x_{t+1} = x$.
If there is no such path, then there must be a path $R$, internally vertex-disjoint from $\{u,v\}$, from $v$ to an arbitrary vertex $x \in C \setminus \{u\}$ (otherwise, deleting $u$ would disconnect $G$, contradicting its $2$-connectivity). Furthermore, there must exist a path $Q$ connecting $u$ to $w$, not containing $v$ (otherwise, deleting $v$ would separate $u$ and $w$) and internally vertex-disjoint from $C$ and $R$ (otherwise, we would have a path from $w$ to a vertex in $C \setminus \{u\}$, ruled out previously). Now, we obtain the desired structure by setting $x_1 = u$, $x_{t+1} = x$, and $p_1$ and $p_2$ the second and third vertices on the path consisting of $Q$, and the edge $wv$ (Figure~\ref{fig1}(b)).
Let $d^{\uparrow}_t$, $d^{\uparrow}_k$, $d^{\uparrow}_2$ denote the number of neighbors $x_i$ with $1 \leq i \leq t$ of $x_t$, $x_k$, resp.\ $p_2$. Similarly, let $d^{\downarrow}_t$, $d^{\downarrow}_k$, $d^{\downarrow}_2$ denote the number of neighbors $x_i$ with $t < i \leq k$ of $x_t$, $x_k$, resp.\ $p_2$. Let $d^{\circ}_t$, $d^{\circ}_k$, $d^{\circ}_2$ denote the number of neighbors in $V \setminus C$ of $x_t$, $x_k$, resp.\ $p_2$.
\begin{claim}
At least one of the following three inequalities holds:
\begin{enumerate}[(1)]
\item $d^{\uparrow}_t + d^{\uparrow}_k + d^{\uparrow}_2> t+1$,
\item $d^{\downarrow}_t + d^{\downarrow}_k + d^{\downarrow}_2 > k-t+1$.
\item $d^{\circ}_t + d^{\circ}_k + d^{\circ}_2 > n-k-1$
\end{enumerate}
\end{claim}
\begin{claimproof}
Suppose otherwise. Then the sum of degrees of $x_t$, $x_k$, $p_2$ is at most $(t + 1) + (k-t+1) + (n-k-1) \leq n+1$, and thus at least one of them has degree at most $(n+1)/3 < \delta$, a contradiction.
\end{claimproof}
In the following, we assume $d^{\uparrow}_2 \leq 1$, since, if $p_2$ is connected to some $x_i$ with $1 < i \leq t$, then we may choose a different index $t$ in our construction.
Suppose inequality (1) holds. Then, $d^{\uparrow}_t + d^{\uparrow}_k > t$, and by the pigeonhole-principle, there is some $1 \leq i < t$ such that $x_k x_{i+1}$ and $x_{t} x_i$ are edges of $G$. Then, $C$ can be extended by adding these two edges and the path $(x_1,p_1,\dots,x_{t+1})$ and removing the edges $x_k x_1$, $x_t x_{t+1}$, and $x_i x_{i+1}$. (See Figure~\ref{fig1}(c).)
Suppose inequality (2) holds. Then, there is some $t+1 \leq i < k$ such that one of the following is true:
(a) $x_k x_{i}$ and $x_{t} x_{i+1}$ are edges of $G$,
(b) $x_t x_{i}$ and $p_{2} x_{i+1}$ are edges of $G$,
(c) $i < k-1$, and $x_k x_{i}$ and $p_{2} x_{i+2}$ are edges of $G$,
(d) $x_k x_{t}$ or $p_{2} x_{k}$ is an edge of $G$.
In all these cases $C$ can be extended similarly to the previous case. (See Figure~\ref{fig1}(d) for an illustration of cases (a), (b), (c).)
To see that one of the four cases must hold, we can argue by contradiction. Apart from the boundaries, every vertex $x_i$ that is connected to $x_t$ rules out $x_{i-1}$ from being connected to $x_k$. Similarly, every vertex $x_i$ that is connected to $p_2$ rules out $x_{i-2}$ from being connected to $x_k$, as well as $x_{i-1}$ from being connected to $x_t$. Thus, fixing the connections from $x_t$ and $p_t$ first, we rule out $d^{\downarrow}_t + d^{\downarrow}_k - 2$ possible neighbors of $x_k$.
Suppose inequality (3) holds. Then, by a similar pigeonhole-argument, one of the following is true:
(a) $x_t p_j$ or $x_k p_j$ is an edge of $G$ for some internal vertex $p_j$ on path $P$, or
(b) at least two of $x_t w$, $x_k w$, and $p_2 w$ are edges of $G$, for some $w \in V \setminus (C \cup P)$.
In all these cases $C$ can be extended similarly to the previous cases.
The claimed running time can be achieved via a straightforward implementation. \let\qed\relax\quad\raisebox{-.1ex}{$\qedsymbol$}
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=14cm]{fig}
\caption{Illustration of the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemnw}. (a) cycle $C$ with sets $N(v)$ and $N^{+}$ of vertices shown as solid, resp.\ hollow circles; (b) constructing a path between two vertices of $C$; (c) one case of extending $C$; (d) extending $C$ in the first three cases, when inequality (2) holds. Vertices $x_t$, $x_k$, $p_2$ shown as hollow dots.\label{fig1}}
\end{figure}
\section{Relaxing the cardinality-constraint (proof of Theorem~\ref{thm1})}\label{sec2}
Let $C \subseteq V(G)$ denote the set of high-degree vertices of $G$ (those with degree at least $n/2$), and let $S = V(G) \setminus C$ denote the remaining (i.e.\ low-degree) vertices.
Observe that $|S| \leq k$. By Lemma~\ref{bondy-chvatal}, we may add all edges between vertices in $C$, without changing the Hamiltonicity of $G$, assume therefore that $C$ is a clique.
The proof of the following theorem is inspired by the \emph{crown reductions}~\cite{Abu-KhzamFLS07,ChorFJ04,Fellows03} used to obtain kernels for \textsc{Vertex Cover} and \textsc{Saving $k$ Colors}.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:dist:to:clique}
There is a polynomial-time algorithm that, given a graph~$G$ and a nonempty set~$S \subseteq V(G)$ such that~$G-S$ is a clique, outputs an induced subgraph~$G'$ of~$G$ on at most~$3|S|$ vertices such that~$G$ is Hamiltonian if and only if~$G'$ is Hamiltonian.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Given a graph~$G$ let $S \subseteq V$, such that $C := V(G) \setminus S$ is the vertex set of a clique in $G$. If~$C \leq 2|S|$ then~$G' := G$ suffices, so we assume~$C > 2|S|$ in the remainder. Let~$S' := \{v_1, v_2 \mid v \in S\}$ be a set containing two representatives for each vertex of~$S$. Construct a bipartite graph~$H$ on vertex set~$C \cup S'$. For each edge~$cv \in E(G)$ with~$c \in C$ and~$v \in S$, add the edges~$c v_1, c v_2$ to~$H$. Compute a maximum matching~$M \subseteq E(H)$ in graph~$H$, for example using the Edmonds-Karp algorithm. Let~$C^*$ be the vertices of~$C$ saturated (matched) by~$M$. If~$|C^*| \geq |S|+1$ then let~$C' := C^*$, and otherwise let~$C' \subseteq C$ be a superset of~$C^*$ of size~$|S| + 1$. Output the graph~$G' := G[C' \cup S]$ as the result of the reduction.
\begin{claim} \label{claim:size}
Graph~$G'$ has at most~$3|S|$ vertices.
\end{claim}
\begin{claimproof}
Since each vertex of~$C^*$ is matched to a distinct vertex in~$S'$, with~$|S'| = 2|S|$, it follows that~$|C^*| \leq 2|S|$ which implies~$|C'| \leq 2|S|$. As~$V(G') = C' \cup S$, the claim follows.
\end{claimproof}
The output graph~$G'$ therefore satisfies the size bound. It remains to prove that it is equivalent to~$G$ with respect to Hamiltonicity. We first prove the simpler implication.
\begin{claim} \label{claim:prime:ham:g:ham}
If~$G'$ is Hamiltonian, then~$G$ is Hamiltonian.
\end{claim}
\begin{claimproof}
Suppose that~$G'$ is Hamiltonian, and let~$F \subseteq E(G)$ be a Hamiltonian cycle in~$G'$. Fix an arbitrary orientation of~$F$. As each vertex from~$C'$ has a unique successor on~$F$, while~$|C'| > |S|$ by definition, it follows that some vertex~$x \in C'$ has a successor from~$C'$ along the cycle; let this be~$y \in C'$. Then we can transform~$F$ into a Hamiltonian cycle in~$G$ by removing the edge~$xy$ and replacing it by a path through all the clique-vertices of~$C \setminus C'$.
\end{claimproof}
The remainder of the proof is aimed at proving the reverse implication. For this, we introduce some terminology. For a vertex set~$S^*$ in a graph~$G^*$, we define a \emph{path cover of~$S^*$ in~$G^*$} as a set of pairwise vertex-disjoint simple paths~$P_1, \ldots, P_\ell$ in~$G^*$, such that each vertex of~$S^*$ belongs to exactly one path~$P_i$. For a vertex set~$C^*$ in~$G^*$, we say the path cover \emph{has $C^*$-endpoints} if the endpoints of each path~$P_i$ belong to~$C^*$. We will sometimes interpret a subgraph in which each connected component is a path as a path cover, in the natural way.
\begin{claim} \label{claim:pathcover:to:cycle}
If there is a path cover of~$S$ in~$G'$ having~$C'$-endpoints, then~$G'$ is Hamiltonian.
\end{claim}
\begin{claimproof}
Any path cover of~$S$ consists of at least one path (since~$S$ is nonempty by assumption) and the endpoints of the paths are all distinct. Hence a path cover consisting of~$\ell \geq 1$ paths has exactly~$2\ell$ distinct endpoints~$\{s_1, t_1, \ldots, s_\ell, t_\ell\}$, which are vertices in the clique~$C'$. Let~$P_{\ell+1}$ be a simple path in~$G'$ visiting all vertices that are not touched by the path cover; such a path exists because the only vertices not touched by the path cover belong to the clique~$C'$. Then one can obtain a Hamiltonian cycle in~$G'$ by taking the edges of~$P_1, \ldots, P_\ell, P_{\ell+1}$, together with edges connecting the end of path~$P_i$ to the beginning of path~$P_{i+1}$ for all relevant values of~$i$.
\end{claimproof}
To prove that Hamiltonicity of~$G$ implies Hamiltonicity of~$G'$, we will construct a path cover of~$S$ in~$G'$ having~$C'$-endpoints, using a hypothetical Hamiltonian cycle in~$G$. To do so we need several properties enforced by the matching~$M$ in~$H$, which we now explore.
Let~$U_C$ be the vertices of~$C$ that are not saturated by~$M$. Let~$R$ denote the vertices of~$H$ that are reachable from~$U_C$ by an $M$-alternating path in the bipartite graph $H$ (which necessarily starts with a non-matching edge), and define~$R_C := R \cap C$ and~$R_{S'} := R \cap S'$.
\begin{claim} \label{claim:properties:matching}
The sets~$R, R_C, R_{S'}$ satisfy the following.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Each $M$-alternating path in~$H$ from~$U_C$ to a vertex in~$R_{S'}$ (resp.~$R_C$) ends with a non-matching (resp.~matching) edge.\label{eq:last:edge}
\item Each vertex of~$R_{S'}$ is matched by~$M$ to a vertex in~$R_{C}$. \label{eq:sprime:saturated}
\item For each vertex~$x \in R_C$ we have~$N_H(x) \subseteq R_{S'}$. \label{eq:neighborsrc:reachable}
\item For each vertex~$v \in S$ we have~$v_1 \in R_{S'} \Leftrightarrow v_2 \in R_{S'}$.\label{eq:copies:behave:alike}
\item For each vertex~$v \in S' \setminus R_{S'}$, we have~$N_H(v) \cap R_{C} = \emptyset$ and each vertex of~$N_H(v)$ is saturated by~$M$.\label{eq:neighbors:notreachable}
\end{enumerate}
\end{claim}
\begin{claimproof}
\eqref{eq:last:edge} An $M$-alternating path starting in~$U_C$ must start with a non-matching edge, since~$U_C$ consists of unsaturated vertices, and it starts from the $C$-partite set of~$H$. Hence such a path moves to the~$S'$-partite set over non-matching edges, and moves back to the $C$-partite set over matching edges.
\eqref{eq:sprime:saturated} If a vertex~$x \in R_{S'} \subseteq R$ is not saturated, then the $M$-alternating path from~$U_C$ witnessing~$x \in R$ starts and ends with a non-matching edge (by \eqref{eq:last:edge}) and is in fact an $M$-augmenting path. This contradicts that~$M$ is a maximum matching. Hence each~$x \in R_{S'}$ is matched by~$M$ to some vertex~$y$. By \eqref{eq:last:edge} the $M$-alternating path from~$U_C$ to~$x$ that witnesses~$x \in R_{S'}$ ends with a non-matching edge, so together with the matching edge~$\{x,y\}$ this forms an $M$-alternating path witnessing~$y \in R_C$.
\eqref{eq:neighborsrc:reachable}
Consider a vertex~$x \in R_C$ and an $M$-alternating path~$P$ from~$U_C$ witnessing~$x \in R$. By \eqref{eq:last:edge} the last edge on~$P$ (if any) is a matching edge. Hence if~$x$ is saturated by~$M$, then its matching partner~$y$ is the predecessor of~$x$ on~$P$ and a prefix of~$P$ witnesses~$y \in R$ and hence~$y \in R_{S'}$. For any vertex~$z \in N_H(x)$ that is not the matching partner of~$x$, we can augment~$P$ by the edge~$xz$ to obtain an $M$-alternating path from~$U_C$ to~$z$ witnessing~$z \in R_{S'}$. Together, these two arguments show~$N_H(x) \subseteq R_{S'}$.
\eqref{eq:copies:behave:alike}
Suppose~$v_1 \in R_{S'}$ and let~$P$ be an $M$-alternating path from~$U_C$ to~$v_1$. By~\eqref{eq:last:edge} path~$P$ ends with a non-matching edge~$x v_1$. Since~$v_1$ and~$v_2$ have identical neighborhoods in~$H$, we can replace the last edge of~$P$ by~$x v_2$ to obtain an $M$-alternating path witnessing~$v_2 \in R_{S'}$. The case that~$v_2 \in R_{S'}$ is symmetric.
\eqref{eq:neighbors:notreachable}
Consider~$v \in S' \setminus R_{S'}$. If~$x \in N_H(v) \cap R_{C}$, then~\eqref{eq:neighborsrc:reachable} implies~$v \in R_{S'}$, a contradiction. Hence~$N_H(v) \cap R_{C} = \emptyset$. An unsaturated $H$-neighbor~$x$ of~$v$ would imply~$x \in N_H(v) \cap U_C \subseteq N_H(v) \cap R_C$, so each vertex of~$N_H(v)$ is saturated by~$M$.
\end{claimproof}
Using these structural insights we can now prove the desired converse to Claim~\ref{claim:prime:ham:g:ham}. Before we give the formal proof, we present the main idea. To prove that~$G'$ is Hamiltonian if~$G$ is, we take a Hamiltonian cycle~$F$ in~$G$ and turn it into a path cover of~$S$ in~$G'$ with~$C'$-endpoints. Any Hamiltonian cycle~$F$ in~$G$ yields a path cover of~$S$ with~$S$-endpoints, by simply taking the restriction of~$F$ onto the vertices of~$S$. The challenge is to extend this path cover with edges into~$C'$ to give it the desired $C'$-endpoints: if the Hamiltonian cycle~$F$ used an edge to jump from~$S$ to~$C$, we have to provide a similar jump in~$G'$. If~$F$ jumps from a vertex~$v \in S$ whose corresponding copies~$v_1, v_2 \in S'$ do not belong to~$R_{S'}$, then the $C$-endpoint of the jumping edge is saturated by~$M$, belongs to~$C'$ and therefore to~$G'$, and can be used to provide the analogous jump in~$G'$. On the other hand, for all vertices~$v \in S$ whose copies~$v_1, v_2$ belong to~$R_{S'}$, we will globally assign new jumping edges based on the matching~$H$. The properties of a matching will ensure that these jumping edges lead to distinct targets and give a valid path cover of~$S$ in~$G'$ having~$C'$-endpoints. We now formalize these ideas.
\begin{claim} \label{claim:g:to:prime}
If~$G$ is Hamiltonian, then~$G'$ is Hamiltonian.
\end{claim}
\begin{claimproof}
Let~$F$ be a Hamiltonian cycle in~$G$. By Claim~\ref{claim:pathcover:to:cycle} it suffices to build a path cover of~$S$ in~$G'$ with~$C'$-endpoints. View~$F$ as a 2-regular subgraph of~$G$, and let~$F_1 := F[S]$ be the subgraph of~$F$ induced by~$S$. Since~$F$ spans~$G$ and all vertices of~$S$ are present in~$G'$, it follows that~$F_1$ is a path cover of~$S$ in~$G'$. However, the paths in~$F_1$ have their endpoints in~$S$ rather than in~$C'$. We resolve this issue by inserting edges into~$F_1$ to turn it into an acyclic subgraph~$F_2$ of~$G'$ in which each vertex of~$S$ has degree exactly two. This structure~$F_2$ must be a path cover of~$S$ in~$G'$ with~$C'$-endpoints, since the degree-two vertices~$S$ cannot be endpoints of the paths. To do the augmentation, initialize~$F_2$ as a copy of~$F_1$. Define~$R_S := \{v \in S \mid v_1 \in R_{S'} \vee v_2 \in R_{S'}\}$ and proceed as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item For each vertex~$v \in R_S$, we have~$v_1, v_2 \in R_{S'}$ by Claim~\ref{claim:properties:matching}\eqref{eq:copies:behave:alike}, which implies by Claim~\ref{claim:properties:matching}\eqref{eq:sprime:saturated} that both~$v_1$ and~$v_2$ are matched to distinct vertices~$x_1, x_2$ in~$R_C$. If~$v$ has degree zero in subgraph~$F_1$, then add the edges~$vx_1$, $vx_2$ to~$F_2$. If~$v$ has degree one in~$F_2$ then only add the edge~$vx_1$. Do not add any edges if~$v$ already has degree two in~$F_1$.
\item For each vertex~$v \in S \setminus R_S$, we claim that~$N_G(v) \cap R_C = \emptyset$. This follows from the fact that~$N_G(v) = N_H(v_1) = N_H(v_2)$ and~Claim~\ref{claim:properties:matching}\eqref{eq:neighbors:notreachable}, using that~$v \notin R_S$ implies~$v_1, v_2 \notin R_{S'}$. Hence the (up to two) neighbors that~$v \in S \setminus R_S$ has in~$C$ on the Hamiltonian cycle~$F$ do not belong to~$R_C$, while~Claim~\ref{claim:properties:matching}\eqref{eq:neighbors:notreachable} ensures that all vertices of~$N_G(v)$ are saturated by~$H$ and hence belong to~$C'$. For each vertex~$v \in S \setminus R_S$, for each edge from~$v$ to~$C \cap C'$ incident on~$v$ in~$F$, we insert the corresponding edge into~$F_2$.
\end{itemize}
It is clear that the above procedure produces a subgraph~$F_2$ in which all vertices of~$S$ have degree exactly two. To see that~$F_2$ is indeed a path cover, having no vertex of degree larger than two, it suffices to notice that the edges inserted for~$v \in R_S$ connect to \emph{distinct} vertices in~$C' \cap R_C$, while the edges inserted for~$v \in S \setminus R_S$ connect to~$C' \setminus R_C$ in the same way as in the Hamiltonian cycle~$F$. Hence~$F_2$ forms a path cover of~$S$ in~$G'$ having~$C'$-endpoints, which implies that~$G'$ is Hamiltonian and proves Claim~\ref{claim:g:to:prime}.
\end{claimproof}
Claims~\ref{claim:prime:ham:g:ham} and~\ref{claim:g:to:prime} prove the correctness of the reduction and Claim~\ref{claim:size} gives the desired size bound. Since the reduction can easily be performed in polynomial time, this completes the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:dist:to:clique}. \let\qed\relax\quad\raisebox{-.1ex}{$\qedsymbol$}
\end{proof}
Observe that the proof of Lemma~\ref{claim:prime:ham:g:ham} explicitly constructs the Hamiltonian cycle in case of a ``yes''-answer. The running time of the reduction is dominated by the bipartite matching step, and the process of undoing the Bondy-Chv\'atal augmentations (Lemma~\ref{bondy-chvatal}), if a cycle of the original graph is to be constructed. Both tasks can be performed in time $O(n^3)$.
\section{Relaxing the degree-constraint (proof of Theorem~\ref{thm2})}\label{sec3}
The outline of the proof largely follows an earlier argument of H\"aggkvist~\cite{haggkvist}. We improve the $O(n^{5k})$ running time of H\"aggkvist's algorithm to $c^k \cdot n^{O(1)}$.
The algorithm either finds a Hamiltonian cycle or constructs a certificate of non-Hamiltonicity, in the form of a cut $(S,T)$ of the graph, such that the vertices of $T$ can not be covered by $|S|$ vertex-disjoint paths, and this certificate can be verified within the required running time. (Observe that a Hamiltonian cycle induces such a path-cover for an arbitrary cut; paths consisting of single vertices are allowed.)
Assume that $k < n/34$, and thus $\delta > 8n/17$. (Otherwise we revert to a standard exponential-time algorithm.) Furthermore, $\delta < n/2$ may be assumed, as otherwise $G$ is Hamiltonian by Dirac's theorem. Also assume that $G$ is $2$-connected (otherwise it is not Hamiltonian).
Start by running the procedure from the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemnw}, either obtaining a Hamiltonian cycle, or an independent set of size $\delta + 1$. Assume that the latter is the case, and label the obtained independent set as $A_1$.
Partition $V(G)$ into sets $A_1$, $A_2$, and $A_3$, where $A_2$ denotes the set of vertices in $v \in V(G) \setminus A_1$ such that $|N(v) \cap A_1| \geq \delta/2$, and $A_3 = V(G) \setminus (A_1 \cup A_2)$. In words, $A_2$ contains vertices that are sufficiently highly connected to the obtained independent set, and $A_3$ contains the remaining vertices.
\begin{lemma}[\cite{haggkvist}, Thm.\ 2] \label{lemhaggkvist}
Given sets $A_1$, $A_2$, $A_3$ as defined, we can find a set of vertices $S \subseteq V(G)$ such that $|S| \geq 3 \delta -n +2$, and $G[V(G) \setminus S]$ can be covered by $|S|$ vertex-disjoint paths if and only if $G$ is Hamiltonian.
\end{lemma}
We sketch the argument, referring to H\"aggkvist~\cite[p.\ 32-33]{haggkvist} for the full details.
\begin{proof}[Proof sketch]
Let $T = V(G) \setminus S$. The ``if'' direction is trivial, since every Hamiltonian cycle of $G$ induces a cover of $G[T]$ by $|S|$ vertex-disjoint paths, for arbitrary $S$.
It remains to show the converse, i.e.\ that a cover of $G[T]$ by $|S|$ vertex-disjoint paths can be extended into a Hamiltonian cycle of $G$, for a suitably chosen $S$.
We let $S=A_2$ if $|A_2| \leq |A_1 \cup A_3|$, and $S = A_1 \cup A_3$ otherwise.
Consider the bipartite graph with sides $S$ and $T$ containing only those edges of $G$ that have one endpoint in $S$ and another endpoint in $T$. Add to this bipartite graph the edges of the path-cover of $T$ by $|S|$ vertex-disjoint paths (assuming such a cover exists). Call this graph $B$.
Let $B'$ be the graph obtained from $B$ by connecting all pairs of vertices in $S$.
Observe that $B$ is Hamiltonian if and only if $B'$ is Hamiltonian (furthermore, in case they are Hamiltonian, they admit the exact same Hamiltonian cycles). The ``only if'' case is obvious since $E(B') \supseteq E(B)$. In the other direction, $B'[T]$ contains $|S|$ disjoint components, therefore a Hamiltonian cycle of $B'$ can not traverse any edge of $B'[S]$. (This is because for an arbitrary Hamiltonian cycle $H$ of $B'$ the induced graphs $H[S]$ and $H[T]$ have the same number of connected components.)
Now we form graph $B''$ from $B'$, by repeatedly applying the Bondy-Chv\'atal theorem (Lemma~\ref{bondy-chvatal}), adding edges with one endpoint in $S$ and one endpoint in $T$. It can be shown that this results in adding all edges between $S$ and $T$.
As $B''$ fully connects $S$ and $T$, it is clearly Hamiltonian, as we can traverse the $|S|$ vertex-disjoint paths in $B''[T]$ and link them together through hops via arbitrary vertices of $S$ (using each vertex in $S$ exactly once).
The claim on the size of $S$ and the fact that all possible edges between $S$ and $T$ satisfy the degree-conditions of the Bondy-Chv\'atal Theorem (Lemma~\ref{bondy-chvatal}) follow from a delicate counting argument, which crucially relies on the fact that $8n/17 < \delta < n/2$. We refer to~\cite{haggkvist} for the details. \let\qed\relax\quad\raisebox{-.1ex}{$\qedsymbol$}
\end{proof}
It remains to verify whether $G[T]$ can be covered by $|S|$ vertex-disjoint paths.
\begin{lemma}\label{lempathcover}
Given an $n$-vertex graph $G$, we can find in time $O(c^t \cdot n^3)$ a cover of $G$ with $n-t$ vertex-disjoint paths, or report that no such cover exists, for arbitrary $c > (2e)^{2}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Apply color-coding~\cite{ColorCoding}, \cite[\S\,5.2]{book4}. Call a path nontrivial if it has more than one vertex. Say that a coloring is \emph{good} for a cover by vertex-disjoint paths, if all vertices that appear in a nontrivial path receive a different color. Clearly, if there is a cover by at most $n-t$ paths then there is a cover by exactly $n-t$ paths, and in such a cover there are at most $2t$ vertices that appear in a nontrivial path. So if there is a path cover with $n-t$ paths, a random coloring with $2t$ colors is \emph{good} for this cover with probability $e^{-2t}$. (See e.g.~\cite[Lemma 5.4]{book4}.)
On a vertex-colored graph with color set $C = \{1, \dots 2t\}$, we solve the following problem by dynamic programming: for a set $X \subseteq C$ and $v \in V(G)$, let $T[X,v]$ be the smallest number $q$ for which there exists a collection $P_1,\dots,P_q$ of vertex-disjoint paths in $G$, such that $P_q$ ends in vertex $v$ and the multiset of colors used in $P_1,\dots,P_q$ is exactly equal to $X$. (In particular, this implies that no two vertices in a path may have the same color, for it would appear twice in the multiset and only once in the set $X$.)
Let the $2t$-coloring of $G$ be given by $f : V(G) \rightarrow [2t]$. Then $T[X,v]$ satisfies the following recurrence:
\begin{itemize}
\item $T[\{c\}, v] = 1$ if $f(v) = c$,
\item $T[X, v] = +\infty$ if $f(v) \notin X$,
\item $T[X, v] = \displaystyle\min\left\{
1 +
\min_{u \in V(G) \setminus \{v\}}{T\bigl[X \setminus \{f(v)\}, u\bigr]},
\min_{u \in N_G(v)}{T\bigl[X \setminus \{f(v)\}, u\bigr]}
\right\}$, otherwise.
\end{itemize}
Intuitively, the interesting part of the recurrence has two cases: either we can let $v$ be a trivial path (so we pay $1$ for having a path with $v$, and then need a collection of paths that can end at any other vertex $u$ that covers the remaining colors), or we take a system of paths covering the remaining colors that ends in a neighbor $u$ of $v$, and add the edge $uv$ to the end of that path.
Now, observe that for any color-subset $X$ and vertex $v$, there is a cover of $G$ with $T[X, v] + (n - |X|)$ paths: we cover $|X|$ vertices, one of each color in $X$, by $T[X,v]$ paths and cover the remaining $(n - |X|)$ vertices by trivial paths. So if we encounter a set $X$ and vertex $v$ for which $T[X,v] + (n - |X|) \leq n - t$, or equivalently, $T[X,v] \leq |X| - t$, then the answer is ``yes''. On the other hand, if $G$ has a path cover by $n-t$ paths and a coloring is good for this cover, then letting $X$ be the set of colors of vertices that appear in a nontrivial path and $v$ an endpoint of such a path, we obtain $T[X,v] + (n - |X|) \leq n-t$.
So by trying $e^{2t}$ random colorings and solving the dynamic program for each one, we solve the ``cover by $n-t$ disjoint paths'' problem with constant success probability. With $c^{2t}$ for $c>e$, we can boost the success probability arbitrarily close to $1$. The dynamic program can be solved in time $O(2^{2t} n^3)$. The claimed running time follows.
We may de-randomize the algorithm by replacing the randomized coloring by a deterministic construction, e.g.\ via \emph{splitters}. We omit the details of this, by now standard, technique~\cite[\S\,5.6]{book4} \let\qed\relax\quad\raisebox{-.1ex}{$\qedsymbol$}
\end{proof}
In our application of Lemma~\ref{lempathcover}, we need to cover $G[T]$ by $|S|$ vertex-disjoint paths.
Observe that $|S| \geq n/2 - 3k$, and consequently $|T| \leq n/2 + 3k$.
The difference between the order of the graph $G[T]$ and the number of paths $t$ with which we want to cover it, is therefore at most $6k$.
Applying Lemma~\ref{lempathcover}, the running time of this step is thus $O(c^{6k} \cdot n^3)$, for arbitrary $c > (2e)^2$.
To construct a Hamiltonian cycle, find the set $S$ using Lemma~\ref{lemnw} and Lemma~\ref{lemhaggkvist}, find an appropriate path-cover using Lemma~\ref{lempathcover}, and recover the Hamiltonian cycle of $G$ by undoing the Bondy-Chv\'{a}tal steps in Lemma~\ref{lemhaggkvist}. The claimed running time of Theorem~\ref{thm2} follows by adding up the corresponding terms and by using straightforward data structuring.
\section{Remarks and open questions}\label{sec4}
We described two algorithms that solve the Hamiltonian cycle problem, with running time that depends polynomially on the graph size and single-exponentially on the distance from Dirac's bound, a condition that guarantees the Hamiltonicity of a graph. We have considered two different ways of measuring this distance. It would be interesting to improve the bases of the exponentials in our running times, and to obtain a polynomial kernel for the second parameterization.
A natural question left open by our work is whether the two parameterizations can be combined, to obtain a generalization of both. We suspect but have not been able to prove that the following holds.
\begin{conjecture}
If at least $n-k$ vertices of $G$ have degree at least $n/2-k$, then {\sc Hamiltonian Cycle} with input $G$ can be solved in time $c^k \cdot n^{O(1)}$ for some constant $c$.
\end{conjecture}
The results of this paper can be extended with minimal changes to similar parameterizations of Ore's theorem (Lemma~\ref{lemore}). Extending the results to generalizations of Dirac's and Ore's theorems to \emph{digraphs} would be interesting. More generally, finding new algorithms by parameterizing structural results of graph theory (whether related to Hamiltonicity or not) is a promising direction.
\section{Acknowledgement}
We thank Naomi Nishimura, Ian Goulden, and Wendy Rush for obtaining a copy of Bondy's 1980 research report~\cite{bondy}.
\newpage
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
Fuglede's conjecture was first stated by B. Fuglede in 1974 (\cite{Fuglede}). It proposes that for every subset $E$ of $\mathbb{R}^d$ with positive Lebesque measure, $L^2(E)$ has an orthogonal basis of exponentials (called \emph{$E$ is spectral}) if and only if $E$ tiles $\mathbb{R}^d$ by translation. In subsequent years the conjecture was proven for various different domains.
However, in 2004 T. Tao disproved the conjecture for $d \geq 5$ in \cite{Tao2004}. Furthermore Tao's proof relied on constructing a counterexample, namely a spectral set in $\mathbb{Z}_3^5$ that does not tile.
More counterexamples for different variations of the discrete $\mathbb{Z}_n^d$ case were found subsequently. In 2016 A. Iosevich, A. Mayeli and J. Pakianathan showed that the conjecture does indeed hold in the $\mathbb{Z}_p^2$ case. For the $p$ prime and $d=3$ case it is known that tiling implies spectrum \cite[Theorem 1.1.(g)]{Aten2015}, but the implication in the other direction remains open.
Also, in \cite{Aten2015} the authors proved that the Fuglede conjecture holds in the $d=3$, $p=3$ case. In their paper the authors developed the tools to be able to tackle the problem directly. Unfortunately, they have to point out that their methods are no longer feasible for $p=5$ since the number of spectral sets that need to be tested become too big (even for a computer).
The aim of this paper is to overcome these problems by approaching it from a different perspective, while still relying heavily on the theory developed in \cite{Aten2015}: Instead of generating all possible matrices and testing their rank, we start with just three linearly independent vectors, satisfying certain conditions and see if we can find enough vectors within the span of those three vectors that also fulfill the conditions to then construct a square matrix using those vectors as the rows. This will guarantee that the rank of the resulting matrix is three, as needed for a counterexample. Using this approach we can reduce the search space drastically.
\begin{theorem}
The Fuglede conjecture holds in $\mathbb{Z}_5^3$. That is, a set $V \subset \mathbb{Z}_5^3$ tiles if and only if it is spectral.
\end{theorem}
The remainder of the paper will give the proof of this result with the aid of a computer.
\section{Theoretical results}
\begin{definition}
A vector $v \in \mathbb{Z}_p^{mp}$ is called \emph{balanced} if every element of $\mathbb{Z}_p$ appears exactly $m$ times as a component of $v$.
A matrix $M \in \mathbb{Z}_p^{mp \times mp}$ is called \emph{log-Hadamard} if the difference of any two rows of $M$ is balanced.
A matrix $M \in \mathbb{Z}_p^{mp \times mp}$ is called \emph{special dephased log-Hadamard} if $M$ is a log-Hadamard matrix and the first row and column are all 0 and the second row and column are $(0,1,\dots,p-1,0,\dots,p-1,\dots,0,1,\dots,p-1)$.
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}[Proposition 9.1 in \cite{Aten2015}]
\label{theorem:3DFuglede}
Let $p$ be a prime. The following are equivalent:
\begin{itemize}
\item A subset of $\mathbb{Z}_p^3$ tiles if and only if it is spectral.
\item There does not exist an $mp \times mp$ special dephased log-Hadamard matrix with entries in $\mathbb{Z}_p$ of rank $3$ where $1 < m < p$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
We immediately get the following lemma:
\begin{lemma}
\label{3indpvec}
Let $1 < m < p$.
If there exists an $mp \times mp$ special dephased log-Hadamard matrix with entries in $\mathbb{Z}_p$ of rank $3$ then there also exists an $M \in \mathbb{Z}_p^{mp \times mp}$ with the first four rows being $b_0$,$b_1$,$b_2$ and $b_3$ such that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $M$ is log-Hadamard
\item $b_0$ and the first column are all 0, \label{lemma::3indpvec::b_0=0}
\item $b_1 = (0,1,\dots,p-1,0,\dots,p-1,\dots,0,1,\dots,p-1)$,
\item $b_2 = (0,0,*,*,\ldots,*)$,
\item $b_3$ is linearly independent of $b_1$,$b_2$,
\item all other rows are linear combinations of $b_1, b_2, b_3$, \label{lemma::3indpvec::lincomb}
\item the difference between any two row vectors is balanced. \label{lemma::3indpvec::balanced}
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{definition}[Definition 5.3. from \cite{Aten2015}]
For $p$ a prime, a $p \times p$ matrix $X$ of nonnegative integer entries whose row and column sums as well as diagonal sums of the form $\sum_{i=0}^{p-1} X_{i,i+s}$ (for $0 \leq s \leq p-1$) all add up to the same number $m$ is called a \emph{Davey matrix (of weight $m$)}.
\end{definition}
The remarks after \cite[Corollary 5.2.]{Aten2015} give raise to the following lemma:
\begin{lemma}
If $v,w \in \mathbb{Z}_p^{m p}$ are balanced and their difference is balanced as well, then the matrix $X \in \mathbb{Z}^{p \times p}$ with $X_{i,j}= \# \{k : v_k=i, w_k=j, k = 1,\dots,mp\}$ is a Davey matrix. We say $X$ is raised by the pair $(v,w)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
$\sum_{k=0}^{p-1} X_{i,k}=\# \{k : v_k=i, k = 1,\dots,mp\}=m$ since $v$ is balanced.
$\sum_{k=0}^{p-1} X_{k,j}=\# \{k : w_k=j, k = 1,\dots,mp\}=m$ since $w$ is balanced.
$\sum_{k=0}^{p-1} X_{k,k+s}=\# \{k : v_k-w_k=s, k = 1,\dots,mp\}=m$ since $v-w$ is balanced.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{Lemma::win_cond}
If the conditions of Lemma \ref{3indpvec} are fulfilled and $b_1$,$b_2$ and $b_3$ are as in the Lemma. Then we know that there are three Davey matrices $D_1$, $D_2$ and $D_3$ (raised by the pairs $(b_1,b_2), (b_1,b_3)$ and $(b_2,b_3)$ respectively) and a set $\Lambda \in \mathbb{Z}_p^3$ of cardinality at least $m p-1$, such that for all $(\lambda_1,\lambda_2,\lambda_3), (\mu_1,\mu_2,\mu_3) \in \Lambda$ we have $(\lambda_1-\mu_1)b_1+(\lambda_2-\mu_2)b_2+(\lambda_3-\mu_3)b_3$ is balanced.
\end{lemma}
\section{Overview of the algorithm}
\subsection{Outline}
The last Lemma outlines our algorithm. We start with $b_1=(0,1,\dots,p-1,0,\dots,p-1,\dots,0,1,\dots,p-1)$ and cycle over all triples of Davey matrices and for each triple find all solutions $b_2,b_3$ of balanced vectors who pairwise generate the three given Davey matrices. For each solution of $b_1,b_2,b_3$ we find the largest set $\Lambda$ fulfilling the conditions above. And then show that $\Lambda$ is not big enough.
\subsection{Outer loop}
For a given prime $p$ and $1 < n <p$, we start with $b_1$ as in Lemma \ref{3indpvec} and a loop ranging over all Davey matrices of weight $n$. By Lemma \ref{3indpvec} we can first restrict our search to all balanced vectors whose first entry is 0, so we are only interested in Davey matrices $D$ with $D_{0,0}>0$. We will call the set of these matrices $\mathcal{D}_n$. Furthermore we can restrict $b_2$ to those with a second entry of 0 and therefore any Davey matrix $D$ that is raised by the pair ($b_1$,$b_2$) has to fulfill $D_{0,1}>0$. Algorithm \ref{alg::davey_on_vec} now returns one possible $b_2$ such that $D$ is raised by $(b_1,b_2)$. All possible solutions are the same, modulo permutations of those entries in $b_2$ where $b_1$ has the same value on corresponding entries. We can arbitrarily choose one of those solutions, as having $M$ as in Lemma \ref{3indpvec} we immediately see that column operations that do not change $b_1$ result in another matrix $M'$ that also fulfills the properties of the Lemma.
\begin{example}
Let $b_1=(0,1,2,0,1,2)$ a balanced vector in $\mathbb{Z}_3^6$ and $D$ be a Davey matrix:
$$D= \begin{pmatrix}
1 & 1 & 0 \\
1 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 1 & 1
\end{pmatrix}.$$
Then possible $b_2$ are
$(0,0,1,1,2,2),(0,0,2,1,2,1)$
(since we insist that the first and second entry in $b_2$ is 0). The vectors only differ by transpositions of the third and sixth entry.
\end{example}
\subsection{Inner loops}
Now we have $b_1$ and $b_2$ fix. So the next step is to find all candidates for $b_3$. We know that both $(b_1,b_3)$ and $(b_2,b_3)$ have to give raise to a Davey matrix, so here we have to loop over the set of all Davey matrices in $\mathcal{D}_n$ twice. Now given two Davey matrices $D_1$ and $D_2$ we can find all possible $b_3$ using Algorithm \ref{alg::davey_on_vec_2x2}. Because of the work laid out in Subsection \ref{subsec::search_reduction} we can restrict the set that $D_1$ is chosen from (for fixed $D$ and $D_2$). This is because if $(b_1,b_2)$ give raise to $D$ and we want $(b_2,b_3)$ to give raise to $D_2$, we have some kind of composition of Davey matrices.
\subsection{Testing a triple $(b_1,b_2,b_3)$}
Now in the innermost part of the program we have to test if a triple $(b_1,b_2,b_3)$ is part of a potential solution. By Lemma \ref{3indpvec} (\ref{lemma::3indpvec::lincomb}) we know that all other rows in a solution $M$ have to be linear combinations of $(b_1,b_2,b_3)$ and from (\ref{lemma::3indpvec::b_0=0}) and (\ref{lemma::3indpvec::balanced}) we know that we are only interested in the linear combinations that result in balanced vectors. This results in a set of valid combinations $V$ as a subset of $\mathbb{Z}_p^3$, i.e.
$$
V=\{(\lambda_1,\lambda_2,\lambda_3) \in \mathbb{Z}_p^3: \lambda_1 b_1+\lambda_2 b_2+\lambda_3 b_3 \text{ is a balanced vector in } \mathbb{Z}_p^{mp}\}
$$ Now to solve the problem we need a set $\Lambda \subset V$ that fulfills the conditions in Lemma \ref{Lemma::win_cond} which can be written as
$$
\forall (\lambda_1,\lambda_2,\lambda_3), (\mu_1,\mu_2,\mu_3) \in \Lambda:
(\lambda_1-\mu_1,\lambda_2-\mu_2,\lambda_3-\mu_3) \in V.
$$
So $\Lambda$ can be seen as a clique in a graph on $V$ with nodes $(v_1,v_2,v_3)$ and $(w_1,w_2,w_3)$ being connected by an edge if $(v_1-w_1,v_2-w_2,v_3-w_3) \in V$. Since the cardinality of $\Lambda$ has to be $np-1$ we need to find a clique of at least that cardinality that contains $(1,0,0),(0,1,0)$ and $(0,0,1)$.
\subsection{Results for $p=5$}
For $p=5$ it turns out that a clique-search is not necessary. Since we have that $(1,0,0),(0,1,0),(0,0,1) \in \Lambda$ we can exclude all nodes not connected to one of those three. The remaining set $R$ has to contain $\Lambda$.
Running the program shows that for each choice of $D$,$D_2$,$D_1$ and $b_3$ the reduced set $R$ has $|R|<np-1$ and therefore cannot contain a $\Lambda$ big enough for a solution. Hence there is no solution to Lemma \ref{3indpvec} and by Theorem \ref{theorem:3DFuglede} we conclude that a subset of $\mathbb{Z}_5^3$ tiles if and only if it is spectral, i.e. the Fuglede conjecture holds for $d=3$ and $p=5$.
\subsection{Remarks on $p \geq 7$}
Similar to the step from $p=3$ to $p=5$, the amount of work required to check all cases increases drastically. So while the program is not restricted to $p=5$ the amount of computations required for the $p=7$ case is far beyond of what is feasible.
\section{Explanation of different parts of the program}
\subsection{The reduction of the search space for $D_1$}
\label{subsec::search_reduction}
\begin{example}
\label{example::search_reduction}
Let
$$D= \begin{pmatrix}
1 & 1 & 0 \\
1 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 1 & 1
\end{pmatrix},
D_2= \begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 0
\end{pmatrix}
$$
and $b_1, b_2$ such that they give raise to $D$.
Then choosing
$$D_1=\begin{pmatrix}
2 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 2 \\
0 & 2 & 0
\end{pmatrix} \in \mathcal{D}_2$$ doesn't give any valid $b_3$ and can therefore be disregarded.
\end{example}
\begin{proof}
We can show this by observing the pre-image with respect to $D$ and the image with respect to $D_2$ of every 1 in $b_2$. If we think of the vectors $b_1$, $b_2$, $b_3$ written as rows of a $3 \times 6$ matrix, this means finding all ones in $b_2$ and looking at the number above and below. Because of $D$ the numbers above a 1 in $b_2$ can only be one 0 and one 2. And because of $D_2$ the numbers below a 1 in $b_2$ can only be one 1 and one 2. So only looking at $b_1$ and $b_3$ there is either at least on pair (0,1) denoting a 0 on top (in $b_1$) and a 1 at the bottom (at the same position in $b_3$) and (2,2), or we have (0,2) and (2,1). Since $(b_1,b_3)$ give raise to $D_1$ this has to be reflected by the entries with the respective indices. But $(D_1)_{0,1}=0$ which excludes the first case and $(D_1)_{0,2}=0$ which excludes the second case, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
This example shows that we can disregard this choice of $D_1$. Furthermore, here we only followed the 'path' of every 1. We can do the same steps for every number in $\mathbb{Z}_p$ and will get different restrictions most of the time.
\subsection{Algorithms}
The following algorithms refer to the source code contained in Appendix A. The code can also be accessed at \url{ https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2541903}.
\begin{algorithm}[{\ttfamily davey\_on\_vec}] \label{alg::davey_on_vec}
Given a Davey matrix $D$ and a balanced vector $b$ we can generate a corresponding balanced vector $b'$ such that $D$ is raised by $(b,b')$. In general there are several solutions $b'$. $D_{i,j}$ tells us how often a number $i$ lies on top of a number $j$. So for each number in $\mathbb{Z}_p$ we can collect which numbers have to be below it and how often. Then we just traverse $b$ from left to right and assign the numbers according to these collections.
\end{algorithm}
\begin{algorithm}[{\ttfamily davey\_on\_vec\_2x2}]
\label{alg::davey_on_vec_2x2}
This is similar to the previous algorithm, but now we are given two Davey matrices $D^1$ and $D^2$ and two balanced vectors $b^1$ and $b^2$. Our goal is to generate all possible vectors $b^3$ such that the pairs $(b^1,b^3)$ and $(b^2,b^3)$ give raise to $D^1$ and $D^2$ respectively.
To solve this we do a simple tree search. To find the entry $b^3_i=y$ we have to look at the corresponding value $b^1_i=x$, now using $D^1$ we can find the possible values for $y \in \mathbb{Z}_p$ that still allows $(b^1,b^3)$ to give raise to $D^1$, namely we need $D^1_{x,y}>0$. Let $A_1$ be the set of all such values $y$. We can do the same with $b^2$, $D^2$ to get another subset of $\mathbb{Z}_p$: $A_2$ and $b^3_i$ has to be in both sets generated that way. If $A_1 \cap A_2=\emptyset$ we can abandon this branch. If $|A_1 \cap A_2|=1$ we have found $b^3_i$. And if $|A_1 \cap A_2|>1$ then there might be several solutions, so we have to branch and check all possible choices for $b^3_i$.
That way we can step by step find all possible vectors $b^3$.
\end{algorithm}
\begin{algorithm}[{\ttfamily get\_davey\_matrices}]
This algorithm generates all possible Davey matrices of a fixed weight n.
From the note after Definition 5.3. in \cite{Aten2015} we know that a Davey matrix can be written as a sum of permutation matrices. Therefore we need to generate all possible permutation matrices first.
Now any permutation matrix has sum of rows and sum of columns equal to 1. However the sums along the diagonals might not be constant. For each permutation matrix we calculate these sums, a $p$-tuple we will call {\it key} and store matrices with the same key together.
Next we run a loop over all possible combinations of $n$ (where $n$ is the desired weight of the Davey matrices) of those keys. Taking one combination, if (and only if) adding all these keys (as vectors in $\mathbb{Z}^p$) results in $(n,\ldots,n)$ then any sum of the respective matrices to the involved keys will give raise to a Davey matrix!
\end{algorithm}
\begin{algorithm}[{\ttfamily balanced\_linear\_combinations}]
For a given balanced vector $b \in \mathbb{Z}_p^d$ any multiple that isn't divisible by $p$ is a balanced vector again. If however we have three balanced vectors $b_1,b_2,b_3$ determining which linear combinations of the three vectors are again balanced vectors is tricker, so we have to brute-force it by testing all $p^3$ possible combinations.
\end{algorithm}
\begin{algorithm}[{\ttfamily calc\_cache}]
This implements part of the calculation outlined in Subsection \ref{subsec::search_reduction}. Namely the one we can do preemptively, before starting the actual program to generate a cache for quick lookup. Considering Example \ref{example::search_reduction} we see that after choosing 1 as the pivot element what actually mattered were the numbers above: $a=(0,2)$ (in $b_1$) and below (in a potential $b_3$): $b=(1,2)$ and our conditions for the Davey matrix turned out to be that either the entries at $\{(0,1), (2,2)\}$ or the entries at $\{(0,2),(2,1)\}$ were non-zero. These are all possible sets of pairings of numbers in $a$ and $b$, we will call them the keys.
Finding these sets of pairings is the first step of this algorithm, done iteratively over the length of the tuples $a$ and $b$. The second step is for each of these entries to take all pairings and find those Davey matrices that match at least one key, then the set of those matrices will be stored as a result for $(a,b)$.
\end{algorithm}
\begin{algorithm}[{\ttfamily davey\_filtered\_from\_cache}]
This algorithm is the other part of the calculation outlined in Subsection \ref{subsec::search_reduction}, the one done during the main calculation. This algorithm uses an encoding of $D$ in its "pre-images", i.e. a list of tuples, the first tuple consisting of the numbers that result in a 0, next those that result in a 1, and so forth, accounting for multiplicity. $D$ from Example \ref{example::search_reduction} would be encoded as $[(0,1),(0,2),(2,3)]$ (one 0 and one 1 result in a 0) while $D_1$ would be encoded as $[(0,0),(2,2),(1,1)]$.
The given $D_2$ will also be encoded in a similar way by looking at the image for each number, i.e. which numbers in a potential $b_3$ have to be below a 0, a 1, etc. So for $D_2$ as in Example \ref{example::search_reduction} this would be $[(0,2),(1,2),(2,3)]$.
Note that Davey matrices for $p=3$ are always symmetric but this is no longer true for $p \geq 5$.
Now having these encodings we can use the previously calculated {\ttfamily davey\_cache} to get all Davey matrix candidates for what $D_1$ can be.
So we basically do what we did in Example \ref{example::search_reduction}, following the "path" of each value in $\mathbb{Z}_p$. For each number we get a set of Davey matrices that are compatible with that value, so the intersection of those sets is compatible with all of them. That list will be returned.
In Example \ref{example::search_reduction} we only used 1 as the value, but already saw that $D_1$ wasn't in the cache generated for the combination $((0,2),(1,2))$ (second entry of the encoding of $D$ and second entry of the encoding of $D_2$) and therefore not in any intersection.
\end{algorithm}
\pagebreak
|
\section{Introduction}
Binary classification involves vector-scalar pairs $(x,y) \in \mathcal{X} \times \mathcal{Y} $, where $\mathcal{Y}=\left\{-1,1\right\}$ and $\mathcal{X} \subset \mathbb{R}^p$ is a compact subset of $p$-dimensional feature space. Each pair describes an object of study, for example a brain scan or a tissue sample of a medical patient. Individual components $x^{j}$ of a vector $x$ are called features. Each feature describes some numerical property of the object represented by $x$, for example signal intensity in a single voxel of a brain scan, or expression level of a single gene. The value of $y$ tells us whether the object belongs to the positive or the negative class. In many scenarios the feature vectors are easy to obtain, but the class variable is not. For example, we can measure methylation status of each CpG base-pair in patient's genome relatively easily, but deciding if the patient's prognosis is positive or negative is challenging.
In statistical learning \cite{friedman2001elements}, we assume that samples $(x,y)$ come from a fixed but unknown distribution $D$ over $\mathcal{X} \times \mathcal{Y}$.
For a given feature vector $x$, the probabilities of either class are given by conditional distribution $D_{y|x}$ over $\mathcal{Y}$, and for a given class $y$, the probability density of feature vectors in that class is given by conditional distribution $D_{x|y}$ over $\mathcal{X}$.
While the underlying distributions $D$, $D_{y|x}$, and $D_{x|y}$ are unknown, we have access to a training set $Z$ consisting of $m$ samples $z_i=(y_i, x_i)$ drawn independently from $D$.
In the binary classification problem the goal is to use the training set to learn how to predict classes $y$ for feature vectors $x$, even if we did not see such a feature vector in the training set.
The training set can be used to construct a predictive model, in a form of a hypothesis function $h: \mathcal{X} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$, where the sign of $h(x)$ indicates the predicted class for input feature vector $x$. For a given sample $(x,y)$, the prediction is considered correct if the signs of the predicted and the true class agree, that is, if $y h(x)>0$. The predictive model should make as few errors as possible over samples $z=(x,y)$ sampled from distribution $D$, that is, it should minimize $\int_{\mathcal{X} \times \mathcal{Y}} I[yh(x) \leq 0] D(z) \diff z$, where $I$ is an indicator function over Boolean domain returning 1 for true and 0 for false.
A simple but often effective class of hypotheses is the class of linear functions $h(x;\beta,b)=\beta^T x + b=\sum_{j=1}^p \beta_j x^j + b$. A linear predictive model is parameterized by a vector of feature weights $\beta \in \mathbb{R}^p$ and a bias term $b\in \mathbb{R}$. To simplify the notation, we often add one more dimension to $\mathcal{X}$ with all samples having a value of one. The predictive model is then simply $h(x;\beta)=\beta^T x$, $\beta \in \mathbb{R}^{p+1}$, with $\beta_{p+1}$ playing the role of bias.
Training of a linear model involves finding a suitable parameter vector $\beta$.
For a single sample $(x,y)$, the suitability of a model $h$ with specific $\beta$ will be captured by a loss function $\ell(y, h(x;\beta))$, which returns a nonnegative real number that we interpret as a measure of our dissatisfaction with the prediction $h(x;\beta)$.
The natural {\em 0/1 loss}, defined as $\ell(y, h(x;\beta))= I[y \beta^T x \leq 0]$, is not a continuous function of the parameter vector $\beta$, and is flat almost everywhere, leading to problems with finding $\beta$ that minimizes the loss. Instead of the 0/1 loss, a convex function that upper-bounds it is often used in training classification models. For example, the least-square loss $\ell(y,h)=(y-h)^2$ is used in Fisher's Linear Discriminant and in Least-Squares Support Vector Machine (LS-SVM) classifier \cite{suykens1999least}.
Once the loss function is chosen, the goal of training a model is to find the parameter vector $\beta$ that minimizes the expected loss $\mathbb{E}_{z \sim D} \ell(y, h(x;\beta))$, referred to as {\em risk} of the model, $R(\beta)=\int_{\mathcal{X} \times \mathcal{Y}} \ell(y, h(x;\beta)) D(z) \diff z$. Since $D$ is unknown, a surrogate goal is to search for $\beta$ that leads to low loss on samples from the training set. For example, the {\em empirical risk minimization} strategy involves finding parameters $\beta$ that minimize {\em empirical risk}, that is, the average loss on the training set, $\hat{R}(\beta)=\frac{1}{m}\sum_{i=1}^{m} \ell(y_i, h(x_i;\beta))$.
The model $\beta$ that minimizes the empirical risk may have high generalization risk $R(\beta)$, that is, may fare poorly on samples outside of the training set, especially if the number of training samples $m$ is smaller, or not much larger, than the number of features $p$, the features are not statistically independent, or the feature values are noisy. Often, the generalization error can be reduced if a penalty on the complexity of the model is introduced into the optimization problem. Typically, this penalty term, known as regularization term, is based on $\lVert \beta \rVert$, a norm of the vector of model parameters, leading to {\em regularized empirical risk minimization} strategy, which finds parameters that minimize $\hat{L}(\beta) = \hat{R}(\beta) + \lambda f(\lVert \beta \rVert)$. For example, most Support Vector Machines \cite{cortes1995support} use squared $L_2$ norm of $\beta$, $\lVert \beta \rVert_2^2$, as the regularizer.
With technical progress in many experimental disciplines, the ability to measure large number of features in large number of samples is rapidly increasing. There is ongoing interest in fast methods for solving large-scale classification problems. One of the approaches being explored is training the predictive model using a quantum algorithm that has access to the training set stored in quantum-accessible memory. In parallel to research on efficient architectures for quantum memory \cite{blencowe2010quantum}, work on quantum machine learning algorithms and on quantum learning theory is under way (see for example Refs. \cite{BWPR17,dunjko2018machine,SchF18} and \cite{arunachalam2017guest} for review). A pioneering example of this approach is Quantum LS-SVM \cite{RML14}, which achieves exponential speedup compared to classical LS-SVM algorithm, although the trained model, that is, the feature weights vector $\beta$, is computed as a quantum state and is not directly available for inspection.
Quantum LS-SVM uses quadratic least-squares loss and squared-$L_2$ regularizer, and thus translates to an unconstrained quadratic programming (QP) problem, which can be solved using the seminal HHL \cite{harrow2009quantum} algorithm for solving quantum linear systems of equations. The least-squares loss, while often used in regression problems, leads to high-magnitude loss if $h(x)$ has large magnitude, even if $h(x)$ and $y$ agree on the sign, that is, the prediction is correct. Most classification loss functions involve a nonincreasing $\mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}_+$ function of the product $yh$. If the sign of prediction $h(x)$ and the target class $y$ agree, then loss should not increase if $|h|$ increases. One prominent example of a convex, monotonic loss is the {\em hinge loss}, defined as $\ell(y,h)=[1-yh]_{+}=\max(0,1-yh)$, which is used in the original variant of the Support Vector Machine (SVM) classifier \cite{cortes1995support}. Hinge loss leads to hinge risk $\hat{R}_{SVM}(\beta)=\frac{1}{m}\sum_{i=1}^{m} \max(0,1-y_i \beta^T x_i )$. However, using the hinge loss in SVM leads to a quadratic problem with inequality constraints, and algorithms based on quantum manipulation of eigenvalues such as HHL and other recent methods \cite{somma2016quantum, subramanian2018implementing} are only applicable to unconstrained, or equality-constrained quadratic problems, since only these types of QP problems can be re-interpreted as linear systems of equations.
The $L_2$ regularizer used in LS-SVM penalizes large-magnitude feature weights, but is unlikely to set any feature weights to null. In many real-world scenarios involving classification problems with large number of features we expect that highly-accurate predictions can be made using just a few discriminative features. The remaining features either carry no information about the separation of classes, or the information is redundant. For example, classification problems involving gene expression measured using microarrays or RNA-seq may have tens of thousands of features, and brain scans can have million of voxels, but only a small number may be enough to separate subjects with one subtype of a disease from another subtype, an information that is useful in choosing treatment. In these scenarios, we expect that a well-performing model should be sparse; that there is a vector $\beta$ composed mostly of zeros that achieves near-optimal risk $R(\beta)$.
The key problem is to decide which feature weights should be non-zero.
To find sparse solutions to classification problems, a regularization term in the form of $L_1$ norm of $\beta$ is often included in the objective function. $L_1$ regularization is especially useful when working with a training set with large number of features compared to the number of training samples, which is referred to as the $p>m$ case. Optimization problems involving $L_1$ norm typically lead to inequality constraints that cannot be presently handled by quantum algorithms based on HHL.
In this paper, we focus on Sparse SVM (sSVM) \cite{bennett1999combining,kecman2000support,zhu20041}, a linear classifier based on regularized empirical risk minimization involving hinge loss and $L_1$ regularizer, $\hat{L}_{sSVM}(\beta) = \hat{R}_{SVM}(\beta) + \lambda \lVert \beta \rVert_1$, where $\lambda > 0$ is a hyperparameter specifying the strength of regularization.
Training of a Sparse SVM model can be transformed into an optimization problem with linear objective function and linear inequality constraints.
We introduce \mbox{\em Quantum Sparse SVM} (QsSVM), which is based on recently proposed quantum algorithms for solving semidefinite programming (SDP) problems \cite{brandao2017quantum,van2017quantum,brandao2017large,van2018improvements}, of which linear programs are a special case.
We show that while for arbitrary binary classification problems no quantum speedup is achieved using quantum SDP/LP solvers, there are realistic families of cases in which using a sparse linear classifier makes sense in terms of the expected accuracy of predictions, and polynomial quantum speedup compared to classical methods can be guaranteed. Moreover, the quantum SDP/LP solvers underlying QsSVM return more information about the trained predictive model $\beta$ than it is in the case of Quantum LS-SVM based on HHL method. This is especially important for sparse linear predictive models, which are often used not just to predict class variables from the feature vectors, but to gain insight into which features
affect the class variable.
\section{Quantum Sparse SVM}
The training of Sparse SVM model using a training set with $p$ features and $m$ samples involves solving a minimization problem
\begin{align}
\label{eq:SparseSVM}
\operatornamewithlimits{arg\ min}_{\beta \in \mathbb{R}^p} \frac{1}{m}\sum_{i=1}^{m} \max(0,1-y_i \beta^T x_i ) + \lambda \sum_{j=1}^p | \beta_j |.
\end{align}
Using standard techniques, this non-linear unconstrained optimization problem can be transformed to an equivalent constrained linear program with $n=m+2p$ nonnegative variables and $m$ linear inequality constraints
\begin{align}
\label{eq:SparseSVMConstr}
\min_{\xi,\beta^+,\beta^-} \;\;\;\; & \frac{1}{m}\sum\limits_{i=1}^{m} \xi_i + \lambda \sum\limits_{j=1}^{p} \beta_j^+ + \lambda \sum\limits_{j=1}^{p} \beta_j^- \\
\text{s.t.} \;\;& \sum\limits_{j=1}^{p} y_i x_i^j \beta_j^+ - \sum\limits_{j=1}^{p} y_i x_i^j \beta_j^- \geq 1 - \xi_i, \;\;\;\;\; i\in[m]\nonumber \\
\;\; & \xi_i, \beta_j^+, \beta_j^- \geq 0, \nonumber
\end{align}
where $[m]=\left\{1,...,m\right\}$. Under positive $\lambda$, we can read out the solution as $\beta_j = \beta_j^+ - \beta_j^-$. We also have $|\beta_j| = \beta_j^+ + \beta_j^-$. The value of the hinge loss of $i$-th training sample is equal to $\xi_i$.
Simplex-based and interior-point methods are currently the main approaches for solving practical LP problems, but alternative theoretical approaches are being studied, including those aimed at a broader problem of semidefinite programs. An SDP problem with known symmetric $n \times n$ matrices $C$, $A_i$ for $i=[m]$, and known scalar constants $b_i$, involves finding a positive semidefinite $n \times n$ matrix $X$
\begin{align*}
\min_X \;\;\;\; & C \cdot X \\
\text{s.t.} \;\;& A_i \cdot X \leq b_i , \;\;\;\;\; i \in [m] \\
\;\; & X \succeq 0 \nonumber
\end{align*}
where $\cdot$ represents element-wise multiplication and $X \succeq 0$ indicates that matrix $X$ is positive semidefinite. A corresponding dual SDP problem involves finding a vector $\alpha \in \mathbb{R}^m$
\begin{align*}
\max_\alpha \;\;\;\; & b^T \alpha\\
\text{s.t.} \;\;& C - \sum_{i=1}^m \alpha_i A_i \succeq 0.
\end{align*}
LP involving nonnegative variables is a special case of SDP where all the matrices are diagonal.
The dual variable $\alpha_i$ is null whenever $A_i \cdot X < b_i$, and for every non-zero $\alpha_i$, the primal program constraint is satisfied with equality, $A_i \cdot X = b_i$.
In the context of SVMs, where primal constraints and dual variables correspond to training samples, samples with $\alpha_i \neq 0$ are called support vectors. Those are all samples with non-zero loss, $\xi_i>0$, as well as those with $\xi_i=0$ for which
the linear prediction is exactly equal to the class variable,
$\beta^T x_i = y_i$; in both these cases, $y_i\beta^T x_i + \xi_i = 1$. On the other hand, samples with $y_i \beta^T x_i > 1$, which have null loss $\xi_i=0$, are not support vectors, and $\alpha_i=0$.
Arora and Kale \cite{arora2007combinatorial,arora2016combinatorial} introduced a primal-dual algorithm for solving SDP/LP problems with input of size $n$ and with $m$ constraints with asymptotic computational complexity $\BigPolyOh{mn \; \mathrm{poly}\big(R,r,1/\varepsilon\big)}$, where $\varepsilon$ is the desired accuracy of the algorithm\footnote{ $\BigPolyOh{f(n,m)}$ hides factors that are logarithmic in $n,m$.}. The complexity depends not only on the size of the problem, $n$ and $m$, but also on the size of the primal solution, $R$, and dual solution $r$; in the LP case these are captured by the $L_1$ norms of the primal and dual solution vectors.
Based on the Arora and Kale's approach, a quantum algorithm that uses quantum Gibbs sampling has been proposed recently by Brand\~{a}o and Svore \cite{brandao2017quantum}, with time complexity $\BigPolyOh{ \left(\sqrt{mn}\right) \; \mathrm{poly}\big(R,r,1/\varepsilon\big)\Big)}$, which is a quadratic speed-up compared to the classical algorithm. Subsequent stream of improvements \cite{van2017quantum,brandao2017large} culminated up to this date with a quantum algorithm utilizing fast quantum OR lemma, provided by van Apeldoorn and Gily{\'e}n \cite{van2018improvements}, with complexity $\BigPolyOh{ \left(\sqrt{m}+\sqrt{n}\right) \; \mathrm{poly}\big(R,r,1/\varepsilon\big)\Big)}$.
The Quantum Sparse SVM (QsSVM) algorithm operates in the following way. The LP problem is seen as an SDP problem that involves diagonal matrices $C$ and $A_i$, all of size $n$ by $n$, where $n=2p+m$. It also involves an $m$-dimensional vector $b$ with all elements equal to $-1$. Access to the $b$ vector is given by a unitary oracle
\begin{align*}
O_b\ket{i}\ket{0} = \ket{i}\ket{b_i} = \ket{i}\ket{-1}, \nonumber
\end{align*}
where $i \in [m]$ and $\ket{-1}$ is a binary representation of $-1$ up to a chosen precision.
Access to matrix $C$ and matrices $A_i$ is given by unitary oracles
\begin{align*}
O_C\ket{k,z} &= \ket{k,z\oplus C[k,k]}, \nonumber \\
O_{A}\ket{i,k,z} &= \ket{i,k,z\oplus A_i[k,k]}, \nonumber
\end{align*}
where $z$ is a binary string with length depending on the chosen precision, $\oplus$ represents bit-wise XOR, and where $k \in [2p+m]$. For $C$, we have $C[k,k]=\frac{1}{m}$ for $k\in \left\{1,...,m\right\}$ and $C[k,k]=\lambda$ otherwise. For $A_i$, we have $A_i[k,k]=-1$ for $k\in \left\{1,...,m\right\}$, $A_i[k,k]=-y_i x_i^{(k-m)}$ for $k\in \left\{m+1,...,m+p\right\}$, and $A_i[k,k]=y_i x_i^{(k-m-p)}$ for $k>m+p$. The oracle $O_{A}$ can be constructed from unitary oracles returning binary representations of $y_i \in \left\{-1,1\right\}$ and $x_i^j$ and from efficient unitaries for bitstring multiplication and index addition and subtraction. The quantum oracles for $y_i$ and $x_i^j$ need to be implemented using quantum RAM.
Quantum random access memory (qRAM) uses $\log N$ qubits to address any quantum superposition of $N$ memory cell which may contains either quantum or classical information. For example, qRAM allows accessing classical data entries $x_i^j$ in quantum superposition by a transformation
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{mp}}\sum_{i=1}^m\sum_{j=1}^p \ket{i,j}\ket{0...0}\xrightarrow[]{\text{qRAM}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{mp}}\sum_{i=1}^m\sum_{j=1}^p\ket{i,j}\ket{x_i^j}, \nonumber
\end{align*}
where $\ket{x_i^j}$ is a binary representation up to a given precision.
Discovering practical architectures for qRAM that allow query access in logarithmic time in terms of the number of items to be loaded is still an open challenge in quantum machine learning \cite{BWPR17}, with several approaches being considered \cite{GLM08, 2GLM08, AGCM15}.
The quantum algorithm for training QsSVMs produces output in the form of samples from the normalized dual solution vector $\alpha$, providing the identities of one support vector at a time, or sampling from a density operator proportional to solution $X$, which for $X$ diagonal in computational basis provides the identities of the few non-zero-loss samples and the few non-zero feature weights $\beta_j$ in the sparse solution.
\section{Complexity of Quantum Sparse SVM}
Assuming oracle access to input, the computational complexity of quantum SDP solver utilized in Quantum Sparse SVM shows improved dependence on $n$ and $m$, but polynomial dependence on $R$ and $r$ may erase any gains compared to classical LP solvers. Indeed, for any training set, the minimum of the objective function of the SparseSVM optimization problem (eq. \ref{eq:SparseSVM}) is bounded from above by one
\begin{align}
1 \geq \min_{\beta} \frac{1}{m}\sum_{i=1}^{m} \max(0,1-y_i \beta^T x_i ) + \lambda \sum_{j=1}^p | \beta_j |,\nonumber
\end{align}
since an objective function value of one can be obtain by setting $\beta = 0$, which leads to unit loss for each training sample, and thus unit average loss. For some training sets, one is the minimum of the objective function -- for example if training samples come in pairs, $(x,+1)$ and $(x,-1)$. In this case, the norm of the primal solution is $R=\sum_i |\xi_i| +\sum_j |\beta_j| = m$, and the norm of the dual solution is $r=\sum_i |\alpha_i| = 1$, since the dual objective function is just $\sum_i -\alpha_i$ and strong duality makes it equal to the value of the primal objective function.
In the complexity bound in quantum SDP/LP solvers, $\BigPolyOh{ (\sqrt{m}+\sqrt{n}) \; \mathrm{poly}\big(R,r,1/\varepsilon\big)\Big)}$, the polynomial term involving $R$ and $r$ has high exponent. The solver of van Apeldoorn and Gily{\'e}n \cite{van2018improvements} has complexity $
\BigPolyOh{ \sqrt{m}\big(Rr/\varepsilon\big)^4+\sqrt{n}\big(Rr/\varepsilon\big)^5}$. Thus, $Rr=\BigOh{m}$ erases any speedups compared to classical solvers.
A more realistic case in which we see $R=\BigOh{m}$ is a regular XOR problem, for example involving two features and four training samples, $[+1,+1]$ and $[-1,-1]$ with $y=+1$ and $[+1,-1]$, $[-1,+1]$ with $y=-1$. For any $\beta \in \mathbb{R}^2$, if there is a sample with loss $1-\delta$, there is another sample with loss $1+\delta$. Thus, sum of $\xi_i$ variables is one for any $\beta$, and again $\beta=0$ is the minimizer of the regularized empirical risk. However, for XOR problems a linear classifier is known to be useless even if speed is not a concern.
Below, we explore two realistic families of classification problems in which using a sparse linear classifier makes sense in terms of accuracy of the model, and in which quantum speedup can be achieved under mild conditions.
\subsection{Hard-margin Sparse SVM}
A {\em $\nu$-margin linearly separable classification problem}, for $\nu>0$, is a problem defined by underlying distribution $D$, characterized by an underlying vector $\beta^{\star} \in \mathbb{R}^p$ with $\lVert \beta \rVert_2 =1$, in which the class $y$ is a deterministic function of $x$, that is, the conditional distribution over classes is $D_{y|x} \in \left\{0,1\right\}$ for each vector $x$. Further,
\begin{itemize}
\item for each $x \in \mathcal{X}$, the conditional distribution over classes $y \in \mathcal{Y}$ is \mbox{$D_{y|x} = [\mathrm{sign} (y {\beta^{\star}}^T x)]_+\in \left\{0,1\right\}$}, that is, the separation between the positive and negative classes is linear,
\item the distribution $D(x,y)$ has null mass for $\left\{x: | \frac{1}{\nu}{\beta^{\star}}^T x | \leq 1 \right\}$, that is, a narrow band of width $\nu$ on both sides of the linear decision boundary is devoid of samples from either class.
\end{itemize}
A $\nu$-margin linearly separable problem is called sparse if the number of non-zero components in the vector $\beta^{\star}$ defining $D$ is small compared to the number of features, $p$.
For this special case, the Sparse SVM regularized empirical risk minimization is characterized by the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}
For $p \rightarrow \infty$, consider a family of $p$-dimensional $\nu$-margin linearly separable sparse classification problems $D_p$ over $\mathcal{X}_p \times \mathcal{Y}$, where $\mathcal{X}_p \in \mathbb{R}^p$, based on sparse underlying vectors $\beta^{{\star}}_p$ with at most $p'=\BigOh{f(p)}$ non-zero components, for some slowly increasing function $f$. Then, for each $p$, there exist
\begin{itemize}
\item a primal linear program with optimal solution $\hat{\beta}_p$ such that each training sample is classified correctly by $h(x)=\hat{\beta}_p^T x$, and $R_p = \lVert \hat{\beta}_p \rVert_1 = \sum_j \left( \hat{\beta_j^+} + \hat{\beta_j^-} \right) \leq \rho_p$,
\item a corresponding dual linear program with a solution vector $\alpha_p$ such that $r_p = \lVert \alpha_p \rVert_1 \leq \rho_p$,
\end{itemize}
such that $\rho_p \leq \sqrt{p'}/\nu$.
\begin{proof}
For any training set sampled from the $D$ there is at least one solution $\beta$ with $\hat{R}(\beta)=0$, that is, with $1-y_i \beta^T x_i \leq 0$, or with $\xi_i=0$ for each $i\in [m]$. We can thus narrow the solution space to solutions with null empirical risk, and consider a constrained linear problem without the slack variables $\xi_i$
\begin{align}
\label{eq:SparseSVMnoXi}
\min_{\beta^+, \beta^-} \;\;\;\; & \sum\limits_{j=1}^{p} \beta_j^+ + \sum\limits_{j=1}^{p} \beta_j^- \\
\text{s.t.} \;\;& \sum\limits_{j=1}^{F} y_i x_i^j \beta_j^+ - \sum\limits_{j=1}^{F} y_i x_i^j \beta_j^- \geq 1 , \;\;\;\;\; i \in [m]\nonumber \\
\;\; & \beta_j^+, \beta_j^- \geq 0. \nonumber
\end{align}
For brevity, below we will refer to the vectors in the LP solution space as $\beta$, and to the minimizer as $\hat{\beta}$. These should be understood as reconstructed from $\beta^+$ and $\beta^{-}$. For example, $\hat{\beta} = \hat{\beta}^+ + \hat{\beta}^-$, and $\lVert \hat{\beta} \rVert_1 = \sum_j \left( \hat{\beta}_j^+ + \hat{\beta}_j^- \right) $.
The scaled vector $\beta^{{\star}} / \nu$ is a feasible solution to problem \ref{eq:SparseSVMnoXi}, since it achieves null loss on any samples from $D$, including those in the training set.
For any unit $L_2$-norm vector $\beta$ with $p'$ non-zero entries, the highest $L_1$ norm is achieved if all the $p'$ coordinates are equal to $1/\sqrt{p'}$. Thus, $\lVert \beta \rVert_1 \leq \sqrt{p'}$. The solution $\beta^{{\star}}$ has unit $L_2$-norm, and thus $\lVert \frac{1}{\nu} \beta^{{\star}} \lVert_1 \leq \sqrt{p'}/\nu$.
On the given training set, the empirical minimizer $\hat{\beta}$ has lowest $L_1$ norm among all feasible parameter vectors. Thus, $\lVert \hat{\beta} \rVert_1 \leq \lVert \frac{1}{\nu} \beta^{{\star}}_p \rVert_1 \leq \sqrt{p'}/\nu$.
Dual program has objective $\sum_{i=1}^m -\alpha_i$, and from strong duality, $r_p = \sum_{i=1}^m |\alpha_i| = \lVert \hat{\beta} \rVert_1 = R_p \leq \sqrt{p'}/ \nu$.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
An immediate corollary follows. A family of $\nu$-margin linearly separable sparse classification problems in which the number of non-zero coordinates in the solution vector solution grows as $p'=\BigOh{\log p}$ leads to the family of LP problems with primal and dual solution norms $R_p = r_p = \frac{1}{\nu} \BigOh{\sqrt{\log p}}$. For these problems, quantum SDP solvers offer speedup compared to currently available classical solvers.
\subsection{Soft-margin Sparse SVM}
To move beyond linearly separable case, we will consider scenarios where the classes overlap, but the optimal decision boundary is not far from being linear, and the region of overlap is limited, so that the generalization error resulting from using linear classifier is not high.
As a motivating example, consider a $p$-dimensional classification problem where samples $x$ in each class are distributed as an isotropic multivariate normal distribution with diagonal covariance matrix with the same value $\sigma$ on the diagonal, but with different means. Without loss of generality, we will assume that $\sigma=1$ -- it can be achieved by rescaling the feature values.
In the two isotropic Gaussians classes case, the optimal solution is known to be a hyperplane, and the projection on the line orthogonal to the hyperplane, $u={\beta^{\star}}^T x$, results in the two classes forming univariate Gaussians $\mathcal{N}_{\mu}(u)$ and $\mathcal{N}_{-\mu}(u)$. The multivariate scenario, and the corresponding univariate case are depicted schematically in Figure \ref{fig:softMargin}a and \ref{fig:softMargin}b.
We can further simplify the setup by considering a new variable $v=yu=y{\beta^{\star}}^T x$; then both classes are distributed according to $D_{v|+} = D_{v|-} = \mathcal{N}_{\mu}(v)$. The hinge loss $\ell(y,h(x))=[1-yh(x)]_+$ in this setting is simply $L(v) = \max(0,1-y\beta^T x)=\max(0,1-v)=[1-v]_+$, and the generalization risk associated with hinge loss is $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} L(v) \mathcal{N}_{\mu}(v) \diff v$.
As before, we will consider a scenario in which as the number of features $p$ grows, the number of features needed for accurate predictions, $p'$, grows much more slowly. These discriminative features will have means $+c$ and $-c$ in the positive and the negative class, respectively -- though the situation does not change if the signs of the means are swapped for some of the discriminative features. With increasing number $p'$ of discriminative features, each with means differing by $2c$, the distance between the means of the two multivariate isotropic Gaussians increases at the rate of at least $2c\sqrt{p'}$, and after the projection into single dimension to form $D_{v|+} = D_{v|-}= \mathcal{N}_{\mu}(v)$ as described above, the value of $\mu$ increases as $c\sqrt{p'}$.
To move beyond this idealized Gaussian scenario, we will consider problems governed by distributions $D(x,y)$ that give rise to univariate class conditional distributions $D_{v|+} $ and $ D_{v|-}$ that have tails in the region of non-zeros loss, $v \leq 1$, bounded from above by Gaussian tails, with the Gaussian mean $\mu$ diverging at a rate $c\sqrt{p'}$ as the number of discriminative features $p'$ increases, and the tails are truncated beyond some constant $-\Delta$, also increasing with $p'$. Figure \ref{fig:softMargin}c shows this generalized scenario, which is formalized by the definition below.
\begin{figure}[!b]
\caption{\label{fig:softMargin} Multivariate two-class problem and its univariate views.}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{fig1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
A {\em $(\Delta,\mu)$-truncated subgaussian classification problem}, for $\mu>1$, $\Delta>0$, is defined by distribution $D$ such that there is an underlying vector $\beta^{\star} \in \mathbb{R}^p$ with $\lVert \beta \rVert_2 =1$, for which
\begin{itemize}
\item the conditional distributions $D_{x|+}$ and $D_{x|-}$ of the samples from the positive and negative class, respectively, give rise to univariate distributions $D_{v|+}$ and $D_{v|-}$ on a line resulting from the projection $v=y{\beta^{\star}}^T x$,
\item the tails of $D_{v|+}$ and $D_{v|-}$ are bounded from above, in the region $v \in (-\infty,1]$, by the probability density function $\mathcal{N}_{\mu}(v)$,
\item the tails of $D_{v|+}$ and $D_{v|-}$ have zero mass for $v<-\Delta$.
\end{itemize}
A $p$-dimensional $(\Delta,\mu)$-truncated subgaussian problem is called sparse if the number of non-zero components in the vector $\beta^{\star}$ is small compared to the number of features, $p$.
For the hinge loss, the generalization risk $R({\beta^{\star}})$ associated with model $h(x)={\beta^{\star}}^T x$ on the $(\Delta,\mu)$-truncated subgaussian problem $D$ is bounded through the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:ExpVar}
Let $D$ be a $(\Delta,\mu)$-truncated subgaussian classification problem with underlying vector $\beta^{\star}$ leading to univariate distributions $D_{v|+}$ and $D_{v|-}$ as described above. Let $L=\max(0,1-v)$ be a univariate random variable capturing hinge loss of the model $h(x)={\beta^{\star}}^T x$ for samples from $D$. Then, the expectation and standard deviation of $L$ are bounded by
\begin{align}
&R({\beta^{\star}}) = \mathbb{E}[L] \leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}e^{-\frac{(1-\mu)^2}{2}} = \mathcal{N}_{\mu}(1), \label{eq:EL}\\
&\mathbb{V}\mathrm{ar}[L] \leq \left[(1-\mu)^2+1\right]\left[1+\mathrm{erf}\,\left(\frac{1-\mu}{\sqrt{2}}\right)\right] \label{eq:VarL}.
\end{align}
Also, values of $L$ are in the range $[0,\Delta+1]$.
\begin{proof}
The proof relies on properties of integrals of $x^k \mathcal{N}_{0}(x)$. The technical details are given in the Appendix.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
The result above gives the bound on the expected value of the hinge loss for the model $h(x)={\beta^{\star}}^T x$ on the distribution $D$, that is, it bounds from above the the generalization risk of that model, $R({\beta^{\star}})=\mathbb{E}[L]$. However, it does not give an upper bound on the empirical risk for the model $h(x)={\beta^{\star}}^T x$ on a specific training set with $m$ samples and $p$ features, sampled from $D$. This bound is given be the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}
Let $D$ be a $(\Delta,\mu)$-truncated subgaussian problem based on $\beta^{\star}$. Let $\hat{R}({\beta^{\star}})$ be the empirical risk associated with model $\beta^{\star}$ over a $m$-sample training set sampled {\em i.i.d.} from $D$. Then, with probability at least $1-\delta$
\begin{align}
\hat{R}({\beta^{\star}}) &\leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}e^{-\frac{(1-\mu)^2}{2}} \label{eq:RhatBound}\\
&+ 4 \frac{ \sqrt{\log(2/\delta)}} {\sqrt{m}} \left[ (1-\mu)^2+1\right]\left[1+\mathrm{erf}\,\left(\frac{1-\mu}{\sqrt{2}}\right) \right] \nonumber \\
&+ 4 \frac{ (\Delta+1) \log(2/\delta)}{m} \nonumber
\end{align}
\begin{proof}
Consider $m$ values $l_1, ..., l_m$ drawn from a univariate random variable $L$ taking values in range in $[a,b]=[0,\Delta +1]$, and with finite variance $s=\mathbb{V}\mathrm{ar}[L]$ and finite mean $R=\mathbb{E}[L]$. Let $\hat{R}=\frac{1}{m}\sum_{i=1}^{m} l_i$ be the empirical mean. Bernstein's inequality states that
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{P}( | \hat{R} - R | \geq t ) \leq 2 \exp\left( \frac{mt^2}{2(s^2 +(b-a) t)} \right).
\end{align*}
That is, with probability at least $1-\delta$,
\begin{align*}
\hat{R} \leq R + 4s\sqrt{\frac{\log(2/\delta)}{m}} + \frac{4(b-a) \log(2/\delta)}{m}.
\end{align*}
We thus have
\begin{align*} \hat{R}({\beta^{\star}}) \leq \mathbb{E}[L] + 4 \mathbb{V}\mathrm{ar}[L] \sqrt{\frac{\log(2/\delta)}{m}} + \frac{4 (\Delta+1) \log(2/\delta)}{m}
\end{align*}
The bound follows from plugging in the bounds on expected value (eq. \ref{eq:EL}) and variance (eq. \ref{eq:VarL}) of the loss.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
We are now ready to analyze the behavior of empirical risk of models $\beta_p^{\star}$ on problems $D_p$ as the number of all features $p$ and the number of discriminative features $p'$ grow.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:emrisk}
For $p \rightarrow \infty$, consider a family of $p$-dimensional $(\Delta_p,\mu_p)$-truncated subgaussian problems $D_p$ with underlying vectors $\beta_p^{\star}$. Assume that the vector $\beta_p^{\star}$ is sparse, it only has $p' = 1+2 \log p$ non-zero coefficients. Further, assume that the mean $\mu_p$ diverges with the number of discriminative features $p'$ as $\mu_p > c\sqrt{p'}$ for some $c>1$. As $p$ grows, we allow scattering of the samples farther into the region dominated by the other class -- specifically, we allow $\Delta_p \leq 2\log p$. Then, with probability at least $1-\delta$, we have
\begin{align}
\label{eq:eq:RhatBound2}
\hat{R}({\beta_p^{\star}}) &\leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi} p }+ 4 \frac{ (2\log p+1) \log(2/\delta)}{m}.
\end{align}
\begin{proof}
Under the assumption that $\mu_p$ grows at least as $c\sqrt{p'}=c\sqrt{1+2\log p}$,
we have $\mu_p \geq 1 + \sqrt{2\log p}$, which leads to the bound on the first term of eq. (\ref{eq:RhatBound}), and to the second term approaching null limit. The technical details of the proof are given in the Appendix.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
Sparse SVM involves regularized empirical risk, that is, minimization of a weighted sum of the empirical risk and the $L_1$ norm of the model $\beta$.
Under the scenario of slowly increasing number of discriminative features, the Sparse SVM regularized empirical risk minimization is characterized by the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}
For $p \rightarrow \infty$, consider a family of $p$-dimensional classification problems $D_p$ as described in Lemma \ref{lem:emrisk}. For each $D_p$, consider the SparseSVM regularized empirical minimization problem (eq. \ref{eq:SparseSVM})
\begin{align*}
\operatornamewithlimits{arg\ min}_{\beta} &{\;\;\;} \frac{1}{m}\sum\limits_{i=1}^{m} \max(0,1-y_i \beta^T x_i) + \lambda \lVert \beta \rVert_1,
\end{align*}
involving $m$-sample training set sampled from $D_p$.
Then, for each $p$, with probability $1-\delta$, there exist an empirical minimizer $\hat{\beta_p}$ of the problem above that can be found using a linear program (eq. \ref{eq:SparseSVMConstr}), with $L_1$ norms of the primal and dual solutions, $R_p$ and $r_p$, respectively, bounded as
\begin{align}
R_p \leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \frac{m}{p} + 4 (1 + 2 \log p) \log(2/\delta) ] + \lambda \sqrt{1+2 \log p}, \label{eq:sotfBound_Rp}\\
r_p \leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \frac{1}{p} + \frac{ 4(1 + 2 \log p )\log(2/\delta)}{m} + \lambda \sqrt{1+2 \log p} \label{eq:sotfBound_rp}.
\end{align}
\begin{proof}
As shown in the hard-margin case in the previous section, we have $\lVert \beta_p^{\star} \rVert_1 \leq \sqrt{p'}$ for $\beta_p^{\star}$ with unit $L_2$-norm and $p'$ non-zero coefficients.
On the training set, the minimizer $\hat{\beta_p}$ has lowest objective function of all possible $\beta$, including $\beta_p^{\star}$. Thus, we have
\begin{align*}
\hat{R}(\hat{\beta_p}) + \lambda \lVert \hat{\beta_p} \rVert_1 \leq \hat{R}({\beta_p^{\star}}) + \lambda \lVert \beta_p^{\star} \rVert_1 \leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \frac{1}{p} + 4 \frac{ (1 + 2 \log p) \log(2/\delta)}{m} + \lambda \sqrt{1+2 \log p}.
\end{align*}
From strong duality, we have $r_p = \hat{R}(\hat{\beta_p}) + \lambda \lVert \hat{\beta_p} \rVert_1$. The norm $R_p$ of the primal solution does not involve averaging the losses $\max(0,1-y_i \beta^T x_i)$. Instead, the losses are added up, that is, $R_p$ includes the term $m\hat{R}(\hat{\beta_p})$ instead of the empirical risk.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
The immediate corollary is that if we are dealing with $p>m$ scenario, in which $L_1$ regularization is especially useful, that is, when $m/p = \BigOh{1}$, neither $R_p$ nor $r_p$ grow with $m$, and both grow with $p$ as $\BigOh{\log p}$. Utilizing the quantum SDP/LP solver proposed of van Apeldoorn and Gily{\'e}n \cite{van2018improvements}, training QsSVMs, which translates to solving an LP problem (eq. \ref{eq:SparseSVMConstr}) with $m$ constraints and $n=2p+m$ variables, has computational complexity of
\begin{align*}
\BigPolyOh{ \sqrt{m}\big(\log^2 p/\varepsilon\big)^4+\sqrt{m+2p}\big(\log^2 p/\varepsilon\big)^5}= \BigPolyOh{ \sqrt{m+2p}
\; \mathrm{poly}\big(\log p,1/\varepsilon\big)},
\end{align*}
assuming efficient oracle access to data. Thus, using quantum SDP solvers offers speedup compared to classical solvers.
More generally, the computational complexity is $\BigPolyOh{ \sqrt{m+2p}\; \mathrm{poly}\big(\frac{m \log p}{p},\log p,1/\varepsilon\big)}$, leading to speedup even in some cases beyond the $p>m$ scenario, such as $m=\BigOh{p \log p}$. The scenarios in which number of features is larger or at least comparable to the number of samples is of great practical importance -- it is common in biomedical data analysis, for example in classification of molecular profiles such as gene expression or methylation, or classification of 3D brain scans.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
TA is supported by NSF grant IIS-1453658. Early results that are part of this work were presented as poster at the Conference on Quantum Machine Learning Plus in Innsbruck, Austria, 2018. We are grateful to Ronald de Wolf for inspiring comments on our work.
\bibliographystyle{alpha}
\newcommand{\etalchar}[1]{$^{#1}$}
\newcommand{\noopsort}[1]{}
|
\section{Introduction}
Neural network training typically employs a two-stage procedure, \textit{i.e.}, hyperparameter tuning followed by model training. Although there have been systems that enable automatic optimization of the hyperparameters, the gap between the two stages relies heavily on human engineering which results in a lengthy and often inefficient model development cycle. Deep neural networks are especially powerful with large scale data, however the labor costs in model training and tuning on large datasets are becoming more expensive at the same time. Nowadays, machine learning professionals spend a majority of their time tuning model-related parameters. Effectively automating the neural network training procedure becomes an important yet challenging problem to address. A promising direction is to build an end-to-end machine learning system that merges the two-stage learning process and reduces human engineering.
Population Based Training (PBT) has recently emerged and opened up a new direction in neural network training which jointly optimizes the hyperparameters while training the network weights at the same time \cite{max-pbt-2017}. The core idea is to repeatedly replace a poorly performing model with a better performer and continue training with hyperparameters mutated from the better one. The mutation is an important procedure that allows the hyperparameters to dynamically change over time, which is difficult to achieve by any conventional hyperparameter tuning method.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\vskip 1em
\includegraphics[width=.475\textwidth]{fig1}
\caption{Black-box Service for Population Based Training based on a Worker-Controller framework. Each solid blue circle represents a training trial. A black arrow represents a trial dependency (usually for warm-starting the model from a parent's checkpoint) and a gray arrow represents an un-selected parent trial which loses in a tournament and fails to reproduce. The PBT controller oversees the progress of the whole population and decides training actions.}
\label{fig:pull}
\end{figure}
A natural way to design a PBT system is to allow every worker access to the information of all other workers in a shared database and all of the workers progress at the same pace. However, this implementation approach typically requires continuous and simultaneous training of all workers and may encounter issues when the workers could be preempted by other higher priority jobs in a real distributed working environment. In addition, existing implementations of PBT are mostly glass-box approaches, which introduces additional restrictions on how the neural network model is implemented. The trainer has to know information about other parallel workers and performs weight copying and hyperparameter changes. The hyperparameters, for example, in TensorFlow \cite{tensorflow} may have to be defined in the computation graph in order to be changed efficiently every so often.
We propose a generalized Population Based Training framework to improve training extensibility and scalability. The proposed framework is based on the idea of decomposing the whole model training into multiple trials, where in each trial a worker only trains for a limited amount of time. Figure \ref{fig:pull} illustrates the high-level controller-worker framework adopted by the proposed system. An important notion of the system is that each trial is dependent on one or more other trials, \textit{e.g.}, the initial checkpoint can be the last checkpoint of another trial and the hyperparameters can be decided based on other trials' final measurements. A population controller is introduced into the system to oversee the whole population of trials. The controller also decides the hyperparameters and the checkpoint for warm-starting a worker in a new trial.
This paper introduces the system design of a black-box PBT service and evaluates the accuracy, performance and scalability of the proposed system by case study on the real world application of human speech synthesis using WaveNet \cite{wavenet}, where we show improved performance, in terms of both accuracy and convergence, compared to existing hyperparameter optimization methods \cite{vizier}.
\section{Preliminary}
The proposed PBT service framework is inspired by the design of Vizier hyperparameter tuning service \cite{vizier}. This section introduces the concepts of both Population Based Training and the Vizier hyperparameter tuning service.
\subsection{Vizier Service}
Vizier is a black-box hyperparameter optimization service developed by \citet{vizier}. Compared to other systems for hyperparameter tuning, the major advantage of Vizier is that a black-box service could significantly reduce the effort required for setting up a hyperparameter tuning experiment. In addition, a black-box service allows the highest flexibility in the setup of the training procedure in the client side, \textit{i.e.}, it can be easily applied to different types of machine learning models and model training libraries.
\subsection{Population Based Training}
Population Based Training (PBT) was proposed by \citet{max-pbt-2017}; it is an asynchronous optimization algorithm that effectively utilizes a fixed amount of computational budget to jointly optimize a population of models and their hyperparameters. PBT is related to evolutionary strategies, however it differs from conventional evolution in that PBT employs an idea called warm-starting, \textit{i.e.}, initializing a model training session using a checkpoint saved from another model's training.
The reason why PBT performs efficient hyperparameter search is because PBT makes decisions based on incomplete observations (non-converged objective values). Most traditional hyperparameter tuning methods require training until near convergence and use the final performance measurement to guide the following search. Those processes could be extremely lengthy especially in the large scale deep learning scenarios.
\textit{Glass-Box Implementation.} All of the existing implementations of PBT are glass-box approaches where the parallel workers read and write to the same database and decide whether to warm start from another worker's checkpoint. The glass-box implementations have following limitations:
\begin{itemize}
\itemsep 0pt
\item Any changes made to the computation graph can be complicated. So the hyperparameters often need to be defined in the computation graph.
\item In a distributed setting, the glass-box approach does not gracefully handle the case of a worker job being preempted by another worker job.
\item The glass-box framework is not extendable to advanced evolution or mutation decisions that need to be made based on a global assessment of all the workers' performance measures.
\end{itemize}
We propose a black-box service based solution to PBT training. We show that our black-box design can address the above issues encountered by the glass-box approaches.
\section{PBT Service Framework}
\subsection{Overview}
The proposed PBT service is a \emph{stateless} service, by which we mean each of the requests to the service does not depend on any other. This generally follows the design of the Vizier hyperparameter tuning service and allows the service to be highly scalable. Figure \ref{fig:pbt-system} shows a system diagram of the proposed PBT service.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{system-small.pdf}
\caption{PBT Service System Diagram. The PBT service is composed of a controller, a tuner API layer and a persistent database. Tuner API and the database are similar to the design of the Vizier service. The major information container about model training is called \textit{Trial}, defined using a protocol buffer, which is passed between PBT controller, Tuner API, persistent database and the workers in the client. PBT controller may suggest two kinds of actions to the client, \textit{i.e.}, suggest a new trial or early-stop a trial.}
\label{fig:pbt-system}
\end{figure}
The PBT service is a black-box model training service which jointly optimizes hyperparameters and model parameters. Instead of asking a worker to make decisions on its own, we turn over all the decision making to a central controller. The workload assigned to each trial becomes a relatively smaller number of training steps and the workers always send requests to the controller (or service) for their next moves. Our PBT service has the following advantages:
\begin{itemize}
\itemsep 0pt
\item Allows for tuning hyperparameters no matter whether they are defined in the computation graph or not.
\item Allows for training a model with both differentiable and non-differentiable objectives.
\item Allows all hyperparameters to be dynamic over time.
\item Sufficient scalability and flexibility in using low priority workers.
\item Maximizes flexibility with the machine learning model training frameworks.
\end{itemize}
We introduce the concepts and major components of the proposed PBT service in the rest of this section.
\subsection{Trial}
A \textit{trial} represents a continuous training session. The configuration of a trial is defined using a protocol buffer (protobuf), which is a critical piece of information exchanged frequently among PBT controller, tuner API and the workers.
The main fields in the trial protobuf are parameters and metadata where metadata contains information that should not be regarded as hyperparameters. Parameters contain all the hyperparameters of a trial and the metadata stores PBT algorithm related messages. So a trial typically contains the following fields:
\begin{itemize}
\itemsep 0pt
\item \textit{hparams}: The hyperparameters of the training session.
\item \textit{warm\_start\_checkpoint\_path}: An optional field indicating which checkpoint path the training session should start with.
\item \textit{parent\_trial\_id}: An optional field indicating the trial ID of the current trial's parent (where the warm start checkpoint comes from).
\item \textit{initiator\_parent\_trial\_id}: An optional field indicating the trial that initiated the reproduction that results in the current trial. The initiator may not be the real parent of the current trial.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Parameters}
The PBT system supports four types of parameters: integer, floating point, discrete and categorical values. A user should specify flexible hyperparameters at the beginning of a training study. They could also disable the evolution (or mutation) of some parameters. The mutator in the evolution engine refers to this field and skips the mutation of any parameters specified in it.
It is possible some parameters are dependent on other parameters, \textit{e.g.}, learning rate is dependent on the type of optimizer. So essentially, all the parameters are represented using a directed acyclic graph (DAG).
\subsection{Controller}
We follow the algorithm playground design in Vizier and define the following two functions for the population controller, which are elaborated below.
\begin{itemize}
\itemsep 0pt
\item \textsc{GetNewSuggestion}(\textit{trials}, $k$): Return a list of $k$ new trials given all the existing trials. The trials returned from this method are basically determined by the reproduction procedure in the evolution engine. Please see the next section for more details.
\item \textsc{GetEarlyStoppingTrials}(\textit{trials}): Return a list of trials that need to be stopped immediately given all existing trials. This function is useful when we want to kill some running trials and free the resources for other trials. Although not a necessary component, it allows for a more generalized evolution framework.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Initiator Based Evolution}
Evolution algorithms have been extensively studied over the past decades. While there are numerous strategies in the evolution literature, we introduce an initiator based evolution framework. The framework is well aligned with the original PBT algorithm \cite{max-pbt-2017} which implements the explore/exploit operations. Our proposed framework is generic and can be extended to many other evolution approaches. A major advantage of such initiator based approach is that every trial is guaranteed to participate in at least one reproduction procedure. We believe such guarantee is important for evolution with a small population size such as 20. We follow the popular evolution design choice by formulating the fitness of each trial, and defining the reproduction strategy.
\subsubsection{Fitness representation}
The fitness of a trial represents how well a trial performs. A higher fitness leads to higher chance of survival in evolution. We represent the fitness of a trial as a tuple
\begin{equation}
f(\mathbf t) = [f_1(\mathbf t), f_2(\mathbf t), \ldots, f_k(\mathbf t)]
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf t$ is a trial and $f_i$ is the $i$-th fitness evaluation function.
The reason for defining such generalized tuple representation is because many real world applications contain multiple objectives and it is often the case that some objectives (fitnesses) are missing due to noisy or missing data. Representing all objectives into the fitness allows a thorough and robust comparison between trials.
The comparison of two fitness tuples can be defined in different ways for different applications. For multi-objective optimization, a fitness $f_a$ is better than $f_b$ if and only if all elements in $f_a$ are larger than their correspondences in $f_b$. However, the fitness can also be compared with priority, \textit{e.g.}, first compare the first element and then compare the rest only if the first elements are equivalent.
\subsubsection{Reproduction Strategy}
The main reproduction concepts in the proposed initiator based evolution is described as follows.
\paragraph{Initiator.} We define the concept of an \textit{initiator}, which represents a trial that initiates the current reproduction. This is an asymmetric evolution, \textit{i.e.}, when a trial completes, it sends a request to the server to initiate a competition with other population members to decide its next move.
\paragraph{Opponent Selection.} Not every member of the remaining population participates in the competition. We define a selection process which selects the population members in the last $k$ generation as the potential opponents. The value $k$ is empirically set default to 2.
However, it is often the case that the devices in a distributed setting are not homogeneous, \textit{i.e.}, different workers may perform differently. In addition, some parameters of the model may also affect the training and evaluation speed. To relieve such effect, we restrict every trial to only compete with trials in the past $k$ generations (including earlier generations and the same generation as the initiator trial). We justify this design choice through a comparative experiment, which will be described in Section \ref{sec:opponent}.
\paragraph{Parent.} The initiator competes against another trial randomly sampled from the survival pool. The winner is chosen as the parent for the current reproduction.
So essentially every population member participates in a binary tournament once and only once. This is also known as \textit{binary tournament selection}.
\paragraph{Reproduction.} A new trial (or child) is generated based on the selected parent through a procedure called \textit{reproduction}.
A typical reproduction procedure contains crossover (\textit{aka.} recombination) and mutation. However, the vanilla PBT algorithm is essentially a single parent evolution without a crossover. The mutation for scalar hyperparameters is to choose a random multiplier, either 0.8 or 1.2. In addition, we also implement mutations for categorical and discrete parameters. For categorical parameters, the mutation is equivalent to random sampling. For discrete parameters, we restrict the parameter to mutate to either the lowest larger element or the largest lower element \textit{w.r.t.} the current value.
\subsection{Worker}
A worker represents one training process that is composed of a trainer and an evaluator. Figure \ref{fig:worker} shows an illustration of how the worker works. After a worker finishes its job, \textit{i.e.}, when the evaluator has evaluated the final checkpoint in the model directory, a worker will request a new trial suggestion from the PBT server.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.85\linewidth]{worker.pdf}
\caption{System diagram of a worker. A worker is composed of a trainer and an evaluator which are synchronized. The trainer receives messages such as warm start checkpoint path and hyperparameters from the PBT service and the evaluator sends messages about the measurements (objective values) and checkpoint paths back to the service.}
\label{fig:worker}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Trainer}
The trainer receives a parent checkpoint path and hyperparameters from the PBT service. The trainer constructs the model architecture using the given hyperparameters as if it were a vanilla training session. The parent checkpoint is restored into the corresponding variables when the model is constructed. This is why the PBT service design is a black-box approach -- the model training procedure does not require knowledge of PBT and the PBT system does not need to know about the internals of model training. The only addition to the trainer is the checkpoint warm starting before the training session starts.
\subsubsection{Warm-start.}
In usual cases, the warm-starting procedure can be done using checkpoint restoring such as \textit{tf.train.Saver.restore}\footnote{\url{https://www.tensorflow.org/guide/saved\_model}} in TensorFlow. However, there are cases where a hyperparameter affects the architecture of the neural network and a typical checkpoint restore method usually does not support. In those cases, we use a smart saver\footnote{A similar implementation example can be found in \url{https://github.com/yk/tensorflow-optimistic-restore-saver}} which analyzes the correspondence between a checkpoint and the model architecture using their variable names and only restores matched variables.
\subsubsection{Evaluator}
The evaluator conducts continuous evaluation of the checkpoints in the model directory of the corresponding trial.
Every checkpoint evaluation will report a measurement back to the PBT service, together with the checkpoint path. A final checkpoint has to be kept because it may serve for warm starting a future child trial.
\subsection{Garbage Collection}
A potential issue of large population based training is the exploding size of saved checkpoints. Although one training session can specify automatic garbage collection, as the total number of parallel workers increases, the total number of checkpoints can still be a significant number. We implement a global garbage collection as an option to work together with training jobs. It periodically reads all trial protobufs from the tuner's database, identifies all checkpoints that have already been evaluated and removes these checkpoints from the storage. The client can optionally keep the last checkpoint in every training job since they might be used for serving purposes.
\begin{algorithm}[!tb]
\caption{PBT trial suggestion \textsc{GetNewSuggestion} function.}
\label{alg:example}
\begin{algorithmic}
\STATE {\bfseries Input:} population size $population\_size$, all completed and pending trials $trials$.
\IF{ $\textsc{LastCompleteGeneration}(trials)==0$}
\STATE $child=\textsc{SampleTrial}()$;
\ELSE
\STATE $initiator=\textsc{GetOldestUninitated}(trials)$;
\STATE $opponents=\textsc{SelectOpponents}(initiator,trials)$;
\STATE $child=\textsc{Reproduce}(initiator, opponents)$;
\ENDIF
\STATE \textbf{return} $child$;
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Budget Mode}
The PBT algorithm requires a number of parallel workers to perform model training at the same time. However, it is often difficult to obtain sufficient devices available for a large number of workers at the same time. The proposed service also handles such cases by simulating the evolution with a large generation size using a small number of workers. This is called the \textit{budget} mode.
The budget mode is implemented in a straightforward way by always picking the oldest trial that has not yet initiated any reproduction and only starting a reproduction when the initiator's generation has reached the specified population size. Please note that the budget mode will also be a synchronized evolution when there is only one worker.
\subsection{Training Replay}
Population based training is more effective when using a large population size, which results in a large number of model snapshots with their hyperparameter trajectories. The best performing snapshot is often used for serving purpose. However, there is often a need to re-train the same model on a slightly different set of data. Re-training using a large population again and again may not be the optimal choice. We implement a feature called \textit{training replay}, which extracts and performs the same training procedure (trial dependency and hyperparameter trajectory).
\subsubsection{Subset Training Replay.} The PBT training replay also allows to replay a set of trials in any existing training study. This feature can be useful when a user wants to extract multiple models from the whole population. A particular use case is for model ensemble.
\subsubsection{Trial Dependency Graph.} All the trials are dependent on each other except the initial ones. The training replay requires to extract the dependency graph of a certain final trial in order to perform the same training procedure. This dependency graph is directed acyclic because all the trials are trained over time -- it is impossible for old trials to warm start from a new trial's checkpoint. So the dependency graph can be extracted by traversing the final trial node to an ancestor. A topological sort is performed to enforce the trial dependency into the execution order.
\subsection{Training Recovery}
The PBT service is a stateless service which allows to seamlessly recover a paused or faulty training procedure. The status of all pending trials should be marked as stopped before resuming the PBT training. All of the trial information is passed into the controller as usual and the controller can return new trial suggestions for those trials that have not initiated a reproduction.
\section{Case Study: WaveNet}
While the effectiveness of Population Based Training has been demonstrated by \citet{max-pbt-2017} with a variety of applications such as neural machine translation, generative adversarial networks and reinforcement learning in DM-Lab, Starcraft, etc, we present in this paper a new application of PBT on speech synthesis using WaveNet, to conduct analysis on both accuracy and performance of the proposed PBT system.
\subsection{WaveNet for Human Voice Synthesis}
WaveNet is the state-of-the-art deep generative neural network in modeling raw audio waveforms \cite{wavenet}. The basic building block of a WaveNet is dilated causal convolution. A dilated convolution layer applies convolution with skipped input units which leads to an increased reception field of the convolution without any additional computation costs.
\subsubsection{Dataset.}
We evaluate our system using a public speech dataset, namely LibriSpeech \cite{Panayotov2015LibrispeechAA}. The dataset contains $1000$ hours of English reading speech and is split into training, validation and evaluation sets. We use the training and validation set for all model training.
\subsubsection{Setup.}
We train all models using Tesla P100 GPU cards. Each worker contains one trainer and one evaluator where the evaluator continuously evaluates the latest checkpoints in the trial's directory and reports the objective values to the PBT service.
All trainers have 1 chief GPU worker, 16 GPU workers and 2 parameter servers. The model uses Adam optimizer with exponential moving average on the model weights. The only flexible parameter is learning rate.
\subsection{Approaches}
We compare our PBT service against several popular hyperparameter tuning approaches on the LibriSpeech dataset. All approaches are summarized below:
\begin{itemize}
\itemsep 0pt
\item \textit{Grid Search}: 5 parallel trainers covering a discrete set of learning rates $[0.1, 0.01, 0.001, 0.0001, 0.00001]$. Each one is trained with $1000000$ steps.
\item \textit{GP-Bandit} \cite{gpbandit}: Gaussian Process Bandit with 5 parallel trainers covering a continuous range of learning rate $[10^{-5}, 10^{-1}]$ with logarithm scale. Each trial is trained with $10000$ steps.
\item \textit{CMA-ES} \cite{CMAES}: A method based on covariance matrix adaptation evolution strategy with 5 parallel trainers covering a continuous range of learning rate $[10^{-5}, 10^{-1}]$ with logarithm scale. Each trial is trained with $10000$ steps. However, this method does not utilize warm-starting like PBT.
\item \textit{PBT-5x5}: 5 parallel trainers for a population of size 5, covering a continuous range of learning rate $[10^{-5}, 10^{-1}]$ with logarithm scale. Each trial is trained with $1000$ steps.
\item \textit{PBT-5x20}: 5 parallel trainers using the budget mode simulating a population of size 20, covering a continuous range of learning rate $[10^{-5}, 10^{-1}]$ with logarithm scale. Each trial is trained with $1000$ steps.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Convergence}
\subsubsection{Resource vs. accuracy.} To perform a fair comparison among different methods, we plot the objective values on different computation resources (total number of workers times the number of steps per worker). Please note each worker contains a trainer using 17 GPUs and an evaluator using another single GPU which adds up to a total of 18 GPUs. We did not use the actual time since there is variability in the time consumption due to factors such as disk and CPU congestion. We show the comparison in Figure \ref{fig:fair-compare}. Interestingly, PBT-5x5 outperforms all other methods including PBT-5x20. The reason why PBT-5x5 converges faster than PBT-5x20 is because using 5 workers to simulate a population size of 20 slows down the progress of generation by a factor of around 4. So the actual number of model training steps given the same resource limit is much lower in PBT-5x20. Please see Section \ref{sec:perf} for more details on the performance.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{resource-vs-obj.png}
\caption{Objective value vs. Resource: Resources are defined as the number of workers (each uses 18 GPUs) times the number of training steps performed on each worker. All methods use 5 parallel workers. Lower objective values are better.}
\label{fig:fair-compare}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Continuing the training.} One often uses a fixed computational budget to perform hyperparameter tuning and pick the best set of hyperparameters to continue training the model. We show in this section that PBT can also be effective in a similar fashion, \textit{i.e.}, performing an initial joint optimization with a dynamic schedule of parameters and extend the training with the last (or best) set of hyperparameters. Specifically, we continue the training for all methods by taking the best checkpoint at resource 200K from Figure \ref{fig:fair-compare} and its corresponding hyperparameters. The best found learning rate in Grid search is $0.0001$, GP-Bandit $0.000329653$ and CMA-ES $0.000266482$. The learning rate at the best checkpoint in PBT-5x5 is $0.000114267$ and in PBT-5x20 is $0.000293463$. The comparison is shown in Figure \ref{fig:continuetrain}. All methods are trained using a single worker so they are essentially still utilizing the same computation budget. It is interesting to observe that although grid search outperforms Bandit, CMA-ES and PBT-5x20 within the initial 200k resource, its objective values quickly lift the highest during the continual training stage. PBT-5x5 consistently outperforms all other methods while PBT-5x20 catches up to second place.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{continue_training.png}
\caption{Continue training on a single worker after 200000 resources exhausted, starting with the best checkpoint and its corresponding hyperparameters. Lower objective values are better.}
\label{fig:continuetrain}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{step-vs-obj.png}
\caption{Objective Value vs. Training Step: PBT with 20 population size outperforms all other methods. PBT with 5 population size performs in the second place, which shows that bigger population benefits the model accuracy. Lower values of the objective are better.}
\label{fig:step-obj}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Step vs. accuracy.} One may also want to reuse the discovered hyperparameters to re-train their models on a same or different dataset. The computation budget of re-training is solely dependent on the training steps. So we also plot the minimum objective values found within a certain number of training steps for all methods. The comparison is shown in Figure \ref{fig:step-obj}. We can see that PBT-5x20 outperforms all other methods including PBT-5x5. The reason why 20 population performs better than 5 population is because a larger population can achieve a higher coverage in the hyperparameter search space. PBT-5x5 is comparable to GP-Bandit while CMA-ES performs slightly worse. Grid search is significantly worse than all other approaches and it fails to find a better hyperparameter. However, it can achieves a larger number of training steps within a fixed budget. That is why grid search performs well in Figure \ref{fig:fair-compare}.
The above results suggest that (1) given a fixed computation budget, a user should use a small population in order to see fast training progress for one-time training scenarios such as model development and debugging; (2) when the initial training budget is flexible and especially when a user expects to re-train the model in future occasions, one should consider using a large population to find an efficient hyperparameter schedule that could be reused.
\subsection{Dynamic hyperparameters}
An important property of population based training is its ability to discover a dynamic set of hyperparameters and train the model with such dynamic schedule at the same time. We extract the best learning rate schedule discovered by all methods for the first $10000$ steps, shown in Figure \ref{fig:pbt-5x20-lr}. We notice that PBT-5x20 finds a more dynamic schedule than PBT-5x5 which implies the fact that large population has better coverage in the hyperparameter search space. Also interestingly, the learning rate in PBT-5x20 went up to $0.000459$ in the first 6 generations ($5000$ steps) and then gradually decreated to $0.00029$. The phenomenon in the first 6 generations is similar to the known ``learning rate warm-up'', also used in training the Transformer network \cite{transformer}.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{learning_rate.png}
\caption{Learning rate schedules found by different approaches.}
\label{fig:pbt-5x20-lr}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{time_cost_breakdown.pdf}
\caption{Time cost breakdown for different methods.}
\label{fig:breakdown}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Performance}\label{sec:perf}
We analyze the performance for different methods in this section. We first show in Figure \ref{fig:breakdown} an illustration about the processes that every method needs to go through.
\subsubsection{Computation breakdown.} The grid search approach needs (1) the worker to do a Remote Procedure Call (RPC) to the server, (2) the service to pick one discrete hyperparameter, (3) the service to return the hyperparameter to the worker through RPC, (4) the worker to setup training, (5) the worker to perform training and (6) the last finish-up procedure.
The GP-Bandit, CMA-ES and PBT methods need an additional process which returns the evaluation measurements to the service through RPC. And the PBT approach needs one more procedure which is the worker to warm start from a given checkpoint specified by the PBT service. So essentially, the PBT service has little additional computation on the worker side.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{time_per_trial.png}
\caption{The average time (seconds) per step varies when the number of steps per trial increases. PBT is slightly more expensive than GP-Bandit at the same number of steps ($+0.023s$ @ 1K and $+0.028s$ @10K), probably due to the extra warm-starting. The shaded area represents the $95\%$ confidence interval.}
\label{fig:avg_steptime}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Overhead.} It is important to notice that the PBT method uses $1000$ steps for each trial, which can produce overhead in the other components. So we compare the performance using the averaged time cost per step. The result is shown in Figure \ref{fig:avg_steptime}. The figure shows that the per-step time decreases as the number of steps of a trial increases. This implies that the initialization of a trial is the most expensive part. We found that PBT is slightly more costly (roughly $+0.025$ seconds) than GP-Bandit in every configuration. This is probably due to the additional warm starting at the beginning.
\subsection{Sensitivity}\label{sec:sensitivity}
Another important aspect of model training is its sensitivity to randomization. The same model can be trained multiple times. A stable performance is often desirable. We compare PBT with random search on their performance stability across different runs. Random search can also be seen as a special case of PBT where the number of training steps in each trial is infinite.
Figure \ref{fig:sensitivity} shows the standard errors of the mean (SEM) objective values at different resource level. The results are computed over five runs of either methods. The figure suggests that PBT is consistently more stable than random search across different runs.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{sensitivity.pdf}
\caption{Sensitivity analysis: comparing the standard errors of the mean objective between random search and PBT. The results are computed over 5 runs for each method. Lower value means less sensitivity.}
\label{fig:sensitivity}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Scalability}
As we mentioned above, the population size can affect accuracy and performance in PBT. We conducted a study on how the performance varies with a different population size. We show in Figure \ref{fig:popsize-vs-gen} the average time (hours) for PBT to reach a certain generation number. The result shows that PBT with population size 20 costs roughly 3x the computation of PBT with population size 5 (theoretically it should be 4x but there are some variation in the real cluster environment). We further plot the number of generations progressed per hour under different population sizes in Figure \ref{fig:popsize-vs-gen-per-hour} and different number of workers in Figure \ref{fig:worker-vs-gen-per-hour}. Both results suggest a nearly linear scalability of our system.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{gentime-vs-popsize.png}
\caption{Population size vs. the average time (hours) to reach a certain generation in the budget mode of population based training. The number of real workers for both is 5.}
\label{fig:popsize-vs-gen}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\subfigure[\label{fig:popsize-vs-gen-per-hour}]{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{genperhour-vs-popsize.png}~~~}
\subfigure[\label{fig:worker-vs-gen-per-hour}]{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{gen_per_hour_vs_worker.png}~~~}
\caption{Scalability: The number of progressed generations per hour vs (a) varying population size or (b) varying worker number of population based training. In (a), the number of (real) workers is 5. In (b), the population size is 20. The error represents the $95\%$ confidence interval.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Opponent Selection Strategy}\label{sec:opponent}
To justify the design choice in the proposed evolution framework, we perform a comparison among three opponent selection strategies. The objective values at resource 200K are compared in Figure \ref{fig:opponent-selection}. ``Past generation'' is our design choice which means competing with trials in the earlier generations and same generation. ``Same generation'' means only competing with trials in the same generation. ``Any generation'' allows a trial to compete with future generations. The result suggests that ``past generation'' results in the best performance. A possible reason is because this method relieve the effect of the speed differences in different workers.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{opponent-selection.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of opponent selection strategies using the objective values at resource 200K. Lower is better.}
\label{fig:opponent-selection}
\end{figure}
\iffalse
\subsection{Stability of PBT}
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{Stability of PBT training using 20 asynchronous population members vs. random search using 20 parallel workers. The error represents the $95\%$ confidence interval. All models are trained using the Momentum optimizer. Learning rate is the only flexible hyperparameter.}
\label{table:pbt-stability}
\begin{center}
\begin{sc}
\resizebox{0.99\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{lcccr}
\toprule
Data set & Training & Validation & Evaluation \\
\midrule
PBT $\times1$ & 99.99 & 90.72 & 90.47\\
PBT $\times10$ & - & - & -\\
Random $\times1$ & - & 90.03 & -\\
Random $\times10$ & - & - & -\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\end{sc}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.1in
\end{table}
\subsection{Stability of Training Replay}
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{Stability of training replay. The error represents the $95\%$ confidence interval. All models are trained using the Momentum optimizer. Learning rate is the only flexible hyperparameter.}
\label{replay-table}
\begin{center}
\begin{sc}
\resizebox{0.99\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{lcccr}
\toprule
Data set & Training & Validation & Evaluation \\
\midrule
PBT $\times1$ & 99.99 & 90.72 & 90.47\\
PBT Replay $\times10$ & 99.95$\pm$0.01 & 90.97$\pm$ 0.10& 90.44$\pm$0.14 \\
Random $\times1$ & - & 90.03 & -\\
Random Replay $\times10$ & - & - & - \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\end{sc}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.1in
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{Training with flexible optimizer and learning rate. The error represents the $95\%$ confidence interval. All models are trained using the Momentum optimizer.}
\label{table:pbt-opt}
\begin{center}
\begin{sc}
\resizebox{0.99\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{lcccr}
\toprule
Data set & Training & Validation & Evaluation \\
\midrule
PBT opt $\times1$ & - & 91.89 & - \\
Random opt$\times1$ & - & 89.93 & -\\
Human $\times10$ & - & 92.34$\pm$0.15 & - \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\end{sc}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.1in
\end{table}
\fi
\section{Related Work}
\subsection{Hyperparameter Optimization}
Hyperparameter optimization is a critical step in most machine learning systems \cite{NIPS2011_hyper}. Over the past years, there have been a variety of algorithms proposed to automatically tune hyperparameters of a machine learning model including Grid search, Random search \cite{randomsearch}, Bayesian optimization \cite{Snoek:bayesian}, Gradient-based optimization \cite{gradient-hparam}, Bandits \cite{Li2017HyperbandAN} and Evolutionary algorithms \cite{CMAES}.
Population based training \cite{max-pbt-2017} is the core algorithm of our service. Our implementation is different from the original paper in that the workers are not allowed to access the measurements of other workers and mutation decisions are not made inside the worker process. The advantage of our black-box design is that it allows a user to train using PBT with minimal infrastructure changes.
Google Vizier \cite{vizier} is the most related system which is a hyperparameter tuning service. A user receives trial information from the Vizier service, training with the specified hyperparameters and returning the measurements to the service. PBT service inherits the service design from Vizier while exntending to require the trainers to always warm start from a given checkpoint path.
In addition, the PBT service is a distributed model training service whose purpose is broader than just hyperparameter tuning. PBT is a joint learning process that combines both hyperparameter search and model training into one single loop. So the outcome of PBT is not only a hyperparameter schedule but also a set of high performing models. A user can either choose the existing best model checkpoint for serving or extract the best hyperparameter schedule to perform other training procedures.
\subsection{AutoML via Asynchronous Evolution}
Evolution algorithms, naturally distributed, have been widely applied to a variety of applications at scale. For hyperparameter tuning in machine learning models, the covariance matrix adaptation evolution strategy (CMA-ES) has been popular \cite{FRIEDRICHS2005107, CMAES}.
Recently, large scale distributed evolution has proven effective in the neural architecture search problem. \citet{pmlr-v70-real17a} is probably the first to apply the evolution framework into large scale neural architecture search. More recently, \citet{amoebanet} introduced a simple regularization to the asynchronous evolution framework, which removes population members according to their ages and produces appealing results in searching image classifier architectures.
Most of the existing evolution based machine learning systems do not full exploit the idea of warm-starting which is a core component in the PBT system design. Warm-starting a model training allows for the transfer of existing knowledge gained in previously trained models and enables efficient hyperparameter search.
\section{Conclusion}
We presented a black-box service framework for Population Based Training. The proposed service design allows clients to train their models using PBT with minimal infrastructure effort, \textit{i.e.}, the only requirement of applying PBT to an existing training framework is to warm start the model from a checkpoint and report the measure back to the PBT server. We discussed several useful features in our PBT system such as training replay, training recovery, garbage collection, and budget mode. We conducted a case study of our system in WaveNet human speech synthesis and demonstrated that our PBT system produces superior accuracy and performance compared to other popular hyperparameter tuning methods. Moreover, the PBT system is able to directly train a model using the discovered dynamic set of hyperparameters while traditional methods can only tune static parameters. In addition, we show that the proposed PBT framework is feasible for large scale deep neural network training.
\section*{Acknowledgement}
The authors would like to thank Alexander Vostrikov, Ali Razavi, Andy Bodart, Ben Coppin, Daniel Golovin, Daniel Visentin, Eddie Kessler, Eli Bixby, Gabriel Doliner, Harish Chandran, Joyce Chen, Karen Simonyan, Mariam Doliashvili, Matthieu Devin, Maxim Krikun, Michelle Gong, Oriol Vinyals, Salem Haykal, Sibon Li, Simon Osindero, Todd Hester, Tom Walters, Vivek Ramavajjala, Zhe Zhao, Zora Tang and many other colleagues in Alphabet for their meaningful discussions and contributions.
\bibliographystyle{ACM-Reference-Format}
|
\section{Introduction}
Almost-Grassmannian structures belong to the class of \emph{irreducible parabolic geometries} (also called \emph{almost-Hermitian symmetric} structures), which include projective and conformal structures, among many others. An \emph{$(m,n)$-almost-Grassmannian structure} on an $mn$-dimensional manifold $M$ comprises a vector bundle isomorphism of $TM$ with $\mathcal{E}^* \otimes \mathcal{F}$, where $\mathcal{E}$ and $\mathcal{F}$ are vector bundles over $M$ of respective ranks $m$ and $n$, together with an isomorphism $\wedge^m \mathcal{E} \cong \wedge^n \mathcal{F}$; the latter corresponds to a volume form compatible with the tensor product. Denote $\text{Gr}(m,n)$ the real Grassmannian variety of $m$-planes in ${\bf R}^{m+n}$, by $\mathcal{E}$ its tautological $m$-plane bundle, and by $\mathcal{F}$ the rank-$n$ anti-tautological bundle. An $(m,n)$-almost-Grassmannian structure mimics the isomorphism of $T \text{Gr}(m,n)$ with $\mathcal{E}^* \otimes \mathcal{F}$.
Almost-Grassmannian structures have been studied under the guise of \emph{Segr\'e structures}. The \emph{Segr\'e cone} $S(m,n)$ is the variety in ${\bf R}^{mn}$ comprising the rank-one elements under the identification with $\text{Hom}({\bf R}^m, {\bf R}^n)$.
An $(m,n)$-Segr\'e structure on $M^{mn}$ is a bundle of Segr\'e cones $S_x(m,n) \subset T_x M$. It is essentially equivalent to an $(m,n)$-almost Grassmannian structure (see \cite{akivis.goldberg.ag.structures}).
In the special case $m=n=2$, when $\dim M =4$, an almost-Grassmannian structure
is equivalent to a conformal spin structure of split signature
$(2,2)$. In fact, $(2,n)$-almost-Grassmannian structures in many respects can be
viewed as higher-dimensional analogs of signature-$(2,2)$ conformal
geometry, which is one of the reasons for the interest in them. Torsion-free $(2,n)$-almost-Grassmannian structures correspond to
(anti-)self-dual conformal structures.
There is a close relation between
$(2,n)$-almost Grassmannian structures and almost quaternionic structures (see
\cite{salamon.quaternionic}). They can be viewed as different real forms of the same complex
geometry.
Finally, $(2,n)$-almost-Grassmannian structures are connected to projective
structures by twistor theory via \emph{path geometries}. The latter are parabolic
geometries that model systems of second-order ODEs. More precisely, they correspond
to collections of unparametrized curves $\mathcal{C}$ in a manifold $X$ obtained as
the solutions of such a system; these lift to a foliation $\widetilde{\mathcal{C}}$
of the projectivized tangent bundle ${\bf P}(TX)$.
For one special class of path geometries, $\mathcal{C}$ are the unparametrized
geodesics of an affine connection on $M$---that is, a projective structure
,---while for another class, the \emph{path space} ${\bf P}(TX) /
\widetilde{\mathcal{C}}$ locally inherits a $(2,n)$-almost Grassmannian structure
. The intersection of the two classes is the \emph{flat} path geometry, for which
$\mathcal{C}$ comprises projective lines in $X = {\bf RP}^{n+1}$ (see \cite[Secs 2
and 3]{grossman.thesis}).
Irreducible parabolic geometries can admit certain very special automorphisms which fix a point and have trivial derivative at that point, which is then called a \emph{higher-order fixed point}. Note that a semi-Riemannian metric or an affine connection does not admit nontrivial automorphisms with higher-order fixed points. These \emph{strongly essential automorphisms} occur in abundance on the homogeneous model spaces for each parabolic geometry. A structure that is locally equivalent to this model is said to be \emph{flat}. (See
Sections \ref{model} and \ref{sec.auts} below).
Many rigidity results say that a strongly essential flow can occur only in the presence of flatness. Let $x_0$ be a higher-order fixed point.
\begin{itemize}
\item Nagano and Ochiai \cite{nagano.ochiai.proj} proved for a torsion-free connection that existence of a strongly essential projective flow implies projective flatness of the connection on a neighborhood of $x_0$.
\item The second author and Neusser proved the analogous result for almost-c-projective structures and almost-quaternionic structures in \cite[Thms 4.4, 1.2]{mn.1graded}. (See also \cite[Thm 3.7]{cap.me.parabolictrans} for a precursor result on almost-quaternionic structures.)
\end{itemize}
In conformal Lorentzian geometry, Frances smoothly deformed the Minkowski metric in a neighorhood of a point $x_0$ so that it retains a conformal flow with $x_0$ as higher-order fixed point. The resulting $C^\infty$ metric is conformally flat inside the light cone of $x_0$, but nonflat outside \cite[Sec 6]{frances.ccvf}. Then came the following rigidity results:
\begin{itemize}
\item In semi-Riemannian geometry, Frances and the second author proved in \cite{fm.champsconfs} that existence of a strongly essential conformal flow implies conformal flatness on an open set $U$ with $x_0 \in \overline{U}$.
\item In \cite[Thm 1.3]{mn.1graded}, the second author and Neusser proved that a $(2,n)$-almost-Grassmannian structure admitting a strongly essential flow is flat on an open set $U$ with $x_0 \in \overline{U}$ (see also \cite[Prop 3.5]{cap.me.parabolictrans} for a partial result).
\end{itemize}
Kruglikov and The exhibited a $C^\omega$ homogeneous path geometry which is not flat and admits a strongly essential flow in \cite[Prop 5.3.2]{kruglikov.the.submax}. Path geometries are not irreducible. The local path space in their example admits a $(2,n)$-almost-Grassmannian structure. The flow descends, but it is not strongly essential on the quotient.
The proofs of the rigidity theorems cited above, as well as the construction of \cite{kruglikov.the.submax}, make use of the \emph{Cartan geometry} canonically associated to the parabolic geometric structures in question.
This association is only possible with sufficiently high regularity; the minimal order required depends on the structure.
\subsection{Our examples}
In \cite{cap.deformations}, the first author described the infinitesimal automorphisms and deformations of a parabolic geometry intrinsically in terms of the associated Cartan geometry, using the twisted de-Rham sequence of differential froms with coefficients in the adjoint tractor bundle and the corresponding BGG sequence of invariant differential operators. Motivated by this description of infinitesimal deformations, we explicitly construct a family, locally on $\text{Gr}(2,n)$, that is invariant by a strongly essential flow and integrates to a family of deformed structures, all admitting this flow as automorphisms. These show that Theorem 1.3 of \cite{mn.1graded} does not hold assuming only $C^1$ regularity.
An almost-Grassmannian structure is said to be $C^k$ if $M$ is at least $C^{k+1}$; $\mathcal{E}$, $\mathcal{F}$, and the isomorphism $\wedge^m \mathcal{E} \cong \wedge^n \mathcal{F}$ are at least $C^{k+1}$; and the isomorphisms $TM \cong \mathcal{E}^* \otimes \mathcal{F}$ are $C^k$. Such structures are said to be equivalent if they are $C^k$ equivalent (see Section \ref{sec.auts} below).
\begin{theorem}
\label{main.thm}
Let $n\geq 3$ and $x_0 \in \text{Gr}(2,n)$. There are a dense, open neighborhood $U$ of $x_0$; a strongly essential flow $\{z^t\} < \text{Aut } \text{Gr}(2,n)$ with $x_0$ as higher order fixed point; and an $(n-1)$-parameter family of $C^1$ almost-Grassmannian structures of type $(2,n)$ on $U$, of which each:
\begin{itemize}
\item contains $\{z^t \}$ in its automorphism group;
\item is not locally equivalent to $\text{Gr}(2,n)$ on any open set $V$ with $x_0 \in \overline{V}$;
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
The deformations are given in Section \ref{sec.endo.section}, and the precise claims about them are in Proposition \ref{main.prop}.
\begin{remark}
In fact, none of these deformed structures are locally equivalent to the path space of a path geometry; the harmonic torsion is the full obstruction to this property (see \cite[Props 4.4.3, 4.4.45]{cap.slovak.book.vol1}).
\end{remark}
\section{Background}
\subsection{Almost-Grassmannian structures as first-order $G$-structures}\label{AGr}
For almost-Grassmannian structures of low regularity, as we construct below, the description as Cartan geometries is not
available. Thus we start by reviewing various descriptions of such structures with a
special emphasis on the requirements on regularity.
Let us fix integers $m,n\geq 2$ as above,
with the
case $m=2$, $n>2$ being of primary interest.
An almost-Grassmannian structure as defined above can be equivalently defined as a (first-order)
G-structure for the Lie group
$$
G_0:=\{(A,B)\in\text{GL}(m,{\bf R})\times\text{GL}(n,{\bf R}):\det(A)\det(B)=1\}.
$$
Under the identification ${\bf R}^{mn} \cong \text{Hom}({\bf R}^m,{\bf R}^n)$,
the natural representation of $G_0$ on ${\bf R}^{mn}$ is
$\rho(A,B)\cdot X:=BXA^{-1}$. Observe that the resulting homomorphism $G_0\to \text{GL}(mn,{\bf R})$
has two element kernel $\{(\text{Id},\text{Id}),(-\text{Id},-\text{Id})\}$ and thus is infinitesimally
injective, so this indeed defines a type of
first-order G-structures on
manifolds of dimension $mn$.
Such a structure is
given by a principal bundle $p_0:\mathcal{G}_0\to M$ with structure group $G_0$
together with a $\rho$-equivariant bundle morphism to the first order frame bundle $\Cal PM$ of $M$.
The structure is $C^k$ provided $\Cal{G}_0$ is a $C^{k+1}$ principal bundle and the morphism to $\Cal PM$ is $C^k$.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:G-str}
On a smooth manifold of dimension $mn$, a $C^k$ first-order $G_0$-structure is equivalent
to a $C^k$ almost-Grassmannian structure of type $(m,n)$.
\end{proposition}
The proof is standard; we give the main points. The bundles $\Cal E^*$ and $\Cal F$ are
associated bundles
to $\Cal G_0$, while conversely $\Cal G_0$ is obtained as a subbundle of the
fibered product of the frame bundles of $\Cal E^*$ and $\Cal F$. This shows that a $\rho$-equivariant bundle morphism
from $\Cal G_0$ to $\Cal P M$ is equivalent to an isomorphism $TM \stackrel{\sim}{\to} \Cal E^*\otimes
\Cal F$, and the correspondence respects $C^k$ regularity.
A $\rho$-equivariant bundle morphism $\Cal G_0\to\Cal PM$ can be
equivalently encoded as a one-form $\theta\in\Omega^1(\Cal G_0,{\bf R}^{mn})$
which is $G_0$--equivariant and strictly horizontal. Denoting by
$r^g:\Cal G_0\to\Cal G_0$ the principal action of $g\in G_0$, equivariance
means $(r^g)^*\theta= \rho(g)^{-1}\o\theta$.
The second condition says that for each point
$u\in\Cal G_0$, the kernel of $\theta(u):T_u\Cal G_0\to{\bf R}^{mn}$ is the vertical
subspace in $T_u \Cal G_0$.
In this picture,
$C^k$ regularity means $\theta$ is $C^k$, in the sense that for each
$C^k$ vector field $\xi\in\frak X(\Cal G_0)$, the function
$\theta(\xi):\Cal G_0\to{\bf R}^{mn}$ is $C^k$.
\subsection{The homogeneous model---the Grassmann variety}\label{model}
In this section we describe the $(m,n)$-almost-Grassmannian structure on $\text{Gr}(m,n)$.
The group $G_0$ can be realized as the subgroup of $G:=\text{SL}(m+n,{\bf R})$ respecting the decomposition ${\bf R}^{m+n} \cong {\bf R}^m\oplus{\bf R}^n$.
The Lie algebra $\frak g_0$ is identified with the corresponding block diagonal subalgebra of ${\mathfrak{g}}$. Its adjoint action on ${\mathfrak{g}}$ preserves a decomposition ${\mathfrak{g}}={\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}\oplus{\mathfrak{g}}_0\oplus{\mathfrak{g}}_1$, where ${\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}$ and ${\mathfrak{g}}_{1}$ are the subalgebras with nonzero entries only in the lower-left and upper-right blocks, respectively.
The decomposition
satisfies $[{\mathfrak{g}}_i,{\mathfrak{g}}_j]\subset{\mathfrak{g}}_{i+j}$, where we set ${\mathfrak{g}}_k=\{0\}$ for
$|k|>1$.
Note that ${\mathfrak{g}}_{-1} \cong \text{Hom}({\bf R}^m, {\bf R}^n)$, and the restriction of
the adjoint action of elements of $G_0$ to ${\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}$ is the representation $\rho$ from Section \ref{AGr}.
Next, let $P < G$ comprise the
block-upper-triangular matrices,
with Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{p}}:={\mathfrak{g}}_0\ltimes{\mathfrak{g}}_1\subset{\mathfrak{g}}$. It is the
stabilizer of ${\bf R}^m \subset {\bf R}^{m+n}$,
so $G/P$ can be identified with $\text{Gr}(m,n)$.
As is well known, the tangent bundle
$T(G/P)$ is the associated bundle $G \times_P ({\mathfrak{g}} / {\mathfrak{p}})$, where $P$ acts via the adjoint representation, which factors on the quotient ${\mathfrak{g}} / {\mathfrak{p}}$ through projection to $G_0$.
The vector space ${\mathfrak{g}}/{\mathfrak{p}}$ is moreover $G_0$-equivariantly isomorphic to ${\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}$.
Consequently, $\text{Gr}(m,n)$ carries an
almost
Grassmannian structure.
Note that the
auxiliarly bundles $\Cal E \cong G \times_P {\bf R}^m$ and $\Cal F \cong G \times_P ({\bf R}^{m+n}/{\bf R}^m)$ for this structure are exactly the tautological and
the anti-tautological bundles.
\subsection{Automorphisms and flatness}\label{sec.auts}
Let $M$ be a $C^{k+1}$ manifold of dimension $mn$ with a $C^k$ almost-Grassmannian structure comprising
\begin{itemize}
\item $C^{k+1}$ vector bundles $\mathcal{E}$ and $\mathcal{F}$ of ranks $m$ and $n$, respectively
\item $\Theta : TM \stackrel{\sim}{\rightarrow} \mathcal{E}^* \otimes \mathcal{F}$ of regularity $C^k$
\item $\nu : \Lambda^m \mathcal{E} \stackrel{\sim}{\rightarrow} \Lambda^n \mathcal{F}$ of regularity $C^k$
\end{itemize}
\begin{definition} \label{def-aut}
An \emph{automorphism} of the $C^k$ almost-Grassmannian structure above is a $C^{k+1}$ diffeomorphism $h$ of $M$ together with
\begin{itemize}
\item lifts $h_{\mathcal{E}}^*$ and $h_{\mathcal{F}}$ of $h$ to automorphisms of $\mathcal{E}^*$ and $\mathcal{F}$, respectively,
\item such that $h^* \Theta = (h_{\mathcal{E}}^* \otimes h_{\mathcal{F}}) \circ \Theta$, and
\item such that $\nu \circ \Lambda^m h_{\mathcal{E}} = \Lambda^n h_{\mathcal{F}} \circ \nu$
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
In the $G$-structure framework, $h \in \mbox{Diff}^{k+1} M$ is an automorphism if it lifts to a principal bundle automorphism of $\Cal G_0$ which is semi-conjugate via the $\rho$-equivariant bundle morphism $\Cal G_0 \to \mathcal{P}M$ to the natural lift of $h$ to $\mathcal{P}M$.
Isomorphisms of almost-Grassmannian structures are defined by the obvious extension of Definition \ref{def-aut}. Local isomorphisms are isomorphisms between connected open subsets, with their restricted structures.
Consider $g \in G$ as a diffeomorphism of $\text{Gr}(m,n) \cong G/P$. It naturally acts by automorphisms $g_{\mathcal{E}}^*$ and $g_{\mathcal{F}}$ of the vector bundles $\mathcal{E}^* \cong G \times_P {\bf R}^{m*}$ and ${\mathcal{F}} \cong G \times_P ({\bf R}^{m+n}/{\bf R}^m)$, respectively. The $P$-equivariant isomorphism of $\text{Hom}({\bf R}^m,{\bf R}^{m+n}/{\bf R}^m)$ with ${\mathfrak{g}} / {\mathfrak{p}}$ gives a $G$-equivariant isomorphism of $T \text{Gr}(m,n) \cong G \times_P {\mathfrak{g}}/{\mathfrak{p}}$ with $\mathcal{E}^* \otimes \mathcal{F}$, on which $g$ acts by $g_{\mathcal{E}}^* \otimes g_{\mathcal{F}}$. Any $g \in G$ is thus an automorphism of the almost-Grassmannian structure on $\text{Gr}(m,n)$.
Let $P_+$ be the connected, unipotent, normal subgroup of $P$ with Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{g}}_{1}$. For $g \in P_+$, the linear isomorphisms $(g_{\mathcal{E}}^*)_{[\text{Id}_G]}$ and $(g_{\mathcal{F}})_{[\text{Id}_G]}$ are trivial, so the derivative of $g$ on $T_{[\text{Id}_G]} (G/P)$ is trivial. The $G$-conjugates of $P_+$ furnish nontrivial strongly essential automorphisms at every point of $\text{Gr}(m,n)$.
Each $g \in G \backslash \{ \pm \text{Id}_{{\bf R}^{m+n}} \}$ is a nontrivial transformation of $G/P$, because there is no larger $G$-normal subgroup in $P$. Thanks to the canonical Cartan connection associated to an almost-Grassmannian
structure, presented in Section \ref{harm-curv} below, the automorphism group of $\text{Gr}(m,n)$ is precisely $G/\{ \pm \text{Id} \}$. On any almost-Grassmannian manifold (of sufficient regularity),
the Cartan connection underlies the fact that the automorphism group is a Lie group of dimension at most $(m+n)^2-1 = \dim G$, with equality only if the
structure is locally isomorphic to $\text{Gr}(m,n)$, in which case it is said to be \emph{flat}. Deciding whether an almost
Grassmannian structure is flat thus is a fundamental question
in the theory.
\subsection{The harmonic torsion}\label{tors}
The description as a $G_0$-structure $(p_0:\Cal G_0\to M,\theta)$ directly leads to the first fundamental
invariants of almost Grassmannian structures.
We first choose a $C^{k}$ principal connection
$\gamma\in\Omega^1(\Cal G_0,{\mathfrak{g}}_0)$. If $\theta$ is at least $C^1$, we can define the \textit{torsion} of $\gamma$ as the covariant exterior
derivative $d^\gamma\theta\in\Omega^2(\Cal G_0,{\bf R}^{mn})$; explicitly, for $\xi,\eta\in\frak X(\Cal G_0)$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn.dtheta}
d^\gamma\theta(\xi,\eta)=d\theta(\xi,\eta)+\gamma(\xi)(\theta(\eta))-\gamma(\eta)(\theta(\xi)).
\end{equation}
If $\theta$, $\xi$ and $\eta$ are $C^k$, then the above is a $C^{k-1}$ function.
From the properties of $\theta$, it follows readily that $d^\gamma\theta$ is horizontal and
$G_0$-equivariant and thus descends to a form $T^\gamma\in\Omega^2(M,TM)$, which is
the usual interpretation of the torsion.
We next compute the dependence of $T^\gamma$ on $\gamma$. First note that, at a point $u \in \Cal G_0$, (\ref{eqn.dtheta}) depends only on $\gamma_u:T_u\Cal G_0\to{\mathfrak{g}}_0$. As discussed in \ref{model}, we can view $\theta$ as having values in ${\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}$. For any other principal connection $\hat{\gamma}$, the
difference $\hat\gamma_u - \gamma_u$ is given by $f_u \circ\theta_u$ for some linear map
$f_u :{\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}\to{\mathfrak{g}}_0$. The first differential in the cochain complex of ${\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}$ with coefficients in ${\mathfrak{g}}$ restricts on ${\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^* \otimes {\mathfrak{g}}_0$ to the following $G_0$-equivariant linear map:
\begin{equation}
\label{partial1}
\partial_1:{\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^*\otimes{\mathfrak{g}}_0\to\Lambda^2{\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^*\otimes{\mathfrak{g}}_{-1} \qquad (\partial_1f)(w,v) = f(w) v - f(v) w
\end{equation}
For all $u$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn.change.torsion}
T^{\hat\gamma}_u - T^\gamma_u = (\partial_1
f_u) \circ \theta_u.
\end{equation}
The image of $\partial_1$
determines a
smooth subbundle $\Cal A\subset\Lambda^2T^*M\otimes TM$. The projection of $T^\gamma$ to
$(\Lambda^2T^*M\otimes TM)/\Cal A$ is thus independent of the
choice of connection (see \cite[Secs 3.1.10--3.1.13]{cap.slovak.book.vol1}). This invariant of the almost Grassmannian structure is called the \textit{intrinsic torsion} or the \textit{harmonic torsion}.
For $\text{Gr}(m,n)$ it is easy to see that locally
there always are torsion-free connections preserving the structure, so the intrinsic
torsion of the homogeneous model vanishes identically. Thus nonzero intrinsic torsion is an obstruction to local isomorphism of a given
almost Grassmannian structure to $\text{Gr}(m,n)$.
For a $C^1$-structure, it is an
obstruction to local $C^1$-isomorphism to $\text{Gr}(m,n)$ (for which the
corresponding map between the underlying manifolds would be a local $C^2$-diffeomorphism).
We now explicitly describe the subbundle $\Cal A\subset\Lambda^2T^*M\otimes TM$ as a ${\mathfrak{g}}_0$ representation when $m=2$.
Recall that
the representation corresponding to the tangent bundle
$TM$ is ${\mathfrak{g}}_{-1} \cong {\bf R}^{2*}\boxtimes{\bf R}^n$, where the exterior tensor product corresponds to the direct sum decomposition of ${\mathfrak{g}}_0$.
Next we have the decomposition into irreducible
components
\begin{equation}\label{La2-decomp}
\Lambda^2({\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^*)\cong (\Lambda^2{\bf R}^2\boxtimes S^2{\bf R}^{n*})\oplus
(S^2{\bf R}^2\boxtimes\Lambda^2{\bf R}^{n*}).
\end{equation}
We tensor these with ${\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}$ and decompose into irreducibles.
For $k\geq 2$,
the representation $S^2{\bf R}^k\otimes{\bf R}^{k*}$ splits into a trace-free component, denoted
$(S^2{\bf R}^k\otimes{\bf R}^{k*})_0$, and a trace component, isomorphic to ${\bf R}^k$, and similarly
for the dual. There is an analogous decomposition of $\Lambda^2{\bf R}^k\otimes{\bf R}^{k^*}$,
but here the trace-free part is trivial when $k=2$.
For $m=n=2$, the map $\partial_1$ from \eqref{partial1} is
surjective, so
no intrinsic torsion is
available. In our case when $m=2$, $n>2$,
$$(\Lambda^2{\bf R}^2\otimes{\bf R}^{2*})\boxtimes (S^2{\bf R}^{n*}\otimes{\bf R}^n)\subset\Im(\partial_1).$$
The intersection of $\Im(\partial_1)$ with the other irreducible components of $\Lambda^2({\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^*) \otimes {\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}$ is the trace component, which can be written
\begin{equation}
\label{tracep}
{\bf R}^2\boxtimes (\Lambda^2{\bf R}^{n*}\otimes{\bf R}^n)+
(S^2{\bf R}^2\otimes{\bf R}^{2*})\boxtimes{\bf R}^{n*},
\end{equation}
where the factors ${\bf R}^2$ and ${\bf R}^{n*}$ are embedded via a tensor product with $\text{Id}$ followed by a symmetrization and an alternation, respectively. Hence
the harmonic torsion
corresponds to a section of the bundle associated to the remaining irreducible component
$$
\mathbb{T} = (S^2{\bf R}^2\otimes{\bf R}^{2*})_0\boxtimes (\Lambda^2{\bf R}^{n^*}\otimes{\bf R}^n)_0.
$$
To verify non-vanishing harmonic torsion in the example we are going to construct, we
need the following result.
\begin{lemma}\label{harm-tors}
Let $\xi,\eta\in \text{Hom}({\bf R}^2,{\bf R}^n)$ both have
kernel spanned by $0 \neq v\in{\bf R}^2$, and let $T \in \Im(\partial_1)$.
Then
$T(\xi,\eta):{\bf R}^2\to{\bf R}^n$ maps $v$ into the span of the images of
$\xi$ and $\eta$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{Pf}
Take $0 \neq \alpha\in{\bf R}^{2*}$ with $\alpha(v)=0$, so we
can write $\xi=\alpha\otimes w_1$ and $\eta=\alpha\otimes w_2$ for elements
$w_1,w_2\in{\bf R}^n$.
Let $T=T_1+T_2$ be the decomposition of $T$ corresponding to \eqref{La2-decomp}.
Clearly $T_1(\xi,\eta)=0$.
Now decompose $T_2$ according to
\eqref{tracep}
as $T_{21}+T_{22}$ (in a non-unique way). Given $\tilde v\in{\bf R}^2$, embedded in the trace component of $S^2{\bf R}^2\otimes{\bf R}^{2*} \cong \text{Hom}({\bf R}^2,S^2{\bf R}^2)$, it sends $v$ to a multiple
of the symmetric product $v\odot\tilde v$. Since $\xi(v)=\eta(v)=0$, we conclude that
$T_{1}(\xi,\eta)(v)=0$. On the other hand, $\tau\in{\bf R}^{n^*}$, embedded in the trace component of $\Lambda^2{\bf R}^{n*}\otimes{\bf R}^n \cong \text{Hom}(\Lambda^2 {\bf R}^n, {\bf R}^n)$,
sends $(w_1,w_2)$ to a
multiple of $\tau(w_1)w_2-\tau(w_2)w_1$, so all values of $T_{2}(\xi,\eta)$ belong to the span of the images of $\xi$ and $\eta$. The desired conclusion follows.
\end{Pf}
\subsection{Deformations of almost-Grassmannian structures}\label{sec.inf.def}
Given an al\-most-Grassmannian structure with $\theta : TM \stackrel{\sim}{\to} \mathcal{E}^* \otimes \mathcal{F}$, we will construct deformations by post-composing with a continuous family $\{ \Phi_t \}$ of linear automorphisms of $\mathcal{E^*} \otimes \mathcal{F}$. To construct this family, we will first construct endomorphisms, that is, a section $\Phi$ of $\text{End } \mathcal{E}^* \otimes \text{End } \mathcal{F}$ and then show that this exponentiates to a one-parameter family of automorphisms.
At a given point $x \in M$, write $\mathcal{E}_x \cong E$ and $\mathcal{F}_x \cong F$. The vector space automorphisms of $E^* \otimes F$ respecting the tensor product are those of the form $\Psi_{E^*} \otimes \Psi_F$, for $\Psi_{E^*} \in \text{Aut } E^*$ and $\Psi_F \in \text{Aut } F$. Given a one-parameter group of such automorphisms $\Psi^t_{E^*} \otimes \Psi^t_F$, the generating endomorphism has the form $\psi_{E^*} \otimes \text{Id}_F + \text{Id}_{E*} \otimes \psi_F$ for $\psi_{E*} \in \text{End } E^*$ and $\psi_F \in \text{End } F$. The condition $\det \Psi^t_{E^*} \cdot \det \Psi^t_F \equiv 1$ is equivalent to $\text{tr}\ \psi_{E*} + \text{tr}\ \psi_F =0$.
The sections of $\mbox{Aut}(\mathcal{E}^* \otimes \mathcal{F})$ arising from automorphisms of the almost-Grassmannian structure are those of the form $\Psi_{\Cal E^*} \otimes \Psi_{\Cal F}$, for $\Psi_{\Cal E^*} \in \text{Aut } \Cal E^*$ and $\Psi_{\Cal F} \in \text{Aut } {\Cal F}$, with $\nu \circ \Lambda^m \Psi_{\Cal E^*} = \Lambda^n \Psi_{\Cal F} \circ \nu$. The generator of a nontrivial deformation is thus nontrivial modulo $\text{End } \Cal E^* \otimes \text{Id}_{\Cal F} + \text{Id}_{\Cal E^*} \otimes \text{End } \Cal F$. A pointwise complementary subbundle is given by the tensor product of trace-free endomorphisms $\mbox{End}_0 \ \Cal E^* \otimes \mbox{End}_0 \ \Cal F$. We will construct a section of this bundle in Sections \ref{sec.eigen.sections} and \ref{sec.endo.section} below.
The results of \cite{cap.deformations} apply to almost-Grassmannian structures of sufficient regularity to define a Cartan connection (see Section \ref{harm-curv}). Here infinitesimal automorphisms and deformations are described as the kernel and cokernel, respectively, of BGG operators acting on sections of the adjoint tractor bundle, with a certain ``twisted'' linear connection. The infinitesimal change of harmonic torsion and harmonic curvature (for the latter, see Section \ref{harm-curv}) resulting from a given infinitesimal deformation can also be described in general from these operators and this connection. This point of view was the inspiration for the concrete deformations we construct below.
\subsection{Prolongation and the canonical Cartan connection}\label{harm-curv}
We will verify in Section \ref{sec.C2.curvature} that the results of \cite{cap.me.parabolictrans} apply to $C^k$ almost-Grassmannian structures with $k \geq 2$,
so any example of this regularity admitting a strongly essential flow by automorphisms
has vanishing harmonic curvature on an open set containing the higher-order fixed point in its closure. We explain in this section that $(2,n)$-almost Grassmanian structures of regularity $C^k$ with $k\geq 2$ determine a canonical $C^0$ Cartan connection as well as $C^0$ harmonic curvature. In low regularity, general existence results do not apply, so we briefly sketch the explicit constructions, following \cite{css.ahs2}.
\subsubsection{Construction of the prolongation}
Given a $C^k$ almost Grassmannian structure $(p_0:\Cal G_0\to M,\theta)$ of type $(2,n)$, we will prolong $\Cal G_0$ to a $C^{k-1}$ principal $P$-bundle $\mathcal{G} \to M$.
To this end, we view ${\mathfrak{g}}_0$ as a subalgebra of $\text{End } {\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}$.
The kernel $\ker(\partial_1)$ of the differential from (\ref{partial1}) is the subspace of ${\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^*\otimes{\mathfrak{g}}_0 \subset {\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^* \otimes {\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^* \otimes {\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}$ of elements symmetric in ${\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^*$, which is precisely the \emph{first prolongation} of ${\mathfrak{g}}_0$ (see \cite[I.1]{kobayashi.transf}). It is isomorphic to
${\mathfrak{g}}_1$, embedded into ${\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^*\otimes{\mathfrak{g}}_0$ via the adjoint representation.
The bundle $\Cal G$ is constructed as a ${\mathfrak{g}}_1$-bundle over $\Cal G_0$. Note that $P \cong G_0 \ltimes {\mathfrak{g}}_1$.
Given $u_0\in\Cal G_0$,
denote by $V_{u_0} \Cal G_0\subset T_{u_0}\Cal G_0$
the vertical subspace, so $\theta_{u_0}$ defines a linear isomorphism
$T_{u_0}\Cal G_0/V_{u_0}\Cal G_0\to{\bf R}^{2n}$. Recall from Section \ref{tors} that (\ref{eqn.dtheta}) depends at $u_0$ only on the value $\gamma_{u_0}$ of a chosen principal connection. Let $u : T_{u_0}\Cal G_0 \to{\mathfrak{g}}_0$ be any linear
map recognizing fundamental vector fields---that is $u(\zeta_A(u_0)) = A\in{\mathfrak{g}}_0$ for $\zeta_A(u_0) = \left. \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t}\right|_0 u_0. e^{tA}$. Now $d \theta_{u_0} + [u,\theta_{u_0}]$ vanishes when either input is in $V_{u_0}\Cal G_0$,
so it equals $\theta_{u_0}^* T_u$ for
a unique map
$T_u\in\Lambda^2{\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^*\otimes{\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}$.
Varying the choice of $u$ yields, as in Section \ref{tors},
the affine subspace $T_u+\Im(\partial_1)$;
moreover, the trace-free subspace
$\mathbb{T} = (S^2{\bf R}^{2*}\otimes{\bf R}^2)_0\boxtimes (\Lambda^2{\bf R}^n\otimes{\bf R}^{n*})_0$ is a $G_0$-invariant
complement to $\Im(\partial_1)$. Thus for each point $u_0\in\Cal G_0$, the linear map $u$ can be chosen
such that $T_u$ is totally trace-free. For a fixed $u_0$ and $T \in \mathbb{T}$, the space of linear maps $u$ giving rise via $\theta_{u_0}$ to $T$ is, according to (\ref{eqn.change.torsion}), an affine space modeled on $\ker \partial_1 \cong {\mathfrak{g}}_{1}$.
Explicitly,
any two such maps differ according to $\hat u - u = \mbox{ad}_Z \circ \theta_{u_0} \in {\mathfrak{g}}_0$, for a unique
element $Z\in{\mathfrak{g}}_1$.
Now $\Cal G$ is the family of maps $u$ as above for which $T_u \in \mathbb{T}$, as $u_0 $ varies over $\Cal G_0$. Denote $q$ the projection $\Cal G \to \Cal G_0$.
We can realize $\Cal G$ as a subspace of the vector bundle $T^*\Cal G_0\otimes{\mathfrak{g}}_0\to\Cal G_0$
defined as above in terms of $\theta$ and $d\theta$, which is $C^{k-1}$;
it follows that $\Cal G$ is a $C^{k-1}$ submanifold here.
Elementary representation theory gives a $G_0$-equivariant linear map
$S:\Lambda^2{\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^*\otimes{\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}\to{\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^*\otimes{\mathfrak{g}}_0$ which vanishes on
$\mathbb{T}$ and such that $\partial_1\o S$ is the projection to
$\Im(\partial_1)$. From a $C^{k-1}$ principal connection on $\Cal G_0$, one can use $S$ to modify it to a $C^{k-1}$ principal connection
$\gamma$ with $\gamma_{u_0} \in \Cal G$ for all $u_0 \in \Cal G_0$; connections of this type correspond to local $C^{k-1}$ sections of $q$.
Now $q:\Cal G\to\Cal G_0$ is a $C^{k-1}$ principal $P_+$-bundle, and $p:=p_0\o q:\Cal G\to M$ is a $C^{k-1}$
principal $P$-bundle
(see \cite{css.ahs2} for more details).
\subsubsection{Harmonic curvature and Cartan connection}
\label{sec.curv.and.connxn}
Construction of the Cartan connection on $\Cal G$ entails, by analogy with the prolongation process of the previous section, finding canonical ${\mathfrak{g}}_1$-valued one-forms on $\Cal G$, which turn out to be unique. There are tautological forms $\theta_{-1} + \theta_0$, where $\theta_{-1}:=q^*\theta$ and $(\theta_0)_u:= q^* u$, viewing $u \in \text{Hom}(T_{q(u)} \Cal G_0,{\mathfrak{g}}_0)$.
It is easy to see that
$(\theta_0)_u(\zeta_A)=A$ for all $A\in{\mathfrak{g}}_0$,
and that $\theta_{-1} + \theta_0$ is $P$-equivariant once
${\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}\oplus{\mathfrak{g}}_0$ is identified with ${\mathfrak{g}}/{\mathfrak{g}}_1$.
Assuming that $\theta$ is at least $C^2$, the form $\theta_0$ is at least
$C^1$, so we can form its exterior derivative $d\theta_0 \in \Omega^2(\Cal G, {\mathfrak{g}}_0)$.
Let
$\phi:T_u\Cal G\to{\mathfrak{g}}_1$ be a linear map satisfying
$\phi(\zeta_{A+Z}(u))=Z$ on the fundamental vector fields for $A+Z\in {\mathfrak{g}}_0\ltimes{\mathfrak{g}}_1 \cong {\mathfrak{p}} $.
As before,
\begin{equation}\label{K_u}
(d \theta_0)_u + \frac{1}{2} [ (\theta_0)_u, (\theta_0)_u ] + [\phi,(\theta_{-1})_u]
\end{equation}
vanishes if either input is in $V_u \Cal G$ (the vertical bundle for $p : \Cal G \to M$), so
it equals $(\theta_{-1})^* K_\phi$ for a linear map
$K_\phi:\Lambda^2{\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}\to{\mathfrak{g}}_0$.
For another choice $\hat{\phi}$, the difference is
$\hat\phi - \phi = f \circ (\theta_{-1})_u$ for some linear map
$f\in{\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^*\otimes{\mathfrak{g}}_1$. Another grading component of our Lie algebra differential,
$\partial_2:{\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^*\otimes{\mathfrak{g}}_1\to\Lambda^2{\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^*\otimes{\mathfrak{g}}_0$, is a $G_0$--equivariant linear map for which $K_{\hat\phi}-K_\phi=\partial_2(f)$.
Projection modulo the subbundle $\mathcal{B} \subset \Lambda^2T^*\Cal G\otimes{\mathfrak{g}}_0$ determined by $\Im(\partial_2)$ yields another invariant:
given a local principal connection $\gamma$ on $\Cal G_0$ for which $\gamma_{u_0} \in \Cal G$ for all $u_0$ in the domain, and a locally defined $\phi \in \Omega^1(\Cal G, {\mathfrak{g}}_1)$, smooth of class $C^{k-1}$,
one obtains a $C^{k-1}$ section of $(\Lambda^2T^*\Cal G\otimes{\mathfrak{g}}_0) / \mathcal{B}$ called the \textit{harmonic curvature} of the geometry. This can be
recovered as a component of the curvature of any adapted connection.
Now, it can be shown that $\partial_2$ is injective, and that there is a
natural $G_0$--invariant complement $\mathbb{K}$ to $\Im(\partial_2)$. Hence for each $u\in\Cal G$, there
is a unique $\phi$ such that $K_\phi \in \mathbb{K}$. We obtain $\theta_1\in\Omega^1(\Cal G,{\mathfrak{g}}_1)$ of class $C^{k-2}$, and a $C^{k-2}$ Cartan connection
$\omega=\theta_{-1}\oplus\theta_0\oplus\theta_1 \in \Omega^1(\Cal G, {\mathfrak{g}})$.
Note that when $k \geq 3$, the Cartan curvature can be defined by
$K=d\omega+ \frac{1}{2} [\omega,\omega] \in \Omega^2(\Cal G,{\mathfrak{g}})$,
and the harmonic torsion and the harmonic curvature
are components of $K$. For the homogeneous model, $\omega$ is the Maurer-Cartan form, so $K$ vanishes identically, as does the harmonic
curvature (see \cite{css.ahs2} for more details).
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop.cg.kgeq2}
For $k \geq 2$, a $C^k$ almost-Grassmannian structure of type $(2,n)$, $n \geq 3$, on $M$ determines a $C^{k-1}$ principal $P$-bundle $\Cal G \to M$ equipped with a $C^{k-2}$ Cartan connection $\omega \in \Omega^1(\Cal G, {\mathfrak{g}})$. A $C^k$ morphism between two such almost-Grassmannian structures canonically lifts to a morphism of the associated Cartan geometries.
\end{proposition}
\begin{Pf}
It remains only to verify the last statement.
Let $h$ be a local $C^{k+1}$ diffeomorphism between open subsets of $M$ and $\widetilde{M}$, lifting to
a $G_0$-equivariant local $C^k$-diffeomorphism
$\Phi_0:\Cal G_0\to\widetilde{\Cal G}_0$ with
$\Phi^*_0 \tilde\theta=\theta$.
Given $u\in q^{-1}(u_0) \subset \Cal G$,
let
$\Phi(u):= (\Phi_0^{-1})^* u$. It is easy to check that $T_{\Phi(u)}=T_u$,
so
$\Phi(u)\in (\tilde{q})^{-1}(\Phi_0(u_0)) \subset \tilde{\Cal G}$.
This
evidently defines a $P$-equivariant $C^{k-1}$ lift $\Phi: \Cal G\to\tilde{\Cal G}$ of $\Phi_0$.
The construction implies that $\Phi^*\tilde\theta_i=\theta_i$
for $i=-1,0$.
Then repeating this argument with the harmonic curvature allows us
to conclude that $\Phi^*\tilde\omega=\omega$, so
$\Phi$ is a morphism of Cartan geometries.
\end{Pf}
As a corollary, we note that for a
structure of class at least $C^2$, nonvanishing harmonic curvature is an obstruction
to local isomorphism to $\text{Gr}(2,n)$.
\section{Description of the strongly essential flow in coordinates}
\label{sec.descr.flow}
By homogeneity of $\text{Gr}(2,n)$, we may assume the point $x_0$ in Theorem \ref{main.thm} is the standard 2-plane spanned by the first two coordinate vectors in ${\bf R}^{2+n}$.
The deformation will be constructed on the open subset $U$ comprising the orbit of $x_0$ under all transformations $\text{Id} + X$, with $X \in \mbox{Hom}({\bf R}^2, {\bf R}^n)$. This set is the domain of an affine chart in the Pl\"ucker coordinates on $\text{Gr}(2,n)$, and equals the top cell in the standard Schubert decomposition. Identify $U$ with $\text{Hom}({\bf R}^2, {\bf R}^n)$, and represent an element of $U$ in coordinates
$$X = ( x_{ij})_{i=1,j=1}^{i=n,j=2}$$
The principal $P$-bundle $G \rightarrow \text{Gr}(2,n) \cong G/P$ restricted to $U$ is smoothly equivalent to the trivial bundle $U \times P$. The quotient bundle $G/G_1$ restricted to $U$ is $\left. \Cal G_0 \right|_U$, which is smoothly equivalent to $U \times G_0$.
We will use the following explicit trivializations over $U$ of the tautological and anti-tautological bundles, together with their duals.
Denote by $\{e_1, \ldots, e_{n+2} \}$ the standard basis of ${\bf R}^{2+n}$ with dual basis $\{e^1, \ldots, e^{n+2} \}$.
For $j'=1',2'$, define a section of $\left. \mathcal{E}\right|_U$ by $E_{j'}(X) = (\text{Id} + X)e_{j'}$, and let $E^{j'}$ be the sections $e^{j'}$ of $\mathcal{E}^*$. Next let $E_i(X)$ equal the image of $e_{i+2}$ in ${\bf R}^{2+n}/X$ for $i=1,\ldots, n$, and $E^i(X) = e^{i+2} - x_{i1} e^1 - x_{i2} e^2$, which are well-defined on ${\bf R}^{2+n} / X$.
We will henceforth denote the restrictions of these bundles to $U$ simply by $\mathcal{E}$, $\mathcal{E}^*$, $\mathcal{F}$, and $\mathcal{F}^*$.
The restriction of the standard flat Grassmannian structure on $\text{Gr}(2,n)$ to $U$ is given by the obvious isomorphism from $TU\cong U\x\text{Hom}({\bf R}^2, {\bf R}^n)$ with $\Cal E^* \otimes \Cal F$. It sends the coordinate vector fields $\partial^{j'}_{i}:= {\partial}/{\partial x_{ij'}}$ on $U$ to the sections $E^{j'}\otimes E_i$ of $\Cal E^* \otimes \Cal F$.
\subsection{The strongly essential flow}
Let $Z$ be a rank-one element of ${\mathfrak{g}}_1 \cong \text{Hom}({\bf R}^n, {\bf R}^2)$. Let $\{ z^t \}$ be the one-parameter subgroup of $P < G$ generated by $Z$; it is just the group of matrices $\{ \text{Id} + tZ \} < \text{SL}(2+n,{\bf R})$. Theorem \ref{main.thm} applies to any strongly essential flow generated by a rank-one element of ${\mathfrak{g}}_{1}$. After conjugation in $G$, we may assume $Z = e^1 \otimes e_{1'}$, where now $\{ e^1, \ldots, e^n \}$ is the standard basis of ${\bf R}^{n*}$ and $\{ e_{1'}, e_{2'} \}$ the standard basis of ${\bf R}^2$. Then $\text{im } Z = {\bf R} e_{1'}$, and $\ker Z = \mbox{span}\{ e_2, \ldots, e_n \}$.
For $X \in U \cong {\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}$, denote $e^X$ the corresponding lower-triangular unipotent matrix in $G$. Then compute the image in $U \times P$
\begin{eqnarray*}
z^t.e^X & = &
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\text{Id}_2 + tZX & tZ \\
X & \text{Id}_n
\end{array}
\right) \\
& = &
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\text{Id}_2 & 0 \\
X(\text{Id}_2 + tZX)^{-1} & \text{Id}_n
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\text{Id}_2 + tZX & tZ \\
0 & \text{Id}_n - X (\text{Id}_2 + tZX)^{-1} tZ
\end{array}
\right),
\end{eqnarray*}
assuming that $\text{Id}_2 + tZX$ is invertible, which for fixed $t$ holds on an open neighborhood of $0$.
The following two subspaces are fixed by $\{z^t\}$:
$$ F_1 = \{ X \ : \ XZ = 0 \}$$
and
$$ F_2 = \{ X \ : \ ZX = 0 \}$$
The intersection $F_1 \cap F_2$ will be called the \emph{strongly fixed set} and denoted $SF$. Note that $X \in SF$ if and only if $[X,Z]=0$ and, in coordinates,
$$SF = \{ X \ : \ x_{12} = 0 = x_{i1} \ \mbox{for all} \ i = 1, \ldots, n \}$$
Let $H_0 = \{ X \ : \ x_{11} = 0 \}$. For $X \notin H_0$, decompose $X$ as
$$X_f + X_d =
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
0 & 0 \\
& x_{22} - \frac{x_{12}}{x_{11}} \cdot x_{21} \\
\vdots & \vdots \\
0 & x_{n2} - \frac{x_{12}}{x_{11}} \cdot x_{n1}
\end{array}
\right)
+
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
x_{11} & \frac{x_{12}}{x_{11}} \cdot x_{11} \\
& \\
\vdots & \vdots \\
x_{n1} & \frac{x_{12}}{x_{11}} \cdot x_{n1}
\end{array}
\right)
$$
with $X_f \in SF$ and $X_d$ rank 1.
If $X \notin H_0$, then $z^t.X = X_f + z^t.X_d$, which equals
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eqn.ztaction}
X_f +
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\frac{x_{11}}{1+tx_{11}} & \frac{\frac{x_{12}}{x_{11}} \cdot x_{11}}{1+tx_{11}} \\
\vdots & \vdots \\
\frac{x_{n1}}{1+tx_{11}} & \frac{\frac{x_{12}}{x_{11}} \cdot x_{n1}}{1+tx_{11}}
\end{array}
\right)
\end{eqnarray}
Let $H_+ = \{ X \in U \ : \ x_{11} > 0 \}$ and $H_- = \{ X \in U \ : \ x_{11} < 0 \}$. The formula (\ref{eqn.ztaction}) above yields $z^t.X \rightarrow X_f$ as $t \rightarrow \pm \infty$ for $X \in H_{\pm}$, respectively.
Note that if $X \in H_0$, then $ZXZ = 0$, and $(\text{Id} + tZX)^{-1} = \text{Id} - tZX$. Then $z^t X = X (\text{Id} - t ZX) $ which equals $X$ as $t$ varies if and only if $XZX=0$; the latter holds only when $ZX$ or $XZ=0$. We conclude that $F_1 \cup F_2$ equals the fixed set of ${z^t}$ in $U$.
\subsection{Action on associated vector bundles}
\label{sec.assoc.vbs}
The matrix in $P$
$$ p_t(X) =
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\text{Id}_2 + tZX & tZ \\
0 & \text{Id}_n - X (\text{Id}_2 + tZX)^{-1} tZ
\end{array}
\right)
$$
from above encodes the action of $z^t$ on $\mathcal{E}$ and $\mathcal{F}$, and, in turn, on $TU$. For $X \notin H_0$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eqn.holonomy}
p_t(X) = p_t(X_d) =
\left(
\begin{array}{cccccc}
1+tx_{11} & tx_{12} & t & & \cdots & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & & \cdots & 0 \\
& & \frac{1}{1+tx_{11}} & & & \\
& & \frac{-tx_{21}}{1+tx_{11}} & 1 & & \\
& & \vdots & & \ddots & \\
& & \frac{-tx_{n1}}{1+tx_{11}}& & & 1
\end{array}
\right)
\end{eqnarray}
For $X \in H_0$, straightforward calculation gives the formula (\ref{eqn.holonomy}), with $x_{11} = 0$.
On $\mathcal{E} = \left. (G \times_P {\bf R}^2) \right|_U \cong U \times {\bf R}^2$ the action of $\{ z^t \}$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eqn.E.action}
(z^t_{\mathcal{E}})_X =
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1+tx_{11} & tx_{12} \\
0 & 1
\end{array}
\right) \ \mbox{with respect to} \ \{ E_{1'}, E_{2'} \}
\end{eqnarray}
and on $\mathcal{E}^*$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eqn.Estar.action}
(z^{-t}_{\mathcal{E}})_{z^t.X}^* =
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\frac{1}{1+tx_{11}} & \frac{-tx_{12}}{1+tx_{11}} \\
0 & 1
\end{array}
\right) \ \mbox{with respect to} \ \{ E^{1'}, E^{2'} \}
\end{eqnarray}
On $\mathcal{F}$, the action is
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eqn.F.action}
(z^t_{\mathcal{F}})_{X} =
\left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
\frac{1}{1+tx_{11}} & & & \\
\frac{-tx_{21}}{1+tx_{11}} & 1 & & \\
\vdots & & \ddots & \\
\frac{-tx_{n1}}{1+tx_{11}}& & & 1
\end{array}
\right) \ \mbox{w.r.t.} \ \{ E_1, \ldots, E_n\}
\end{eqnarray}
and, finally, on $\mathcal{F}^*$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eqn.Fstar.action}
(z^{-t}_{\mathcal{F}})^*_{z^t.X} =
\left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
1+tx_{11} & & & \\
tx_{21} & 1 & & \\
\vdots & & \ddots & \\
tx_{n1} & & & 1
\end{array}
\right) \ \mbox{w.r.t.} \ \{ E^1 , \ldots, E^n \}
\end{eqnarray}
\section{The invariant deformation and non-flatness}
Our deformation is constructed in Sections \ref{sec.eigen.sections} and \ref{sec.endo.section} below. Then in Section \ref{sec.proof.calc} we compute terms of the harmonic torsion which are nonzero on an open, dense subset of any neighborhood of $x_0$. It follows that our $C^1$, deformed structures are not flat on any open set $V$ with $x_0 \in \overline{V}$, and thus that the $C^1$ version of \cite[Thm 1.3]{mn.1graded} does not hold. The proof of vanishing harmonic torsion in \cite{mn.1graded} requires several degrees of differentiability of the structure, so it remains open whether $C^1$ is the maximal regularity of such a counterexample.
Our result \cite[Prop 3.5]{cap.me.parabolictrans}, on the other hand, says that the harmonic curvature must vanish on an open set $V$ with $x_0 \in \overline{V}$, in the presence of a flow by strongly essential autmorphisms, and we explain in Section \ref{sec.C2.curvature} below that it applies to $C^2$ structures. In Section \ref{sec.nonzero.curv}, we verify that the harmonic curvature of our deformations restricted to their common smooth locus is nonzero. Our deformations are thus in some sense structures of maximal regularity for which the conclusion of \cite[Prop 3.5]{cap.me.parabolictrans} does not hold.
\subsection{Eigen-sections of associated bundles}
\label{sec.eigen.sections}
Here we define sections of $\mathcal{E}$ and $\mathcal{F}$ and of the dual bundles, which are invariant by $z^t$ up to multiplication by a function on $U$. For any $X$ where the decompositions
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn.decomps.EF}
\mathcal{E}_X = \ker X_d \oplus \text{im } Z \qquad \mbox{and} \qquad \mathcal{F}_X = \ker Z \oplus \text{im } X_d
\end{equation}
are valid, each section will have values in one factor or its dual. The sections together will span the fibers over $X$ in $\mathcal{E}, \mathcal{F}$, or their duals.
Define
\begin{eqnarray*}
v(X) = - x_{12} E_{1'} + x_{11} E_{2'} & & \iota(X) = E_{1'} \\
\tilde{v}(X) = E^{2'} & & \tilde{\iota}(X) = x_{11} E^{1'} + x_{12} E^{2'}
\end{eqnarray*}
These pairs of sections are smooth on $U$ and independent on $U \setminus H_0$. We compute from (\ref{eqn.E.action}) and (\ref{eqn.Estar.action})
\begin{eqnarray*}
z^t_{\mathcal{E}} (v(X)) = (1+tx_{11}) \cdot v(z^t.X) & & z^t_{\mathcal{E}}(\iota(X)) = (1+tx_{11}) \cdot \iota(z^t.X) \\
(z^{-t}_{\mathcal{E}})^* (\tilde{v}(X)) = \tilde{v}(z^t.X) & & (z^{-t}_{\mathcal{E}})^* (\tilde{\iota}(X)) = \tilde{\iota}(z^t.X)
\end{eqnarray*}
Now define sections of $\mathcal{F}$ and $\mathcal{F^*}$ for $i = 2, \ldots, n$ by
\begin{eqnarray*}
w(X) = x_{11} E_1 + \cdots + x_{n1} E_n & & \kappa_i(X) = E_i \\
\tilde{w}(X) = E^1 & & \tilde{\kappa}^i(X) = x_{11}E^i - x_{i1}E^1
\end{eqnarray*}
These sections transform, for $i = 2, \ldots, n$, according to (\ref{eqn.F.action}) and (\ref{eqn.Fstar.action}) by
\begin{eqnarray*}
z^t_{\mathcal{F}}(w(X)) = w(z^t.X) & & z^t_{\mathcal{F}}(\kappa_i(X)) = \kappa_i(z^t.X) \\
(z^{-t}_{\mathcal{F}})^*(\tilde{w}(X)) = (1+tx_{11}) \cdot \tilde{w}(z^t.X) & & (z^{-t}_{\mathcal{F}})^*(\tilde{\kappa}^i(X)) = (1+tx_{11})\cdot \tilde{\kappa}^i(z^t.X)
\end{eqnarray*}
\subsection{Invariant section of the endomorphism bundle}
\label{sec.endo.section}
Now consider the sections
$$ \varphi' = v \otimes \tilde{\iota} \qquad \mbox{and} \qquad \varphi_i = \tilde{\kappa}^i \otimes w$$
of $\text{End } \mathcal{E}^*$ and $\text{End } \mathcal{F}$, respectively, for $i=2, \ldots, n$. These preserve the decompositions (\ref{eqn.decomps.EF}).
They are each nilpotent endomorphisms of order two for any $X$: $(\varphi'_X)^2 = 0$ and $((\varphi_i)_X)^2 = 0$ for all $i$; in particular, they are trace-free.
The tensor $\varphi' \otimes \varphi_i$ is a section of the subbundle $\mbox{End}_0 \ \mathcal{E}^* \otimes \mbox{End}_0 \ \mathcal{F} \subset \text{End } TU$, as in Section \ref{sec.inf.def}, corresponding to nontrivial deformations of the structure. The flow acts on this section by
$$ (z^t)_*(\varphi'(X) \otimes \varphi_i(X)) = (1+tx_{11})^2 \cdot \varphi'(z^t.X) \otimes \varphi_i(z^t.X)$$
Define $q(X) = x_{12}^2 + x_{11}^2 + \cdots + x_{n1}^2$. Note that $q(z^t.X) = (1+tx_{11})^{-2} \cdot q(X)$. Then the section
$$\Phi_i = \frac{1}{q} \varphi' \otimes \varphi_i$$
is $z^t$-invariant. The coefficients of the components of $\Phi$ are rational functions in the variables $x_{12}, x_{11}, \ldots, x_{n1}$ with numerator degree four and denominator degree two. They are smooth on $U \backslash SF$ and $C^1$ on $SF$, in particular at the origin.
Denote by $E^{i'}_{j'}$ the elementary endomorphism of $\mathcal{E}^*$ sending $E^{j'}$ to $E_{i'}$, and by $E_j^i$ the elementary endomorphism of $\mathcal{F}$ sending $E_i$ to $E_j$. The coefficients of $\Phi_i$ are given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
\frac{1}{q(X)} \cdot \left( -x_{11}x_{12}E_{1'}^{1'} - x_{12}^2 E_{1'}^{2'} + x_{11}^2 E_{2'}^{1'} + x_{11}x_{12} E_{2'}^{2'} \right) \\
\otimes \left( \sum_{k=1}^n x_{11}x_{k1} E_k^i - \sum_{k=1}^n x_{i1}x_{k1} E_k^1 \right)
\end{eqnarray*}
which expands further, denoting $E^{i'}_{j'} \otimes E_k^\ell$ by $E^{i' \ell}_{j'k}$, as
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sum_k \frac{x_{12}x_{11}x_{i1}x_{k1}}{q(X)} E_{1'k}^{1'1} + \sum_k \frac{-x_{12}x_{11}^2x_{k1}}{q(X)} E_{1'k}^{1'i} + \sum_k \frac{x_{12}^2x_{i1}x_{k1}}{q(X)} E_{1'k}^{2'1} \\
+ \sum_k \frac{-x_{12}^2x_{11}x_{k1}}{q(X)} E_{1'k}^{2'i} + \sum_k \frac{-x_{11}^2x_{i1}x_{k1}}{q(X)} E_{2'k}^{1'1} + \sum_k \frac{x_{11}^3 x_{k1}}{q(X)} E_{2'k}^{1'i} \\
+ \sum_k \frac{-x_{12}x_{11}x_{i1}x_{k1}}{q(X)} E_{2'k}^{2'1} + \sum_k \frac{x_{12}x_{11}^2x_{k1}}{q(X)} E_{2'k}^{2'i}
\end{eqnarray*}
Of course, for any constant ${\bf c}=(c_2, \ldots, c_n)$, the endomorphism field
$$\Phi=\Phi_{\bf c} = \sum_{i=2}^n c_i \Phi_i$$
will be $z^t$-invariant and $C^1$.
\begin{proposition}
\label{main.prop}
Let $\theta : TU \stackrel{\sim}{\rightarrow} \text{Hom}({\bf R}^2,{\bf R}^n)$ be the flat almost-Grass\-man\-nian structure on $U$. Then for any ${\bf c} \neq {\bf 0}$, $(\text{Id} + \Phi_{\bf c}) \circ \theta$ is a $\{ z^t \}$-invariant, $C^1$ almost-Grassmannian structure on $U$ not $C^1$ equivalent to $\theta$.
\end{proposition}
Fix ${\bf c} \neq {\bf 0}$ and denote $\Phi = \Phi_{\bf c}$. We first show that $(\text{Id} + \Phi) \circ \theta$ is an almost-Grassmannian structure on $U$. Recall from above that $(\varphi')^2 = 0$ and $(\varphi_i)^2 = 0$ for all $i = 2, \ldots, n$; note that moreover, $\varphi_i \circ \varphi_j = 0$ for all $i,j = 2, \ldots, n$, so that $c_2 \varphi_2 + \cdots + c_n \varphi_n$ is also nilpotent of order two. It follows that $\Phi_X$ is a nilpotent endomorphism of $(\mathcal{E}^* \otimes \mathcal{F})_X$ of order two for all $X \in U$, so the matrix exponential of $\Phi_X$ in $\text{SL}(\mathcal{E}^* \otimes \mathcal{F})_X$ is simply $\text{Id} + \Phi_X$. We conclude that $\text{Id} + \Phi_X$ is an isomorphism for all $X \in U$, so $(\text{Id} + \Phi) \circ \theta$ is an almost-Grassmannian structure on $U$. The $\{ z^t \}$-invariance holds by construction.
The derivatives of the rational coefficients in $\Phi$ are undefined on $SF$, the zero set of $q$. The numerators are homogeneous polynomials in $x_{12}, x_{11}, \ldots, x_{n1}$ of degree five, with denominators all equal $q^2$. Such functions extend continuously to $0$ on $SF$.
The final claim of the proposition is proved in the following section.
\subsection{Calculation of nonzero harmonic torsion terms}
\label{sec.proof.calc}
Recall from Section \ref{tors} that the harmonic torsion can be computed from any principal connection $\gamma \in \Omega^1(\Cal G_0,{\mathfrak{g}}_0)$. Such a connection is equivalent to a pair of (volume-compatible) linear connections $\nabla_{\Cal E^*}$ on $\Cal E^*$ and $\nabla_{\Cal F}$ on $\Cal F$. These induce a connection on $\mathcal{E}^* \otimes \mathcal{F}$ of the form $\nabla_{\mathcal{E^*}} \otimes \text{Id}_{\mathcal{F}} + \text{Id}_{\mathcal{E^*}} \otimes \nabla_{\mathcal{F}}$. Via an almost-Grassmannian structure $\Psi : TU \stackrel{\sim}{\rightarrow} \mathcal{E^*} \otimes \mathcal{F}$ of class at least $C^1$, this connection can be pulled back to $TU$, and that pullback has a well-defined torsion. For the harmonic torsion,
we map back to $\Cal E^*\otimes\Cal F$ via $\Psi$ and project to the bundle associated to $ (S^2{\bf R}^2\otimes{\bf R}^{2*})_0\boxtimes (\Lambda^2 {\bf R}^{n*}\otimes{\bf R}^n)_0,$ as in Section \ref{tors}.
Nonvanishing of the result is an obstruction to $C^1$ flatness.
As $\mathcal{E^*}$ and $\mathcal{F}$ are trivial bundles over $U$, we can use the trivial connections on each. By construction, the frame $\{E^{i'}_j\}$ of $\Cal E^*\otimes\Cal F$ is parallel.
Denote by $\nabla$ the pullback to $TU$ via our deformed almost-Grassmannian structure corresponding to $\text{Id} + \Phi$.
The pullbacks of $\{E^{i'}_j\}$ comprise a framing of $TU$ by parallel vector fields $\{ \tilde E^{i'}_j \}$. The torsion is then determined by their brackets.
We compute a specific component of the torsion and apply Lemma \ref{harm-tors}
to show that the harmonic torsion is nonzero.
Consider the sections $E^{2'}_s$ for $s>1$ and $E^{2'}_1$ of $\Cal E^*\otimes\Cal F$. Both have rank one with kernel spanned by $E_{1'}$. Now $T(\tilde E^{2'}_s,\tilde E^{2'}_1)$ by construction depends only on the component of $T$ in the subbundle corresponding to the second summand in the decomposition \eqref{La2-decomp}. Consequently, Lemma \ref{harm-tors} implies nonvanishing of the harmonic torsion provided $T(\tilde E^{2'}_s,\tilde E^{2'}_1)(E_{1'})$ is not contained in the span of $E_1$ and $E_s$.
From the explicit description of $\Phi$ from above, we obtain for $s>1$
$$ \tilde{E}^{2'}_s = \theta^{-1} \circ (\text{Id} + \Phi)^{-1}(E^{2'}_s) = \partial^{2'}_s - c_s \cdot \sum_{p'=1, k = 1}^{p'=2, k=n} \frac{x_{1p'} x_{11}^2 x_{k1}}{q(X)} \partial^{p'}_k,$$
while
$$ \tilde{E}^{2'}_1 = \theta^{-1} \circ (\text{Id} + \Phi)^{-1}(E^{2'}_1) = \partial^{2'}_1 + \sum_{p'=1,k=1,i=2}^{p'=2,k=n,i=n} c_i \cdot \frac{x_{1p'} x_{11} x_{k1} x_{i1}}{q(X)} \partial^{p'}_k.$$
Since these fields are parallel, the torsion is given by
$$T(\tilde{E}^{2'}_s, \tilde{E}^{2'}_1) = -[\tilde{E}^{2'}_s, \tilde{E}^{2'}_1]=- \frac{c_s x_{11}^2}{q(X)} \cdot \sum_k \left( x_{k1} \partial^{2'}_k - \frac{2 x_{k1} x_{12}}{q(X)} \sum_{p'} x_{1p'} \partial^{p'}_k \right).$$
Mapping this vector field $\tilde{D}$ to $\Cal E^*\otimes \Cal F$ via $(\text{Id} + \Phi)\circ\theta$, we obtain, in order of increasing \emph{net degree}---degree of numerator minus degree of denominator,
\begin{eqnarray*}
D := (\text{Id} + \Phi) \circ \theta (\tilde{D})
= & - \frac{c_s x_{11}^2}{q(X)} \cdot \sum_k \left( x_{k1} E^{2'}_k - \frac{2 x_{k1} x_{12}}{q(X)} (x_{11} E^{1'}_k + x_{12} E^{2'}_k ) \right. \\
+ & \left. x_{k1} \Phi(E^{2'}_k) - \frac{2 x_{k1} x_{12}}{q(X)} \left( (x_{11} \Phi(E^{1'}_k) + x_{12} \Phi(E^{2'}_k ) \right) \right)
\end{eqnarray*}
This is a continuous section of $\Cal E^*\otimes\Cal F$. Now compute
$$
D(E_{1'}) = \frac{c_s x_{11}^2}{q(X)} \cdot \sum_k \frac{-2 x_{k1} x_{12} x_{11}}{q(X)} E_k + \ \mbox{higher-order terms},$$
where the higher-order terms have net degree at least three. This has nontrivial projection modulo $\mbox{span} \{E_1, E_s \}$ on an open, dense subset of any neighborhood of $0$ in $U$, provided $c_s \neq 0$.
We conclude that the harmonic torsion of the deformed structure given by $\text{Id} + \Phi$ is nontrivial on an open, dense subset of any neighborhood of 0. This structure is thus inequivalent to $\text{Gr}(2,n)$ on any open subset containing $0$ in its closure.
\subsection{Vanishing of harmonic curvature for $C^2$ structures}
\label{sec.C2.curvature}
Let $(\Cal G_0 \to M, \theta)$ be a $(2,n)$ almost-Grassmannian structure of regularity $C^2$ admitting a strongly essential flow $\{ z^t \}$ with higher-order fixed point $x_0$.
We verify here that the proof of \cite[Thm 3.1]{cap.me.parabolictrans} applies to such a structure, so it has vanishing harmonic curvature on an open set containing the higher order fixed point in its closure.
Let $(p: \Cal G \to M, \omega)$ be the $C^1$ prinicpal $P$-bundle and $C^0$ Cartan connection, respectively, given by Proposition \ref{prop.cg.kgeq2}. There is a $C^1$ exponential map $\exp : \Cal G \times {\mathfrak{g}} \rightarrow \Cal G$, giving $C^1$ exponential curves $\tilde{\gamma}_X(s)= \exp(u,sX)$ as in \cite[Def 1.4]{cap.me.parabolictrans}. This differentiability is sufficient to apply all of the holonomy calculations of \cite[Sec 2]{cap.me.parabolictrans}.
Let $\xi$ be the vector field generating $\{ z^t \}$. For any $u \in p^{-1}(x_0)$, the value $\omega_{u}(\xi) \in {\mathfrak{g}}_1$ (\cite[Sec 1.2]{cap.me.parabolictrans}); let $Z$ be the value for a particular choice of $u$. The rank of $Z$ as an element of $\text{Hom}({\bf R}^n, {\bf R}^2)$ can be two or one.
In either case, $Z$ defines a subset $\Cal T(X) \subset {\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}$ comprising elements generating an $\mathfrak{sl}_2$-triple $\{X, A = [Z,X], Z \}$ (see \cite[Def 2.11]{cap.me.parabolictrans}). Along exponential curves $\tilde{\gamma}_X$ for $X \in \Cal T(Z)$, the harmonic curvature and harmonic torsion must belong to the \emph{stable subspaces} $\mathbb{K}^{[st]}$ and $\mathbb{T}^{[st]}$, respectively, determined by $A$ (\cite[Def 2.13]{cap.me.parabolictrans}). This restriction appears in Corollary 2.14 (1) of \cite{cap.me.parabolictrans}, which in turn rests on Proposition 2.9 of the same; the required property here is that the harmonic curvature and torsion are given by \emph{continuous} $P$-equivariant functions on $\Cal G$.
When $\text{rk } Z = 2$, then $| \Cal T(Z) | = 1$, and $\mathbb{K}^{[st]} = 0$. The harmonic curvature vanishes not only along the curve $\gamma_X = p \circ \tilde{\gamma}_X$, but on a neighborhood of $\gamma_X \backslash \{ x_0 \}$, as given by \cite[Prop 3.3]{cap.me.parabolictrans}.
When $\text{rk } Z = 1$, as in the examples constructed above, then the \emph{strongly stable subspace} $\mathbb{K}^{[ss]}$ determined by $A$ is trivial. Together with other purely algebraic features of the $\mathfrak{sl}_2$-triple and its representation on $\mathbb{K}$, this property suffices to again prove vanishing of the harmonic curvature on a neighborhood of $\gamma_X \backslash \{ x_0 \}$, as shown in \cite[Prop 3.5 (4a)]{cap.me.parabolictrans}.
The proof of \cite[Thm 1.3]{mn.1graded} that $(2,n)$-almost-Grassmannian manifolds with strongly essential automorphisms have vanishing harmonic torsion on an open set containing the higher-order fixed point in its closure is more involved, and requires higher regularity; in particular, the full Cartan curvature and a \emph{fundamental derivative} (see \cite[Sec 3.4]{mn.1graded}) of it must be continuous. Thus it remains unclear whether a deformation with the properties in the conclusion of Theorem \ref{main.thm} could have higher regularity than $C^1$.
\subsection{Nonvanishing harmonic curvature on smooth locus}
\label{sec.nonzero.curv}
Our $C^1$ deformed structures $(\text{Id} + \Phi) \circ \theta$ do not have a well-defined harmonic curvature tensor everywhere, but we can prove that the harmonic curvature for these structures is nontrivial on the smooth locus $U \backslash SF$, for sufficiently small values of ${\bf c}$.
The \emph{infinitesimal change} of harmonic curvature produced by the infinitesimal deformation $\Phi_{\bf c}$ is the derivative at $t=0$ of the change of harmonic curvature produced by the deformations $(\text{Id} + t \Phi_{\bf c}) \circ \theta = (\text{Id} + \Phi_{t {\bf c}}) \circ \theta$. For our aim, it suffices to show that the infinitesimal change of harmonic curvature caused by $\Phi_{\bf c}$ is nontrivial for ${\bf c} \neq {\bf 0}$.
According to Theorem 3.6 of \cite{cap.deformations}, the infinitesimal change of harmonic curvature induced by an infinitesimal deformation can be computed on the smooth locus with the BGG sequence constructed from a certain linear connection on the adjoint tractor bundle. The operators in that BGG sequence act between sections of bundles associated to Lie algebra homologies $H_*({\mathfrak{g}}_1,{\mathfrak{g}})$, which are isomorphic to the Lie algebra cohomology spaces $H^*({\mathfrak{g}}_{-1},{\mathfrak{g}})$. These are representations of ${\mathfrak{g}}_0$, which can be computed explicitly using Kostant's version of the Bott-Borel-Weil Theorem. The specific calculations for the Grassmannian case can be found in Section 3.5 of \cite{cap.soucek.subcomplexes} and
in Section 4.1.3 Step (D) of \cite{cap.slovak.book.vol1}.
In degree one, this representation is irreducible and isomorphic to $\mathfrak{sl}({\bf R}^{2*}) \boxtimes \mathfrak{sl}({\bf R}^n)$.
In degree two, there are two irreducible components, one of which is the module $\mathbb T$ of Section \ref{tors} corresponding to the harmonic torsion. The other component $\mathbb{K} \subset \Lambda^2 {\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^* \otimes {\mathfrak{g}}_0$ is the harmonic curvature module of Section \ref{sec.curv.and.connxn}. It is the component of maximal highest weight in
$$ (\Lambda^2 {\bf R}^2 \boxtimes S^2 {\bf R}^{n*}) \otimes (\mathfrak{sl}({\bf R}^{2*}) \oplus \mathfrak{sl}({\bf R}^n))$$
(recall the decomposition in (\ref{La2-decomp})), which turns out to be
$$\mathbb{K} \cong \Lambda^2 {\bf R}^2 \boxtimes (S^3 {\bf R}^{n*} \otimes {\bf R}^n)_0$$
The construction of BGG sequences provides an invariant differential operator $D$ mapping sections of
$\mbox{End}_0 (\mathcal{E}^*) \boxtimes \mbox{End}_0 (\mathcal{F})$, corresponding to infinitesimal deformations, to sections of the bundle associated to $\mathbb K$, yielding the infinitesimal change of harmonic curvature (see Section 3.6 of \cite{cap.deformations}).
Any BGG operator admits a universal formula in terms of any \emph{distinguished connection} of the structure, its curvature and torsion, and their covariant derivatives.
In our case, the initial structure is the flat structure on the open set $U \backslash SF \subset \mbox{Gr}(2,n)$, for which the flat connection $\nabla_0$ induced by the trivial connections on $\Cal E^*$ and $\Cal F$ as in Section \ref{sec.proof.calc} is a distinguished connection.
Representation theory implies that $D$ must be a second-order operator.
Since $\nabla_0$ is torsion-free and flat, the universal formula for $D$ can only consist of applying two covariant derivatives, which automatically are symmetric, followed by tensorial operations induced by ${\mathfrak{g}}_0$-equivariant maps on the inducing representations. The latter is a ${\mathfrak{g}}_0$-equivariant map
$$
\rho : S^2({\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^*)\otimes (\mathfrak{sl}({\bf R}^{2*}) \boxtimes \mathfrak{sl}({\bf R}^n))\to\mathbb K.
$$
Similarly as in \eqref{La2-decomp}, we can decompose
$$
S^2({\mathfrak{g}}_{-1}^*)\cong (S^2{\bf R}^2\boxtimes S^2{\bf R}^{n*})\oplus (\Lambda^2{\bf R}^2\boxtimes\Lambda^2{\bf R}^{n*}),
$$
It is easy to see from representation theory that $\rho$ factors through the first summand.
There is a unique homomorphism $S^2{\bf R}^2\otimes({\bf R}^2\otimes{\bf R}^{2*})_0\to\Lambda^2{\bf R}^2$ up to scale: the unique nonzero contraction with values in ${\bf R}^2 \otimes {\bf R}^2$, followed by an alternation.
There is also a unique homomorphism
$$S^2{\bf R}^{n*}\otimes({\bf R}^n\otimes{\bf R}^{n*})_0\to(S^3 {\bf R}^{n*} \otimes {\bf R}^n)_0$$
up to scale: symmetrization of the three ${\bf R}^{n*}$ components followed by projection on the module of trace-free elements.
Using similar index notation as before, we now form the second derivative $\{ \nabla_{i'}^j \nabla_{\ell'}^m \Phi^{p' o}_{q' r} \}$, and then projection to $\mathbb{K}$ is achieved by
\begin{enumerate}
\item contracting the indices $p'$ and $\ell'$;
\item skew-symmetrizing the indices $i'$ and $q'$;
\item symmetrizing the indices $j, m$, and $o$; and
\item removing the trace of $r$ with $(j m o)$
\end{enumerate}
Like in Section \ref{sec.proof.calc}, it now suffice to apply the operations in the ${\bf R}^2$-part and then find a nonzero component which cannot be contained in the pure trace component. Namely, we now compute the term $\kappa_{2' 1' r}^{1 1 1}$, for $r > 1$, which evidently has this property.
\begin{eqnarray*}
\kappa^{111}_{2' 1' r} & = & \frac{1}{2} \left( \nabla^1_{2'} \nabla_{1'}^1 \Phi^{1' 1}_{1' r} + (\nabla_{2'}^1)^2 \Phi^{2' 1}_{1' r} - (\nabla^1_{1'})^2 \Phi^{1' 1}_{2' r} - \nabla_{1'}^1 \nabla_{2'}^1 \Phi_{2' r}^{2' 1} \right) \\
& = & \frac{1}{2} \left( 2 \nabla^1_{2'} \nabla_{1'}^1 \Phi^{1' 1}_{1' r} + (\nabla_{2'}^1)^2 \Phi^{2' 1}_{1' r} - (\nabla^1_{1'})^2 \Phi^{1' 1}_{2' r} \right)
\end{eqnarray*}
using that $\nabla^1_{2'} \nabla_{1'}^1 \Phi^{1' 1}_{1' r} = - \nabla_{1'}^1 \nabla_{2'}^1 \Phi_{2' r}^{2' 1}$ by trace-freeness in the primed indices and flatness of $\nabla$. Recall from Section \ref{sec.endo.section}
$$ \Phi^{1' 1}_{1' r} = \sum_{i > 1} c_i \frac{x_{12} x_{11} x_{i1} x_{r1}}{q(X)} \qquad \Phi^{2' 1}_{1' r} = \sum_{i > 1} c_i \frac{x_{12}^2 x_{i1} x_{r1}}{q(X)} \qquad \Phi^{1' 1}_{2' r} = - \sum_{i > 1} c_i \frac{ x_{11}^2 x_{i1} x_{r1}}{q(X)}$$
Then compute, writing $q = q(X)$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\nabla^1_{2'} \nabla_{1'}^1 \Phi^{1' 1}_{1' r} & = & \sum_{i > 1} c_i \left( \frac{x_{i1} x_{r1}}{q} - \frac{2(x_{11}^2 + x_{12}^2) x_{i1} x_{r1}}{q^2} + \frac{8 x_{12}^2 x_{11}^2 x_{i1} x_{r1}}{q^3} \right) \\
(\nabla_{2'}^1)^2 \Phi^{2' 1}_{1' r} & = & \sum_{i > 1} c_i \left( \frac{2 x_{i1} x_{r1}}{q} - \frac{10 x_{12}^2 x_{i1} x_{r1}}{q^2} + \frac{8 x_{12}^4 x_{i1} x_{r1}}{q^3} \right) \\
(\nabla^1_{1'})^2 \Phi^{1' 1}_{2' r} & = & - \sum_{i > 1} c_i \left( \frac{2 x_{i1} x_{r1}}{q} - \frac{10 x_{11}^2 x_{i1} x_{r1}}{q^2} + \frac{8 x_{11}^4 x_{i1} x_{r1}}{q^3} \right)
\end{eqnarray*}
Finally,
$$ \kappa_{2' 1' r}^{111} = \sum_{i > 1} c_i \left( \frac{3x_{i1} x_{r1}}{q} - \frac{7(x_{11}^2 + x_{12}^2) x_{i1} x_{r1}}{q^2} + \frac{4 (x_{11}^2 + x_{12}^2)^2 x_{i1} x_{r1}}{q^3} \right) \neq 0.$$
\bibliographystyle{amsplain}
|
\subsubsection*{\bibname}}
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
\def\BibTeX{{\rm B\kern-.05em{\sc i\kern-.025em b}\kern-.08em
T\kern-.1667em\lower.7ex\hbox{E}\kern-.125emX}}
\begin{document}
\title{Active Learning for High-Dimensional Binary Features
}
\author{\IEEEauthorblockN{Ali Vahdat}
\IEEEauthorblockA{\textit{Huawei Noah's Ark Lab} \\
Montreal, Canada \\
<EMAIL>}
\and
\IEEEauthorblockN{Mouloud Belbahri}
\IEEEauthorblockA{\textit{Huawei Noah's Ark Lab} \\
Montreal, Canada \\
<EMAIL>}
\and
\IEEEauthorblockN{Vahid Partovi Nia}
\IEEEauthorblockA{\textit{Huawei Noah's Ark Lab} \\
Montreal, Canada \\
<EMAIL>}
}
\maketitle
\begin{abstract}
Erbium-doped fiber amplifier (EDFA) is an optical amplifier/repeater device used to boost the intensity of optical signals being carried through a fiber optic communication system. A highly accurate EDFA model is important because of its crucial role in optical network management and optimization. The input channels of an EDFA device are treated as either on or off, hence the input features are binary. Labeled training data is very expensive to collect for EDFA devices, therefore we devise an active learning strategy suitable for binary variables to overcome this issue. We propose to take advantage of sparse linear models to simplify the predictive model. This approach simultaneously improves prediction and accelerates active learning query generation. We show the performance of our proposed active learning strategies on simulated data and real EDFA data.
\end{abstract}
\begin{IEEEkeywords}
Active Learning, EDFA, Exponential Family, Binary Features, BIC
\end{IEEEkeywords}
\section{Introduction}
\label{sect:intro}
We start by introducing the Erbium-doped fiber amplifier (EDFA) device, and subsequently review some of the works in the literature on active learning.
\subsection{EDFA}
\label{sect:edfa_background}
The EDFA equipment is an optical repeater/amplifier device to boost the intensity of optical signals through optical fiber. A highly accurate EDFA model is critical for a number of different reasons, such as: i) to improve performance of light path setup, ii) to calculate optical signal to noise ratio (OSNR), and iii) to predict the path performance. However, collecting labeled data from EDFA devices is expensive, involving an expert technician in lab environment to play with the device and collect and record the input-output signal levels. This is where active learning (AL) strategies is used to collect more data to improve the accuracy of the EDFA model.
For an EDFA equipment the input signal is received at a \textit{channel}'s input and the amplified signal leaves the same channel's output. A typical EDFA device supports between 40 and 128 channels depending on the manufacturer and type. Each channel can carry the optical signal for a different service, but not all channels carry service signal at all times. Channels carrying service signals are interpreted as \emph{on} and others are interpreted as dummy or \emph{off} channels. Therefore input signals can be deemed as binary or $x=\{-1, 1\}$. Rather than the actual strength of the channel output, we are interested in the channel gain which is $$y_c = \mathrm{gain}_c = \mathrm{output}_c - \mathrm{input}_c$$ where $c$ is the channel index, $c \in \{1, \ldots, C\}$, ($C$ is the number of channels for a given EDFA device). Therefore, $y$ is a continuous random variable.
Here, our objective is to use active learning to improve performance of a simple model for a single EDFA channel. Channel outputs are independent given channel inputs, so the generalization towards multivariate output is straightforward.
\subsection{Active Learning}
\label{sect:al_background}
State-of-the-art machine learning (ML) algorithms require an unprecedented amount of data to learn a useful model. Although there is access to a huge amount of data, most of the available data are unlabeled, and labeling them are often time-consuming and/or expensive. This gives rise to a category of ML algorithms that identify the most promising data subset to improve model performance. A data point selected to be inquired about its label is usually referred to as a \emph{query}, and the entity providing the label for the queried data point is usually called an \emph{oracle}. Oracle could be a human, a database, or a software providing the label for the query.
ML algorithms are capable of achieving better performance if the learning algorithm is involved in the process of selecting the data points it is trained on. This is the main objective of AL methods. AL-based methods usually achieve this enhanced performance by selecting the data points they deem more useful for training, based on some form of i) uncertainty measure i.e. using the data points where the ML algorithm is most uncertain about or ii) some form of data representativeness, i.e. using the data points that are good representatives of the data distribution, see \cite{settles2012activeBook} for details.
Depending on the type of data, there are two main variations of AL algorithms; stream-based and pool-based. In stream-based AL the learning algorithm, e.g. a classifier, has access to each unlabeled data point sequentially for a short period of time. The AL algorithm determines whether to request a query or discard the request \cite{cohn1996active}. In pool-based AL \cite{lewis1994sequential}, the learning algorithm e.g. a classifier, has access to the pool of all unlabeled data. At each iteration the algorithm queries the label of an unlabeled data point from the oracle. Our proposed method falls within this category, where most AL research has been focused. Common AL algorithms improve a classifier algorithm, devised for data with continuous features and discrete response. Motivated with the EDFA application, we develop an AL algorithm for data with discrete features and a continuous response.
Methods using \emph{uncertainty sampling} \cite{sharma2013most, ramirez2014anytime} query data points with the highest uncertainty. After observing the a new point in the uncertain region, the learning algorithm becomes more confident about the neighboring subspace of the queried data point. The query strategy maintains the exploration-exploitation trade-off \cite{osugi2005balancing}. In a classification task entropy is used as the uncertainty measure. However, motivated from support vector machines, some authors define uncertainty through the decision boundary \cite{tong2001support, baram2004online}. For regression tasks prediction variance is the common uncertainty measure. Methods based on universal approximators, such as neural networks, lack analytical form for prediction variance, so empirical variance of the prediction is used instead.
Methods that focus on a single criteria to select a query often limit the active learning performance. AL algorithms are often trapped due to the sampling bias. Therefore an exploration-exploitation method with a large proportion of random sampling during the early queries is adopted. Some authors also consider combining different criteria \cite{cebron2009active, bondu2010exploration} or selecting the strategies adaptively for a better performance. \cite{baram2004online, hsu2015active, chu2016activeTransfer} perform adaptive strategy selection by connecting the selection problem to multi-arm bandit methods. \cite{baram2004online} uses unlabeled data points as arms (slot machines), whereas \cite{hsu2015active} uses AL strategies as arms in the bandit problem.
In \cite{konyushkova2017learning} authors train a regressor that predicts the expected error reduction for a candidate data point in a given learning state. The experience from previous AL outcomes is utilized to learn strategies for query selection. \cite{ali2014active} proposes to train multiple models along with the active learning process. They construct two sets simultaneously; a biased training set that improves the accuracy of individual models, and an unbiased validation set that helps to select the best model. \cite{sabharwal2016incremental} automatically selects a model, tunes its hyperparameters, evaluates models on a small set of data, and gradually expands the set if the model is promising.
Section~\ref{sect:background} lays out the modeling and query generation. Section~\ref{sect:experimental} provides results on simulated data, which gives us the insight we need to apply our active learning strategies to the real data.
\section{Methodology}
\label{sect:background}
A typical pool-based AL algorithm has access to a small pool of labeled data\footnote{Note that we show univariate variables with lowercase letters, e.g. $y$, vectors with bold lowercase letters, e.g. $\mathbf x$, and matrices with bold uppercase letters, e.g. $\mathbf X$.},
$$D_L=\{(\mathbf x_1, y_1), (\mathbf x_2, y_2), \ldots, (\mathbf x_n, y_n)\},$$ where $\mathbf x_i\in \rm I\!R^p$ is the predictor and $y_i \in \rm I\!R$ is the response. Also, there is a potentially larger pool of unlabeled data $$D_U=\{\mathbf x_{n+1}, \mathbf x_{n+2}, \ldots, \mathbf x_m\}.$$
In the EDFA application $\mathbf x$ is the set of $p$ input channels, and $y$ is one of the output channels selected for modeling. Output channels are conditionally independent, which allows to model each output channel independently.
A typical AL algorithm starts by training a model using the labeled pool $D_L$. Then, at each iteration an AL strategy select a promising data point $\mathbf x_i$ from the unlabeled pool $D_U$ and queries its label $y_i$. Once label is retrieved for $\mathbf x_i$, this data point is removed from $D_U$ and $(\mathbf x_i, y_i)$ is added to $D_L$. The classifier now is trained on the new pool $D_L$, including the recently added $(\mathbf x_i, y_i)$. This process is repeated until a termination criteria -- usually a sampling budget $T$ -- is reached. With a small sampling budget $T$, the goal of AL is to find the best sequence of data points to be queried in order to maximize the average test accuracy of the model.
\label{sect:linear}
Suppose the response variable observations come from a distribution in the exponential family with canonical link. Its probability density function is defined as
\begin{align}
f(y_i \mid \eta_i, \phi) = \mathrm{exp} \Big( \frac{y_i \eta_i - b(\eta_i)}{a_i(\phi)} + c(y_i, \phi) \Big).
\label{eq:exp_fam}
\end{align}
Here, $\eta_i$ and $\phi$ are location and scale parameters. The functions $a_i(.), b(.)$ and $c(.)$ are known.
Motivated from generalized linear models, one may introduce a link function $g$ and focus on modelling
$$ \eta_i = g(\mu_i) = \mathbf x_i^{\top} \boldsymbol \beta,$$
where $\mu_i = \mathbb{E}(y_i)$ is the dependent variable's mean, $\mathbf x_i$ is a $p$-dimensional vector of predictors and $\boldsymbol \beta$ is the $p$-dimensional vector of coefficients. It can be shown that if $y_i$ has a distribution in the exponential family, then
\begin{align*}
&\mathbb{E}(y_i) = \mu_i = \frac{\partial b(\eta_i)}{\partial \eta_i}, \\
&\mathbb{V}(y_i) = \sigma_i^2 = \frac{\partial^2 b(\eta_i)}{\partial^2 \eta_i} a_i(\phi).
\end{align*}
For an EDFA equipment, $y$ is a continuous random variable. Therefore, one can model the relationship between $y$ and $\mathbf x$ with a Gaussian distribution. The Gaussian distribution with mean $\mu_i$ and variance $\sigma^2$ is part of the exponential family with a linear link function $g$ such as
$$ \eta_i = g(\mu_i) = \mu_i = \mathbf x_i^{\top} \boldsymbol \beta,$$
and $b(\eta_i) = \frac{1}{2} \eta_i^2$, $a_i(\phi) = \phi$, and $\phi = \sigma^2$. In this case, the generalized linear model falls into the linear regression context.
There is a strong reason to start with a linear model. A linear model with interactions fully describes any complicated model built over discrete features, suitable for the EDFA data setting.
The coefficients $\boldsymbol \beta$ are unknown in practice, and are estimated using least squares
$$\hat \mathbf y = \mathbf X \hat \boldsymbol \beta, \textrm{~~where~~} \hat\boldsymbol \beta = (\mathbf X^\top\mathbf X)^{-1} \mathbf X^\top\mathbf y,$$
where $\mathbf y_{n \times 1}$ is the vector of observed response, $\mathbf X_{n \times p}$ is row-wise stacked matrix of predictors. Therefore,
$$\hat\mathbf y = \mathbf X(\mathbf X^\top\mathbf X)^{-1} \mathbf X^\top \mathbf y = \mathbf H\mathbf y,$$
where $\mathbf H$ is the projection matrix.
In ultra high-dimensional settings ($p \gg n$) where most feature selection methods fail computationally, it is suggested to order the features $\mathbf x$ with a simple measure of dependence like Pearson correlation and select some of relevant features. This simplifies the ultra high-dimensional setting to a high-dimensional setting \cite{FanLv_SURE_2008} where $p \sim n$ and feature selection methods are computationally feasible. In AL, ultimately, a query is generated with an estimated model dimension $m\ll p$.
\subsection{Feature ordering}
In active learning for EDFA, model building starts with small number of observations $n$, say $n\approx 20$. If the feature dimension $p\gg 40$, least squares estimate of coefficients $\hat\boldsymbol \beta$ are ill conditioned, because $\mathbf X^\top\mathbf X$ is rank-deficient. Regularization, feature selection, dimension reduction, are common methods to resolve this problem. Here we focus on sparse estimation of the coefficients often implemented by $L_1$ regularization. Sparse estimation selects only a small subset of features to predict the response. Active learning requires to re-estimate the model after each new observation is added, and feature selection significantly accelerates frequent model updates.
However, $L_1$ regularization is still computationally challenging for large $p\gg n$. \cite{FanLv_SURE_2008} recommends \emph{sure} screening to pre-select a subset of features with a large absolute correlation (with the response), and then to run $L_1$ regularization on this subset. They show this subset selection keeps important features with a high probability.
Therefore, the $L_1$ regularization is run over \emph{sure} pre-selected features, to reduce the dimensionality from order of $p\gg n$ to $p\sim n$. This dimension reduction is fast and requires only $O(np)$ operations to compute the correlations, and $O(n\log n)$ to order them. The total computation complexity of \emph{sure} screening is $O(p n \log n)$.
Once pre-selected features are chosen, an $L_1$ regularization method is used to choose the number of features in the model. The $L_1$ regularized regression \emph{lasso} (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator) by \cite{Tibshirani_lasso_1996} solves
{\small
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:lasso}
\ell(\boldsymbol \beta\mid \lambda) &=& \frac{1}{2}(\mathbf y-\mathbf X\boldsymbol \beta)^\top(\mathbf y-\mathbf X\boldsymbol \beta) + \lambda \sum_{j=1}^p |\beta_j|, \\ && \lambda\in \rm I\!R, \boldsymbol \beta\in\rm I\!R^p.\nonumber \\
\hat{\boldsymbol \beta}\mid \lambda &=& \argmin_{\boldsymbol \beta} \ell(\boldsymbol \beta\mid\lambda)\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
}
Setting the regularization constant $\lambda=0$ returns the least squares estimates which performs no shrinking and no selection. If $\mathbf X^\top\mathbf X$ is diagonal, the \emph{lasso} reduces to soft-thresholding, a common computationally fast estimation method in compressed sensing.
For a given $\lambda>0$ the regression coefficients $\hat\boldsymbol \beta$ are shrunk towards zero, and some of them are set to zero (sparse selection) similar to soft-thresholding. However, the fitting algorithm is more challenging as $\mathbf X^\top\mathbf X$ is not diagonal, which is the case of EDFA data. \cite{friedman2010regularization} proposed a fast coordinate descent method to fit \eqref{eq:lasso} for a given $\lambda>0$. In practice an appropriate value of $\lambda$ is unknown, and cross-validation is used over a grid to search for a convenient regularization constant. Choosing appropriate $\lambda$ using cross-validation does not provide sparse consistent models. Even does not guarantee estimation consistency, and moreover, is computationally expensive.
\cite{shao_penalization_1996} showed sparsity and parameter consistency do not coincide for $L_1$ regularized regression such as the \emph{lasso}. Two approaches are suggested to address this issue; i) estimate the model dimension $m<p$ consistently, and use the estimated model dimension to re-estimate the regression parameter $\boldsymbol \beta$, or ii) use a non-convex regularization such as the \emph{scad} of \cite{FanLi_SCAD_2001}. Here we use the first approach and estimate the model dimension contently, and then refit the model with non-zero parameters to recover regression parameter consistency. We avoid cross-validation because it is i) inconsistent, ii) computationally challenging. Instead we derive the predictive distribution, also called the \emph{evidence} which is known to be sparse consistent \cite{shao_penalization_1996}. We show the predictive distribution of regression with certain Gaussian prior mimics the Bayesian information criterion (BIC). The BIC of \cite{Schwarz_BIC_1978} is derived under asymptotic approximation, but our predictive distribution is also valid for small sample sizes, suitable for AL setting and EDFA data.
The \emph{lar} (least angle regression) algorithm \cite{Efronetal_lar_2004} computes the \emph{lasso} with some minor modifications, but its implementation is a lot faster, specially if $\lambda$ is unknown. However, even \emph{lar} for $p\gg n$ is slow. This is why we recommend to pre-select using \emph{sure} screening and feed the selected features to \emph{lar} algorithm. With reasonable dimension $p\approx n$ \emph{lar} method is fast. The \emph{lar} algorithm efficiently computes the path of $\hat\boldsymbol \beta(\lambda_j)$ over a sequence of $\lambda_j$ that the parameter dimension changes. The \emph{lar} algorithm finds the path of $\lambda_j$ and individual estimates $\hat\boldsymbol \beta\mid\lambda_j, j=1,\ldots, p$, with the same computational complexity of a single least square.
\subsection{Feature selection}
In a linear model with $p$ covariates, there are $2^p$ candidate models.
Choosing the model dimension and choosing one of the $\lambda_j$'s are inter-related. The choice of model dimension is an integer value $m\in \{1,\ldots,p\}$. The length of sequence of $\lambda_j \approx \min (n, p)$. So one can choose a value $\lambda_j$, and evaluate the model for the effective dimension imposed by that $\lambda_j$. Repeating the same process for all model dimensions and picking the best model dimension $m$ from the $p$ candidate models is wise, we escape from evaluating $2^p$ candidate models and reduce it to only $p$ model evaluation. This approach is well-known as \emph{two-stage} selection, which guarantees the statistical consistency of model dimension, and also the statistical consistency of the estimated parameters simultaneously.
Select a value $\lambda_j$ and use its corresponding nonzero $\hat\boldsymbol \beta(\lambda_j)$ to create a new design matrix $\mathbf X_j$ with dimension $n\times m$. The best model is chosen by maximizing the predictive log likelihood $\ell_j$, i.e., the best model dimension is
$$m=\argmax_{j} \ell_j, \quad j \in \{1,\ldots, p\}.$$
Theorem \ref{theo:bic} derives the predictive log likelihood for small sample sizes inline with the BIC of \cite{Schwarz_BIC_1978}. It is not difficult to see this predictive model is asymptotically equivalent to the BIC. However, in small samples they behave differently.
\begin{theorem}\label{theo:bic}
Let $\hat\boldsymbol \beta$ be the maximum likelihood estimate of $\boldsymbol \beta$ and $\mathcal{F}$ be the exponential family distribution. Suppose that the observed information matrix $J(\hat\boldsymbol \beta)$ is positive definite and
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathbf y & \sim & \mathcal{F},\\
\boldsymbol \beta & \sim & \mathcal N(\hat{\boldsymbol \beta} , n \{J(\hat\boldsymbol \beta)\}^{-1}).
\end{eqnarray*}
The predictive log likelihood
$$\ell_j = \log \int_\infty^\infty \cdots \int_\infty^\infty f(\mathbf y \mid \boldsymbol \beta , \mathbf X) d\pi(\boldsymbol \beta\mid\mathbf X)$$
simplifies to
\begin{eqnarray*}
\ell_j &=& \ell(\hat\boldsymbol \beta) - \frac{m}{2} \log(n+1) + o(1).\end{eqnarray*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Define $\ell(\boldsymbol \beta)$ as the log-likelihood function of $\boldsymbol \beta$ given $\mathbf y$ and $\mathbf X$. Using the second-order Taylor expansion at the maximum likelihood estimate $\hat \boldsymbol \beta$, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{split}
\ell(\boldsymbol \beta) &= \frac{1}{0!} \ell(\hat \boldsymbol \beta) + \frac{1}{1!} \frac{\partial \ell(\boldsymbol \beta)}{\partial \boldsymbol \beta} \mid _{\boldsymbol \beta = \hat \boldsymbol \beta} (\boldsymbol \beta - \hat \boldsymbol \beta) + \\
& \frac{1}{2!} (\boldsymbol \beta - \hat \boldsymbol \beta)^\top \lbrace \frac{\partial^2 \ell(\boldsymbol \beta)}{\partial \boldsymbol \beta \partial \boldsymbol \beta^\top} \rbrace \mid _{\boldsymbol \beta = \hat \boldsymbol \beta} (\boldsymbol \beta - \hat \boldsymbol \beta) + \mathcal{O}_p(||\boldsymbol \beta - \hat \boldsymbol \beta||^3),
\end{split}
\end{align*}
or equivalently,
\begin{align*}
\begin{split}
\ell(\boldsymbol \beta) = \ell(\hat \boldsymbol \beta) - \frac{1}{2} (\boldsymbol \beta - \hat \boldsymbol \beta)^\top \lbrace J(\hat \boldsymbol \beta) \rbrace (\boldsymbol \beta - \hat \boldsymbol \beta) + o(1),
\end{split}
\end{align*}
Hence, by subtracting in the likelihood of $\mathcal{F}$, we have
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
f(\mathbf y \mid \boldsymbol \beta, \mathbf X) &= \mathrm{exp}\{ \ell(\hat \boldsymbol \beta)\} \times \\
& \exp \lbrace - \frac{1}{2} (\boldsymbol \beta - \hat \boldsymbol \beta)^\top \lbrace J(\hat \boldsymbol \beta) \rbrace (\boldsymbol \beta - \hat \boldsymbol \beta) \rbrace + o(1).
\end{split}
\label{eq:ylike1}
\end{align}
Also, the prior distribution of $\boldsymbol \beta$ is
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\pi(\boldsymbol \beta \mid \mathbf X) &= \mid 2 \pi n \{J(\hat \boldsymbol \beta)\}^{-1} \mid^{-\frac{1}{2}} \times \\
& \mathrm{exp} \lbrace -\frac{1}{2n} (\boldsymbol \beta - \hat \boldsymbol \beta)^\top \lbrace \{J(\hat \boldsymbol \beta)\}^{-1} \rbrace^{-1} (\boldsymbol \beta - \hat \boldsymbol \beta)\rbrace.
\end{split}
\label{eq:betalike1}
\end{align}
Therefore, the product of \eqref{eq:ylike1} and \eqref{eq:betalike1} is then given by
\begin{align*}
\begin{split}
& f(\mathbf y \mid \boldsymbol \beta, \mathbf X) \pi(\boldsymbol \beta \mid \mathbf X) = \\
&\mathrm{exp} \lbrace \ell(\hat \boldsymbol \beta) \rbrace \mid 2 \pi n \{J(\hat \boldsymbol \beta)\}^{-1} \mid^{-\frac{1}{2}} \times\\
& \mathrm{exp} \lbrace -\frac{(n+1)}{2n} (\boldsymbol \beta - \hat\boldsymbol \beta)^\top \lbrace \{J(\hat \boldsymbol \beta)\}^{-1} \rbrace^{-1} (\boldsymbol \beta - \hat\boldsymbol \beta)\rbrace + o(1).
\end{split}
\end{align*}
Now, by taking the integral with respect to $\boldsymbol \beta$, the predictive likelihood simplifies to
\begin{align*}
\begin{split}
L_j &= \mathrm{exp} \lbrace \ell(\hat \boldsymbol \beta) \rbrace \mid 2 \pi n \{J(\hat \boldsymbol \beta)\}^{-1} \mid^{-\frac{1}{2}} \mid 2 \pi \frac{n}{n+1} \{J(\hat \boldsymbol \beta)\}^{-1} \mid^{\frac{1}{2}} \\ &+ o(1)
\end{split}
\end{align*}
or equivalently,
$$L_j = (n+1)^{-\frac{m}{2}} ~ \mathrm{exp} \lbrace \ell(\hat \boldsymbol \beta) \rbrace + o(1). $$
Finally, the predictive log likelihood is given by
$$ \ell_j = \ell(\hat \boldsymbol \beta) -\frac{m}{2} \mathrm{log}(n+1) + o(1).~ \square$$
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
Suppose that $$ y_i \sim \mathcal{N}(\mathbf x_i^{\top}\boldsymbol \beta, \sigma^2).$$
The predictive log likelihood simplifies to
\begin{equation} \label{eq:bic}
\ell_j = \mathrm{constant} - \frac{1}{2 \sigma^2 }(\mathbf y-\hat\mathbf y)^\top(\mathbf y-\hat\mathbf y) - \frac{m}{2} \log(n+1)
\end{equation}
where $\hat \mathbf y$ is the predicted response under dimension $m$
$$\hat\mathbf y = \mathbf X_j (\mathbf X_j^\top \mathbf X_j)^{-1} \mathbf X_j \mathbf y.$$
\end{corollary}
In case of $\mathbf y$ having a Gaussian distribution, the Taylor expansion is exact since $ \mathcal{O}_p(||\boldsymbol \beta - \hat \boldsymbol \beta||^3) = 0$. The positive constant $2\sigma^2$ is unknown in practice, and does not play a role in maximization.
\subsection{Linear query generation}
\label{sect:linearquery}
Here we focus on linear models for query generation. Linear models are attractive because the class of linear models including main effects with interactions cover any complex function on discrete features. We start with a linear model with main effects only (and no interaction) to create an extremely fast query generation, called \emph{query-by-sign}. Then generalize it to a linear model with main effects and pair-wise interactions to trade-off some computation for better accuracy. We call this method \emph{query-by-variance}. However, the model may include higher order significant interactions. We address this issue by using bagged trees to produce \emph{query-by-bagging}.
In AL context, the objective is to request a new observation that most improves the model performance. There are two major paradigms to interpret model performance; i) smaller variance of prediction $\hat\mathbf y$, and ii) smaller variance of estimators $\hat\boldsymbol \beta$. Here we take the former approach as it makes more sense for the EDFA application, and focus on improving prediction accuracy as the objective.
In an AL setting, at each iteration, a new data point $\underline {\mathbf x}_{1 \times p}$ is requested, and after observing its response variable $y(\underline {\mathbf x})$ the training set is updated. Therefore, we use the notation $\hat\boldsymbol \beta(\underline {\mathbf x})$ to emphasize that this new $\hat\boldsymbol \beta$ is estimated after adding this new observation to the previously observed design matrix $\mathbf X_{n \times p}$.
The new design matrix, after adding the new observation is
$$\underline { \mathbf X} _{(n+1)\times p}=\left[
\begin{array}{c}
\mathbf X_{n\times p} \\
\underline {\mathbf x}_{1\times p}
\end{array}
\right],$$
Note that $\mathbf X$ is the training data already observed, and variance is a function of the new observation $\underline {\mathbf x}$ only. To improve prediction accuracy, we query a new observation $\underline {\mathbf x}$ under which the model prediction has the largest uncertainty $\mathbb V\{\hat y(\underline {\mathbf x})\}$. From \emph{conditional variance theorem} \cite{sheldon2002first}
\begin{align*}
\mathbb V\{\hat y(\underline {\mathbf x})\}= \mathbb E_{\underline {\mathbf x}}[\mathbb V\{\hat y(\underline {\mathbf x})\mid \underline {\mathbf x} \}] + \mathbb V_{\underline {\mathbf x}}[ \mathbb E \{\hat y (\underline {\mathbf x}) \mid \underline {\mathbf x}\}].
\end{align*}
Since $\underline {\mathbf x}$ is a query and under our control, this simplifies to
$$\mathbb V\{\hat y(\underline {\mathbf x})\}= \mathbb V\{\hat y(\underline {\mathbf x})\mid \underline {\mathbf x} \}.$$
From linear model assumption the response variance $\mathbb V\{ y(\underline {\mathbf x})\mid \underline {\mathbf x} \}$ is constant $\sigma^2$. Note that the response variance is different from the prediction variance, i.e. $$\mathbb V\{ y(\underline {\mathbf x})\mid \underline {\mathbf x} \}\neq \mathbb V\{ \hat y(\underline {\mathbf x})\mid \underline {\mathbf x} \}.$$ The response variance $\mathbb V\{ y(\underline {\mathbf x})\mid \underline {\mathbf x} \}$ is estimated through the residual mean squares
$$ \frac{1}{n-p} \mathbf r^\top\mathbf r,$$
where $n-p$ is the error degrees of freedom. The residual (or the training error) is $\mathbf r=\hat\mathbf y-\mathbf y$. The prediction variance $\mathbb V\{ \hat y(\underline {\mathbf x})\mid \underline {\mathbf x} \}$ requires more elaboration and depends on $\mathbf X$ and $\underline {\mathbf x}$.
To maximize the prediction variance $\mathbb V\{ \hat y(\mathbf x)\mid \mathbf x \}$ one needs to keep the maximizer scale-invariant, otherwise any direction $\mathbf x$ with a large scale $c$ is solution because $\mathbb V(c\mathbf x)=c^2\mathbb V(\mathbf x)$.
Suppose ${\underline {\mathbf x}}$ is of a fixed norm to avoid scaling, therefore
\begin{equation}
\argmax\limits_{\underline {\mathbf x}} \mathbb V\{{\underline {\mathbf x}}^\top\hat\boldsymbol \beta\}=\argmax\limits_{\underline {\mathbf x}} \sigma^2 {\underline {\mathbf x}}^\top(\mathbf X^\top\mathbf X)^{-1} \underline {\mathbf x},
\label{eq:maxvar}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma^2$ is a constant and can be ignored in maximization.
Equation \eqref{eq:maxvar} is key to active learning for linear models. Suppose the model dimension is estimated properly $m<p$, and $\underline {\mathbf x}$ is continuous $\underline {\mathbf x}\in\rm I\!R^m$. The scale-invariant solution query generation requires maximizing \eqref{eq:maxvar} subject to a bounded norm $\underline {\mathbf x}^\top\underline {\mathbf x} =c^2$. It is easy to see that such a maximizer has a closed form.
\begin{theorem}\label{theo:eigen}
Suppose $\mathbf X^\top\mathbf X$ is positive definite, therefore $\hat{\underline {\mathbf x}}=c~ \mathbf{e}_\mathrm{min}$, where $\mathbf{e}_\mathrm{min}$ is the eigenvector associated with the smallest eigenvalue of $\mathbf X^\top\mathbf X$ is the solution to the following optimization problem
\begin{eqnarray}
& \argmax\limits_{\underline {\mathbf x}} {\underline {\mathbf x}}^\top(\mathbf X^\top\mathbf X)^{-1} \underline {\mathbf x}, \label{eq:eigensol} \\
& \mathrm{s.t.~~} \underline {\mathbf x}^\top\underline {\mathbf x}=c^2. \label{eq:eigenconst} \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $\mathbf X^\top\mathbf X$ is positive definite and let $\mathbf y = c ^{-1} \underline {\mathbf x} = (c ^{-1} \underline {\mathbf x}_1, \ldots, c ^{-1} \underline {\mathbf x}_{\hat p})$. Therefore, the constraint $\underline {\mathbf x}^\top \underline {\mathbf x}= c^2$ is equivalent to $\mathbf y^\top \mathbf y = 1$. The optimization problem reduces to
$$ \argmax_{\mathbf y} {\mathbf y}^\top(\mathbf X^\top\mathbf X)^{-1} \mathbf y ~~ \mathrm{s.t.} ~~ \mathbf y^\top\mathbf y = 1,$$
or equivalently for $\mathbf y \neq \mathbf{0}$, to
$$ \argmax_{\mathbf y} \frac{{\mathbf y}^\top(\mathbf X^\top\mathbf X)^{-1} \mathbf y}{{\mathbf y}^\top\mathbf y}.$$
Let $\mathbf{Q}$ be the orthogonal matrix whose columns are the eigenvectors of $\mathbf{A} = (\mathbf X^\top \mathbf X)^{-1}$ and $\mathbf{D}(\lambda)$ the associated eigenvalues diagonal matrix. Suppose that the eigenvalues are ordered such as $\lambda_1 \geq \lambda_2 \geq \ldots \geq \lambda_{\hat p}$. Let $\mathbf{A}^{1/2} = \mathbf{Q} \mathbf{D}(\lambda)^{1/2} \mathbf{Q}^\top$ and $\mathbf{z} = \mathbf{Q}^\top \mathbf y$. Therefore, for $\mathbf{z} \neq \mathbf{0}$,
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
& \frac{{\mathbf y}^\top(\mathbf X^\top\mathbf X)^{-1} \mathbf y}{{\mathbf y}^\top\mathbf y} = \frac{{\mathbf y}^\top \mathbf{A}^{1/2} \mathbf{A}^{1/2} \mathbf y}{{\mathbf y}^\top \mathbf{Q} \mathbf{Q}^\top \mathbf y} = \frac{\mathbf{z}^\top \mathbf{D}(\lambda) \mathbf{z}}{\mathbf{z}^\top \mathbf{z}} \\
& = \frac{\sum_{j=1}^{\hat p} \lambda_j z_j^2}{\sum_{j=1}^{\hat p} z_j^2} \leq \lambda_1 \frac{\sum_{j=1}^{\hat p} z_j^2}{\sum_{j=1}^{\hat p} z_j^2} = \lambda_1 .
\label{eq:cond1eigen}
\end{split}
\end{align}
Now, for $\mathbf y = \mathbf{e}_\mathrm{max}$, the eigenvector associated with $\lambda_1$, the largest eigenvalue of $(\mathbf X^\top\mathbf X) ^{-1}$, we have
$$ \mathbf{z} = \mathbf{Q}^\top \mathbf{e}_\mathrm{max} = (1, 0, \ldots, 0)^\top, $$
because $ \mathbf{e}_j^\top \mathbf{e}_\mathrm{max} = 1$ for $j=1$ and $0$ otherwise. Hence for this choice of $\mathbf y$, we have
\begin{align}
\frac{\mathbf{e}_\mathrm{max}^\top(\mathbf X^\top\mathbf X)^{-1} \mathbf{e}_\mathrm{max}}{\mathbf{e}_\mathrm{max}^\top \mathbf{e}_\mathrm{max}} = \frac{\mathbf{z}^\top \mathbf{D}(\lambda) \mathbf{z}}{\mathbf{z}^\top \mathbf{z}} = \frac{\lambda_1}{1} = \lambda_1.
\label{eq:cond2eigen}
\end{align}
By \eqref{eq:cond1eigen} and \eqref{eq:cond2eigen}, it is straightforward to see that $\hat \mathbf y = \mathbf{e}_\mathrm{max}$ and since $\mathbf y = c ^{-1} \underline {\mathbf x}$, we have $\hat \underline {\mathbf x} = c ~ \mathbf{e}_\mathrm{max}$. Consequently $\hat \underline {\mathbf x} = c ~ \mathbf{e}_\mathrm{min}$ where this time $\mathbf{e}_\mathrm{min}$ is the eigenvector associated with the smallest eigenvalue of $\mathbf X^\top\mathbf X$. $\square$
\end{proof}
The computational cost of this solution is $O(m^2)$, which is quite fast for small $m$. The application of \eqref{eq:eigensol} is not restricted to continuous feature space. Suppose that the feature space is binary $\underline {\mathbf x} \in \{-1,+1\}^{m},$ then $\underline {\mathbf x}^\top\underline {\mathbf x} = m$ and a relaxed approximate solution is
\begin{equation}
\hat{\underline {\mathbf x}} = \sign(\mathbf{e}_\mathrm{min}).
\end{equation}
The linear model is sparse, so the dimension of $\underline {\mathbf x}$ is negligible ($m \ll p$). The brute force maximizes the objective by trying all $2^{m}$ possible values, so it is combinatorially large. However, for small $m \leq 18 $, exhaustive search is computationally feasible.
\subsection{Ensemble-based query generation}
\label{sect:ensemble}
In many applications the prediction function is a nonlinear function. While a linear model helps to identify important features, they are not accurate for prediction purpose. As a consequence, an inaccurate prediction model leads to generating suboptimal queries. The model may contain even more than the second order interactions, or the linear model variance assumption $\mathbb V(y(\mathbf x)) = \sigma^2$ might be wrong.
In this section we address both issues by fitting a flexible ensemble tree on the sparse features, and relax assumption the constant variance assumption by computing the empirical variance of the prediction. Among many variants of ensemble methods we propose bagging, because empirical estimation of the variance $\mathbb V(y(\mathbf x))$ is straightforward.
Bagging \cite{breiman1996bagging} is a method for fitting an ensemble of learning algorithms trained on bootstrap replicates of the data in order to get an aggregated predictor. Suppose that $B$ bootstrap replicates are sampled from the observed $n$ independent data
$$(\mathbf x_i, y_i), \quad i=1,\ldots, n,$$
and for $b = 1, \ldots, B,$ a regression tree $T_b$ is fitted. Therefore the response prediction is
$$\hat \mathbf y = \frac{1}{B} \sum_b \hat \mathbf y_b, $$
where $\hat \mathbf y_b = \hat T_b(\mathbf x)$ is the prediction output of a single tree. Hence, the prediction variance $\mathbb V\{\hat y(\underline {\mathbf x})\mid \underline {\mathbf x} \}$ is estimated by the empirical variance
$$ \hat\mathbb V\{ \hat y(\underline {\mathbf x})\mid \underline {\mathbf x} \} = \frac{1}{B-1} \sum_b \lbrace \hat y_b(\underline {\mathbf x}) - \hat y(\underline {\mathbf x}) \rbrace ^2.$$
In the context of active learning, the query-by-bagging suggests ${\hat \underline {\mathbf x}}$ that maximizes the empirical variance such as
\begin{equation}
\hat \underline {\mathbf x} = \argmax\limits_{\underline {\mathbf x}} \hat\mathbb V\{ \hat y(\underline {\mathbf x})\mid \underline {\mathbf x} \}.
\label{eq:empvar}
\end{equation}
\section{Experimental Analysis}
\label{sect:experimental}
We divide our experimental analysis into two subsections; simulated data, discussed in Section~\ref{sect:simulations}, and the real-world EDFA application, discussed in Section~\ref{sect:application}.
\subsection{Simulations}\label{sect:simulations}
Here we conduct a simulation study to assess the performance of the three proposed active learning methods: \emph{query-by-sign}, \emph{query-by-variance} and \emph{query-by-bagging}. Each method has its associated fitted model; a linear model using main effects only for \emph{query-by-sign}, a linear model using main effects and second order interaction terms for \emph{query-by-variance}, and an ensemble of bagged trees for \emph{query-by-bagging}. We compare the three different query generation strategies against random sampling. We evaluate the performance of these methods by varying the complexity of the simulated data, see Table \ref{tab:queries} for a summary.
\begin{table}[htb!]
\caption{Summary of the proposed query strategies.}
\label{tab:queries}
\centering
{\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c c c c}
& Query by & Query by & Query by \\
& Sign & Variance & Bagging \\
\hline
Modeling & \\
\hline
Used Effects & main & main + & bagged tress \\
& & pair-wise & \\
Ordering & lar & sure, lar & lar \\
Selection& BIC & BIC & BIC \\
\hline
Sampling \\
\hline
Used Effects & main & main + & main \\
& & pair-wise & \\
Optimization & $\sign(\mathbf{e}_\mathrm{min})$ & $\mathbb V(\hat y (\underline {\mathbf x}))$ & $\hat{\mathbb V}(\hat{y}(\underline {\mathbf x}) )$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{table}
An active learning algorithm in our experiments has the following components: a) A training set $D$, split into labeled ($D_L$) and unlabeled ($D_U$) pools, b) A validation set $V$, c) A sampling budget $T$, and d) Features selection update frequency.
For each scenario, we generate $100$ independent observations for the labeled pool ($D_L$), and $20000$ independent observations for the unlabeled pool ($D_U$). As mentioned earlier, $D_U$ is the pool that responds to the queries by providing the label $y_i$ for the data point $\mathbf x_i$. Sampling budget ($T$) is usually set at $1000$, and finally, a set of $2000$ labeled data points is generated for validation purpose ($V$). We use the RMSE for comparing different active learning strategies.
Data is generated with the following specifications:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Draw $(x_1^\star, \ldots, x_p^\star)$ a vector of random variables from a Bernoulli distribution $\mathrm{Ber}(\theta)$,
\item For $j=1, \ldots, p$, let $x_j = 2 x_j^\star - 1$ so that the features space is $\lbrace -1,1 \rbrace^p$,
\item Let $\beta_0$ be a constant and define $(\beta_1, \ldots, \beta_p)$ as a vector of random variables with discrete probability distribution: $\mathrm{Pr} (\beta_j=-3) = \mathrm{Pr} (\beta_j=+3) = 0.5$ for a subset of size $k < p$ of features, and $\mathrm{Pr} (\beta_j=0) = 1$ for the remaining $p-k$ features.
\end{enumerate}
With $p$ features, the most complicated regression model generates a coefficient for the constant $\beta_0$, $p$ coefficients for main effects (features), ${p \choose 2}$ coefficients for second-order (pair-wise) interactions, ..., and one last coefficient for the full-interactions term. In our simulations, with only $k$ non-zero coefficients, ${k \choose 2}$ terms can be included for second-order interactions. Simulated data using this model will guarantee the usefulness of feature selection.
We consider three different scenarios. We assume a linear model $\mathbf y=\mathbf X \boldsymbol \beta + \boldsymbol \varepsilon$, where the input matrix $\mathbf X$ can be composed of either; i) main effects and 2nd order interactions where we highlight the usefulness of query-by-variance ii) main effects, 2nd and 3rd order interactions where we highlight the usefulness of query-by-bagging and iii) main effects only, where we highlight the usefulness of query-by-sign.
For the remainder of this section, we fix $k=7$ and $p=40$. We simulate data based on generated models using 2nd and 3rd order interactions. Data generated including 2nd order interactions has an input dimension of $7 + {7 \choose 2} = 28$, and for 3rd order interactions the input dimension is $7 + {7 \choose 2} + {7 \choose 3} = 63$.
All models are fitted with features selected by the \emph{lar} algorithm. Note that after each set of 50 new observations added to the labeled pool, the feature selection is repeated and the model is updated. The three active learning methods are as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textbf{query-by-sign}: Fit a linear model using only main effects (pre-selected by constrained \emph{lar}). Query the observation $\hat{\mathbf x} = \sign(\mathbf{e}_\mathrm{min})$.
\item \textbf{query-by-variance}: Fit a linear model using main effects (pre-selected by constrained \emph{lar}) and the corresponding 2nd order interaction terms. Query the observation $\hat{\mathbf x}$ that maximizes the variance of $\hat \mathbf y$.
\item \textbf{query-by-bagging}: Fit $10$ bagged regression trees with maximum $10$ features (pre-selected by constrained \emph{lar}) in each tree. Query the observation $\hat{\mathbf x}$ that maximizes the empirical variance of $\hat \mathbf y$.
\end{enumerate}
In the first scenario data are simulated by a linear model using main effects and 2nd order interactions. Figure \ref{fig:scene1} illustrates the performance of the three different active learning strategies on this data. The query-by-sign (top left) fails because the fitted model only incorporates main effects, and hence is not an accurate approximation of the data. query-by-variance (top right) and query-by-bagging (bottom) active learning strategies outperform the random sampling strategy and eventually find the ``true'' model as the sampling budget increases, however, query-by-bagging finds the ``true'' model more smoothly.
\begin{figure}[tbh]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{fig/Sim_2nd_order_3methods_1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{fig/Sim_2nd_order_3methods_2.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{fig/Sim_2nd_order_3methods_3.png}
\caption{Validation RMSE on data simulated by a linear model with main effects and 2nd order interactions using three different AL strategies; query-by-sign (top), query-by-variance (middle), and query-by-bagging (bottom).}
\label{fig:scene1}
\end{figure}
In the second scenario data is simulated by a linear model using main effects, 2nd and 3rd order interactions. Observing the failure of query-by-sign for the less complex data of first scenario, we compare only the query-by-variance to the query-by-bagging methods in this scenario. Figure \ref{fig:scene2} illustrates the results. When the 3rd order interaction terms are added to the simulated model, the query-by-variance (left panel) fails compared to the random sampling strategy. This suggests query-by-variance needs to be adjusted if significant 3rd order interactions are present in the model. However, query-by-bagging (right panel), outperforms the random sampling strategy by a large margin.
\begin{figure}[tbh]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{fig/Sim_3rd_order_3methods_2.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{fig/Sim_3rd_order_3methods_3.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Validation RMSE on data simulated by a linear model with main effects, 2nd and 3rd order interactions using two different AL strategies; query-by-variance (top) and query-by-bagging (bottom).}
\label{fig:scene2}
\end{figure}
Table~\ref{tab:runtime} summarizes the run time for the three proposed methods. As expected query-by-sign is the strategy with least computational cost and the fastest method. Query-by-variance is more computationally expensive, and query-by-bagging is the most expensive among the three methods. Times reported is the time needed (in seconds) to generate 200 queries with no model update during the query generation. The models are fixed to use 5 features only. Experiments are performed on a laptop with a 2.6 GHz CPU.
\begin{table}[htb!]
\caption{Run time (in seconds) for generation of 200 queries.}
\label{tab:runtime}
\centering
{\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c c c c}
& Query by & Query by & Query by \\
& Sign & Variance & Bagging \\
\hline
Training size & \\
\hline
1000 & 2.45 & 5.68 & 6.69 \\
2000 & 2.54 & 5.57 & 7.19 \\
3000 & 2.84 & 6.22 & 7.94 \\
4000 & 3.74 & 7.31 & 9.02 \\
5000 & 4.09 & 8.13 & 11.01 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{table}
\subsection{Application}
\label{sect:application}
Here We apply our query generation methods to the data collected from the optical amplifier equipment (EDFA).
Our data set contains about $9000$ observations for an EDFA device with $40$ channels. We split the data set into a training set, a validation set, and a test set with $4500$, $2250$, and $2250$ observations, respectively. We further split the training set into a labeled pool of $100$ observations, and an unlabeled pool of $4400$ observations. Sampling budget is $1000$.
There is a trade-off between maximum number of features to include in the bagging ensemble and the update frequency of feature selection. Using a large number of features in the model renders query generation computationally expensive, and therefore requires a less frequent feature selection update. By keeping the maximum number of features in the model small, we can generate queries faster, and update the features selection more often. For example, if only 18 features are used for bagging and query generation, and features selection is performed every 10 iterations, we can achieve performance observed in left side of Figure \ref{fig:edfa2}. Note that the final validation RMSE has dropped to $0.085$ which is enough to save multiple hours of engineers' time for collecting labeled data. On the right side of this figure we can further observe the increasing model size as more and more observations are queried by the active learning. Although the model can add more useful features or drop less useful ones at each model update step (as can be seen from the oscillating model size graph), the model using active learning strategy takes more advantage of this freedom compared to the random sampling strategy, and reaches the maximum number of features allowed to index for modeling and query generation (i.e. $18$.) The performance of AL strategy increases as model size upper bound increases to 20 or higher, but this comes with a computational cost.
\begin{figure}[tbh]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{fig/edfa_bagging_parametertunning.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.31\textwidth]{fig/edfa_bagging_modelsize.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Validation RMSE on EDFA data using query-by-bagging (top). The estimated model size as the number of samples increases (bottom).}
\label{fig:edfa2}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sect:conclusion}
Active learning helps to make better use of limited labeling budget by integrating data selection process into the learning algorithm. We proposed three different active learning strategies with different computational costs and running time requirements. The simplest strategy, query-by-sign, only considers main effects of a linear model for query generation. Query-by-variance takes advantage of second-order interactions, and query-by-bagging considers high-order interactions by using an ensemble of trees to model data and generate the queries. We simulated data using models with second or third order interactions, and compared the three different active learning strategies. We then applied our findings to EDFA data, a very small and highly complex data set. We observed that query-by-bagging, when tuned properly, improves the model prediction performance and saves engineers' data collection time. Also, the simpler sampling strategy, query-by-variance, displays interesting results, but on data sets with less main effect interactions.
|
\section{Introduction}
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provides high spatial resolution and exquisite soft tissue contrast, leading to its pervasive use for visualization of tissue anatomy. Using MR images for quantitative analysis of tissue-specific information is critical for numerous diagnostic and prognostic protocols. The gold-standard for high fidelity region annotation is manual tissue segmentation, which can be time-consuming and prone to inter-reader variations \cite{hoyte2011segmentations, bogner2012readout}. Thus, there has always been great interest in developing fully-automated tissue segmentation techniques that are robust to small image variations \cite{dam2015automatic, bauer2013survey}.
A common application of segmentation is the segmentation of articular cartilage for studying changes associated with onset and development of osteoarthritis (OA) \cite{erhart2015new, dunn2004t2}. Recent advances in MRI have focused on developing non-invasive morphological and compositional biomarkers for tracking the onset and progression of OA. There is promising evidence suggesting that changes in cartilage morphology and composition may serve as early-OA biomarkers \cite{eckstein2013quantitative, welsch2008cartilage}. Despite its potential, accurate measurement of cartilage morphology entails tedious manual segmentation of the fine structure of cartilage in hundreds of MRI slices and patients \cite{Eckstein_2006}. Though automatic segmentation of femoral cartilage is of great interest, the tissue's thin morphology and low contrast with surrounding tissue structures makes automatic segmentation challenging.
Traditional automatic segmentation approaches have utilized 3D statistical shape modeling or multi-atlas segmentations modulated by anisotropic regularizers \cite{seim2010model, shan2014automatic}. However, such techniques are highly sensitive to deformations in knee shape, which can be caused by variations in patient knee size and in incidence and progression of pathology \cite{pedoia2016segmentation}. Advances in deep learning and convolution neural networks (CNNs) have shown great potential for enhancing the accuracy of cartilage segmentation \cite{liu2018deep, norman2018use}. However, due to the stochastic nature of deep learning and the multitude of training parameters (hyperparameters) that can be fine-tuned for any given problem, developing analytic estimations of network behavior is challenging \cite{lecun2015deep, shwartz2017opening}. As a result, practical design choices for optimizing CNN performance for segmentation in MRI, especially for femoral cartilage segmentation, have been under-explored.
Often, CNN architectures are modified in the hope of increasing overall accuracy and generalizability while minimizing inference time. In the case of the popular ImageNet challenge \cite{russakovsky2015imagenet} for natural image classification, classification accuracy and generalizability have varied considerably with changes in network architecture \cite{szegedy2015going, he2016deep}. Additionally, while 2D architectures have been effective at slice-by-slice segmentation of medical images, recent works have also utilized volumetric architectures, which take 3D volumes as inputs to potentially add through-plane (depth) contextual cues to improve segmentation \cite{kamnitsas2017efficient, cciccek20163d}. However, the extent to which network structure and input depth impact semantic segmentation in medical imaging remains unclear.
Variations in CNN training protocol may also affect network performance. As network weights are optimized with respect to the gradient of the training loss function, the selection of loss function may dictate network accuracy. In particular for segmentation, where foreground-background class imbalance is common, loss functions, such as weighted cross-entropy and soft Dice loss, are often chosen to minimize the impact of class imbalance \cite{tian2017deep, baumgartner2017exploration}. In addition, supervised CNN training requires both large training sets and corresponding high-fidelity segmentation masks, which are difficult to produce. In cases of limited training data, data augmentation is a common practice for artificially increasing variability of training data to reduce overfitting and promote generalizability \cite{perez2017effectiveness, krizhevsky2012imagenet}. Moreover, MRI volumes can be acquired with varying fields of view (FOVs), resulting in different matrix sizes. A commonly reported advantage of fully convolutional network (FCN) CNN architectures is their ability to infer on images or volumes of arbitrary matrix sizes not specifically utilized during the training process \cite{long2015fully}.
In this study, we investigate three factors associated with the performance and generalizability of segmentation CNNs: network architecture, training loss functions, and data extent. While performance is quantified by traditional segmentation accuracy metrics, we also quantify the generalizability of a network using the sensitivity of applying trained networks to segment MR images at varying FOVs. All experiments were conducted on segmentation of femoral cartilage, a challenging localization problem and a relevant target for studying OA. We seek to quantify performance variations induced by these three factors to motivate how CNN segmentation models can be built, trained, and deployed with confidence.
\section{Methods}
\subsection{Dataset}
\label{sec:methods_dataset}
Data for this study were acquired from the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) (http://oai.epi-ucsf.org), a longitudinal study for studying osteoarthritis progression \cite{Peterfy_2008}. 3D sagittal double echo steady state (DESS) datasets along with their corresponding femoral cartilage segmented masks were utilized in this study (relevant scan parameters: FOV=14cm, Matrix=384$\times$307 (zero-filled to 384$\times$384), TE/TR=5/16ms, 160 slices with a thickness of 0.7mm) \cite{Peterfy_2008}. This dataset consisted of 88 patients with Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) OA grades between 1 and 4 \cite{kellgren1958osteo}, measured at two time points (baseline and 1 year) for a total of 176 segmented volumes. These patients were randomly split into cohorts of 60 patients for training, 14 for validation, and 14 for testing, resulting in 120, 28, and 28 volumes used during training, validation, and testing, respectively. An approximately equal distribution of KL grades was maintained among all three groups (Supporting Table S1).
\subsection{Data Pre-processing}
\label{sec:methods_data_preprocessing}
All DESS volumes in \S\ref{sec:methods_dataset} were downsampled by a factor of 2 in the slice dimension (to dimensions of 384$\times$384$\times$80) prior to network training and inference to increase SNR and reduce computational complexity, justified by previous studies reporting that approximately 1.5mm slices are adequate for cartilage morphometry \cite{Eckstein_2006}. Images were downsampled using sum-of-squares combinations, and the corresponding masks were downsampled by taking the union of the masks to compensate for partial volume artifacts. The volume was then cropped in-plane to 288$\times$288 by calculating the center of mass (COM) and centering the cropped region 50 pixels in the superior (up) direction and 20 pixels in the anterior (left) direction to bias the COM to femoral cartilage and away from the tibia and posterior muscles. The volume was then cropped to remove 4 slices from both the medial and lateral ends, resulting in volumes of dimensions 288$\times$288$\times$72. All scans were subsequently volumetrically zero-mean whitened ($\mu$=0, $\sigma$=1) by subtracting the image volume mean and scaling by the image volume standard deviation.
All data pre-processing was conducted using MATLAB (MathWorks, Natick, MA). These training, validation, and testing sets were used for all experiments unless otherwise indicated.
\begin{figure}[bt]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{imgs/fig01-architectures.png}
\caption{Three encoder-decoder fully convolutional network architectures adopted for femoral cartilage segmentation. U-Net (A) uses skip connections to concatenate weights from the encoder to the decoder while SegNet (B) passes pooling indices to the decoder to reduce computational complexities of weight concatenation. Unlike traditional encoder-decoder architectures, DeeplabV3+ (C) uses spatial pyramid pooling and atrous (dilated) convolutions to extract latent feature vectors at multiple fields of view.}
\label{fig:architectures}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Network Architecture}
\label{sec:methods_network_architecture}
In this experiment, we wanted to evaluate the sensitivity of the semantic segmentation task to different, popular CNN architectures. We selected three general 2D FCN architectures for analysis: U-Net, SegNet, and DeeplabV3+ \cite{ronneberger2015u, badrinarayanan2015segnet, chen2018deeplab}. These FCN architectures utilize variations of the encoder-decoder model for semantic segmentation for extracting features at different spatial fields of view.
The U-Net architecture implements an encoder-decoder model using max-pooling and transpose convolutions to downsample and upsample feature maps (Figure ~\ref{fig:architectures}a). In this structure, the number of network filters increases exponentially as a function of network depth. The U-Net also relies on deep skip connections by concatenating encoder outputs to the decoding layers in order to share spatial cues between the two and to propagate the loss efficiently at different network depths \cite{glorot2010understanding, pascanu2013difficulty}. SegNet uses a similar encoder-decoder architecture but passes pooling indices to upsampling layers to avoid the overhead of copying encoder weights (Figure ~\ref{fig:architectures}b). In contrast to using max-pooling to promote spatial invariance and to downsample feature maps, DeeplabV3+ implements `Xception` blocks \cite{chollet2017xception} and spatial pyramid pooling with dilated convolutions to capture a larger receptive field without increasing the parameter size (Figure ~\ref{fig:architectures}c). Instead of transposed convolutions, the DeeplabV3+ decoder uses bilinear upsampling to upsample the features to the input image size. While the U-Net and SegNet have shown promise for musculoskeletal MRI semantic segmentation \cite{liu2018deep, norman2018use}, DeeplabV3+ has been primarily utilized for natural image segmentation \cite{chen2017rethinking} and has seen limited use in segmentation of medical images.
As a baseline comparison, all architectures were trained for 100 epochs and subsequently fine-tuned for 100 epochs following training hyperparameters detailed in Table ~\ref{table:default_hyperparameters}.
\begin{table}[bt]
\caption{Default hyperparameters used for network training.}
\label{table:default_hyperparameters}
\begin{tabular}{lccccc}
\toprule
Architectures & BS & initial LR & LR step-decay (DF, DP) & Optimizer & Initialization \\
\midrule
U-Net & 35 & 1e-2 & 0.8, 1 & Adam & He\\
SegNet & 15 & 1e-3 & N/A & Adam & He\\
DeeplabV3+ & 12 & 1e-4 & N/A & Adam & He\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}\par
BS, mini-batch size; LR, learning rate; DF, drop factor; DP, drop period (epochs)
\end{table}
\subsection{Volumetric Architectures}
\label{sec:methods_volumetric_architectures}
In this experiment, we trained a 2.5D \cite{roth2014new} and 3D U-Net architecture for femoral cartilage segmentation. The 2.5D network uses a stack of $t$ continuous slices in a scan to generate a segmentation mask for the central slice (additional details are described in the supplemental information). Three 2.5D networks with inputs of thickness $t$=3,5,7 were trained.
In contrast, a 3D network outputs a segmentation on all $t$ slices. As all operations are applied in 3D, the 2$\times$ max-pooling applied in the through-plane direction constrains the input to have $t=2^{N_p}$ slices, where $N_p$ refers to the number of pooling steps. To maintain an identical number of pooling steps as the 2D and 2.5D networks ($N_p=5$), the 3D U-Net was trained using 32 slices of the volume as an input ($t=32$). As a result, the scans in the training dataset described in \S\ref{sec:methods_data_preprocessing} were also cropped by an additional 4 slices from the medial and lateral ends, resulting in volumes with 64 slices. Memory constraints of the hardware necessitated that this volume be further divided into two 3D subvolumes of size 288$\times$288$\times$32 and that the batch size be reduced to 1. The 2D and 2.5D networks had an exponentially increasing number of filters ranging from 32$\xrightarrow{}$1024, while the 3D network had filters ranging from 16$\xrightarrow{}$512 to accommodate for the same network depth. All networks maintained a comparable number of weights (Supporting Figure S2).
\subsection{Loss Function}
\label{sec:methods_loss_function}
As trainable parameters in a network update with respect to the loss function, we hypothesize that a relevant loss function is critical for any learning task. Traditionally, binary cross-entropy has been used for binary classification tasks. However, class imbalance has shown to limit the optimal performance in cases of general cross-entropy losses \cite{kamnitsas2017efficient}. We selected three additional loss functions commonly used for segmentation in cases of class imbalance for comparison: soft Dice loss \cite{milletari2016v}, weighted cross-entropy (WCE), and focal loss ($\gamma$=3) \cite{lin2018focal}, as described additionally in the supplementary.
In this experiment, four models using the U-Net architecture were trained using the four loss functions described above with the training, validation, and testing sets described in \S\ref{sec:methods_dataset}.
\begin{figure}[bt]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{imgs/fig02-Augmentation_Figure.png}
\caption{An example augmented, final 2D slice is generated from an original 2D slice by sequentially applying four feasible transformation factors: scaling, shearing, gamma, and motion. Parameters for all four factors are sampled uniformly at random.}
\label{fig:augmentation}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Data Augmentation}
\label{sec:methods_data_augmentation}
To qualify the effect of data augmentation on model generalizability, we trained the standard U-Net architecture with and without augmented training data.
Each 2D slice and corresponding mask in the training volume were randomly augmented to add heterogeneity to the training dataset. The augmentation procedure consisted of sequential transformations of the original image and masks with: 1. zooming (between 0-10\%), 2. shearing (between -15$^{\circ}$ to 15$^{\circ}$ in both the horizontal and vertical directions), 3. gamma variations (between 0.8-1.1 for simulating varying contrasts), and 4. motion blur (between 0-5 pixels in magnitude and 0$^{\circ}$ to 360$^{\circ}$ in direction). Parameters for each transformation were chosen uniformly at random within the specified ranges, with an example slice shown in Figure ~\ref{fig:augmentation}. These specific augmentation methods and magnitudes were chosen to mimic typically encountered physiological and imaging variations. No augmentations were applied to the scans in the validation and test sets.
All 2D slices were augmented fourfold, resulting in the augmented dataset consisting 5x the data in the non-augmented training set. To overcome this discrepancy while training separate networks with and without augmented data, the networks trained using augmented data were trained for 5x shorter than those trained using non-augmented data (20 epochs total).
\subsection{Generalizability to Multiple Fields of View}
\label{sec:methods_FOV}
In this experiment, we compare the differences in network performance on scans at different FOVs with the same underlying image resolution. In addition to the inference dataset (V0) cropped to a volume of ($288\times288\times72$) described in \S\ref{sec:methods_dataset}, three new test sets were created with different degrees of cropping: V1 ($320\times320\times80$), V2 ($352\times352\times80$), and V3 ($384\times384\times80$).
As data augmentation is hypothesized to increase network generalizability, we compared the performances of the U-Net models trained using non-augmented and augmented data as specified in \S\ref{sec:methods_data_augmentation} among the four test sets (V0-V3).
\subsection{Training Data Extent}
\label{sec:methods_data_limitation}
Performance of CNNs has also been shown to be limited by the extent (amount) of data available for training \cite{rafiq2001neural}. To explore the relationship between the extent of training data and network accuracy, we trained each of the three base network architectures in \S\ref{sec:methods_network_architecture} on varying sized subsets of the training data. The original training set consisting of 60 patients was randomly sampled (with replacement) to create 3 additional sub-training sets of 5, 15, and 30 patients with similar distributions of KL grades (Supporting Table S3). The same validation and testing sets described in \S\ref{sec:methods_dataset} (with 14 patients, each at two time points) were used to assess the generalizability of the networks.
The network trained on the complete sample of training data (60 patients) was trained for 100 epochs. To ensure that all sub-sampled networks maintained an equal number of backpropagation steps to update filter weights, we scaled the number of epochs by the ratio of the fully sampled patient count (60) to the number of patients in the sub-training set. As a result, networks trained on 5, 15, and 30 patients were trained for 1200, 400, and 200 epochs respectively. Experiments were repeated 3 times each (with Python seeds 1, 2, and 3) to enhance reproducibility and to minimize the stochasticity of random network weight initializations.
\subsection{Network Training Hyperparameters}
For all experiments, convolutional layers with rectified linear unit (ReLU) activations were initialized using the "He" initialization \cite{nair2010rectified, he2015delving}. Training was performed using the Adam optimizer with default parameters ($\beta_1=0.9$, $\beta_2=0.999$, $\epsilon$=1e-8) with random shuffling of mini-batches using a Tensorflow backend \cite{kingma2014adam, abadi2016tensorflow}. All neural network computations were performed on 1 Titan Xp graphical processing unit (GPU, NVIDIA, Santa Clara, CA) consisting of 3,840 CUDA cores and 12GB of GDDR5X RAM.
Due to the randomness of the training processes, we empirically determined a pseudo-optimal set of hyperparameters for training each network. To reduce large variances in training batch normalization layers caused by small mini-batch sizes, the largest mini-batch size that could be loaded on the Titan Xp GPU was used for each network. The initial learning rate and use of step decay was also empirically determined based on the network architecture. Table ~\ref{table:default_hyperparameters} details the hyperparameters used with each network architecture. Networks were trained using the soft Dice loss, unless otherwise specified.
\subsection{Quantitative Comparisons}
For each experiment, the model that resulted in the best loss on the validation dataset was used for analysis on the testing dataset. During testing, output probabilities of femoral cartilage ($p_{FC}$) were thresholded at 0.5 to create binary femoral cartilage segmentations ($p_{FC}\leq0.5 \xrightarrow{} 0$, $p_{FC}>0.5 \xrightarrow{} 1$). No additional post-processing was performed on the thresholded masks.
Segmentation accuracy was measured on the testing dataset using three metrics - Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), volumetric overlap error (VOE), and coefficient of variation (CV) \cite{taha2015metrics}. High accuracy segmentation methods maximize DSC (a maximum of 100\%) while minimizing VOE and CV (a minimum of 0\%). The segmentation masks obtained from the OAI dataset served as ground truth. Statistical comparisons between the inference accuracy of different models were assessed using Kruskal-Wallis tests, and corresponding Dunn post-hoc tests, ($\alpha=0.05$). All statistical analyses were performed using the SciPy (v1.1.0) library \cite{jones2014scipy}.
Additionally, changes in network performance in the slice (depth-wise) direction were visualized using graphs termed depth-wise region of interest distribution (dROId) plots. The normalized depth-wise field of view (dFOV) spanning the region of interest is defined as the ordered set of continuous slices containing femoral cartilage according to ground truth manual segmentation, where, in the set, the first slice corresponds to medial side (dFOV=0\%) and the last slice corresponds to the lateral side (dFOV=100\%). All volumes were mirrored to follow this convention.
\begin{table}[bt]
\centering
\caption{A summary of network performance (mean (standard deviation)) in base and volumetric architecture, loss function, and data augmentation experiments. Models with Dice score coefficient (DSC) accuracy and volumetric overlap error (VOE) significantly (p<0.05) than corresponding metric of \textit{all} other models in the given experiment are marked with *. Models with all metrics signficantly different (p<0.01) than corresponding metric of \textit{all} other models in the given experiment are marked with **. Best performing networks in each experiment category are bolded.}
\includegraphics[width=13cm]{imgs/perf-summary.png}
\label{table:perf-summary}
\end{table}
\section{Results}
All performance results (except data limitation) are summarized in Table ~\ref{table:perf-summary}.
\begin{figure}[bt]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{imgs/fig04-arch-samples.png}
\caption{Sample segmentations from three FCN architectures (U-Net, SegNet, DeeplabV3+) with true-positive (green), false-positive (blue), and false-negative (red)
overlays. Despite statistically significant difference between the performance of U-Net and the other two architectures, there is minimal visual variation between
network outputs. Thick, continuous cartilaginous regions (A) have considerably better performance throughout the entire region, including edge pixels. Failures (red arrows) occur in regions of thin, disjoint femoral cartilage common in edge (B) and medial-lateral transition slices (C). However, (C) shows all networks successfully handled challenging slices that include difficult to segment anatomy (white arrows), such as cartilage lesions, heterogeneous signal, and proximity to anatomy with similar signal (ACL, fluid).}
\label{fig:arch-comparison}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[bt]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{imgs/fig05-normROI-bar-summary.png}
\caption{Performance bar graphs and depth-wise region of interest distribution (dROId) plots for convolutional neural network models with different (A) network architectures, (B) volumetric architectures, (C) training loss functions, and (D) training data augmentations. The field of view defined by the region of interest in dROId plots is normalized (0-100\%) to map performance at knee-specific anatomical locations despite variations in patient knee size.}
\label{fig:ROI-graph}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Network Architecture Comparison}
A comparison of the performance of the U-Net, SegNet, and DeeplabV3+ architectures on sample slices is shown in Figure ~\ref{fig:arch-comparison}. All three base architectures maintained high fidelity in segmenting slices containing thick cartilage structures (Figure ~\ref{fig:arch-comparison}A). However, all networks had worse performance in slices containing regions of full-thickness cartilage loss and denuded subchondral bone, edge slices, and medial-lateral transition regions (Figure ~\ref{fig:arch-comparison}B,C). Despite lower accuracy in these regions, these networks accurately segmented slices with heterogeneous signal caused by pathology and proximity to anatomy with similar signal (Figure ~\ref{fig:arch-comparison}C). Performance decreased at edge regions (dFOV\textasciitilde[0, 10]\%, [90, 100]\%) and at the medial-lateral transition region (dFOV\textasciitilde[55, 65]\%) as seen in the dROId plot in Figure ~\ref{fig:ROI-graph}A. There was no significant difference in the performance of U-Net, SegNet, and DeeplabV3+ models as measured by DSC (p=0.08), VOE (p=0.08), and CV (p=0.81).
\subsection{Volumetric Architectures Comparison}
Results of the 2D, 2.5D, and 3D U-Net architectures showed no significant difference between the performance of 2D U-Net and that of the three versions ($t$=3,5,7) of the 2.5D U-Net. The 2D U-Net, however, did perform significantly better than the 3D U-Net (DSC,VOE-p<0.05). There were also no significant differences (p=1.0) in the performance between the 2.5D architectures using inputs of different depths ($t$=3,5,7). Decreased DSC at edge and medial-lateral transition regions was indicative for all models as seen on the dROId plot (Figure ~\ref{fig:ROI-graph}B). In the 3D U-Net model, DSC was greater in the lateral compartment of the knee (dFOV\textasciitilde[60,90]\%) compared to that of the medial compartment (dFOV\textasciitilde[15, 45]\%). Among 2D and 2.5D networks, performance in the lateral and medial regions was comparable.
\begin{figure}[bt]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{imgs/fig06-loss_performance.png}
\caption{A summary of performances of networks trained on (A) binary cross-entropy (BCE), (B) soft Dice, (C) weighted cross-entropy (WCE), and (D) focal losses. The estimated median probability ($p^*_{FC}$, defined as $CDF(p^*_{FC})=0.5$, is marked by the red star. BCE has peak errors at $p_{FC}$=0, $p_{FC}$=1, with relatively uniform number of errors at low confidence probabilities ($0.25 \leq p_{FC} \leq 0.75$). Soft Dice loss has a clear bi-modal distribution with peaks at $p_{FC}$=0,1, with negligible errors at low confidence probabilities. Almost all WCE errors were false-positives ($p_{FC}$>0.5), with increasing error density at higher probabilities. While focal loss exhibits similar peaks at $p_{FC}$=0,1, as soft Dice and BCE, ~90\% of the error density is centered around low confidence probabilities.}
\label{fig:loss-distribution}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Loss Function Comparison}
Performance differences between BCE, soft Dice, and focal losses were negligible, but all three losses significantly outperformed WCE (p<5e-10) across all slices (Figure ~\ref{fig:ROI-graph}C).
Using the WCE loss model for inference, the incidence rate of false-positives (misclassifying a background pixel as femoral cartilage) was significantly greater (p<2e-10) than the incidence rate of false-negatives (misclassifying a femoral cartilage pixel as background). Over 99\% of the WCE model errors were false-positives (Figure ~\ref{fig:loss-distribution}C). The pixel-wise error distribution, as measured on the test set (V0) appeared correlated to the output probability of femoral cartilage ($0\leq p_{FC}\leq1$), which may be an indicator of network confidence in classifying a pixel as femoral cartilage.
For BCE, soft Dice, and focal losses, the difference between the false-positive and false-negative rates were not significant (p>0.4). The incidence of errors is also symmetrically distributed around the threshold probability with medians $p^*_{FC}$ of 0.48, 0.84, and 0.51, respectively (Figure ~\ref{fig:loss-distribution} A,B,D). The error rate in BCE was relatively uniform across all probabilities while the distribution of error rates in soft Dice loss is primarily bi-modal with peaks at $p_{FC}=0$ and $p_{FC}=1$. The focal loss error distribution was more densely centered around $p_{FC}=0.5$.
\subsection{Data Augmentation Comparison}
The use of augmented training data significantly decreased network performance (p<0.001) compared to the augmented training data set (Figure ~\ref{fig:ROI-graph}B). The performance was also consistently lower at other regions of the knee.
\begin{figure}[bt]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{imgs/fig07-fcn-dice-bargraph.png}
\caption{The Dice score coefficient (DSC) accuracy on four test sets consisting of volumes at different spatial fields of view (FOVs) using the U-Nets trained on non-augmented and augmented training sets. Inference using the non-augmented U-Net is variable across different FOVs, with significantly lower accuracy in test sets cropped to different FOVs (p<0.01). While the augmented U-Net has a generally lower DSC on the test sets than the non-augmented U-Net, it performs consistently on volumes at different FOVs (p>0.99).}
\label{fig:fov-generalizability}
\end{figure}
\subsection{FOV Generalizability Comparison}
Baseline U-Net network performance was variable across test sets consisting of scans at different fields of view (Figure ~\ref{fig:fov-generalizability}). Inference on semi-cropped test sets (V1, V2) had significantly lower performance (p<0.01) than that on the original test set (V0). There was no significant difference (p=1.0) between performance on test set V0 and the non-cropped test set (V3). In contrast, there was no significant difference in performance of the augmented U-Net model across all four test sets (p>0.99).
\begin{figure}[bt]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{imgs/fig03-data-limit-fit.png}
\caption{Performance of U-Net, SegNet, and DeeplabV3+ (DLV3+) when trained on retrospectively subsampled training data. The plots (log-x scale) and corresponding $r^2$ values indicate a power-law relationship between segmentation performance, as measured by the (A) Dice score coefficient accuracy (DSC), (B) volumetric overlap error (VOE), and (C) coefficient of variation (CV), and the number of training patients for all networks. Experiments were repeated 3 times with fixed Python random seeds to ensure reproducibility of the results.}
\label{fig:data-limit}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Data Extent Trend}
Network performance for all three networks increased with increasing training data (Figure ~\ref{fig:data-limit}). The trend between the number of patients in the training dataset and network performance followed a power-law ($y=\alpha x^\beta$) scaling, as hypothesized previously \cite{amari1992four}, for all performance metrics (p<1e-4). Pixel-wise performance metrics, DSC and VOE, had a strong fit to the hypothesized power-law curve for all architectures ($r^2>0.91$ and $r^2>0.95$, respectively). CV had a relatively weaker, but still strong, fit ($r^2>0.63$). Among the different architectures, there was no significant difference in the intercept ($\alpha$) or exponent ($\beta$) of the curve fit measured at different seeds, and all exponents were less than 1 ($\beta$<1).
\section{Discussion}
In this study, we examined how variations in FCN architecture, loss functions, and training data impacted network performance for femoral cartilage segmentation. We found no significant pixel-wise difference in the performance of U-Net, SegNet, and DeeplabV3+, three commonly used FCN frameworks for natural image segmentation. There was also no significant performance difference between the segmentations produced by 2D and 2.5D networks. We demonstrated that BCE, soft Dice, and focal losses had similar false-positive and false-negative incidence rates, while WCE biased the network toward false-positive errors. Moreover, while data augmentation reduced U-Net performance, it increased generalizability in performance among scan volumes at different fields of view. Additionally, this study verified that segmentation performance scales directly, following a power-law relationship, with increasing data size. Traditionally, training methods and architectures have been a design choice when applying CNNs for semantic segmentation. In these cases, our findings provide insight into which design choices may be most effective for knee MR image segmentation using CNNs.
\subsection{Base Architecture Variations}
Based on network performance metrics, newer network architectures like DeeplabV3+ have slightly improved, though not significant, segmentation accuracy compared to traditionally used U-Net and SegNet models. The larger receptive field induced by using dilated convolutions in DeeplabV3+ may increase spatial awareness to foreground-background boundary regions.
The \textit{expressivity} of a network, often used to characterize network generalizability, is defined as the degree to which the network structure facilitates learning features that are representative for the task. As expressivity increases, performance also increases. \textit{Raghu, et al.} and \textit{Bengio, et al.} suggest that expressivity is highly impacted by network structures such as depth, which enables hierarchical feature representations, and regularizations, which prime the network to learn representative features that are stable across different inputs \cite{raghu2016expressive, bengio2011expressive}. While DeeplabV3+ does not follow the same sequential autoencoder structure as U-Net and SegNet, it leverages dilated convolutions to extract features at various fields of view and decodes these features to create a hierarchical feature representation as expressive as those generated by the other two architectures.
Though network architecture has been closely linked with expressivity, there was no significant difference in the performance of the three network architectures, and all networks failed in similar regions of minimal, disjoint cartilage (Figure ~\ref{fig:arch-comparison}). The non-uniqueness in failure cases indicates that all three network models may optimize for similar deep features and consequently, segment images in a visually comparable manner. This minimal difference in performance suggests that beyond some threshold expressivity, differences in CNN architectures may have a negligible impact on the overall segmentation performance. Similar work for fully-connected neural networks (i.e. no convolutions) demonstrated network generalization is not limited by the architecture for a wide array of tasks, given that the network is expressive enough to achieve a small training error \cite{lampinen2018analytic}. While CNNs and fully-connected neural networks are not an exhaustive representation of all forms of neural networks, the trend of the limited effect of network structure on overall expressivity indicates that improving architectures may not be as effective in training better-performing networks.
\subsection{Practical Design for Volumetric Architectures}
In this study, the volumetric (2.5D/3D) networks had a negligible impact on segmentation accuracy and even performed worse than traditional 2D slice-wise segmentation in the case of the 3D network. The limited difference between 2.5D and 2D networks may be explained by the negligible difference in expressivity of these networks. These networks only differ at the first convolutional layer, which takes the image/volume as the input. While 2.5D networks accept an input volume ($M\times N\times t$), and 2D networks accept an input slice ($M\times N \times 1$), the output of the initial convolution layer is the same size in both networks. As a result, 2.5D networks only have more parameters in the first convolution layer (Supporting Figure S2), which is negligible when compared to the general size of the network and may not expressively represent the through-plane information 2.5D networks hope to capture.
Unlike 2.5D networks, which collapse the 3D input into multiple 2D features after the first convolutional layer, 3D networks maintain the depth-wise dimension throughout the network. While this allows depth-wise features to be extracted throughout the entire network, the number of network parameters also increases, which can limit the batch size of the network. In the 3D network trained in this study, a batch size of 1 was required to fit the scan volume as an input, which may have lead to less stable feature regularization. Additionally, to allow fitting the scan volume as an input, the 3D network had approximately the same number of parameters as the 2.5D and 3D networks. However, as the number of parameters per kernel increases to maintain the extra dimension, the number of filters at the initial convolutional layers had to be curbed twofold. The fewer filters at earlier stages in the network likely contributed to lower expressivity, and consequently poorer performance, of the network. With increased computational and parallelization power, designing 3D networks with similar filter counts as 2D networks may increase network expressivity.
\subsection{Selecting Loss Functions}
While network architectures did not significantly impact performance, U-Net models trained using BCE, soft Dice, and focal losses performed significantly better than the model trained using WCE loss. While WCE is intended to normalize loss magnitude between imbalanced classes, the artificial weighting biases the network to over-classify the rarer class.
The degree of false-positive bias introduced into the network using WCE is likely modulated by the respective class weights. As the median frequency re-weighting method over-biases the network, traditional weighting protocols based on class incidence may not be the optimal weighting scheme. While optimal performance is traditionally measured by reducing the overall error, WCE loss weightings may be used to intentionally steer a network either towards additional false-positives or false-negatives, depending on the specific use case.
Additionally, the different error distributions around the threshold probability ($p_{FC}$=0.5) indicate the potential success of each loss function (Figure ~\ref{fig:loss-distribution}). In a binary problem, the probability output of pixel $i$ ($p_i$) is binarized at some threshold probability $p_T$, typically chosen to be the midpoint ($p_T$=0.5). Let $\hat{y}_i \in \{0,1\}$ define the output of the binarization operation $\beta$ on for pixel $i$, such that $
\hat{y}_i = \beta(p_i) = \begin{cases}
1, \;\; p_i>p_T\\
0, \;\; p_i\leq p_T\\
\end{cases}$. Let $y_i \in \{0,1\}$ correspond to the ground-truth class for pixel $i$. Therefore, pixel $i$ is misclassified if $y_i \neq \beta(p_i)$. If pixel $i$ is misclassified, let $dp_i$ be the minimum amount of shift required to $p_i$ to correctly classify pixel $i$ (i.e. $\beta(p_i + dp_i)=y_i$). For the loss functions used above, the energy required to shift $p_i$ is directly proportional to $dp_i$. If $p_i$ is close to the limit bounds ($p_i \approx 0, 1$), $dp_i$ is very large; but if $p_i$ is \textit{close} to the threshold probability $p_T$, $dp_i$ is much smaller. Therefore, a distribution that is densely centered around $p_T$ minimizes $dp_i$ and has the most potential for reducing error rate with limited energy.
Of the four error distributions induced by different loss functions, focal loss produces errors that are most densely centered around $p_T$, which may make it most amenable for future optimization. Focal loss likely achieves this distribution by weighting the BCE loss to be inversely proportional to the correct classification. For example, a pixel with a probability for its correct class close to 1 will be weighted less than a pixel with a probability for its correct class close to 0. As a result, well-classified pixels will not contribute to the loss, and consequently, will not be further optimized. This preserves high error rate close to $p_{FC}$=0.5, as a network trained with focal loss is most uncertain about these examples. This symmetric distribution also suggests that correcting false-positive and false-negative errors would require an equal amount of energy.
\subsection{Achieving Multi-FOV Robustness through Data Augmentation}
As MR scan protocols can often adjust the image FOV for different sized patients, training an FCN that is generalizable to multiple FOVs may be desired. The U-Net trained on non-augmented images did not exhibit the same performance across different FOVs. Recall that test sets V1, V2, and V3 covered a larger through-plane field of view (80 slices) than V0, whose dimensions were identical to the training volumes (72 slices). Failure cases in V1 and V2 were predominately in the 8 slices not included in the volumetrically cropped testing/training sets. It is likely the network failed in these regions because these additional slices include anatomy that may not have been seen during training.
In contrast, the U-Net trained using augmented training data exhibited the same performance across all FOVs. The augmentations introduced realistic variations that could occur during imaging (motion and gamma variations) and artificial variations that change the distribution of anatomy across pixels (zooming and shearing). The later set of artificial augmentations manipulate the FOV that the tissue of interest covers in the training image. As a result, the optimized network likely consists of a family of features that is robust to spatial FOV variations within the degrees of the zooming and shearing distributions used. Thus, instead of measuring the expressivity of a FCN network on a single test set, we suggest that the expressivity for multi-FOV applications should be quantified by its performance on test sets at varying FOVs for evaluating robustness to multi-FOV scans.
While augmentations have been readily accepted as a method to increase network accuracy, the 2D U-Net trained with augmented data in this study had sub-optimal performance. This phenomenon likely occurred because the network trained with non-augmented data optimized features for images containing the same FOV of anatomy as the training images. In contrast, the augmented dataset may challenge the network by varying the FOV and contrast of information seen. The optimal minimum may not minimize loss as efficiently on the non-augmented datasets, and as a result, the features are not optimized to achieve a high testing loss on test set V0. However, these features likely increased the stability of the network for inference on scans of multiple FOVs. We suggest that augmentations should be meticulously curated to increase network expressivity to expected image variations, especially in regards to tissues of interest having variable sizes in potential test images.
\subsection{Navigating Training with Limited Data}
The performance of all three networks changed at a considerably slow rate as data size increased. The rate is primarily governed by the exponent value ($\beta$) in the power-law equation. The mean exponent across three seeds $\bar{\beta}$<0.05 for all architectures indicated a slow growth in performance as a function of data size. In a recent work, Hestness, et al. empirically verified that the error rate in image classification decreases following a power-law scaling with $\beta<1$ regardless of architecture \cite{hestness2017deep}. Like image classification, semantic segmentation also appeared to follow this trend, with minimal variation in $\beta$ among architectures.
Moreover, this slow-growth power-law performance scaling can allow us to empirically estimate the performance of these networks as the data size increases. Based on these parameter estimates, achieving a 95\% Dice accuracy for the U-Net, SegNet, and DeeplabV3+ models would require approximately 350, 440, and 300 patients, respectively. Therefore, while increasing training data does increase performance over time, the addition of each subsequent dataset diminishes marginal utility. These results suggest that even with small amounts of data, high percentage of performance can generally be obtained.
\subsection{Limitations}
Despite the promising empirical relationships elucidated in this work, there were limitations to this study that should be addressed in future studies. Training hyperparameters for each network were empirically determined by investigating training loss curves for the initial epochs. While a robust hyperparameter search may yield a more optimal set for training, this was beyond the primary premise of this work, which aimed to explore larger tradeoffs between network architectures, loss functions, and training data. Additionally, the 3D U-Net architecture trained in the volumetric architecture experiment fixed the input depth at 32 slices, resulting in a low batch size and fewer number of filters at each network level. Future studies could modulate the number of input slices to increase batch size and number of filters to optimize network performance. Moreover, all networks performed binary segmentation, but as most loss functions allow for multi-class segmentation, it would be useful to understand the impact of this problem on performance for each tissue.
\section{Conclusion}
In this study, we quantified the impact of variations in network architecture, loss functions, and training data for segmenting femoral cartilage from 3D MRI in order to investigate the tradeoffs involved in segmentation with CNNs. Variations in network architectures yielded minimal differences in overall segmentation accuracy. Additionally, loss functions dictate how the network weights are optimized and, as a result, influence how errors are distributed across probabilities. Moreover, realistic data augmentation methods can increase network generalizability at the cost of absolute network performance on any given test set. Limited amounts of training data may also not be the bottleneck in network performance.
\subsubsection*{Acknowledgments}
Contract grant sponsor: National Institutes of Health (NIH); contract grant numbers NIH R01 AR063643, R01 EB002524, K24 AR062068, and P41 EB015891. Contract grant sponsor: Philips (research support). Image data was acquired from the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI). The OAI is a public-private partnership comprised of five contracts (N01-AR-2-2258; N01-AR-2-2259; N01-AR-2-2260; N01-AR-2-2261; N01-AR-2-2262) funded by the National Institutes of Health, a branch of the Department of Health and Human Services, and conducted by the OAI Study Investigators. Private funding partners include Merck Research Laboratories; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, GlaxoSmithKline; and Pfizer, Inc. Private sector funding for the OAI is managed by the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health. This manuscript was prepared using an OAI public use data set and does not necessarily reflect the opinions or views of the OAI investigators, the NIH, or the private funding partners.
\section{2.5D Networks}
A 2.5D network takes a 3D volume of thickness $t$ as an input and produces a 2D segmentation mask for the central slice. For example, if $t=5$, the stack of slices \{$1$, $2$, $3$, $4$, $5$\} would be the 3D input into the network to produce a 2D segmentation mask for slice $3$. In the case of edge slices, slices extending beyond the volume were repeated. Such a 2.5D approach can provide the CNN through-plane contextual features, while avoiding the use of computationally complex 3D convolutions.
Let $S_i$ be the slice in a volume of $|V|$ slices indexed by $i$ such that $i=\{1, 2, 3, ..., |V|\}$. Let $I(s, t)$ be a 3D input of thickness $t$ to produce a 2D segmentation mask for slice $s$ as seen in Eq. \ref{eq:2.5D}:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:2.5D}
I(s, t) = \{S_{max(s+j, 1)} | j=-t // 2, ..., -1\} \cup \{S_s\} \cup \{S_{min(s+k, |V|)} | k=\{1, ..., t // 2\}
\end{equation}
The $//$ operation refers to integer division. Input thicknesses of $t=3, 5, 7$ were used.
\section{Pixel-wise Loss Functions}
Pixel-wise loss functions aggregate the penalty of misclassifying each pixel in the target segmentation mask. In this experiment, we utilized four pixel-wise losses: binary cross-entropy (BCE) (Eq. \ref{eq:bce}), soft dice loss (Eq. \ref{eq:dice_loss}), weighted cross entropy (WCE) (Eq. \ref{eq:wce}), and focal loss ($\gamma$=3) (Eq. \ref{eq:focal_loss}).
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bce}
BCE = \frac{1}{N}\sum_{n=1}^{N}\sum_{c=0}^{1} y_{n, c} log(p_{n, c})
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:dice_loss}
Dice = \frac{\sum_{n=1}^{N} 2 y_{n} p_{n}}{\sum_{n=1}^{N} (y_n + p_n)}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:wce}
WCE = \frac{1}{N}\sum_{n=1}^{N}\sum_{c=0}^{1} w_c y_{n, c} log(p_{n, c})
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:focal_loss}
Focal = \frac{1}{N}\sum_{n=1}^{N} -(1-p_t)^\gamma log(p_t) \quad
p_t = \begin{cases}
p_{n,1}, \;\; y_{n,1}=1 \;(y_{n,0}=0)\\
1-p_{n,1}, \;\; y_{n,1}=0 \; (y_{n,0}=1)\\
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
In Eqs. \ref{eq:bce}-\ref{eq:focal_loss}, $n$ indexes the image elements (pixels) and $c$ indexes the two classes (0- background, 1- femoral cartilage). For WCE (Eq. \ref{eq:wce}), the class weights ($w_c$) were defined by median frequency re-weighting, $w_c = \frac{median(f_0, f_1)}{f_c}$ where $f_c$ refers to the frequency of pixels corresponding to class $c$ in the training set. The normalized weights were empirically found to be $w_0=1.0$ and $w_1=75.6$. $y_{n}$ is a one-hot-encoded vector corresponding to the ground truth class of pixel $n$. $p_{n, c}$ refers to the probability that pixel $n$ is of class $c$. Note that because this is a binary problem, $p_{n,0} + p_{n,1} = 1$.
\clearpage
\section*{Supplemental Graphics}
\begin{table}[H]
\renewcommand\thetable{S1}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{supporting-imgs/KL-setwise-dist.png}
\caption{Distribution of patients by Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grade at baseline scan in training, validation, and testing sets.}
\label{supp-fig:KL-set-distribution}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[H]
\renewcommand\thefigure{S2}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{supporting-imgs/volume-arch-params.png}
\caption{(A) Number of weights for volumetric U-Net models (2D/2.5D/3D) at different encoder (enc) and decoder (dec) depths. Encoder/decoder layer blocks at different depths are indicated in (B). Input thickness (i.e. number of input slices) for 2.5D and 3D networks are specified in parentheses.}
\label{supp-fig:volume-arch-params}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[H]
\renewcommand\thetable{S3}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{supporting-imgs/data-limit-dist.png}
\caption{Distribution of patients by Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grades at baseline scan in retrospectively subsampled training sets. KL distributions were closely maintained across subsampled training sets.}
\label{supp-fig:data-limit-distribution}
\end{table}
\end{document} |
\section{Introduction}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
We consider the vanishing viscosity limit ($\nu\to0$) of the one-dimensional barotropic Navier-Stokes system in the Lagrangian coordinates:
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{inveq}
\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
v^{\nu}_t - u^{\nu}_x =0,\\
u^{\nu}_t+p(v^{\nu})_x = \nu\Big(\frac{\mu(v^{\nu})}{v^{\nu}} u^{\nu}_x\Big)_x, \end{array} \right.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
where $v$ denotes the specific volume, $u$ is the fluid velocity, and $p(v)$ is the pressure law. We consider the case of a polytropic perfect gas where the pressure is given by
\begin{equation}\label{pressure}
p(v)= v^{-\gamma},\quad \gamma> 1,
\end{equation}
with $\gamma$ the adiabatic constant. Here, $\mu$ denotes the viscosity coefficient given by
\begin{equation}\label{mu-def}
\mu(v) = bv^{-\alpha}.
\end{equation}
Notice that if $\alpha>0$, $\mu(v)$ degenerates near the vacuum, i.e., near $v=+\infty$.
Very often, the viscosity coefficient is assumed to be constant, i.e., $\alpha=0$. However, in the physical context the viscosity of a gas depends on the temperature (see Chapman and Cowling \cite{CC}). In the barotropic case, the temperature depends directly on the density ($\rho=1/v$).
The viscosity is expected to degenerate near the vacuum as a power of the density, which is translated into $\mu(v) = bv^{-\alpha}$ in terms of $v$ with $\alpha>0$.
At least formally, as $\nu\to0$, the limit system of \eqref{inveq} is given by the isentropic Euler system:
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned} \label{Euler}
\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
v_t - u_x =0,\\
u_t+p(v)_x =0.\end{array} \right.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
The idea of approximating inviscid gases by viscous gases with vanishing viscosity is due to the seminal paper by Stokes \cite{Stokes}. The vanishing viscosity limit has been used later to
construct entropy solutions to the isentropic Euler system, see DiPerna \cite{Di,Di_CMP}, Hoff-Liu \cite{HL}, Goodman-Xin \cite{GX}, Yu \cite{Yu}. Recently, Chen and Perepelitsa \cite{CP} proved the convergence of solutions to the Navier-Stokes system with $\alpha=0$ towards an entropy solution of the isentropic Euler system with finite energy initial data.
Some results exist for the inviscid limit of the Navier-Stokes-Fourier system in very special cases, see for instance Feireisl \cite{Fei} and \cite{VW}, and the references cited therein.
In this article, we prove the existence of vanishing viscosity limits of solutions to \eqref{inveq} in some weak sense, and obtain a stability estimate of those limits. We then present the class of inviscid limits, in which the entropy shocks to \eqref{Euler} are unique.
Our result provides an answer, in the case of a shock, to the conjecture: The compressible Euler system admits a unique entropy solution in the class of vanishing viscosity solutions to the associated compressible Navier-Stokes system.
As a breakthrough result related to this conjecture, Bianchini-Bressan \cite{BB} constructed a globally-in-time unique entropy solution to a strictly hyperbolic $n\times n$ system with small BV initial datum, which is obtained from vanishing ``artificial'' viscosity limit of the associate parabolic system.
However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no result on uniqueness of discontinuous entropy solutions in the class of vanishing physical viscosity solutions to the Navier-Stokes systems.
Previous uniqueness results for special discontinuous solutions (as solutions to the Riemann problem) required suitable regularity like locally $BV$ or strong trace properties (see Chen-Frid-Li \cite{Chen1} and Vasseur et al. \cite{KVARMA, LV, Vasseur-2013}). Unfortunately, the global-in-time propagation of those regularities is unknown in general (except for the system with $\gamma=3$ see \cite{Vasseur_gamma3}).
In the multi-D case, De Lellis-Sz\'ekelyhidi\cite{DS10} and Chiodaroli et al. \cite{Ch,CDK,CFK,CK} showed non-uniqueness of entropy solutions. They showed that entropy solutions to the isentropic Euler systems in more than one space dimension are not unique, by constructing infinitely many entropy solutions based on the convex integration method \cite{DS09, DS10}.\\
It is well known that the system \eqref{inveq} admits viscous shock waves connecting two end states
$(v_-,u_-)$ and $(v_+,u_+)$, provided the two end states satisfy the Rankine-Hugoniot condition and the Lax entropy condition (see Matsumura and Wang \cite{MW}):
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{end-con}
&\exists~\sigma\quad\mbox{s.t. }~\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
-\sigma (v_+-v_-) - (u_+-u_-) =0,\\
-\sigma (u_+-u_-) +p(v_+)-p(v_-)=0, \end{array} \right. \\
&\mbox{and either $v_->v_+$ and $u_->u_+$ or $v_-<v_+$ and $u_->u_+$ holds.}
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
In other words, for given constant states $(v_-,u_-)$ and $(v_+,u_+)$ satisfying \eqref{end-con}, there exists a viscous shock wave $(\tilde v^{\nu},\tilde u^{\nu})(x-\sigma t)$ as a solution of
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{shock_0}
\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
-\sigma (\tilde v^{\nu})' - (\tilde u^{\nu})' =0,\\
-\sigma (\tilde u^{\nu})'+p( \tilde v^{\nu})'= \nu\Big(\frac{\mu( \tilde v^{\nu})}{ \tilde v^{\nu}} (\tilde u^{\nu})'\Big)'\\
\lim_{\xi\to\pm\infty}(\tilde v^{\nu},\tilde u^{\nu})(\xi)=(v_{\pm}, u_\pm). \end{array} \right.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
Here, if $v_->v_+$, $(\tilde v,\tilde u)(x-\sigma t)$ is a 1-shock wave with velocity $\sigma=- \sqrt{-\frac{p(v_+)-p(v_-)}{v_+-v_-}}$, whereas if $v_-<v_+$, that is a 2-shock wave with $\sigma= \sqrt{-\frac{p(v_+)-p(v_-)}{v_+-v_-}}$.\\
Let $(\bar v, \bar u)$ be an associated entropy (inviscid) shock wave connecting the two end states $(v_-,u_-)$ and $(v_+,u_+)$ satisfying \eqref{end-con} as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{shock-0}
(\bar v, \bar u)(x -\sigma t)=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
(v_-,u_-) \quad\mbox{if $ x -\sigma t<0$},\\
(v_+,u_+) \quad \mbox{if $x -\sigma t>0$}.\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
As mentioned above, our goal is to show the uniqueness of the entropy shock to \eqref{Euler} in a suitable class, based on a generalization of our recent result \cite{Kang-V-NS17} on the contraction property of viscous shocks to \eqref{inveq}.
More precisely, we prove the contraction of any large perturbations of viscous shocks to \eqref{inveq} in the case of $0<\alpha\le \gamma\le \alpha+1$ and $\gamma>1$, which improves the special case $\gamma=\alpha$ in \cite{Kang-V-NS17}.
The contraction holds up to a shift, and is measured by a weighted relative entropy.
Notice that since the relative entropy is locally quadratic, the contraction measured by the relative entropy can be regarded as $L^2$-type contraction.
To prove the contraction, we employ the new approach introduced by the authors \cite{Kang-V-NS17}, which basically uses the relative entropy method.
The relative entropy method has been extensively used in studying the contraction (or stability) of viscous (or inviscid) shock waves (see \cite{CKKV,CV,Kang19,Kang,Kang-V-NS17,KVARMA,Kang-V-1,KVW,Leger,Serre-Vasseur,SV_16,SV_16dcds,Vasseur-2013,VW}).
\subsection{Main results}
To handle the stability and uniqueness of the entropy shocks, we use the relative entropy associated to the entropy of\eqref{Euler} as follows:
For any functions $v_1,u_1,v_2,u_2$,
\begin{equation}\label{eta_def}
\eta((v_1,u_1)|(v_2,u_2)) :=\frac{|u_1-u_2|^2}{2} +Q(v_1|v_2),
\end{equation}
where $Q(v_1|v_2)$ is the relative functional associated with the strictly convex function
\[
Q(v):=\frac{v^{-\gamma+1}}{\gamma-1},\quad v>0,
\]
that is,
\[
Q(v_1|v_2) :=Q(v_1)-Q(v_2)-Q'(v_2)(v_1-v_2).
\]
However, the first components $v_1$ that we will consider are limit of Navier-Stokes equations, for which we obtain only uniform bounds in $L^1$. Therefore, the limit can be a measure in $t,x$. This is actually physical, and is related to the possible appearance of cavitation. For this reason, we need to extend the definition of relative entropy to measures defined on $\mathbb R^+\times \mathbb R$. We will restrict the definition in the case where we compare a measure $d v$ with a simple function $\bar v$ only taking two values $v_-$ and $v_+$. Let $v_a$ denote the Radon-Nikodym derivative of $dv$ with respect to the Lebesgue measure and $dv_s$ its singular part, i.e., $dv=v_a \,dt\,dx+dv_s$.
The relative entropy is then itself a measure defined as
\begin{equation}\label{dQ}
dQ(v|\bar v)(t,x) := Q\left(v_a|\bar v\right) dt dx + |Q'(\overline V(t,x))| dv_s (t,x) ,
\end{equation}
where we need to define $\overline V$ everywhere. Denote $\Omega_{M}=\{t,x: \bar v(t,x)=\max(v_-,v_+)\}$, we set
\begin{eqnarray*}
\overline{V}(t,x)
=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
\max(v_-,v_+) \qquad \mathrm{for \ \ } (t,x)\in \overline{\Omega_M} \mbox{ (closure of $\Omega_M$)},\\
\min(v_-,v_+) \qquad \mathrm{for \ \ } (t,x)\in (\overline{\Omega_M})^c .\end{array} \right.
\end{eqnarray*}
Note that $|Q'( \max(v_-,v_+))| \le |Q'( \min(v_-,v_+))| $. Also, note that if $v\in L^\infty(\mathbb R^+;L^\infty(\mathbb R)+\mathcal{M}(\mathbb R))$, then $dQ(v|\bar v)$ is defined in $L^\infty(\mathbb R^+; L^\infty(\mathbb R)+\mathcal{M}(\mathbb R))$, where $\mathcal{M}$ denotes the space of nonnegative Radon measures.
\vskip0.3cm
For the global-in-time existence of solutions to \eqref{inveq}, we introduce the function space:
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{X}_T := \{ (v,u)\in\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R~&|~ v-\underline v, ~u- \underline u \in L^\infty (0,T; H^1(\mathbb R)),\\
&\qquad\qquad u-\underline u \in L^2 (0,T; H^2(\mathbb R)),~ v^{-1}\in L^\infty((0,T)\times \mathbb R) \} ,
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
where $\underline v$ and $\underline u$ are smooth monotone functions such that
\begin{equation}\label{sm-end}
\underline v(x) = v_\pm \quad\mbox{and}\quad \underline u(x) = u_\pm\quad\mbox{for } \pm x \ge 1.
\end{equation}
The first theorem is on stability and uniqueness of the entropy shocks to \eqref{Euler}:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm_inviscid}
Let $\gamma>1$ and $\alpha, b>0$ be any constants satisfying $\alpha\le \gamma \le \alpha +1$. For each $\nu>0$, consider the system \eqref{inveq}-\eqref{mu-def}. For a given constant state $(v_-,u_-)\in\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R$,
there exists a constant $\varepsilon _0>0$ such that for any $\varepsilon <\varepsilon _0$ and any $(v_+,u_+)\in\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R$ satisfying \eqref{end-con} with $|p(v_-)-p(v_+)|=\varepsilon $, the following holds.\\
Let $(\tilde v^{\nu}, \tilde u^{\nu})$ be a viscous shock connecting the two end states $(v_-,u_-)$ and $(v_+,u_+)$ as a solution of \eqref{shock_0}.\\
Then for a given initial datum $(v^0,u^0)$ of \eqref{Euler} satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{basic_ini}
\mathcal{E}_0:=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \eta\big((v^0,u^0)| (\bar v, \bar u)\big) dx <\infty,
\end{equation}
the following is true.\\
(i) (Well-prepared initial data) There exists a sequence of smooth functions $\{(v^{\nu}_0, u^{\nu}_0)\}_{\nu>0}$ such that
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{ini_conv}
&\lim_{\nu\to0} v^{\nu}_0 = v^0,\quad \lim_{\nu\to0} u^{\nu}_0 = u^0\quad \mbox{a.e.},\quad v^{\nu}_0>0,\\
&\lim_{\nu\to 0} \int_\mathbb R \left(\frac{1}{2}\left(u^{\nu}_0 +\nu\Big(p(v^{\nu}_0)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\Big)_x -\tilde u^{\nu}-\nu\Big(p(\tilde v^{\nu})^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\Big)_x \right)^2 +Q(v^{\nu}_0|\tilde v^{\nu})
\right)dx = \mathcal{E}_0 .
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
(ii) For a given $T>0$, let $\{(v^{\nu}, u^{\nu})\}_{\nu>0}$ be a sequence of solutions in $\mathcal{X}_T$ to \eqref{inveq} with the initial datum $(v^{\nu}_0, u^{\nu}_0)$ as above.
Then there exist limits $v_{\infty}$ and $u_{\infty}$ such that as $\nu\to0$ (up to a subsequence),
\begin{equation}\label{wconv}
v^{\nu}\rightharpoonup v_{\infty},\quad u^{\nu} \rightharpoonup u_{\infty} \quad \mbox{in} ~\mathcal{M}_{\mathrm{loc}}((0,T)\times\mathbb R) ~\mbox{(space of locally bounded Radon measures)} ,
\end{equation}
where $v_\infty$ lies in $L^\infty(0,T,L^\infty(\mathbb R)+\mathcal{M}(\mathbb R))$.\\
In addition, there exist shift $X_{\infty}\in \mbox{BV}((0,T))$ and constant $C>0$ such that $d Q(v_\infty|\bar v)\in L^\infty(0,T;\mathcal{M}(\mathbb R))$, and for almost every $t\in (0,T)$,
\begin{equation}\label{uni-est}
\int_{\mathbb R } \frac{|u_\infty(t,x)-\bar u(x-X_{\infty}(t))|^2}{2} dx + \left(\int_{x\in \mathbb R } d Q(v_\infty | \bar v (x-X_{\infty}(\cdot))) \right)(t) \ \le C \mathcal{E}_0.
\end{equation}
Moreover, the shift $X_\infty$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{X-control}
|X_\infty(t) -\sigma t| \le \frac{C}{|v_--v_+|}\Big( \mathcal{E}_0 + (1+t)\sqrt{\mathcal{E}_0} \Big).
\end{equation}
Therefore, entropy shocks \eqref{shock-0} (with small amplitude) of the isentropic Euler system \eqref{Euler} are stable and unique in the class of weak inviscid limits of solutions to the Navier-Stokes system \eqref{inveq}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
1. By \eqref{uni-est}, the limits $v_{\infty}, u_{\infty}$ satisfy $v_{\infty}\in \bar v + L^{\infty}(0,T; L^\infty(\mathbb R)+\mathcal{M}(\mathbb R))$ and $u_{\infty} \in \bar u + L^{\infty}(0,T; L^2(\mathbb R))$, where $\mathcal{M}(\mathbb R)$ is the set of bounded Radon measures on $\mathbb R$. The control in measure of $v_\infty$ is due to the fact that $Q(v|\overline{v})\geq c_2|v-\overline{v}|$ for $v\geq 3v_-$ (see (\ref{rel_Q}) in Lemma \ref{lem-pro}). Especially, $v_\infty$ may have some measure concentration at the limit. This corresponds physically to cavitation (the creation of bubbles in the fluid) and appearance of vacuum. It is interesting to see that this does not affect the contraction property (and the uniqueness of the shock at the limit). \\
2. Theorem \ref{thm_inviscid} provides the stability and uniqueness of weak Euler shocks in the wide class of weak inviscid limits of solutions to the Navier-Stokes system. \\
Indeed, for the uniqueness, if $\mathcal{E}_0=0$, then \eqref{uni-est} and \eqref{X-control} imply that for a.e. $t\in (0,T)$,
\[
\int_{\mathbb R } \frac{|u_\infty(t,x)-\bar u(x-\sigma t)|^2}{2} dx + \int_{\mathbb R } Q(v_a(t,x) | \bar v (x-\sigma t)) dx = 0 ,
\]
where $dv_\infty=v_a \,dt\,dx+dv_s$, and the singular part $v_s$ vanishes. Therefore, we have
\[
u_\infty(t,x) = \bar u(x-\sigma t),\qquad v_\infty(t,x) = \bar v (x-\sigma t),\quad \mbox{ a.e. } (t,x)\in [0,T]\times\mathbb R.
\]
3. In fact, the smallness of amplitude of shocks is not needed in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm_inviscid}. The constraint is due to Theorem \ref{thm_general}.\\
4. It is worth emphasizing from the assumption on $\alpha$ and $\gamma$ that Theorem \ref{thm_inviscid} also holds in the case of the shallow water equations (i.e., $\gamma=2$) in a class of inviscid limits of solutions to the viscous shallow water equations (i.e., $\gamma=2$, $\alpha=1$). We refer to Gerbeau-Perthame \cite{GP} for a derivation of the viscous shallow water equations from the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations with free boundary.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{rem-sol}
For the global-in-time existence (and uniqueness) of any large solutions to \eqref{inveq} in $\mathcal{X}_T$, we refer to \cite{MV_sima} in the case of $\alpha<1/2$ and $\gamma>1$. More precisely, they proved that $\rho=1/v$ and $u$ satisfy
\[
\rho-\underline \rho, u-\underline u \in L^\infty (0,T; H^1(\mathbb R)),~u-\underline u \in L^2 (0,T; H^2(\mathbb R)),~ \rho^{-1}\in L^\infty((0,T)\times \mathbb R).
\]
This implies that there exists a solution in $\mathcal{X}_T$ to the system \eqref{inveq} with $\alpha<1/2$ and $\gamma>1$, since the system \eqref{inveq} is equivalent to the one in the Eulerian coordinates for such strong solutions. The result of \cite{MV_sima} was extended by Haspot \cite{Haspot} to the case of $\alpha\in (1/2,1]$. Recently, Constantin-Drivas-Nguyen-Pasqualotto \cite[Theorem 1.6]{CDNP} extended it to the case of $\alpha\ge 0$ and $\gamma\in [\alpha, \alpha+1]$ with $\gamma>1$, but they handled it on the periodic domain.
Recently, the authors \cite{KV_exist19} extends the result \cite[Theorem 1.6]{CDNP} to the case where smooth solutions connect possibly two different limits at the infinity on the whole space, which implies our solution space $\mathcal{X}_T$ .
\end{remark}
The starting point of the proof of Theorem \ref{thm_inviscid} is to derive a uniform-in-$\nu$ estimate for any large perturbations of viscous shocks to \eqref{inveq}. It is equivalent to obtain the contraction property of any LARGE perturbations of viscous shocks to \eqref{inveq} with a fixed $\nu=1$:
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{main}
\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
v_t - u_x =0,\\
u_t+p(v)_x = \Big(\frac{\mu(v)}{v} u_x\Big)_x. \end{array} \right.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
As in \cite{Kang-V-NS17}, we first introduce the following relative functional $E(\cdot|\cdot)$ to measure the contraction:
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{psedo}
&\mbox{for any functions } v_1,u_1,v_2,u_2,\\
&E((v_1,u_1)|(v_2,u_2)) :=\frac{1}{2}\left(u_1 +\Big(p(v_1)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\Big)_x -u_2 -\Big(p(v_2)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\Big)_x \right)^2 +Q(v_1|v_2),
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
where the constants $\gamma, \alpha$ are in \eqref{pressure} and \eqref{mu-def}.
The functional $E$ is associated to the BD entropy (see Bresch-Desjardins \cite{BD_03,BD_06,BDL}). Since $Q(v_1|v_2)$ is positive definite, \eqref{psedo} is also positive definite, that is, for any functions $(v_1,u_1)$ and $(v_2,u_2)$ we have $E((v_1,u_1)|(v_2,u_2))\ge 0$, and
\[
\quad E((v_1,u_1)|(v_2,u_2))= 0~\mbox{a.e.} \quad\Leftrightarrow\quad (v_1,u_1)=(v_2,u_2)~\mbox{a.e.}
\]
The following result provides a contraction property measured by the relative functional \eqref{psedo}.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm_general}
For any $\gamma>1$ and $\alpha, b>0$ satisfying $\alpha\le \gamma \le \alpha +1$, consider the system \eqref{main} with \eqref{pressure}-\eqref{mu-def}. For a given constant state $(v_-,u_-)\in\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R$,
there exist constants $\varepsilon _0, \delta_0>0$ such that the following is true.\\
For any $\varepsilon <\varepsilon _0$, $\delta_0^{-1}\varepsilon <\lambda<\delta_0$, and any $(v_+,u_+)\in\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R$ satisfying \eqref{end-con} with $|p(v_-)-p(v_+)|=\varepsilon $, there exists a smooth monotone function $a:\mathbb R\to\mathbb R^+$ with $\lim_{x\to\pm\infty} a(x)=1+a_{\pm}$ for some constants $a_-, a_+$ with $|a_+-a_-|=\lambda$ such that the following holds.\\
Let $\tilde U:=(\tilde v,\tilde u)$ be the viscous shock connecting $(v_-,u_-)$ and $(v_+,u_+)$ as a solution of \eqref{shock_0} with $\nu=1$.
For a given $T>0$, let $U:=(v,u)$ be a solution in $\mathcal{X}_T$ to \eqref{main} with a initial datum $U_0:=(v_0,u_0)$ satisfying $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} E(U_0| \tilde U) dx<\infty$. Then there exists a shift $X\in W^{1,1}((0,T))$ such that
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{cont_main}
&\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} a(x) E\big(U(t,x+X(t))| \tilde U(x)\big) dx \\
&\qquad +\delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \int_{0}^T \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} |\sigma a' (x)| Q\left(v(t,x+X(t))|\tilde v(x)\right) dx dt \\
&\qquad +\delta_0 \int_{0}^T \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}a(x) v^{\gamma-\alpha}(t,x+X(t))\big|\partial_x\big(p(v(t,x+X(t)))-p(\tilde v(x))\big)\big|^2dxdt \\
&\quad\le \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} a(x) E\big(U_0(x)| \tilde U(x)\big) dx,
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned} \label{est-shift}
&|\dot X(t)|\le \frac{1}{\varepsilon ^2}(1 + f(t)),\\
&\mbox{for some positive function $f$ satisfying}\quad\|f\|_{L^1(0,T)} \le\frac{2\lambda}{\delta_0\varepsilon }\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} E(U_0| \tilde U) dx.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
1. Theorem \ref{thm_general} provides a contraction property for viscous shocks with suitably small amplitude parametrized by $\varepsilon =|p(v_-)-p(v_+)|$. This smallness together with \eqref{end-con} implies $|v_--v_+|=\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon )$ and $|u_--u_+|=\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon )$. For such a fixed small shock, the contraction holds for any large solutions to \eqref{main}, without any smallness condition imposed on $U_0$. This implies that the contraction still holds for any large solutions to \eqref{inveq}, which provides a weak compactness to prove Theorem \ref{thm_inviscid} as the inviscid limit problem ($\nu\to0$).\\
2. In \eqref{cont_main}, the dissipation terms will be used to show the convergence of $\{u^\nu\}_{\nu>0}$ in \eqref{wconv}.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
The contraction property is non-homogenous in $x$, as measured by the function $x\to a(x)$. This is consistant with the hyperbolic case (with $\nu=0$). In the hyperbolic case, it was shown in \cite{Serre-Vasseur} that a homogenous contraction cannot hold for the full Euler system. However, the contraction property is true if we consider a non-homogenous pseudo-distance \cite{Vasseur-2013} providing the so-called $a$-contraction \cite{KVARMA}. Our main result shows that the non-homogeneity of the pseudo-distance can be chosen of a similar size as the strength of the shock (as measured by the quantity $\lambda$).
\end{remark}
The rest of the paper is as follows. We explain main ideas of proofs of the mains results in Section \ref{sec:idea}. In Section \ref{sec:pre}, we provides a transformation of the system \eqref{main}, and an equivalent version of Theorem \ref{thm_general}, and useful inequalities. Section \ref{section_theo} is dedicated to the proof of Theorem \ref{thm_main}. Finally, Section \ref{sec:main} is dedicated to the proof of the main Theorem.
\section{Ideas of the proof.}\label{sec:idea}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
We describe in this section the methodology and main ideas of our results.
\vskip0.5cm
\noindent{\bf Uniform estimates with respect to the viscosity.}
The main results of this paper boil down to the proof of stability of the viscous shocks to the Navier-Stokes equations UNIFORMLY with respect to the strength of the viscosity. This can be obtained by considering only the case of the viscosity $\nu=1$, replacing the notion of stability by the notion of contraction, valid even for large perturbations (Theorem \ref{thm_general}).
Indeed, if $(v^{\nu}, u^{\nu})$ is a solution of \eqref{inveq}, then
$$
v(t,x)=v^{\nu}(\nu t,\nu x), \qquad u(t,x)=u^{\nu}(\nu t,\nu x)
$$
is a solution to \eqref{main}, i.e., the Navier-Stokes equations with $\nu=1$. Note that, even if the initial perturbation $(v_0^{\nu}-\tilde{v}^\nu,u_0^{\nu}-\tilde{u}^\nu)$ is small, let say of order $\mathcal{E}$, then the perturbation $(v_0-\tilde{v},u_0-\tilde{u})$ is big (of order $\mathcal{E}/\nu$):
$$
\int_\mathbb R E(U_0(\xi)|\tilde{U}(\xi))\,d\xi=\frac{1}{\nu}\int_\mathbb R E_{\nu}(U^\nu_0(\xi)|\tilde{U}^\nu(\xi))\,d\xi=\frac{\mathcal{E}}{\nu},
$$
where $E(\cdot|\cdot)$ is defined in \eqref{psedo}, and the rescaled $\nu$-dependent functional $E_\nu(\cdot|\cdot)$ is defined in \eqref{E_nu}.\\
However, a contraction independent of the size of the perturbation in the case $\nu=1$, as in Theorem \ref{thm_general}, provides, after rescaling, a similar contraction for any values $\nu$:
$$
\int_\mathbb R a(\xi/\nu) E_\nu(U^{\nu}(t,\xi+\nu X(t/\nu))|\tilde{U}^\nu(\xi))\,d\xi\leq \int_\mathbb R a(\xi/\nu)E_\nu(U_0^\nu|\tilde{U}^\nu)\,d\xi.
$$
This gives a uniform stability result with respect to $\nu$ provided that the weight function $a$ is uniformly bounded from below and from above, that we have a control on the shift which is independent of the transformation
$$
X(t) \longrightarrow \nu X\left(\frac{t}{\nu}\right),
$$
and that we have a uniform bound of $\int_\mathbb R E_\nu(U_0^\nu|\tilde{U}_0)\,d\xi$. The first two conditions are verified by Theorem \ref{thm_general} thanks to (\ref{est-shift}), and considering $\lambda<1$, and the last one is verified thanks to the well-prepared initial data \eqref{ini_conv}.
\vskip0.5cm
\noindent{\bf The contraction when $\nu=1$: Theorem \ref{thm_main}.} This result is a generalization of the result in \cite{Kang-V-NS17} where only the case $\alpha =\gamma$ was considered. The extension introduces severe technical difficulties. A key to the extension is the local minimization explained below.
\vskip0.1cm
{\it Step one: Considering a new velocity variable.} We need to control the growth of the perturbation due to the hyperbolic terms (flux functionals). Thanks to the relative entropy method, the linear fluxes are easier to handle (the relative functional of linear quantity vanishes). Therefore, the main hyperbolic quantities to control are the pressure terms depending only on the specific volume $v$. At the core of the method, we are using a generalized Poincar\'e inequality Proposition \ref{prop:W}, first proved in \cite{Kang-V-NS17}. The Navier-Stokes system can be seen as a degenerate parabolic system. But the diffusion is in the other variable, the velocity variable $u$. Bresch and Desjardins (see \cite{BDL, BD_03,BD_06}) showed that compressible Navier-Stokes systems have a natural perturbed velocity quantity associated to the viscosity:
$$
h^\nu=u^\nu+\nu \left(p(v^\nu)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\right)_x.
$$
Remarkably, the system in the variables $(v^\nu, h^\nu)$ exhibits a diffusion in the $v$ variable (the Smoluchowski equation), rather than in the velocity variable.
For this reason, we are working with the natural relative entropy of this system, which corresponds to the usual relative entropy of the associated p-system in the $U^\nu_h=(v^\nu, h^\nu)$ variable:
$$
\eta(U^\nu_h|\tilde{U}^\nu_h)= E_\nu(U^\nu|\tilde{U}^\nu).
$$
For the rest of the proof of this theorem, we consider only $\nu=1$ and work only in the new set of variable $(v,h)$. To simplify the notation, we denote $U=(v,h)$ from now on.
\vskip0.1cm
{\it Step 2: Evolution of the relative entropy.}
Computing the evolution of the relative entropy in Lemma \ref{lem-rel}, we get
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& \frac{d}{dt}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} a(\xi) \eta\big(U(t,\xi+X(t))| \tilde U_\varepsilon (\xi)\big) d\xi\\
&&\qquad=\dot X(t) Y(U(t,\cdot+X(t))) +\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U(t,\cdot+X(t)))- \mathcal{J}^{good}(U(t,\cdot+X(t))).
\end{eqnarray*}
The functional $\mathcal{J}^{good}(U)$ is non-negative (good term) and can be split into three terms (see \eqref{ybg-first}, \eqref{ggd}):
$$
\mathcal{J}^{good}(U)=\mathcal{J}^{good}_1(U)+\mathcal{G}_2(U)+\mathcal{D}(U),
$$
where only $\mathcal{J}^{good}_1(U)$ depends on $h$ (and actually does not depend on $v$). The term $\mathcal{D}(U)$ corresponds to the diffusive term (which depends on $v$ only, thanks to the transformation of the system).
\vskip0.1cm
{\it Step 3: Construction of the shift.}
The shift $X(t)$ produces the term $\dot{X}(t) Y(U)$. The key idea of the technique is to take advantage of this term when $Y(U(t,\cdot))$ is not two small, by compensating all the other terms via the choice of the velocity of the shift (see (\ref{X-def})). Specifically, we algebraically ensure that the contraction holds as long as $|Y(U(t))|\geq\varepsilon ^2$. The rest of the analysis is to ensure that when $|Y(U(t))|\leq \varepsilon ^2$, the contraction still holds.
The condition $|Y(U(t))|\leq \varepsilon ^2$ ensures a smallness condition that we want to fully exploit. This is where the non-homogeneity of the semi-norm is crucial. In the case where the function $a$ is constant,
$Y(U)$ is a linear functional in $U$. The smallness of $Y(U)$ gives only that a certain weighted mean value of $U$ is almost null. However, when $a$ is decreasing, $Y(U)$ becomes convex. The smallness $Y(U(t))\leq \varepsilon ^2$ implies, for this fixed time $t$ (See Lemma \ref{lemmeC2} with \eqref{d-weight} and \eqref{tail}):
\begin{equation}\label{small}
\int_{\mathbb R}\varepsilon e^{-C\varepsilon |\xi|}Q(v(t,\xi +X(t))|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon (\xi))\,d\xi\leq C\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2.
\end{equation}
This gives a control in $L^2$ for moderate values of $v$, and in $L^1$ for big values of $v$, in the layer region ($|\xi-X(t)|\lesssim 1/\varepsilon $).
The problem now looks, at first glance, as a typical problem of stability with a smallness condition.
There are, however, three major difficulties: The bad term $\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U)$ has some terms depending on the variable $h$ for which we do not have diffusion, we have some smallness in $v$, only for a very weak norm, and only localized in the layer region. More importantly, the smallness is measured with respect to the smallness of the shock. It basically says that, considering only the moderate values of $v$:
the perturbation is not bigger than $\varepsilon /\lambda$ (which is still very big with respect to the size of the shock $\varepsilon $). Actually, as we will see later, it is not possible to consider only the linearized problem: Third order terms appear in the expansion using the smallness condition (the energy method involving the linearization would have only second order term in $\varepsilon $).
In the argument, for the values of $t$ such that $|Y(U(t))|\leq\varepsilon ^2$, we construct the shift as a solution to the ODE: $\dot X(t)=-Y(U(t,\cdot+X(t)))/\varepsilon ^4$.
From this point, we forget that $U=U(t,\xi)$ is a solution to \eqref{NS} and $X(t)$ is the shift. That is, we leave out $X(t)$ and the $t$-variable of $U$. Then we show that for any function $U$ satisfying
$|Y(U)|\leq \varepsilon ^2$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{but}
-\frac{1}{\varepsilon ^4}Y^2(U)+\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U)-\mathcal{J}^{good}(U)\leq0.
\end{equation}
This is the main Proposition \ref{prop:main} (actually, the proposition is slightly stronger to ensure the control of the shift). This implies clearly the contraction.
From now on, we are focusing on the proof of this statement.
\vskip0.1cm
{\it Step 4: Maximization in $h$ for $v$ fixed.} We need to get rid of the dependence on the $h$ variable from the bad parts $\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U)$. The idea in \cite{Kang-V-NS17} (for $\gamma=\alpha$) is to maximize the bad term with respect to $h$ for $v$ fixed:
$$
\mathcal{B}(v)=\sup_{h} \left(\mathcal{J}^{bad}(v,h)-\mathcal{J}^{good}_1(h)\right).
$$
We then had an inequality depending only on $v$ and $\partial_x v$ (through $\mathcal{D}(U)$) for which we can apply a generalized Poincar\'e inequality.
This does not work anymore when $\gamma\neq \alpha$. This is because $\mathcal{B}(v)$ involves powers of $p(v)$ which cannot be controlled by the good terms due to big values of $p(v)$. The new idea is to maximize in $h$ ONLY for the fixed values of $v$ such that $p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\leq \delta_3$ for a constant $\delta_3$ to be determined (and depending on the Poincar\'e inequality). This leads to the decomposition (\ref{prop:est}), (\ref{ggd}). The bad terms involving values $p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )> \delta_3$ can now be controlled using additional information from the unconditional estimate $|Y(U)|\leq \varepsilon ^2$ (see \eqref{n12}, \eqref{ns1}).
\vskip0.1cm
{\it Step 5: Expansion in $\varepsilon $.} Although we have no control on the supremum of $|p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|$, we can control independently the contribution of the values $|p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|\geq \delta_3$ in Proposition \ref{prop_out} (for the same $\delta_3$ related to the maximization process above. The coefficient $\delta_3$ can be chosen very small, but independent of $\varepsilon $ and of $\varepsilon /\lambda$). The last step is to perform an expansion in the size of the shock $\varepsilon $ every small, uniformly in $v$ (but for a fixed small value of $\delta$). As in \cite{Kang-V-NS17}, the expansion has to be done up to the third order. It leads to the exact same generic expression \eqref{Winst}. The generalized nonlinear Poincar\'e inequality, Proposition \ref{prop:W} concludes the proof.
\vskip0.5cm
\noindent{\bf The inviscid limit: Theorem \ref{thm_inviscid}.}
We have now a stability result uniform with respect to the viscosity. It is natural to expect a stability result on the corresponding inviscid limit. The result, however, is not immediate. Several difficulties have to be overcome. First, due to the BD representation as above, the stability result for $\nu$ fixed is on the quantities:
$$
U^\nu_h=(v^\nu, h^\nu),\quad h^\nu=u^\nu +\nu\left(p(v^\nu)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\right)_x.
$$
This is the reason we need a compatibility condition on the family of initial values $U_0^\nu$. This also leads to a very weak convergence (in measure in $(t,x)$ only). The next difficulty is that for small values of $v$, the relative entropy control only the $L^1$ norm of $Q(v)=1/v^{\gamma-1}$. Therefore the pressure $p(v)=1/v^\gamma$ cannot be controlled at all. Therefore, we do not control the time derivative of $u$ in any distributional sense in $x$. Moreover, we have to study carefully the effect of small and big values of $v$ together with big values of $|u|$ through truncations (see (\ref{v-trunc}) and (\ref{h-trunc})). This is particularly important to pass to the limit on the shift in the contraction inequality (note that the shift converges only in $L^p_{\mathrm{loc}}(\mathbb R^+)$, for $1\leq p<\infty$). Finally, it has to be shown that the shift converges to $\sigma t$ when the perturbation converges to 0. This can be obtained, thanks to the convergence of $v$ in $C^0(\mathbb R^+, W^{-s,1}_{\mathrm{loc}}(\mathbb R))$. It is interesting to note that the continuity (in time) of $v$ is enough. We do not obtain any such control on $u$ (nor $h$).
\section{Preliminaries} \label{sec:pre}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\subsection{Transformation of the system \eqref{main}}
We here provides an equivalent version of Theorem \ref{thm_general} as in \cite{Kang-V-NS17}.
First of all, since the strength of the coefficient $b$ in $\mu(v)$ does not affect our analysis, as in \cite{Kang-V-NS17}, we set $b=\gamma$ (for simplification) and introduce a new effective velocity
\[
h:=u + \Big(p(v)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\Big)_x.
\]
The system \eqref{main} with $\mu(v)=\gamma v^{-\alpha}$ is then transformed into
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{NS_1}
\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
v_t - h_x = -\Big( v^\beta p(v)_x\Big)_{x}\\
h_t+p(v)_x =0, \end{array} \right.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
where $\beta:=\gamma-\alpha$.
Notice that the above system has a parabolic regularization on the specific volume, contrary to the regularization on the velocity for the original system \eqref{main}. This is better for our analysis, since the hyperbolic part of the system is linear in $u$ (or $h$) but nonlinear in $v$ (via the pressure).
This effective velocity was first introduced by Shelukhin \cite{Shel} for $\alpha=0$, and in the general case (in Eulerian coordinates) by Bresch-Desjardins \cite{BD_03,BD_06,BDL}, and Haspot \cite{H1,H2,H3}. It was also used in \cite{VY}.
As mentioned in Theorem \ref{thm_general}, we consider shock waves with suitably small amplitude $\varepsilon $. For that, let $(\tilde v_\varepsilon ,\tilde u_\varepsilon )(x-\sigma_\varepsilon t)$ denote a shock wave with amplitude $|p(v_-)-p(v_+)|=\varepsilon $ as a solution of \eqref{shock_0} with $\mu(v)=\gamma v^{-\gamma}$. Then, setting $\tilde h_\varepsilon :=\tilde u_\varepsilon + \Big(p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\Big)_x$, the shock wave $(\tilde v_\varepsilon ,\tilde h_\varepsilon )(x-\sigma_\varepsilon t)$ satisfies
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{small_shock1}
\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
-\sigma_\varepsilon \tilde v_{\varepsilon }' - \tilde h_{\varepsilon }' =-\Big( {\tilde v_\varepsilon }^\beta p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )' \Big)'\\
-\sigma_\varepsilon \tilde h_{\varepsilon }'+p( \tilde v_\varepsilon )'=0\\
\lim_{\xi\to\pm\infty}(\tilde v_\varepsilon , \tilde h_\varepsilon )(\xi)=(v_{\pm}, u_\pm). \end{array} \right.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
For simplification of our analysis, we rewrite \eqref{NS_1} into the following system, based on the change of variable $(t,x)\mapsto (t, \xi=x-\sigma_\varepsilon t)$:
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{NS}
\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
v_t -\sigma_\varepsilon v_{\xi} - h_{\xi} = -\Big( v^\beta p(v)_{\xi}\Big)_{\xi}\\
h_t-\sigma_\varepsilon h_{\xi}+p(v)_{\xi} =0\\
v|_{t=0}=v_0,\quad h|_{t=0}=u_0. \end{array} \right.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
For the global-in-time existence of solutions to \eqref{NS}, we consider the function space:
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{sol-HT}
\mathcal{H}_T := \{ (v,h)\in\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R~ &|~ v-\underline v \in C (0,T; H^1(\mathbb R)), \\
&\qquad\qquad ~h-\underline u \in C (0,T; L^2(\mathbb R)),~ v^{-1}\in L^\infty((0,T)\times \mathbb R) \} ,
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
where $\underline v$ and $\underline u$ are as in \eqref{sm-end}.
Theorem \ref{thm_general} is a direct consequence of the following theorem on the contraction of shocks to the system \eqref{NS}. \\
\begin{theorem}\label{thm_main}
Assume $\gamma>1$ and $\alpha>0$ satisfying $\alpha\le \gamma \le \alpha +1$.
For a given constant state $(v_-,u_-)\in\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R$, there exist constants $\varepsilon _0,\delta_0>0$ such that the following holds.\\
For any $\varepsilon <\varepsilon _0$, $\delta_0^{-1}\varepsilon <\lambda<\delta_0$, and any $(v_+,u_+)\in\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R$ satisfying \eqref{end-con} with $|p(v_-)-p(v_+)|=\varepsilon $, there exists a smooth monotone function $a:\mathbb R\to\mathbb R^+$ with $\lim_{x\to\pm\infty} a(x)=1+a_{\pm}$ for some constants $a_-, a_+$ with $|a_--a_+|=\lambda$ such that the following holds.\\
Let $\tilde U_\varepsilon :=(\tilde v_\varepsilon ,\tilde h_\varepsilon )$ be a viscous shock connecting $(v_-,u_-)$ and $(v_+,u_+)$ as a solution of \eqref{small_shock1}.
For a given $T>0$, let $U:=(v,h)$ be a solution in $\mathcal{H}_T$ to \eqref{NS} with a initial datum $U_0:=(v_0,u_0)$ satisfying $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \eta(U_0| \tilde U_\varepsilon ) dx<\infty$, there exists a shift function $X\in W^{1,1}((0,T))$ such that
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{cont_main2}
&\int_\mathbb R a(\xi) \eta\big(U(t,\xi+X(t))| \tilde U_\varepsilon (\xi)\big) d\xi \\
&\qquad +\delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \int_{0}^{T}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \sigma a' (\xi) Q\left(v(t,\xi+X(t))|\tilde v_\varepsilon (\xi)\right) d\xi dt \\
&\qquad +\delta_0 \int_{0}^{T}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}a(\xi) v^{\gamma-\alpha}(t,\xi+X(t))\Big|\partial_x\big(p(v(t,\xi+X(t)))-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon (\xi))\big)\Big|^2d\xi dt \\
&\quad\le \int_{\mathbb R} a(\xi) \eta \big(U_0| \tilde U_\varepsilon \big) d\xi,
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned} \label{est-shift1}
&|\dot X(t)|\le \frac{1}{\varepsilon ^2}\Big(f(t) + C\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \eta(U_0|\tilde U_\varepsilon ) d\xi +1 \Big) \quad \mbox{ for \textit{a.e.} }t\in[0,T] ,\\
&\mbox{for some positive function $f$ satisfying}\quad\|f\|_{L^1(0,T)} \le \frac{2\lambda}{\delta_0\varepsilon }\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \eta(U_0| \tilde U_\varepsilon ) d\xi.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
1. In \cite{Kang-V-NS17}, the authors proved Theorem \ref{thm_general} in the case of $\alpha=\gamma$. Therefore, it suffices to prove the remaining cases where $0<\alpha< \gamma \le \alpha +1$. That is, $\beta=\gamma-\alpha\in(0,1]$.\\
2. Notice that it is enough to prove Theorem \ref{thm_main} for 1-shocks. Indeed, the result for 2-shocks is obtained by the change of variables $x\to -x$, $u\to -u$, $\sigma_\varepsilon \to -\sigma_\varepsilon $. \\
Therefore, from now on, we only consider a 1-shock $(\tilde v_\varepsilon ,\tilde h_\varepsilon )$, i.e., $v_->v_+$, $u_->u_+$, and
\begin{equation}\label{RH-con}
\sigma_\varepsilon =- \sqrt{-\frac{p(v_+)-p(v_-)}{v_+-v_-}}.
\end{equation}
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} \label{rem-HT}
As mentioned in Remark \ref{rem-sol}, we consider the solution $(v,u)\in \mathcal{X}_T$ to \eqref{main}. Then, \eqref{NS} admits the solution $(v,h)$ in $\mathcal{H}_T$. Indeed,
since $v_t=u_x \in L^2(0,T; H^1(\mathbb R))$ by $\eqref{main}_1$, we have $v-\underline v \in C (0,T; H^1(\mathbb R))$.
To show $h-\underline u \in C (0,T; L^2(\mathbb R))$, we first find that for $(v,u)\in \mathcal{X}_T$,
\[
h-\underline u=u-\underline u + \frac{\alpha}{\gamma} p(v)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}-1} v_x \in L^\infty (0,T; L^2(\mathbb R)).
\]
Moreover, together with the fact that $v\in L^\infty((0,T)\times \mathbb R)$ by Sobolev embedding, we find that
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
& u_t = -p'(v) v_x + \frac{d}{dv}\Big(\frac{\mu(v)}{v}\Big)v_x u_x + \frac{\mu(v)}{v} u_{xx} \in L^2 (0,T; L^2(\mathbb R)),\\
&\Big(p(v)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}-1} v_x \Big)_t = (\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}-1)p(v)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}-2} v_t v_x + p(v)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}-1} v_{xt} \in L^2 (0,T; L^2(\mathbb R)),
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
which implies $h_t \in L^2 (0,T; L^2(\mathbb R))$, and therefore $h-\underline u \in C (0,T; L^2(\mathbb R))$.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Global and local estimates on the relative quantities}
We here present useful inequalities on $Q$ and $p$ that are crucially used for the proofs of main results. First, the following lemma provides some global inequalities on the relative function $Q(\cdot|\cdot)$ corresponding to the convex function $Q(v)=\frac{v^{-\gamma+1}}{\gamma-1}$, $v>0$, $\gamma>1$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem-pro}
For given constants $\gamma>1$, and $v_->0$, there exist constants $c_1, c_2>0$ such that the following inequalities hold.\\
1) For any $w\in (0,v_-)$,
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{rel_Q}
& Q(v|w)\ge c_1 |v-w|^2,\quad \mbox{for all } 0<v\le 3v_-,\\
& Q(v|w)\ge c_2 |v-w|,\quad \mbox{for all } v\ge 3v_-.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
2) Moreover if $0<w\leq u\leq v$ or $0<v\leq u\leq w$ then
\begin{equation}\label{Q-sim}
Q(v|w)\geq Q(u|w),
\end{equation}
and for any $\delta_*>0$ there exists a constant $C>0$ such that if, in addition,
$v_->w>v_--\delta_*/2$ and $|w-u|>\delta_*$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{rel_Q1}
Q(v|w)-Q(u|w)\geq C|u-v|.
\end{equation}
3) For any $w\in (v_-/4, v_-)$,
\begin{equation}\label{pressure2}
|p(v)-p(w)| \le c_5 |v-w|,\quad \mbox{for all } v\ge v_-/2,
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We refer to \cite[Lemma 2.4, 2.5]{Kang-V-NS17}.
\end{proof}
Next, we use \eqref{rel_Q} and \eqref{Q-sim} above to prove the following lemma, which is used for the proof of Theorem \ref{thm_inviscid}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem_Q1}
For given constants $\gamma, M>1$, there exist constants $C>0$ and $k_0>1$ such that the following inequalities hold.\\
1) For any $k\ge 3M$ and $w\in (M^{-1}, M)$,
\begin{equation}\label{Q1}
\max\{(k^{-1}-v)_+, (v-k)_+ \} \le C Q(v|w),\quad\mbox{for any $v>0$}.
\end{equation}
2) For any $w_1, w_2 \in (M^{-1}, M)$,
\begin{equation}\label{Q2}
Q(v|w_1) \le CQ(v|w_2),\quad \mbox{for any $v\in (0,k_0^{-1})\cup(k_0,\infty)$}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
$\bullet$ {\it proof of \eqref{Q1}} : i) If $k^{-1}\le v\le k$, then $\max\{(k^{-1}-v)_+, (v-k)_+ \}=0\le C Q(v|w)$.\\
ii) If $0<v<k^{-1}$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{Lhs1}
\max\{(k^{-1}-v)_+, (v-k)_+ \}=k^{-1}-v<k^{-1}.
\end{equation}
Since $v<k^{-1}\le M^{-1}/3$, we use \eqref{rel_Q} and \eqref{Q-sim} to have
\[
Q(v|w)\ge Q(M^{-1}/3|w)\ge c_1 |M^{-1}/3-w|^2.
\]
Moreover, since $w>M^{-1}$, we have
\[
Q(v|w)\ge c_14M^{-2}/9 \ge (c_14M^{-1}/3)k^{-1} ,
\]
which together with \eqref{Lhs1} implies the desired inequality.\\
iii) If $v>k$, we have
\[
\max\{(k^{-1}-v)_+, (v-k)_+ \}=v-k\le v-3M.
\]
Likewise, using \eqref{rel_Q}, we have
\[
Q(v|w)\ge c_2 |v-w|.
\]
Since $v>3M> w$, we have
\[
Q(v|w)\ge c_2 (v-3M),
\]
which completes the desired inequality.\\
$\bullet$ {\it proof of \eqref{Q2}} : We set $C:=2\max\big\{\frac{Q'(M)}{Q'(M^{-1})},1\big\}$. Since $Q'<0$, there exists $k_1>1$ such that for all $v>k_1$,
\[
-Q'(M)v\ge (1-C)Q(v) +\big(Q'(M)M -Q(M) \big) - C\big(Q'(M^{-1})M^{-1}-Q(M^{-1})\big).
\]
Moreover, since $Q'$ is increasing and $\frac{d}{dv}\big(Q'(v)v-Q(v)\big)>0$, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\big(-CQ'(w_2)+Q'(w_1)\big) v \ge \big(-CQ'(M^{-1})+Q'(M)\big) v \ge -Q'(M) v\\
&\quad \ge (1-C)Q(v)+\big(Q'(M)M -Q(M) \big) - C\big(Q'(M^{-1})M^{-1}-Q(M^{-1})\big)\\
&\quad \ge (1-C)Q(v) + \big(Q'(w_1)w_1 -Q(w_1) \big) - C\big(Q'(w_2)w_2-Q(w_2)\big).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
which together with the definition of $Q(\cdot|\cdot)$ yields that
\[
Q(v|w_1) \le CQ(v|w_2),\quad \mbox{for all } v>k_1.
\]
On the other hand, since $Q(v)\to +\infty$ as $v\to 0+$, there exists $k_0>k_1$ such that for all $v<k_0^{-1}$,
\[
Q(v)\ge \big(CQ'(M^{-1})-Q'(M)\big) v +\big(Q'(M)M -Q(M) \big) - C\big(Q'(M^{-1})M^{-1}-Q(M^{-1})\big).
\]
Then we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&(C-1)Q(v)\ge Q(v)\\
&\quad \ge \big(CQ'(M^{-1})-Q'(M)\big) v +\big(Q'(M)M -Q(M) \big) - C\big(Q'(M^{-1})M^{-1}-Q(M^{-1})\big)\\
&\quad \ge \big(CQ'(w_2)-Q'(w_1)\big) v + \big(Q'(w_1)w_1 -Q(w_1) \big) - C\big(Q'(w_2)w_2-Q(w_2)\big),
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
which yields that $Q(v|w_1) \le CQ(v|w_2) ~\mbox{for all } v<k_0^{-1}.$
\end{proof}
We present now some local estimates on $p(v|w)$ and $Q(v|w)$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:local}
For given constants $\gamma>1$ and $v_->0$
there exist positive constants $C$ and $\delta_*$ such that for any $0<\delta<\delta_*$, the following is true.\\
1) For any $(v, w)\in \mathbb R_+^2$
satisfying $|p(v)-p(w)|<\delta$ and $|p(w)-p(v_-)|<\delta$,
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{p-est1}
p(v|w)&\le \bigg(\frac{\gamma+1}{2\gamma} \frac{1}{p(w)} + C\delta \bigg) |p(v)-p(w)|^2.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
2) For any $(v, w)\in \mathbb R_+^2$ such that $|p(w)-p(v_-)|\leq \delta$, and satisfying either $Q(v|w)<\delta$ or $|p(v)-p(w)|<\delta$,
\begin{equation}\label{pQ-equi0}
|p(v)-p(w)|^2 \le C Q(v|w).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We refer to \cite[Lemma 2.6]{Kang-V-NS17}.
\end{proof}
\vspace{1cm}
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm_main}}\label{section_theo}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
Throughout this section, $C$ denotes a positive constant which may change from line to line, but which stays independent on $\varepsilon $ (the shock strength) and $\lambda$ (the total variation of the function $a$).
We will consider two smallness conditions, one on $\varepsilon $, and the other on $\varepsilon /\lambda$. In the argument, $\varepsilon $ will be far smaller than $\varepsilon /\lambda$ .
\subsection{Properties of small shock waves}
In this subsection, we present useful properties of the 1-shock waves $(\tilde v_\varepsilon ,\tilde h_\varepsilon )$ with small amplitude $\varepsilon $. In the sequel, without loss of generality, we consider the 1-shock wave $(\tilde v_\varepsilon ,\tilde h_\varepsilon )$ satisfying $\tilde v_\varepsilon (0)=\frac{v_-+v_+}{2}$. Notice that the estimates in the following lemma also hold for $\tilde h_\varepsilon $ since we have $\tilde h_\varepsilon '=\frac{p'(\tilde v_\varepsilon )}{\sigma_\varepsilon } \tilde v_\varepsilon '$ and $C^{-1}\le\frac{p'(\tilde v_\varepsilon )}{\sigma_\varepsilon }\le C$. But, since the below estimates for $\tilde v_\varepsilon $ are enough in our analysis, we give the estimates only for $\tilde v_\varepsilon $.
\begin{lemma}
We fix $v_->0$ and $h_-\in \mathbb R$. Then there exists $\varepsilon _0>0$ such that for any $0<\varepsilon <\varepsilon _0$ the following is true.
Let $\tilde v_{\varepsilon }$ be the 1-shock wave with amplitude $|p(v_-) -p(v_+)|=\varepsilon $ and such that $\tilde v_\varepsilon (0)=\frac{v_-+v_+}{2}$. Then, there exist constants $C, C_1, C_2>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{tail}
-C^{-1}\varepsilon ^2 e^{-C_1 \varepsilon |\xi|} \le \tilde v_\varepsilon '(\xi) \le -C\varepsilon ^2 e^{-C_2 \varepsilon |\xi|},\quad \forall\xi\in\mathbb R.
\end{equation}
Therefore, as a consequence, we have
\begin{equation}\label{lower-v}
\inf_{\left[-\frac{1}{\varepsilon },\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\right]}| v'_{\varepsilon }|\ge C\varepsilon ^2.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Using $v_-/2<\tilde v_\varepsilon <v_-$, the proof follows the same arguments as in \cite[Lemma 2.1]{Kang-V-NS17}. Therefore, we omit its details.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Relative entropy method}
Our analysis is based on the relative entropy. The method is purely nonlinear, and allows to handle rough and large perturbations. The relative entropy method was first introduced by Dafermos \cite{Dafermos1} and Diperna \cite{DiPerna} to prove the $L^2$ stability and uniqueness of Lipschitz solutions to the hyperbolic conservation laws endowed with a convex entropy.
To use the relative entropy method, we rewrite \eqref{NS} into the following general system of viscous conservation laws:
\begin{equation}\label{system-0}
\partial_t U +\partial_\xi A(U)= { -\partial_{\xi}\big(v^\beta \partial_{\xi}p(v)\big) \choose 0},
\end{equation}
where
\[
U:={v \choose h},\quad A(U):={-\sigma_\varepsilon v-h \choose -\sigma_\varepsilon h+p(v)}.
\]
The system \eqref{system-0} has a convex entropy $\eta(U):=\frac{h^2}{2}+Q(v)$, where $Q(v)=\frac{v^{-\gamma+1}}{\gamma-1}$, i.e., $Q'(v)=-p(v)$.\\
Using the derivative of the entropy as
\begin{equation}\label{nablae}
\nabla\eta(U)={-p(v)\choose h},
\end{equation}
the above system \eqref{system-0} can be rewritten as
\begin{equation}\label{system}
\partial_t U +\partial_\xi A(U)= \partial_\xi\Big(M(U) \partial_\xi\nabla\eta(U) \Big),
\end{equation}
where $M(U)={v^\beta \quad 0 \choose 0\quad 0}$, and \eqref{small_shock1} can be rewritten as
\begin{equation}\label{re_shock}
\partial_\xi A(\tilde U_\varepsilon )= \partial_\xi\Big(M(\tilde U_\varepsilon ) \partial_\xi\nabla\eta(\tilde U_\varepsilon ) \Big).
\end{equation}
Consider the relative entropy function defined by
\[
\eta(U|V)=\eta(U)-\eta(V) -\nabla\eta(V) (U-V),
\]
and the relative flux defined by
\[
A(U|V)=A(U)-A(V) -\nabla A(V) (U-V).
\]
Let $G(\cdot;\cdot)$ be the flux of the relative entropy defined by
\[
G(U;V) = G(U)-G(V) -\nabla \eta(V) (A(U)-A(V)),
\]
where $G$ is the entropy flux of $\eta$, i.e., $\partial_{i} G (U) = \sum_{k=1}^{2}\partial_{k} \eta(U) \partial_{i} A_{k} (U),\quad 1\le i\le 2$.\\
Then, for our system \eqref{system-0}, we have
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{relative_e}
&\eta(U|\tilde U_\varepsilon )=\frac{|h-\tilde h_\varepsilon |^2}{2} + Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ),\\
& A(U|\tilde U_\varepsilon )={0 \choose p(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon )},\\
&G(U;\tilde U_\varepsilon )=(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )) (h-\tilde h_\varepsilon )-\sigma_\varepsilon \eta(U|\tilde U_\varepsilon ),
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
where the relative pressure is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{pressure-relative}
p(v|w)=p(v)-p(w)-p'(w)(v-w).
\end{equation}
We consider a weighted relative entropy between the solution $U$ of \eqref{system} and the viscous shock $\tilde U_\varepsilon :={\tilde v_\varepsilon \choose \tilde h_\varepsilon }$ in \eqref{small_shock1} up to a shift $X(t)$ :
\[
a(\xi)\eta\big(U(t,\xi+X(t))|\tilde U_\varepsilon (\xi)\big).
\]
where $a$ is a smooth weight function.\\
In Lemma \ref{lem-rel}, we will derive a quadratic structure on $\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\mathbb R} a(\xi)\eta\big(U(t,\xi+X(t))|\tilde U_\varepsilon (\xi)\big) d\xi$.\\
For that, we introduce a simple notation: for any function $f : \mathbb R^+\times \mathbb R\to \mathbb R$ and the shift $X(t)$,
\[
f^{\pm X}(t, \xi):=f(t,\xi\pm X(t)).
\]
We also introduce the function space:
\[
\mathcal{H}:=\{(v,h)\in\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R~|~ v^{-1}, v \in L^{\infty}(\mathbb R),~ h-\tilde h_\varepsilon \in L^2( \mathbb R), ~ \partial_\xi \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ) \big)\in L^2( \mathbb R) \},
\]
on which the functionals $Y, \mathcal{J}^{bad},\mathcal{J}^{good}$ in \eqref{ybg-first} are well-defined for all $t\in (0,T)$.
\begin{remark} \label{rem-H}
As mentioned in Remark \ref{rem-HT}, we consider the solution $(v,h)\in \mathcal{H}_T$ to \eqref{NS}.
Then, using the fact that $v_\xi \in C (0,T; L^2(\mathbb R)),~\tilde v_\varepsilon ' \in L^2( \mathbb R)$, and $ v^{-1}, v \in C (0,T; L^{\infty}(\mathbb R))$, we find
\[
\partial_\xi \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ) \big) \in C (0,T; L^2(\mathbb R)),
\]
which implies $(v,h)(t)\in \mathcal{H}$ for all $t\in[0,T]$.
\end{remark}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem-rel}
Let $a:\mathbb R\to\mathbb R^+$ be any positive smooth bounded function whose derivative is bounded and integrable. Let $\tilde U_\varepsilon :={\tilde v_\varepsilon \choose \tilde h_\varepsilon }$ be the viscous shock in \eqref{small_shock1}. For any solution $U\in \mathcal{H}_T$ to \eqref{system}, and any absolutely continuous shift $X:[0,T]\to\mathbb R$, the following holds.
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{ineq-0}
\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\mathbb R} a(\xi)\eta(U^X(t,\xi)|\tilde U_\varepsilon (\xi)) d\xi =\dot X(t) Y(U^X) +\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U^X) - \mathcal{J}^{good}(U^X),
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{ybg-first}
&Y(U):= -\int_\mathbb R a'\eta(U|\tilde U_\varepsilon ) d\xi +\int_\mathbb R a\partial_\xi\nabla\eta(\tilde U_\varepsilon ) (U-\tilde U_\varepsilon ) d\xi,\\
&\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U):= \int_\mathbb R a' \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) (h-\tilde h_\varepsilon )d\xi + \sigma_\varepsilon \int_\mathbb R a \partial_\xi \tilde v_\varepsilon p(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi\\
& \qquad\quad -\int_\mathbb R a' v^\beta \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big)\partial_\xi \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) d\xi-\int_\mathbb R a' \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) (v^\beta - \tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta) \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )d\xi \\
&\qquad\quad -\int_\mathbb R a \partial_\xi \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) (v^\beta - \tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta) \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi,\\
&\mathcal{J}^{good}(U):= \frac{\sigma_\varepsilon }{2}\int_\mathbb R a'\left| h-\tilde h_\varepsilon \right|^2 d\xi +\sigma_\varepsilon \int_\mathbb R a' Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi + \int_\mathbb R a v^\beta \left|\partial_\xi \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big)\right|^2 d\xi.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{remark}
In what follows, we will define the weight function $a$ such that $\sigma_\varepsilon a' >0$. Therefore, $-\mathcal{J}^{good}$ consists of three good terms, while $\mathcal{J}^{bad}$ consists of bad terms.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
To derive the desired structure, we use here a change of variable $\xi\mapsto \xi-X(t)$ as
\begin{equation}\label{move-X}
\int_{\mathbb R} a(\xi)\eta(U^X(t,\xi)|\tilde U_\varepsilon (\xi)) d\xi=\int_{\mathbb R} a^{-X}(\xi)\eta(U(t,\xi)|\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}(\xi)) d\xi.
\end{equation}
Then, using the same computation in \cite[Lemma 2.3]{Kang-V-NS17} (see also \cite[Lemma 4]{Vasseur_Book}), we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\mathbb R} a^{-X}(\xi)\eta(U(t,\xi)|\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}(\xi)) d\xi\\
&=-\dot X \int_{\mathbb R} \!a'^{-X} \eta(U|\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X} ) d\xi +\int_\mathbb R \!\!a^{-X}\bigg[\Big(\nabla\eta(U)-\nabla\eta(\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X})\Big)\!\Big(\!\!\!-\partial_\xi A(U)+ \partial_\xi\Big(M(U)\partial_\xi\nabla\eta(U) \Big) \Big)\\
&\qquad -\nabla^2\eta(\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}) (U-\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}) \Big(-\dot X \partial_\xi\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X} -\partial_\xi A(\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X})+ \partial_\xi\Big(M(\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X})\partial_\xi\nabla\eta(\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}) \Big)\Big) \bigg] d\xi\\
&\quad =\dot X \Big( -\int_\mathbb R a'^{-X}\eta(U|\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}) d\xi +\int_\mathbb R a^{-X}\partial_\xi\nabla\eta(\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}) (U-\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}) \Big) +I_1+I_2+I_3+I_4,
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
where
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&I_1:=-\int_\mathbb R a^{-X} \partial_\xi G(U;\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}) d\xi,\\
&I_2:=- \int_\mathbb R a^{-X} \partial_\xi \nabla\eta(\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}) A(U|\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}) d\xi,\\
&I_3:=\int_\mathbb R a^{-X} \Big( \nabla\eta(U)-\nabla\eta(\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X})\Big) \partial_\xi \Big(M(U) \partial_\xi \big(\nabla\eta(U)-\nabla\eta(\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X})\big) \Big) d\xi, \\
&I_4:=\int_\mathbb R a^{-X} \Big( \nabla\eta(U)-\nabla\eta(\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X})\Big) \partial_\xi \Big(\big(M(U)-M(\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X})\big) \partial_\xi \nabla\eta(\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}) \Big) d\xi \\
&I_5:=\int_\mathbb R a^{-X}(\nabla\eta)(U|\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X})\partial_\xi \Big(M(\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}) \partial_\xi \nabla\eta(\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}) \Big) d\xi.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Using \eqref{relative_e} and \eqref{nablae}, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
I_1&=\int_\mathbb R a'^{-X} G(U;\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}) d\xi = \int_\mathbb R a'^{-X} \Big(\big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X})\big) \big(h-\tilde h_\varepsilon ^{-X}\big) -\sigma_\varepsilon \eta(U|\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X})\Big) d\xi\\
&= \int_\mathbb R a'^{-X} \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X})\big) \big(h-\tilde h_\varepsilon ^{-X}\big) d\xi -\frac{\sigma_\varepsilon }{2}\int_\mathbb R a'^{-X}\left| h-\tilde h_\varepsilon \right|^2 d\xi -\sigma_\varepsilon \int_\mathbb R a'^{-X} Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi ,\\
I_2&=-\int_\mathbb R a^{-X} \partial_\xi \tilde h_\varepsilon ^{-X} p(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X}) d\xi.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
By integration by parts, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
I_3&=\int_\mathbb R a^{-X} \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X})\big)\partial_{\xi}\Big(v^\beta \partial_{\xi}\big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X})\big) \Big) d\xi \\
&=-\int_\mathbb R a^{-X}v^\beta |\partial_\xi \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X})\big)|^2 d\xi -\int_\mathbb R a'^{-X} v^\beta \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X})\big)\partial_\xi \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X})\big) d\xi,\\
I_4&= \int_\mathbb R a^{-X} \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X})\big)\partial_{\xi}\Big((v^\beta - \tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta) \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X}) \Big) d\xi \\
&=-\int_\mathbb R a'^{-X} \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X})\big) (v^\beta - \tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta) \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X}) d\xi \\
&\qquad -\int_\mathbb R a^{-X} \partial_\xi \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X})\big) (v^\beta - \tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta) \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X}) d\xi.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Since it follows from \eqref{re_shock} and \eqref{nablae} that
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
I_5=\int_\mathbb R a^{-X}(\nabla\eta)(U|\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X})\partial_\xi A(\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}) d\xi =\int_\mathbb R a^{-X} p(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X}) \Big(\partial_\xi \tilde h_\varepsilon ^{-X} + \sigma_\varepsilon \partial_\xi \tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X} \Big) d\xi,
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
we have some cancellation
\[
I_2+I_5=\sigma_\varepsilon \int_\mathbb R a^{-X} \partial_\xi \tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X} p(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X}) d\xi.
\]
Therefore, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\mathbb R} a^{-X}\eta(U|\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}) d\xi\\
&\quad =\dot X \Big( -\int_\mathbb R a'^{-X}\eta(U|\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}) d\xi +\int_\mathbb R a^{-X}\partial_\xi\nabla\eta(\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}) (U-\tilde U_\varepsilon ^{-X}) d\xi \Big)\\
&\quad + \int_\mathbb R a'^{-X} \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X})\big) (h-\tilde h_\varepsilon ^{-X}) d\xi -\frac{\sigma_\varepsilon }{2}\int_\mathbb R a'^{-X}\left| h-\tilde h_\varepsilon \right|^2 d\xi -\sigma_\varepsilon \int_\mathbb R a'^{-X} Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi \\
&\quad + \sigma_\varepsilon \int_\mathbb R a^{-X} \partial_\xi \tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X} p(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X}) d\xi -\int_\mathbb R a'^{-X} v^\beta \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X})\big)\partial_\xi \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X})\big) d\xi\\
&\quad -\int_\mathbb R a'^{-X} \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X})\big) \left(v^\beta - (\tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta)^{-X}\right) \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X})d\xi \\
&\quad -\int_\mathbb R a^{-X} \partial_\xi \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X})\big) \left(v^\beta - (\tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta)^{-X}\right) \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X}) d\xi -\int_\mathbb R a^{-X} v^\beta |\partial_\xi (p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ^{-X}))|^2 d\xi.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Again, we use a change of variable $\xi\mapsto \xi+X(t)$ to have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\mathbb R} a\eta(U^X|\tilde U_\varepsilon ) d\xi\\
&\quad =\dot X \Big( -\int_\mathbb R a'\eta(U^X|\tilde U_\varepsilon ) d\xi +\int_\mathbb R a\partial_\xi\nabla\eta(\tilde U_\varepsilon ) (U^X-\tilde U_\varepsilon ) d\xi \Big)\\
&\qquad + \int_\mathbb R a' \big(p(v^X)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) (h^X-\tilde h_\varepsilon )d\xi -\frac{\sigma_\varepsilon }{2}\int_\mathbb R a' \left| h^X-\tilde h_\varepsilon \right|^2 d\xi -\sigma_\varepsilon \int_\mathbb R a' Q(v^X|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi \\
&\qquad + \sigma_\varepsilon \int_\mathbb R a \partial_\xi \tilde v_\varepsilon p(v^X|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi -\int_\mathbb R a' (v^\beta)^X \big(p(v^X)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big)\partial_\xi \big(p(v^X)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) d\xi\\
&\qquad -\int_\mathbb R a' \big(p(v^X)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) \left((v^\beta)^{X} - \tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta\right) \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )d\xi \\
&\qquad -\int_\mathbb R a \partial_\xi \big(p(v^X)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) \left((v^\beta)^X - \tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta\right) \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi -\int_\mathbb R a (v^\beta)^X |\partial_\xi (p(v^X)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ))|^2 d\xi,
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
which provides the desired representation.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Construction of the weight function}
We define the weight function $a$ by
\begin{equation}\label{weight-a}
a(\xi)=1-\lambda \frac{p(\tilde v_\varepsilon (\xi))-p(v_-)}{[p]},
\end{equation}
where $[p]:=p(v_+)-p(v_-)$
We briefly present some useful properties on the weight $a$.\\
First of all, the weight function $a$ is positive and decreasing, and satisfies $1-\lambda\le a\le 1$.\\
Since $[p]=\varepsilon $, $p'(v_-/2)\le p'(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\le p'(v_-)$ and
\begin{equation}\label{der-a}
a'=-\lambda \frac{\partial_\xi p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )}{[p]},
\end{equation}
we have
\begin{equation}\label{d-weight}
|a'|\sim \frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }|\tilde v_\varepsilon '|.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Maximization in terms of $h-\tilde h_\varepsilon $}\label{sec:mini}
In order to estimate the right-hand side of \eqref{ineq-1}, we will use Proposition \ref{prop:main3}, i.e., a sharp estimate with respect to $v-\tilde v_\varepsilon $ when $v-\tilde v_\varepsilon \ll 1$, for which we need to rewrite $\mathcal{J}^{bad}$ on the right-hand side of \eqref{ineq-0} only in terms of $v$ near $\tilde v_\varepsilon $, by separating $h-\tilde h_\varepsilon $ from the first term of $\mathcal{J}^{bad}$. Therefore, we will rewrite $\mathcal{J}^{bad}$ into the maximized representation in terms of $h-\tilde h_\varepsilon $ in the following lemma. However, we will keep all terms of $\mathcal{J}^{bad}$ in a region $\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) >\delta\}$ for small values of $v$, since we use the estimate \eqref{ns1} to control the first term of $\mathcal{J}^{bad}$ in that region.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem-max}
Let $a:\mathbb R\to\mathbb R^+$ be as in \eqref{weight-a}, and $\tilde U_\varepsilon ={\tilde v_\varepsilon \choose \tilde h_\varepsilon }$ be the viscous shock in \eqref{small_shock1}. Let $\delta$ be any positive constant.
Then, for any $U\in \mathcal{H}$,
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{ineq-1}
\mathcal{J}^{bad} (U) -\mathcal{J}^{good} (U)= \mathcal{B}_\delta(U)- \mathcal{G}_\delta(U),
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{badgood}
&\mathcal{B}_\delta(U):= \sigma_\varepsilon \int_\mathbb R a \partial_\xi \tilde v_\varepsilon p(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi+ \frac{1}{2\sigma_\varepsilon } \int_\mathbb R a' |p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|^2 {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \leq\delta\}} d\xi \\
&\qquad \quad + \int_\mathbb R a' \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) (h-\tilde h_\varepsilon ) {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) >\delta\}}d\xi \\
& \qquad\quad -\int_\mathbb R a' v^\beta \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big)\partial_\xi \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) d\xi-\int_\mathbb R a' \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) (v^\beta - \tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta) \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )d\xi \\
&\qquad\quad -\int_\mathbb R a \partial_\xi \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) (v^\beta - \tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta) \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi,\\
&\mathcal{G}_\delta(U):=\frac{\sigma_\varepsilon }{2}\int_\mathbb R a'\left| h-\tilde h_\varepsilon -\frac{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )}{\sigma_\varepsilon }\right|^2 {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \leq\delta\}} d\xi + \frac{\sigma_\varepsilon }{2}\int_\mathbb R a'\left| h-\tilde h_\varepsilon \right|^2 {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) >\delta\}} d\xi \\
&\qquad\quad+\sigma_\varepsilon \int_\mathbb R a' Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi +\int_\mathbb R a v^\beta |\partial_\xi \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big)|^2 d\xi.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:0}
Since $\sigma_\varepsilon a' >0$ and $a>0$, $-\mathcal{G}_\delta$ consists of four good terms.
\end{remark}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For any fixed $\delta>0$, we first rewrite $\mathcal{J}^{bad}$ and $-\mathcal{J}^{good}$ into
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U):=\underbrace{ \int_\mathbb R a' \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) (h-\tilde h_\varepsilon ) {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \leq\delta\}} d\xi }_{=:J_1}\\
& \qquad\quad +\int_\mathbb R a' \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) (h-\tilde h_\varepsilon ) {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) >\delta\}} d\xi
+ \sigma_\varepsilon \int_\mathbb R a \partial_\xi \tilde v_\varepsilon p(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi\\
& \qquad\quad -\int_\mathbb R a' v^\beta \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big)\partial_\xi \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) d\xi-\int_\mathbb R a' \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) (v^\beta - \tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta) \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )d\xi \\
&\qquad\quad -\int_\mathbb R a \partial_\xi \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) (v^\beta - \tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta) \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi,
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&-\mathcal{J}^{good}(U):= \underbrace{- \frac{\sigma_\varepsilon }{2}\int_\mathbb R a'\left| h-\tilde h_\varepsilon \right|^2 {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \leq\delta\}} d\xi }_{=:J_2}
-\frac{\sigma_\varepsilon }{2}\int_\mathbb R a'\left| h-\tilde h_\varepsilon \right|^2 d\xi {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) >\delta\}} d\xi \\
&\qquad\quad -\sigma_\varepsilon \int_\mathbb R a' Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi -\int_\mathbb R a v^\beta \left|\partial_\xi \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big)\right|^2 d\xi.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Applying the quadratic identity $\alpha x^2+ \beta x =\alpha(x+\frac{\beta}{2\alpha})^2-\frac{\beta^2}{4\alpha}$ with $x:=h-\tilde h_\varepsilon $ to the integrands of $J_1+J_2$, we find
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
- \frac{\sigma_\varepsilon }{2} \left| h-\tilde h_\varepsilon \right|^2 +\big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) (h-\tilde h_\varepsilon ) = - \frac{\sigma_\varepsilon }{2} \left| h-\tilde h_\varepsilon -\frac{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )}{\sigma_\varepsilon }\right|^2+ \frac{1}{2\sigma_\varepsilon }|p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|^2.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Therefore, we have the desired representation \eqref{ineq-1}-\eqref{badgood}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Main proposition}
The main proposition for the proof of Theorem \ref{thm_main} is the following.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:main}
There exist $\varepsilon _0,\delta_0, \delta_3\in(0,1/2)$ such that for any $\varepsilon <\varepsilon _0$ and $\delta_0^{-1}\varepsilon <\lambda<\delta_0$, the following is true.\\
For any $U\in\mathcal{H} \cap \{U~|~|Y(U)|\le\varepsilon ^2 \}$,
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{prop:est}
\mathcal{R}(U)&:= -\frac{1}{\varepsilon ^4}Y^2(U) +\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U)+\delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} |\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U)|\\
&\qquad -\mathcal{G}_1^-(U)-\mathcal{G}_1^+(U) -\left(1-\delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)\mathcal{G}_2(U) -(1-\delta_0)\mathcal{D}(U) \le 0,
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
where $Y$ and $\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}$ are as in \eqref{ybg-first} and \eqref{badgood}, and $\mathcal{G}_1^-, \mathcal{G}_1^+, \mathcal{G}_2, \mathcal{D}$ denote the four terms of $\mathcal{G}_{\delta_3}$ as follows:
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{ggd}
&\mathcal{G}_1^-(U):=\frac{\sigma_\varepsilon }{2}\int_{\Omega^c} a' |h-\tilde h_\varepsilon |^2 {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) >\delta_3\}} d\xi,\\
&\mathcal{G}_1^+(U):=\frac{\sigma_\varepsilon }{2}\int_\Omega a'\Big(h-\tilde h_\varepsilon -\frac{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )}{\sigma_\varepsilon }\Big)^2 {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \leq\delta_3 \}} d\xi,\\
&\mathcal{G}_2(U):=\sigma_\varepsilon \int_\mathbb R a' Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi,\\
&\mathcal{D}(U):= \int_\mathbb R a v^{\beta} |\partial_\xi (p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ))|^2 d\xi.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
\end{proposition}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm_main} from Proposition \ref{prop:main}}
We will first show how Proposition \ref{prop:main} implies Theorem~\ref{thm_main}.\\
For any fixed $\varepsilon >0$, we consider a continuous function $\Phi_\varepsilon $ defined by
\begin{equation}\label{Phi-d}
\Phi_\varepsilon (y)=
\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
\frac{1}{\varepsilon ^2},\quad \mbox{if}~ y\le -\varepsilon ^2, \\
-\frac{1}{\varepsilon ^4}y,\quad \mbox{if} ~ |y|\le \varepsilon ^2, \\
-\frac{1}{\varepsilon ^2},\quad \mbox{if} ~y\ge \varepsilon ^2. \end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
Let $\varepsilon _0,\delta_0, \delta_3$ be the constants in Proposition \ref{prop:main}. Then, let $\varepsilon , \lambda$ be any constants such that $0<\varepsilon <\varepsilon _0$ and $\delta_0^{-1}\varepsilon <\lambda<\delta_0<1/2$.\\
We define a shift function $X(t)$ as a solution of the nonlinear ODE:
\begin{equation}\label{X-def}
\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
\dot X(t) = \Phi_\varepsilon (Y(U^X)) \Big(2|\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U^X)|+1 \Big),\\
X(0)=0, \end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
where $Y$ and $\mathcal{J}^{bad}$ are as in \eqref{ybg-first}.\\
Then, for the solution $U\in \mathcal{H}_T$, there exists a unique absolutely continuous shift $X$ on $[0,T]$.
Indeed, since $\tilde v_\varepsilon ', \tilde h_\varepsilon ', a'$ are bounded, smooth and integrable, using $U\in \mathcal{H}_T$ together with the change of variables $\xi\mapsto \xi-X(t)$ as in \eqref{move-X}, we find that there exists $a, b\in L^2(0,T)$ such that
\[
\sup_{x\in\mathbb R}| F(t,x)| \le a(t)\quad\mbox{and}\quad \sup_{x\in\mathbb R} |\partial_x F(t,x)| \le b(t),\quad \forall t\in[0,T],
\]
where $F(t,X)$ denotes the right-hand side of the ODE \eqref{X-def}. For more details on the existence and uniqueness theory of the ODE, we refer to \cite[Lemma A.1]{CKKV}. \\
Based on \eqref{ineq-0} and \eqref{X-def}, to get the contraction estimate \eqref{cont_main2}, it is enough to prove that for almost every time $t>0$ ,
\begin{equation}\label{contem0}
\Phi_\varepsilon (Y(U^X)) \Big(2|\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U^X)|+1 \Big) Y(U^X) +\mathcal{J}^{bad} (U^X) -\mathcal{J}^{good} (U^X) \le0.
\end{equation}
We define
\[
\mathcal{F}(U):=\Phi_\varepsilon (Y(U)) \Big(2|\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U)|+1 \Big)Y(U) +\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U) -\mathcal{J}^{good} (U) ,\quad \forall U\in \mathcal{H}.
\]
From \eqref{Phi-d}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{XY}
\Phi_\varepsilon (Y) \Big(2|\mathcal{J}^{bad}|+1 \Big)Y\le
\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
-2|\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}|,\quad \mbox{if}~ |Y|\ge \varepsilon ^2,\\
-\frac{1}{\varepsilon ^4}Y^2,\quad \mbox{if}~ |Y|\le \varepsilon ^2. \end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
Hence, for all $U\in \mathcal{H}$ satisfying $|Y(U)|\ge \varepsilon ^2 $, we have
$$
\mathcal{F}(U) \le -|\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U)|-\mathcal{J}^{good}(U) \le 0.
$$
Using \eqref{ineq-1}, \eqref{XY} and Proposition \ref{prop:main}, we find that for all $U\in \mathcal{H}$ satisfying $|Y(U)|\le \varepsilon ^2 $,
$$
\mathcal{F}(U) \le -\delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}|\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U)| -\delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\mathcal{G}_2(U) - \delta_0\mathcal{D}(U) \le 0.
$$
Since $\delta_0 <1/2$, these two estimates show that for every $U\in \mathcal{H}$ we have
$$
\mathcal{F}(U) \le -\delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} |\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U)| -\delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\mathcal{G}_2(U) - \delta_0\mathcal{D}(U).
$$
Thus, using the above estimates with $U=U^X$, together with \eqref{ineq-0}, \eqref{contem0} and the definition of $\mathcal{I}^{good}$, we find that for a.e. $t>0$,
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{111}
&\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\mathbb R} a\eta(U^X|\tilde U_\varepsilon )+ \delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\mathcal{G}_2(U^X) + \delta_0\mathcal{D}(U^X) d\xi = \mathcal{F}(U^X)+ \delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\mathcal{G}_2(U^X) + \delta_0\mathcal{D}(U^X) \\
&\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad \le -|\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U^X)| \mathbf{1}_{\{|Y(U^X)|\ge\varepsilon ^2\}} -\delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} |\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U^X)| \mathbf{1}_{\{|Y(U^X)|\le\varepsilon ^2\}} \le 0.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
Therefore we have
\begin{equation}\label{cont-pre}
\int_{\mathbb R} a\eta(U^X|\tilde U_\varepsilon ) d\xi + \delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\mathcal{G}_2(U^X) + \delta_0\mathcal{D}(U^X)\le \int_{\mathbb R} a\eta(U_0|\tilde U_\varepsilon ) d\xi <\infty ,
\end{equation}
which completes \eqref{cont_main2}.\\
To estimate $|\dot X|$, we first observe that \eqref{Phi-d} and \eqref{X-def} yield
\begin{equation}\label{contx}
|\dot X| \le \frac{1}{\varepsilon ^2} (2|\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U^X)| +1) , \quad\mbox{for a.e. } t\in (0,T),
\end{equation}
Notice that it follows from \eqref{111} and $1/2\le a\le 1$ by $\delta_0<1/2$ that
\begin{equation}\label{jb-cont}
\int_0^{T}\left(|\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U^X)| \mathbf{1}_{\{|Y(U^X)|\ge\varepsilon ^2\}} + \delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} |\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U^X)| \mathbf{1}_{\{|Y(U^X)|\le\varepsilon ^2\}} \right)dt \le 2\int_{\mathbb R} \eta(U_0|\tilde U_\varepsilon ) d\xi.
\end{equation}
To estimate $|\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U^X)|$ globally in time, using \eqref{ineq-1} and the definitions of $\mathcal{I}^{good}$ and $\mathcal{G}_{\delta_3}$,
we find that
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&|\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U^X)|\\
&=|\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U^X)| {\mathbf 1}_{\{|Y(U^X)|\ge \varepsilon ^2\}} +|\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U^X)| {\mathbf 1}_{\{|Y(U^X)|\le \varepsilon ^2\}} \\
&=|\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U^X)| {\mathbf 1}_{\{|Y(U^X)|\ge \varepsilon ^2\}} +| \mathcal{J}^{good}(U^X) + \mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U^X)-\mathcal{G}_{\delta_3}(U^X)| {\mathbf 1}_{\{|Y(U^X)|\le \varepsilon ^2\}}\\
&\le |\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U^X)| {\mathbf 1}_{\{|Y(U^X)|\ge \varepsilon ^2\}} +| \mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U^X)|{\mathbf 1}_{\{|Y(U^X)|\le \varepsilon ^2\}}\\
&\quad + \frac{|\sigma| }{2}\int_\mathbb R |a'| \Big| \big(h^X-\tilde h_\varepsilon \big)^2 - \left(h^X-\tilde h_\varepsilon -\frac{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )}{\sigma_\varepsilon }\right)^2 \Big|{\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \leq\delta_3 \}} d\xi\\
&\le |\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U^X)| {\mathbf 1}_{\{|Y(U^X)|\ge \varepsilon ^2\}} +| \mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U^X)|{\mathbf 1}_{\{|Y(U^X)|\le \varepsilon ^2\}}\\
&\quad +C \int_\mathbb R |a'| \Big( \big(h^X-\tilde h_\varepsilon \big)^2 + \big(p(v^X)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ) \big)^2 \Big) {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v^X)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \leq\delta_3 \}} d\xi .
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Since for any $v$ satisfying $p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \leq\delta_3$, there exists a positive constant $c_*$ such that $v>c_*^{-1}$ and $|p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|\le c_*$, we use \eqref{pressure2} and \eqref{rel_Q} to have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
& \int_\mathbb R \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ) \big)^2 {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \leq\delta_3 \}} d\xi \\
&\quad \le c_* \int_{v>c_*^{-1}} \big|p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ) \big| {\mathbf 1}_{\{v\ge 3v_- \}} d\xi + \int_{v>c_*^{-1}} \big|p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ) \big|^2 {\mathbf 1}_{\{v\le 3v_- \}} d\xi \\
&\quad \le C\int_{v>c_*^{-1}} \Big( |v-\tilde v_\varepsilon | {\mathbf 1}_{\{v\ge 3v_- \}} + |v-\tilde v_\varepsilon |^2 {\mathbf 1}_{\{v\le 3v_- \}} \Big) d\xi \le C\int_\mathbb R Q(v| \tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi .
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Therefore, using $a' \leq C \delta_0$ and $\delta_0\le \frac{1}{2}\le a$, we have
\[
|\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U^X)|\le |\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U^X)| {\mathbf 1}_{\{|Y(U^X)|\ge \varepsilon ^2\}} +| \mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U^X)|{\mathbf 1}_{\{|Y(U^X)|\le \varepsilon ^2\}} + C \int_\mathbb R a\eta(U^X|\tilde U_\varepsilon ) d\xi,
\]
which together with \eqref{cont-pre} and \eqref{contx} implies
\[
|\dot X|\le \frac{1}{\varepsilon ^2}\left[ \Big( |\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U^X)| {\mathbf 1}_{\{|Y(U^X)|\ge \varepsilon ^2\}} +| \mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U^X)|{\mathbf 1}_{\{|Y(U^X)|\le \varepsilon ^2\}} \Big) + C \int_{\mathbb R} \eta(U_0|\tilde U_\varepsilon ) d\xi + 1 \right],
\]
and \eqref{jb-cont} implies
\[
\int_0^{T}\Big( |\mathcal{J}^{bad}(U^X)| {\mathbf 1}_{\{|Y(U^X)|\ge \varepsilon ^2\}} +| \mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U^X)|{\mathbf 1}_{\{|Y(U^X)|\le \varepsilon ^2\}} \Big) dt \le \frac{2\lambda}{\delta_0\varepsilon }\int_\mathbb R \eta(U_0|\tilde U_\varepsilon ) d\xi.
\]
Hence we complete \eqref{est-shift1}.\\
\vskip0.1cm The rest of this section is dedicated to the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:main}.
\subsection{Expansion in the size of the shock}\label{section-expansion}
We define the following functionals:
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{note-in}
&Y_g(v):=-\frac{1}{2\sigma_\varepsilon ^2}\int_\mathbb R a' |p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|^2 d\xi -\int_\mathbb R a' Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi -\int_\mathbb R a \partial_\xi p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )(v-\tilde v_\varepsilon )d\xi\\
&\quad\qquad+\frac{1}{\sigma_\varepsilon }\int_\mathbb R a \partial_\xi \tilde h_\varepsilon \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big)d\xi,\\
&\mathcal{I}_1(v):= \sigma_\varepsilon \int_\mathbb R a \partial_\xi \tilde v_\varepsilon p(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi,\\
&\mathcal{I}_2(v):= \frac{1}{2\sigma_\varepsilon } \int_\mathbb R a' |p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|^2d\xi,\\
&\mathcal{G}_2(v):=\sigma_\varepsilon \int_\mathbb R a' Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi, \\
&\mathcal{D}(v):=\int_\mathbb R a\, v^\beta |\partial_\xi (p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ))|^2 d\xi.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
Note that all these quantities depend only on $v$ (not on $h$).
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:main3}
For any constant $C_2>0$, there exist $\varepsilon _0, \delta_3>0$, such that for any $\varepsilon \in(0,\varepsilon _0)$, and any $\lambda, \delta\in(0,\delta_3)$ such that $\varepsilon \leq \lambda$,
the following is true.\\
For any function $v:\mathbb R\to \mathbb R^+$ such that $\mathcal{D}(v)+\mathcal{G}_2(v)
is finite, if
\begin{equation}\label{assYp}
|Y_g(v)|\leq C_2 \frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda},\qquad \|p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb R)}\leq \delta_3,
\end{equation}
then
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{redelta}
\mathcal{R}_{\varepsilon ,\delta}(v)&:=-\frac{1}{\varepsilon \delta}|Y_g(v)|^2 +\mathcal{I}_1(v)+\delta|\mathcal{I}_1(v)|\\
&\quad\quad+\mathcal{I}_2(v)+\delta\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)|\mathcal{I}_2(v)|-\left(1-\delta\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)\right)\mathcal{G}_2(v)-(1-\delta)\mathcal{D}(v)\le 0,
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
where note that $\mathcal{I}_1, \mathcal{I}_2 \ge 0$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The proof is almost the same as that of \cite[Proposition 3.4]{Kang-V-NS17}, because $Y_g, \mathcal{I}_1, \mathcal{I}_2, \mathcal{G}_2$ defined in \eqref{note-in} are the exactly same functionals as in \cite[Proposition 3.4]{Kang-V-NS17}, and the diffusion $\mathcal{D}$ is slightly different but has the same expansion.
Note that this proposition corresponds to an expansion in $p(v)$ near $p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )$ (up to $\delta_3$) for $p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )$ close to $p(v_-)$ (up to $\varepsilon $). It is therefore natural that the expansion is similar to the case of $\alpha=\gamma$ as in \cite[Proposition 3.4]{Kang-V-NS17}, since the viscosity is almost constant near $p(v_-)$.
For completeness, the main part of the proof is given in Appendix \ref{app-exp}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Truncation of the big values of $|p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|$}\label{section-finale}
In order to use Proposition \ref{prop:main3} in the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:main}, we need to show that the values for $p(v)$ such that $|p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|\geq\delta_3$ have a small effect. However, the value of $\delta_3$ is itself conditioned to the constant $C_2$ in the proposition. Therefore, we need first to find a uniform bound on $Y_g$ which is not yet conditioned on the level of truncation $k$.
We consider a truncation on $|p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|$ with a constant $k>0$. Later we will consider the case $k=\delta_3$ as in Proposition \ref{prop:main3}. But for now, we consider the general case $k$ to estimate the constant $C_2$. For that, let $\psi_k$ be a continuous function defined by
\begin{equation}\label{psi}
\psi_k(y)=\inf\left(k,\sup(-k,y)\right).
\end{equation}
We then define the function $\bar{v}_k$ uniquely (since the function $p$ is one to one) as
\begin{equation}\label{trunc-def}
p(\bar v_k)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )=\psi_k(p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )).
\end{equation}
We have the following lemma (see \cite[Lemma 3.2]{Kang-V-NS17}).
\begin{lemma}\label{lemmeC2}
For a fixed $v_-\geq0$, $u_-\in\mathbb R$, there exists $C_2, k_0, \varepsilon _0, \delta_0>0$ such that for any $\varepsilon \leq \varepsilon _0$, $\varepsilon /\lambda\leq \delta_0$ with $\lambda<1/2$, the following is true whenever $|Y(U)|\leq \varepsilon ^2$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{l1}
&& \int_\mathbb R|a'||h-\tilde{h}_\varepsilon |^2\,d\xi + \int_\mathbb R|a'| Q(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\,d\xi\leq C\frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda}, \\
\label{lbis}
&& |Y_g(\bar v_k)|\leq C_2\frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda}, \qquad \mathrm{for \ every \ } k\leq k_0.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{lemma}
We now fix the constant $\delta_3$ of Proposition \ref{prop:main3} associated to the constant $C_2$ of Lemma \ref{lemmeC2}. Without loss of generality, we can assume that $\delta_3< k_0$ (since Proposition \ref{prop:main3} is valid for any smaller $\delta_3$). From now on, we set (without confusion)
$$
\bar v:=\bar v_{\delta_3}, \qquad \bar{U}:=(\bar v, h), \qquad \mathcal{B}:=\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}, \qquad \mathcal{G}:=\mathcal{G}_{\delta_3}.
$$
Note from Lemma \ref{lemmeC2} that
\begin{equation}\label{YC2}
|Y_g(\bar v)|\leq C_2 \frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda}.
\end{equation}
We first recall the terms $Y$ in \eqref{ybg-first} as
\[
Y= -\int_\mathbb R a' \frac{|h-\tilde h_\varepsilon |^2}{2} d\xi -\int_\mathbb R a' Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi +\int_\mathbb R a \Big(-\partial_\xi p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )(v-\tilde v_\varepsilon ) +\partial_\xi \tilde h_\varepsilon (h-\tilde h_\varepsilon ) \Big) d\xi.
\]
In what follows, for simplification, we use the notation:
\[
\Omega:=\{\xi~|~ (p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ))(\xi) \leq\delta_3\}.
\]
We split $Y$ into four parts $Y_g$, $Y_b$, $Y_l$ and $Y_s$ as follows: \\
\[
Y= Y_g +Y_b +Y_l + Y_s,
\]
where
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
Y_g&:= -\frac{1}{2\sigma_\varepsilon ^2}\int_\Omega a' |p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|^2 d\xi -\int_\Omega a' Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi -\int_\Omega a \partial_\xi p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )(v-\tilde v_\varepsilon )d\xi\\
&\quad+\frac{1}{\sigma_\varepsilon }\int_\Omega a \partial_\xi \tilde h_\varepsilon \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big)d\xi,\\
Y_b&:= -\frac{1}{2}\int_\Omega a' \Big(h-\tilde h_\varepsilon -\frac{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )}{\sigma_\varepsilon }\Big)^2 d\xi \\
&\quad -\frac{1}{\sigma_\varepsilon } \int_\Omega a' \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big)\Big(h-\tilde h_\varepsilon -\frac{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )}{\sigma_\varepsilon }\Big) d\xi,\\
Y_l&=\int_\Omega a \partial_\xi \tilde h_\varepsilon \Big(h-\tilde h_\varepsilon -\frac{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )}{\sigma_\varepsilon }\Big)d\xi,\\
Y_s&=-\int_{\Omega^c} a' Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi -\int_{\Omega^c} a \partial_\xi p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )(v-\tilde v_\varepsilon )d\xi \\
&\quad -\int_{\Omega^c} a' \frac{|h-\tilde h_\varepsilon |^2}{2} d\xi +\int_{\Omega^c} a \partial_\xi \tilde h_\varepsilon (h-\tilde h_\varepsilon ) d\xi.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Notice that $Y_g$ consists of the terms related to $v-\tilde v_\varepsilon $, while $Y_b$ and $Y_l$ consist of terms related to $h-\tilde h_\varepsilon $. While $Y_b$ is quadratic, and $Y_l$ is linear in $h-\tilde h_\varepsilon $.
Since $\{\xi~|~ |p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )| \leq\delta_3\} \subset \Omega$, $Y_g(\bar U)$ is the same as $Y_g(v)$ in Proposition \ref{prop:main3}. Therefore we need show that $Y_g(U)-Y_g(\bar U)$, $Y_b(U)$, $Y_l(U)$ and $Y_s(U)$ are negligible by the good term $\mathcal{G}$.
For the bad terms $\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}$ in \eqref{badgood}, we will use the following notations :
\begin{equation}\label{bad0}
\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}=\mathcal{B}_1+\mathcal{B}_2^- +\mathcal{B}_2^+ +\mathcal{B}_3 +\mathcal{B}_4+\mathcal{B}_5,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\mathcal{B}_1= \sigma_\varepsilon \int_\mathbb R a \partial_\xi \tilde v_\varepsilon p(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi,\\
&\mathcal{B}_2^- =\int_{\Omega^c} a' \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) (h-\tilde h_\varepsilon )d\xi , \qquad \mathcal{B}_2^+ = \frac{1}{2\sigma_\varepsilon } \int_\Omega a' |p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|^2 d\xi,\\
&\mathcal{B}_3= -\int_\mathbb R a' v^\beta \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big)\partial_\xi \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) d\xi,\\
&\mathcal{B}_4= -\int_\mathbb R a' \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) (v^\beta - \tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta) \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )d\xi, \\
&\mathcal{B}_5= -\int_\mathbb R a \partial_\xi \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big) (v^\beta - \tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta) \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
We also recall the notations $\mathcal{G}_1^-,\mathcal{G}_1^+, \mathcal{G}_2, \mathcal{D}$ in \eqref{ggd} for the good terms.
We now state the following proposition.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop_out}
There exist constants $\varepsilon _0, \delta_0, C, C^*>0$ (in particular, $C$ depends on the constant $\delta_3$ in Proposition \ref{prop:main}) such that for any $\varepsilon <\varepsilon _0$ and $\delta_0^{-1}\varepsilon <\lambda<\delta_0<1/2$, the following statements hold true.
\begin{itemize}
\item[1.] For any $U$ such that $|Y(U)|\leq \varepsilon ^2$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{n1}
&&|\mathcal{B}_1(U)-\mathcal{B}_1(\bar U)| \leq C\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \left( \mathcal{D}(U) + \left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right)+\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right) ,\\
\label{n12}
&&|\mathcal{B}_2^-(U)| \le\delta_0 \left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right) + \frac{1}{2} \mathcal{G}_1^-(U),\\
\label{n13}
&&|\mathcal{B}_2^+(U)-\mathcal{B}_2^+(\bar U)| \le \sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}}\mathcal{D}(U),\\
\label{n14}
&&|\mathcal{B}_3(U)|+|\mathcal{B}_4(U)|+|\mathcal{B}_5(U)| \le C \delta_0 \left( \mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right)+\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)\right),\\
\label{n2}
&&|\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U)| \le C^*\frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda} + C \sqrt{\delta_0} \mathcal{D}(U).
\end{eqnarray}
\item[2.] For any $U$ such that $|Y(U)|\leq \varepsilon ^2$ and $\mathcal{D}(U)\leq \frac{C^*}{4}\frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda}$,
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{m1}
&|Y_g(U)-Y_g(\bar U)|^2 +|Y_b(U)|^2+|Y_l(U)|^2+|Y_s(U)|^2 \\
&\quad\le C\frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda}\left(\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}}\mathcal{D}(U)+\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right)+\mathcal{G}_1^-(U) + \left(\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }\right)^{1/4}\mathcal{G}_1^+(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^{1/4}\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right).
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
\end{itemize}
\end{proposition}
To prove this proposition,
we will control the bad terms in different ways for each case of small or big values of $v$, which all correspond to the big values of $|p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|$ (as $|p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|\ge\delta_3$).
For that, we set
\begin{equation}\label{chi}
p(\bar v_s)- p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ) := \psi_{\delta_3}^s\big(p(v)- p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big),\quad p(\bar v_b)- p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ) := \psi_{\delta_3}^b
\big(p(v)- p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big),
\end{equation}
where $\psi_{\delta_3}^s$ and $\psi_{\delta_3}^b$ are one-sided truncations of $\psi_{\delta_3}$ defined in \eqref{psi}, i.e.,
\[\psi_{\delta_3}^s(y)=\inf (\delta_3,y),\quad \psi_{\delta_3}^b(y)=\sup (-\delta_3,y).\]
Notice that the function $\bar v_s$ (resp. $\bar v_b$) represents the truncation of small (resp. big) values of $v$ corresponding to $|p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|\ge\delta_3$.\\
By comparing the definitions of \eqref{trunc-def} and \eqref{chi}, we see
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{compare1}
& \left( p(\bar v_s)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \right) {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \ge -\delta_3\}} = \left( p(\bar v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \right) {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \ge -\delta_3\}} ,\\
& \left( p(\bar v_b)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \right) {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \le \delta_3\}} = \left( p(\bar v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\right) {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \le \delta_3\}} .
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
We also note that
\begin{equation}\label{def-bar}
\begin{array}{rl}
p(v)-p(\bar v_s)=& (p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ))+(p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )-p(\bar v_s)) \\[0.2cm]
=&\left(I-\psi^s_{\delta^3}\right)\left(p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\right) \\[0.2cm]
=& \left(\left(p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \right)-\delta_3\right)_+,\\[0.2cm]
p(\bar v_b)-p(v)=& (p(\bar v_b)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ))+(p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )-p(v)) \\[0.2cm]
=&\left(\psi^b_{\delta^3}-I\right)\left(p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\right) \\[0.2cm]
=& \left(-\left(p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\right)-\delta_3\right)_+,\\
|p(v)-p(\bar v)|=& |(p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ))+(p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )-p(\bar v))|\\[0.2cm]
=&|(I-\psi_\delta)(p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ))|\\[0.2cm]
=& (|p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|-\delta_3)_+.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Therefore, using \eqref{trunc-def}, \eqref{chi} and \eqref{def-bar}, we have
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{eq_D}
\mathcal{D}(U)&=\int_\mathbb R av^{\beta} |\partial_\xi (p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ))|^2 d\xi\\
&=\int_\mathbb R a v^{\beta} |\partial_\xi (p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ))|^2 ( {\mathbf 1}_{\{|p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) |\leq\delta_3\}} + {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) >\delta_3\}}+ {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) <-\delta_3\}} )d\xi\\
&=\mathcal{D}(\bar U)+\int_\mathbb R a v^{\beta} |\partial_\xi (p(v)-p(\bar v_s))|^2 d\xi+\int_\mathbb R av^{\beta} |\partial_\xi (p(v)-p(\bar v_b))|^2 d\xi\\
&\ge \int_\mathbb R a v^{\beta} |\partial_\xi (p(v)-p(\bar v_s))|^2 d\xi+\int_\mathbb R av^{\beta} |\partial_\xi (p(v)-p(\bar v_b))|^2 d\xi.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
On the other hand, since $Q(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\geq Q(\bar v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )$,
we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq_G}
|\sigma_\varepsilon | \int_\mathbb R |a'|Q(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\,d\xi\geq \mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)=|\sigma_\varepsilon |\int_\mathbb R |a'|\left(Q(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )-Q(\bar v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\right)\,d\xi\geq 0,
\end{equation}
which together with \eqref{l1} yields
\begin{equation}\label{l2}
0\leq \mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)\leq \mathcal{G}_2(U)\leq C\frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda}.
\end{equation}
We first present a series of following lemmas.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma_out1}
Under the same assumption as Proposition \ref{prop_out}, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{big1}
&& \int_\mathbb R|a'| \big| p(v)-p(\bar v_b) \big|^2 d\xi + \int_\mathbb R|a'| \big| p(v)-p(\bar v_b) \big| d\xi \le \sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}}\mathcal{D}(U),\\
\label{big2}
&& \int_\mathbb R|a'| \Big | |p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|^2- |p(\bar v_b)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|^2\Big| {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \le \delta_3\}} \,d\xi \le \sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}}\mathcal{D}(U).
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{l3}
&& \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 v^\beta |p(v)-p(\bar v)|^2 \,d\xi + \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 v^\beta |p(v)-p(\bar v)| \,d\xi \le C\lambda^2 \left( \mathcal{D}(U) +\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \mathcal{G}_2(U)\right) ,\\
\label{l4}
&& \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \Big |v^\beta |p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|^2- \bar v^\beta |p(\bar v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|^2\Big| \,d\xi \le C\lambda^2 \left( \mathcal{D}(U) +\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \mathcal{G}_2(U)\right).
\end{eqnarray}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\noindent{\bf Proof of \eqref{big1}:}
We split the proof into two steps.
\vskip0.2cm
\noindent{\it Step 1:} Note first that since $(y-\delta_3/2)_+\geq \delta_3/2$ whenever $(y-\delta_3)_+>0$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{y-identity}
(y-\delta_3)_+\leq (y-\delta_3/2)_+{\mathbf 1}_{\{y-\delta_3>0\}}\leq (y-\delta_3/2)_+\left(\frac{(y-\delta_3/2)_+}{\delta_3/2}\right)\leq \frac{2}{\delta_3} (y-\delta_3/2)_+^2.
\end{equation}
Hence, to show \eqref{big1}, it is enough to show it only for the quadratic part, with $\bar v_b$ defined with $\delta_3/2$ instead of $\delta_3$. We will keep the notation $\bar v_b$ in Step 2 below.
\vskip0.2cm
\noindent{\it Step 2:}
First, using \eqref{eq_D}, we find that for any $\xi\in\mathbb R$,
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{est6}
|p(v)-p(\bar v_b)(\xi)| &\le \int_{\xi_0}^\xi \left|\partial_\xi \big( p(v)-p(\bar v_b)\big) \right| {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) < -\delta_3\}} \,d\xi \\
&\le C\int_{\xi_0}^\xi v^{\beta/2}\left|\partial_\xi \big( p(v)-p(\bar v_b)\big) \right| {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) < -\delta_3\}} \,d\xi \\
&\le C\sqrt{|\xi|+\frac{1}{\varepsilon }}\sqrt{\mathcal{D}(U)}.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
For any $\xi$ such that $|(p(v)-p(\bar v))(\xi)|>0$, we have from \eqref{def-bar} that $|(p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ))(\xi)|> \delta_3$. Thus using \eqref{pressure2} and \eqref{rel_Q}, we have $Q(v(\xi)|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon (\xi))\geq \alpha$, for some constant $\alpha>0$ depending only on $\delta_3$. Thus,
\begin{equation}\label{beta2}
{\mathbf 1}_{\{|p(v)-p(\bar v)|>0\}}\leq \frac{Q(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )}{\alpha}.
\end{equation}
Since ${\mathbf 1}_{\{|p(v)-p(\bar v_b)|>0\}}\le {\mathbf 1}_{\{|p(v)-p(\bar v)|>0\}}$, using \eqref{est6}, \eqref{beta2} and \eqref{l1}, we estimate
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{stand1}
&\int_\mathbb R|a'| \big| p(v)-p(\bar v_b) \big|^2 d\xi\\
&\le \int_{|\xi|\le\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }}}|a'||p(v)-p(\bar v_b)|^2 \,d\xi+ \int_{|\xi|\geq\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }}}|a'||p(v)-p(\bar v_b)|^2 \,d\xi\\
&\leq\left(\sup_{\left[-\sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon ^3}},\sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon ^3}}\right]}|p(v)-p(\bar v_s)|\right)
\int_{|\xi|\le\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }}}|a'| {\mathbf 1}_{\{|p(v)-p(\bar v)|>0\}} \,d\xi\\
&\qquad+C\mathcal{D}(U) \int_{|\xi|\geq\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }}}|a'| \left(|\xi|+\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\right)\,d\xi\\
&\leq C \mathcal{D}(U) \left(\sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon ^3}}
\int_\mathbb R|a'|\frac{Q(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )}{\alpha}\,d\xi+2\int_{|\xi|\geq\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }}}|a'| |\xi|\,d\xi\right).
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
Therefore we have
\[
\int_\mathbb R|a'| \big| p(v)-p(\bar v_b) \big|^2 d\xi \le C\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}}\mathcal{D}(U).
\]
Indeed, using \eqref{l1} and \eqref{tail} (recalling $|a'|=(\lambda/\varepsilon )|\tilde{v}'_\varepsilon |$), we have
\[
\int_\mathbb R|a'||p(v)-p(\bar v)|^2\,d\xi \leq C \mathcal{D}(U)\left(\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}} +\lambda \varepsilon
\int_{|\xi|\geq\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }}}e^{-c\varepsilon |\xi|} |\xi|\,d\xi \right),
\]
and for the last term, we take $\delta_0$ small enough such that for any $\varepsilon /\lambda\leq \delta_0$,
$$
\lambda \varepsilon \int_{|\xi|\geq\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }}}e^{-c\varepsilon |\xi|} |\xi|\,d\xi =\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon } \int_{|\xi|\geq \sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }}} e^{-c|\xi|} |\xi| d\xi \le \frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon } \int_{|\xi|\geq \sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }}} e^{-\frac{c}{2}|\xi|}d\xi=\frac{2\lambda}{c\varepsilon }e^{-\frac{c}{2}\sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }}}\leq \sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}}.
$$
As mentioned in Step 1, recall that $\bar v_b=\bar v_{b_{\delta_3/2}}$ in the above estimate. Then using \eqref{def-bar}, we have
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{shift1}
\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 v^\beta |p(v)-p(\bar v_{b_{\delta_3}})|^2\,d\xi &=\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 v^\beta (-(p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ))-\delta_3)_+^2\,d\xi \\
&\le \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 v^\beta (-(p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ))-\delta_3/2)_+^2\,d\xi\\
&=\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 v^\beta |p(v)-p(\bar v_{b_{\delta_3/2}})|^2\,d\xi \\
&\leq C\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}}\mathcal{D}(U).
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
For the linear part, using \eqref{def-bar} and \eqref{y-identity} with $y:=-(p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ))$, we have
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{shift2}
\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 v^\beta |p(v)-p(\bar v_{b_{\delta_3}})|\,d\xi &\le \frac{2}{\delta_3}\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 v^\beta |p(v)-p(\bar v_{b_{\delta_3/2}})|^2 \,d\xi\\
& \leq C\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}}\mathcal{D}(U).
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
Hence, we obtain \eqref{big1}.\\
\noindent{\bf Proof of \eqref{big2}:} Since it follows from \eqref{compare1} that
\[
|p(\bar v_b)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )| {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \le \delta_3\}}=|p(\bar v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|{\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \le \delta_3\}} \le \delta_3,
\]
using \eqref{big1}, we have
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{dif1}
&\int_\mathbb R|a'| \Big | |p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|^2- |p(\bar v_b)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|^2\Big| {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \le \delta_3\}} \,d\xi \\
&\quad = \int_\mathbb R |a'| |p( v)-p(\bar v_b)| |p(v)+p(\bar v_b)-2p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|{\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \le \delta_3\}} \,d\xi\\
&\quad\leq \int_\mathbb R |a'| |p(v)-p(\bar v_b)| \left( |p(v)-p(\bar v_b)|+2|p(\bar v_b) -p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )| \right){\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \le \delta_3\}}\,d\xi\\
&\quad \le \int_\mathbb R |a'| \left( |p(v)-p(\bar v_b)|^2+2\delta_3 |p(v)-p(\bar v_b)| \right)\,d\xi \le C\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}}\mathcal{D}(U).
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
\noindent{\bf Proof of \eqref{l3}:}
Thanks to \eqref{y-identity}, it is enough to show the quadratic part, with $\bar v$ defined with $\delta_3/2$ instead of $\delta_3$.
For this case, we will keep the notations $\bar v_s$ and $\bar v_b$ below without confusion.\\
We first decompose the quadratic part into two parts:
\[
\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 v^\beta |p(v)-p(\bar v)|^2\,d\xi =\underbrace{\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 v^\beta |p(v)-p(\bar v_b)|^2 \,d\xi}_{=:Q_b}+ \underbrace{\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 v^\beta |p(v)-p(\bar v_s)|^2 \, d\xi}_{=:Q_s}.
\]
First, using the condition $\beta=\gamma-\alpha\le1$, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
|Q_b| & = \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \frac{v^\beta |p(v)-p(\bar v_b)|^2 }{|v-\bar v| } |v-\bar v| {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )<-\delta_3/2\}} \,d\xi\\
& \le C \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 |v-\bar v| {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )<-\delta_3/2\}} \,d\xi.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
To control the right hand side, we use \eqref{rel_Q1} as follows: If $|v-\bar v|>0$, using \eqref{pressure2}, we find
\[|\bar v-\tilde v_\varepsilon |\ge \min(c_5^{-1} \delta_3/2, v_-/2-\varepsilon _0).\]
Taking $\delta_*$ in $2)$ of Lemma \ref{lem-pro} such that $\varepsilon _0\leq \delta_*/2$ and $\min(c_5^{-1} \delta_3, v_-/2-\varepsilon _0)\ge \delta_*$, we use \eqref{rel_Q1} with $w=\tilde{v}_\varepsilon $, $u=\bar v$ and $v=v$ to find that there exists a constant $C>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{line_lower}
C|v-\bar v|\leq Q(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )- Q(\bar v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ).
\end{equation}
Therefore, using $|a'|\le \varepsilon \lambda$, we find
\begin{equation}\label{Qb}
|Q_b| \le C \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \big(Q(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )-Q(\bar v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\big) \,d\xi \le C\varepsilon \lambda \mathcal{G}_2(U).
\end{equation}
On the other hand, to control $Q_s$, we will first derive a point-wise estimate \eqref{beta1} as below: \\
Using $|a'|=(\lambda/\varepsilon )|\tilde{v}'_\varepsilon |$, together with \eqref{lower-v} and \eqref{l1}, we get
\begin{eqnarray*}
2\varepsilon \int_{-1/\varepsilon }^{1/\varepsilon } Q(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\, d\xi&\leq& \frac{2\varepsilon }{\inf_{[-1/\varepsilon ,1/\varepsilon ]}|a'|}\int_\mathbb R|a'|Q(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\,d\xi\\
&\leq& C \frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda\varepsilon }\frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda}=C\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2.
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore, there exists $\xi_0\in [-1/\varepsilon ,1/\varepsilon ]$ such that $Q(v(\xi_0),\tilde{v}_\varepsilon (\xi_0))\leq C(\varepsilon /\lambda)^2$. For $\delta_0$ small enough, and using \eqref{pQ-equi0}, we have
$$
|(p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ))(\xi_0)|\leq C\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}.
$$
Thus, if $\delta_0$ is small enough such that $C\varepsilon /\lambda\leq \delta_3/2$, then we have from the definition of $\bar v_s$ that
$$
(p(v)-p(\bar v_s))(\xi_0)=0.
$$
Therefore, for any $\xi\in \mathbb R$,
\[
|v^{\beta/2}(p(v)-p(\bar v_s))(\xi)|=\left|\int_{\xi_0}^\xi \partial_\xi \big(v^{\beta/2}(p(v)-p(\bar v_s))\big)\,d\zeta\right|.
\]
To control the right-hand side by the good terms, we observe that
since $v^{\beta/2}=p(v)^{-(\gamma-\alpha)/2\gamma}$,
we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\partial_\xi \big(v^{\beta/2}(p(v)-p(\bar v_s))\big)= \partial_\xi \big( p(v)^{-(\gamma-\alpha)/2\gamma} ((p(v)-p(\bar v_s)) \big)\\
&&\qquad = p(v)^{-(\gamma-\alpha)/2\gamma}\partial_\xi ((p(v)-p(\bar v_s))\\
&&\qquad\quad -\frac{\gamma-\alpha}{2\gamma}p(v)^{-(\gamma-\alpha)/2\gamma} \frac{p(v)-p(\bar v_s)}{p(v)}\partial_\xi \big[ ((p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ))+p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \big]\\
&&\qquad = v^{\beta/2} \partial_\xi ((p(v)-p(\bar v_s)) -\frac{\gamma-\alpha}{2\gamma}v^{\beta/2} \underbrace{ \frac{p(v)-p(\bar v_s)}{p(v)} \partial_\xi ((p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ))}_{=:K}\\
&&\qquad\quad -\frac{\gamma-\alpha}{2\gamma}v^{\beta/2} \frac{p(v)-p(\bar v_s)}{p(v)} \partial_\xi p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ).
\end{eqnarray*}
In particular, note that (by the definition of $\bar v_s$) the part $K$ above can be rewritten by
\[
K= \frac{p(v)-p(\bar v_s)}{p(v)} {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )>\delta_3/2\}} \partial_\xi ((p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ))= \frac{p(v)-p(\bar v_s)}{p(v)} \partial_\xi ((p(v)-p(\bar v_s)).
\]
Then, using $ |\partial_\xi p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )| \le C |\tilde v_\varepsilon '| $ and
\[
\frac{p(v)-p(\bar v_s)}{p(v)} \le C,
\]
we have
\[
|\partial_\xi \big(v^{\beta/2}(p(v)-p(\bar v_s))\big)|\le C v^{\beta/2}(|\partial_\xi ((p(v)-p(\bar v_s))| +|\tilde v_\varepsilon '|).
\]
Therefore, using \eqref{eq_D}, we have that for any $\xi\in \mathbb R$,
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
|v^{\beta/2} (p(v)-p(\bar v_s))(\xi)| &=\left|\int_{\xi_0}^\xi \partial_\xi \big(v^{\beta/2} (p(v)-p(\bar v_s))\big)\,d\xi \right| \\
&\le \int_{\xi_0}^\xi \big|\partial_\xi \big(v^{\beta/2} (p(v)-p(\bar v_s))\big)\big| {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) > \delta_3/2\}} d\xi\\
&\le \int_{\xi_0}^\xi v^{\beta/2}(|\partial_\xi ((p(v)-p(\bar v_s))| +|\tilde v_\varepsilon '| ) {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) > \delta_3/2\}} d\xi\\
&\le C\sqrt{|\xi|+\frac{1}{\varepsilon }}\bigg(\sqrt{\mathcal{D}(U)} + \sqrt{ \int_\mathbb R a |\tilde v_\varepsilon '|^2 v^{\beta}{\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) > \delta_3/2\}} d\xi} \bigg).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Using the condition $\beta=\gamma-\alpha>0$, we have
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{same-1}
\int_\mathbb R a |\tilde v_\varepsilon '|^2 v^{\beta}{\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) > \delta_3/2\}} d\xi &= \int_\mathbb R a |\tilde v_\varepsilon '|^2 \frac{v^{\beta}}{|v-\tilde v_\varepsilon |^2} |v-\tilde v_\varepsilon |^2 {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) > \delta_3/2\}} d\xi\\
&\le C \int_\mathbb R a |\tilde v_\varepsilon '|^2 |v-\tilde v_\varepsilon |^2 {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) > \delta_3/2\}} d\xi.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
In addition, using \eqref{rel_Q} and $|\tilde v_\varepsilon '|\le C\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} |a'|$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{same-s}
\int_\mathbb R a |\tilde v_\varepsilon '|^2 |v-\tilde v_\varepsilon |^2{\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) > \delta_3/2\}} d\xi\le C\frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda^2} \int_\mathbb R |a'| Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi.
\end{equation}
Therefore we obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{beta1}
\forall \xi\in \mathbb R,\quad |v^{\beta/2} (p(v)-p(\bar v_s))(\xi)| \le C\sqrt{|\xi|+\frac{1}{\varepsilon }}\bigg(\sqrt{\mathcal{D}(U)} +\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \sqrt{\mathcal{G}_2(U)} \bigg).
\end{equation}
Now, using \eqref{d-weight} with \eqref{tail}, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
Q_s& \le C\bigg(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2 \mathcal{G}_2(U) \bigg) \lambda^2\varepsilon \int_\mathbb R e^{-C|\varepsilon \xi|} (|\varepsilon \xi|+1) d\xi \\
&\le C\lambda^2 \bigg(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2 \mathcal{G}_2(U) \bigg).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Therefore, this and \eqref{Qb} complete the estimate:
\[
\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 v^\beta |p(v)-p(\bar v)|^2 \,d\xi \leq C\lambda^2 \left( \mathcal{D}(U) +\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \mathcal{G}_2(U)\right).
\]
Hence using the similar estimates as in \eqref{shift1} and \eqref{shift2} (i.e., using \eqref{def-bar} and \eqref{y-identity} with $y:=|p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|$), we obtain \eqref{l3}.
\noindent{\bf Proof of \eqref{l4}:}
We first separate it into two parts:
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\int_\mathbb R |a'|^2 \left| v^\beta |p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|^2 - \bar v^\beta |p(\bar v) -p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|^2 \right|\,d\xi\\
&&\quad\le \underbrace{\int_\mathbb R |a'|^2 v^\beta \left| |p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|^2 - |p(\bar v) -p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|^2 \right| \,d\xi }_{=:I_1} +\underbrace{\int_\mathbb R |a'|^2 \big|v^\beta -\bar v^\beta\big| |p(\bar v) -p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|^2 \,d\xi}_{=:I_2}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Using the same arguments as in \eqref{dif1}, it follows from \eqref{l3} that
\begin{eqnarray*}
I_1&\leq& \int_\mathbb R |a'|^2 v^\beta \left( |p(v)-p(\bar v)|^2+2\delta_3 |p(v)-p(\bar v)| \right)\,d\xi\\
\nonumber&\leq& C\lambda^2 \left( \mathcal{D}(U) +\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \mathcal{G}_2(U)\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
For $I_2$, we first separate $I_2$ into two parts:
\[
I_2=\underbrace{\int_\mathbb R |a'|^2 \big|v^\beta -\bar v^\beta_b\big| |p(\bar v_b) -p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|^2 \,d\xi}_{=:I_2^b}+\underbrace{\int_\mathbb R |a'|^2 \big|v^\beta -\bar v^\beta_s\big| |p(\bar v_s) -p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|^2 \,d\xi}_{=:I_2^s}.
\]
Using the assumption $\beta\le 1$, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
I_2^b&\le \delta_3^2 \int_\mathbb R |a'|^2 \frac{\big|v^\beta -\bar v^\beta_b\big|}{|v-\bar v|} |v-\bar v|{\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )<-\delta_3\}} \,d\xi\\
&\le C\int_\mathbb R |a'|^2 |v-\bar v|{\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )<-\delta_3\}} \,d\xi\\
&\le C \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \big(Q(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )-Q(\bar v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\big) \,d\xi \le C\varepsilon \lambda \mathcal{G}_2(U).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Likewise, we use $\beta>0$ to have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
I_2^s &\le \delta_3^2 \int_\mathbb R |a'|^2 \frac{\big|v^\beta -\bar v^\beta_s\big|} { |v-\bar v|} |v-\bar v| {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )>\delta_3\}} \,d\xi \\
&\le C \int_\mathbb R |a'|^2 |v-\bar v| {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )>\delta_3\}} \,d\xi \le C\varepsilon \lambda \mathcal{G}_2(U).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma_out2}
Under the same assumption as Proposition \ref{prop_out}, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{l5}
&& \int_\mathbb R|a'| \left|p(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )-p(\bar v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\right | \,d\xi\\
\nonumber
&&\quad \leq C\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}} \left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right) +C\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right),\\
\label{l50}
&& \int_\mathbb R|a'| \left|Q(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )-Q(\bar v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\right | \,d\xi+\int_\mathbb R|a'| |v-\bar v| \,d\xi \leq C\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right).
\end{eqnarray}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Following the proof of \cite[Lemma 3.3]{Kang-V-NS17} together with \eqref{l2}, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\int_\mathbb R|a'| \left|Q(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )-Q(\bar v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\right | \,d\xi+\int_\mathbb R|a'| |v-\bar v| \,d\xi \\
&& \qquad\le C \int_\mathbb R|a'| \left(Q(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )-Q(\bar v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\right) \,d\xi \le C\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Following the proof of \cite[Lemma 3.3]{Kang-V-NS17}, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\int_\mathbb R|a'| \left|p(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )-p(\bar v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\right | \,d\xi\\
&& \qquad\le \underbrace{\int_\mathbb R|a'| \left|p(v)-p(\bar v) \right | \,d\xi}_{=:I_1} + C \underbrace{\int_\mathbb R|a'| \left(Q(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )-Q(\bar v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\right) \,d\xi}_{=:I_2}.
\end{eqnarray*}
First, using \eqref{l2}, we have
\[
I_2\le C\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right).
\]
We separate $I_1$ into three parts:
\[
I_1 =\underbrace{ \int_\mathbb R|a'| \left|p(v)-p(\bar v_b) \right | \,d\xi}_{=:I_{11}} +\underbrace{\int_\mathbb R|a'| \left|p(v)-p(\bar v_s) \right | {\mathbf 1}_{\{v<v_-/2\}}\,d\xi}_{=:I_{12}}+\underbrace{\int_\mathbb R|a'| \left|p(v)-p(\bar v_s) \right | {\mathbf 1}_{\{v\ge v_-/2\}}\,d\xi}_{=:I_{13}}.
\]
By \eqref{big1}, we have
\[
I_{11}\le C\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}} \mathcal{D}(U).
\]
For $I_{12}$, we first observe that
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{pw1}
v^\beta \big| p(v)-p(\bar v_s) \big|^2 &= p(v)^{-\frac{\gamma-\alpha}{\gamma}} |p(v)-p(\bar v_s)|^2 {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )>\delta_3\}}\\
&= \Big(\frac{|p(v)-p(\bar v_s)|}{p(v)} \Big)^{\frac{\gamma-\alpha}{\gamma}} {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )>\delta_3\}} |p(v)-p(\bar v_s)|^{\frac{\gamma+\alpha}{\gamma}}\\
&\ge C\delta_3^{\frac{\gamma-\alpha}{\gamma}} |p(v)-p(\bar v_s)|^{\frac{\gamma+\alpha}{\gamma}}.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
Since (by the smallness of $\varepsilon _0$ and $\delta_3$)
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{lower-p}
\left|p(v)-p(\bar v_s) \right | {\mathbf 1}_{\{v<v_-/2\}} &\ge \left|p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ) \right | {\mathbf 1}_{\{v<v_-/2\}} -\left|p(\bar v_s) -p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \right| {\mathbf 1}_{\{v<v_-/2\}} \\
&\ge \left|p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ) \right | {\mathbf 1}_{\{v<v_-/2\}} -\delta_3\\
&\ge \left|p(v_-/2)-p(3v_-/4) \right | -\delta_3\\
&\ge \frac{1}{2}\left|p(v_-/2)-p(3v_-/4) \right |,
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
using \eqref{pw1}, we have
\[
\left|p(v)-p(\bar v_s) \right | {\mathbf 1}_{\{v<v_-/2\}} \le C |p(v)-p(\bar v_s)|^{\frac{\gamma+\alpha}{\gamma}} \le C v^\beta \big| p(v)-p(\bar v_s) \big|^2.
\]
Then it follows from \eqref{beta1} that for all $\xi\in\mathbb R$,
\begin{equation}\label{pwi}
\left|p(v)-p(\bar v_s) \right | {\mathbf 1}_{\{v<v_-/2\}}(\xi) \le C \left(|\xi|+\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\right) \left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right).
\end{equation}
Therefore, using \eqref{pwi} together with the same estimate as in \eqref{stand1}, we have
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{long-est}
I_{12}&\le \int_{|\xi|\le\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }}}|a'||p(v)-p(\bar v_s)| {\mathbf 1}_{\{v<v_-/2\}} \,d\xi+ \int_{|\xi|\geq\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }}}|a'||p(v)-p(\bar v_s)| {\mathbf 1}_{\{v<v_-/2\}} \,d\xi\\
& \leq C\left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right) \left(\sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon ^3}}
\int_\mathbb R|a'| Q(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \,d\xi+2\int_{|\xi|\geq\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }}}|a'| |\xi|\,d\xi\right)\\
& \leq C\left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right) \left(\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}} +\lambda \varepsilon
\int_{|\xi|\geq\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }}}e^{-c\varepsilon |\xi|} |\xi|\,d\xi \right)\\
&\leq C\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}} \left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right).
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
For $I_{13}$, since $\left|p(v)-p(\bar v_s) \right|{\mathbf 1}_{\{v\ge v_-/2\}} \le p(v_-/2)$, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
I_{13} &= \int_\mathbb R|a'| \frac{\left|p(v)-p(\bar v_s) \right |}{|v-\bar v|} |v-\bar v| {\mathbf 1}_{\{v\ge v_-/2\} \cap\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) >\delta_3\} }\,d\xi \\
&\le C \int_\mathbb R|a'| |v-\bar v| {\mathbf 1}_{\{v\ge v_-/2\} \cap\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) >\delta_3\} }\,d\xi \le C\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Hence, we have
\[
I_1\le C\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}} \left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right) +C\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right),
\]
which gives \eqref{l5}.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma_out3}
Under the same assumption as Proposition \ref{prop_out}, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{ns1}
&& \int_{\Omega^c} |a'| \big |p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\big| |h-\tilde h_\varepsilon | d\xi \le \delta_0 \left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right) + \frac{1}{2} \mathcal{G}_1^-(U),\\
\label{ns2}
&&\int_{\Omega^c} |a'| \left( Q(\bar v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) +|\bar v -\tilde v_\varepsilon | \right) d\xi \le C \sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}} \left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right).
\end{eqnarray}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\noindent{\bf Proof of \eqref{ns1}:}
We first separate it into two parts:
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\int_{\Omega^c} |a'| \big| p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \big| |h-\tilde h_\varepsilon | \,d\xi\\
&\quad\le \underbrace{\int_{\Omega^c} |a'| \big| p(v)-p(\bar v) \big| |h-\tilde h_\varepsilon | \,d\xi}_{=:J_1} + \underbrace{\int_{\Omega^c} |a'| \big| p(\bar v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \big| |h-\tilde h_\varepsilon | \,d\xi}_{=:J_2}
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
We use the definition of $\bar v_s$ and H\"older's inequality to have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
J_1&=\int_{\Omega^c} |a'| \big| p(v)-p(\bar v_s) \big| |h-\tilde h_\varepsilon | \,d\xi\\
&\le \left(\int_{\Omega^c}|a'| \big| p(v)-p(\bar v_s) \big|^2 d\xi \right)^{1/2} \left(\int_{\Omega^c}|a'| \big| h -\tilde h_\varepsilon \big|^2 d\xi \right)^{1/2}.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
To estimate $\int_\mathbb R|a'| \big| p(v)-p(\bar v_s) \big|^2 d\xi$, using \eqref{pw1} and \eqref{beta1}, we find that for any $\xi\in\mathbb R$,
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{est5}
|(p(v)-p(\bar v_s))(\xi)|^2 \le C \left(|\xi|+\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\right)^{\frac{2\gamma}{\gamma+\alpha}} \left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right) ^{\frac{2\gamma}{\gamma+\alpha}}.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
Following the similar arguments as in \eqref{stand1}, and using \eqref{est5} with $q:=\frac{2\gamma}{\gamma+\alpha}$ (note $1<q<2$ by $0<\alpha<\gamma$), we obtain
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\int_\mathbb R|a'| \big| p(v)-p(\bar v_s) \big|^2 d\xi\\
&\quad\le \int_{|\xi|\le\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\left(\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }\right)^{1/q}}|a'||p(v)-p(\bar v_s)|^2 \,d\xi+ \int_{|\xi|\geq\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\left(\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }\right)^{1/q}}|a'||p(v)-p(\bar v_s)|^2 \,d\xi\\
& \quad\leq C\left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right) ^q \left(\frac{1}{\varepsilon ^q}
\int_\mathbb R|a'| Q(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \,d\xi+2\int_{|\xi|\geq\left(\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }\right)^{1/q}}|a'| |\xi|^q\,d\xi\right)\\
&\quad\leq C\left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right)^q \left(\frac{1}{\varepsilon ^q} \frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda} +\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon ^q} \int_{|\xi|\geq\left(\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }\right)^{1/q}} |\xi|^q e^{-c|\xi|}\,d\xi\right)\\
&\quad\leq C\left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right)^q \frac{\varepsilon ^{2-q}}{\lambda}.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Therefore,
\[
J_1 \le C \sqrt{ \frac{\varepsilon ^{2-q}}{\lambda}} \left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right)^{q/2} \left(\int_{\Omega^c}|a'| \big| h -\tilde h_\varepsilon \big|^2 d\xi \right)^{1/2}.
\]
Using the Young's inequality (recall $1<q<2$), we have
\[
J_1 \le \delta_0 \left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right) + \frac{C}{\delta_0}\left( \frac{\varepsilon ^{2-q}}{\lambda}\right)^{\frac{1}{2-q}} \left(\int_{\Omega^c}|a'| \big| h -\tilde h_\varepsilon \big|^2 d\xi \right)^{\frac{1}{2-q}}.
\]
Since \eqref{l1} yields
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\left( \frac{\varepsilon ^{2-q}}{\lambda}\right)^{\frac{1}{2-q}} \left(\int_{\Omega^c} |a'| \big| h -\tilde h_\varepsilon \big|^2 d\xi \right)^{\frac{1}{2-q}} &\le C \left( \frac{\varepsilon ^{2-q}}{\lambda}\right)^{\frac{1}{2-q}}
\left( \frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda} \right)^{\frac{q-1}{2-q}}
\int_{\Omega^c}|a'| \big| h -\tilde h_\varepsilon \big|^2 d\xi\\
&=C\left( \frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \right)^{\frac{2}{2-q}}\int_{\Omega^c}|a'| \big| h -\tilde h_\varepsilon \big|^2 d\xi \\
&\le C\left( \frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \right)^2 \int_{\Omega^c}|a'| \big| h -\tilde h_\varepsilon \big|^2 d\xi,
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
we have
\[
J_1 \le \delta_0 \left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right) + \frac{C}{\delta_0}\left( \frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \right)^2 \mathcal{G}_1^-(U).
\]
For $J_2$, we use $\big| p(\bar v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \big|\le\delta_3$ and Young's inequality to have
\[
J_2 \le \delta_3\int_{\Omega^c} |a'| |h-\tilde h_\varepsilon | \,d\xi \le \frac{1}{2}\mathcal{G}_1^-(U) +C\underbrace{\int_\mathbb R |a'| {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) >\delta_3\}} \,d\xi}_{=:J_{21}}.
\]
To control $J_{21}$, we observe that since $(y-\delta_3/2)_+\geq \delta_3/2$ whenever $(y-\delta_3)_+>0$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{y-out}
|p(v)-p(\bar v_{\delta_3/2})|= (|p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|-\delta_3/2)_+ \ge \frac{\delta_3}{2} {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) >\delta_3\}}.
\end{equation}
Then, using \eqref{y-out} and \eqref{est5} (with $q:=\frac{2\gamma}{\gamma+\alpha}$) and following the same estimates as in \eqref{stand1}, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
J_{21} &\le C\int_\mathbb R |a'| |p(v)-p(\bar v_{\delta_3/2})|^{2/q} {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) >\delta_3\}} \,d\xi\\
&\leq C\sqrt\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Therefore,
\[
J_2\le \frac{1}{2}\mathcal{G}_1^-(U) +C\sqrt\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right).
\]
Hence we obtain \eqref{ns1}.\\
\noindent{\bf Proof of \eqref{ns2}:} The proof follows from the above estimate for $J_{12}$ as follows:
\[
\int_{\Omega^c} |a'| \left( Q(\bar v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) +|\bar v -\tilde v_\varepsilon | \right) d\xi \le C\int_\mathbb R |a'| {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) >\delta_3\}} \,d\xi \le C\sqrt\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right).
\]
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma_out4}
Under the same assumption as Proposition \ref{prop_out}, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{l7}
&& \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \frac{|v^\beta-\bar v^\beta|^2}{v^\beta} \,d\xi\le C\lambda \bigg(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)\right)+\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2 \mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \bigg) ,\\
\label{l8}
&& \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \Big| \frac{|v^\beta-\tilde v^\beta_\varepsilon |^2}{v^\beta} - \frac{|\bar v^\beta-\tilde v^\beta_\varepsilon |^2}{\bar v^\beta} \Big| \,d\xi \\
\nonumber
&&\le C\lambda \bigg(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)\right)+\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2 \mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \bigg) .
\end{eqnarray}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\noindent{\bf Proof of \eqref{l7}:}
We first have
\[
\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \frac{|v^\beta-\bar v^\beta|^2}{v^\beta} \,d\xi =\underbrace{\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \frac{|v^\beta-\bar v_b^\beta|^2}{v^\beta} \,d\xi}_{=:I_b} +\underbrace{\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \frac{|v^\beta-\bar v_s^\beta|^2}{v^\beta} \,d\xi}_{=:I_s}.
\]
Since $0<\beta\le 1$, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
I_b&\le C\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 |v^\beta-\bar v_b^\beta| {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )<-\delta_3\}} \,d\xi = C\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \frac{|v^\beta-\bar v_b^\beta|} {|v-\bar v| } |v-\bar v| {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )<-\delta_3\}} \,d\xi\\
&\le C\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 |v-\bar v| {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )<-\delta_3\}} \,d\xi \le C\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \left(Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) -Q(\bar v|\tilde v_\varepsilon )\right) \,d\xi\\
&\le C\varepsilon \lambda\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)\right).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
For $I_s$, we separate it into two cases of $\alpha\ge 1$ and $\alpha<1$.\\
\noindent{\it Case of $\alpha\ge 1$ :}
Since $\beta\le\gamma-1$ by $\alpha\ge 1$, we observe
\[
v^{-\beta}\le v^{-\gamma+1}=Q(v)\quad\mbox{as }~v\to 0,
\]
we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
I_s&= \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \frac{v^{-\beta} |v^\beta-\bar v_s^\beta|^2}{Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) -Q(\bar v|\tilde v_\varepsilon )} {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )>\delta_3\}}\left(Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) -Q(\bar v|\tilde v_\varepsilon )\right) \,d\xi\\
&\le C \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \left(Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) -Q(\bar v|\tilde v_\varepsilon )\right) \,d\xi \le C\varepsilon \lambda\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)\right).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
\noindent{\it Case of $0<\alpha< 1$ :}
Since $\frac{1-\alpha}{\gamma}<1$ and
\[
v^\beta p(v)^{\frac{1-\alpha}{\gamma}}Q(v)=v^\beta(v^{-\gamma})^{\frac{1-\alpha}{\gamma}}v^{-\gamma+1}=v^0=1,
\]
using \eqref{line_lower}, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
I_s&= \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \frac{ |v^\beta-\bar v_s^\beta|^2 {\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )>\delta_3\}}}{v^\beta |p(v)-p(\bar v_s)|^{\frac{1-\alpha}{\gamma}}\left(Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) -Q(\bar v|\tilde v_\varepsilon )\right) } |p(v)-p(\bar v_s)|^{\frac{1-\alpha}{\gamma}}\left(Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) -Q(\bar v|\tilde v_\varepsilon )\right) d\xi\\
&\le C \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 |p(v)-p(\bar v_s)|^{\frac{1-\alpha}{\gamma}}\left(Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) -Q(\bar v|\tilde v_\varepsilon )\right) \,d\xi.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Then, using the fact from \eqref{pw1} and \eqref{beta1} that
\[
|p(v)-p(\bar v_s)|^{\frac{\gamma+\alpha}{\gamma}}\le C \left(|\xi|+\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\right) \bigg(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2 \mathcal{G}_2(U) \bigg) ,
\]
we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
I_s&\le C\bigg(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2 \mathcal{G}_2(U) \bigg)^{\frac{1-\alpha}{\gamma+\alpha}} \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \left(|\xi|+\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\right)^{\frac{1-\alpha}{\gamma+\alpha}}\left(Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) -Q(\bar v|\tilde v_\varepsilon )\right) d\xi.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Notice that since $0<\frac{1-\alpha}{\gamma+\alpha}<1$ by $0<\alpha< 1$, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
|a'| \left(|\xi|+\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\right)^{\frac{1-\alpha}{\gamma+\alpha}} &\le C \varepsilon \lambda e^{-c\varepsilon |\xi|} \left(|\xi|+\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\right)^{\frac{1-\alpha}{\gamma+\alpha}}\\
&\le C \varepsilon ^{1-\frac{1-\alpha}{\gamma+\alpha}} \lambda e^{-c\varepsilon |\xi|} \left(|\varepsilon \xi|+1\right)^{\frac{1-\alpha}{\gamma+\alpha}} \le C\lambda.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Thus, we have
\[
I_s\le C\lambda \bigg(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2 \mathcal{G}_2(U) \bigg)^{\frac{1-\alpha}{\gamma+\alpha}} \left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)\right).
\]
Now, using the Young's inequality with $\frac{1}{p}:=\frac{1-\alpha}{\gamma+\alpha}$ and $\frac{1}{p}+\frac{1}{p'}=1$, and then \eqref{l1},
we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
I_s&\le C\lambda \bigg(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2 \mathcal{G}_2(U) \bigg) + C\lambda \left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)\right)^{p'}\\
&\le C\lambda \bigg(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2 \mathcal{G}_2(U) \bigg) + C\lambda \left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)\right).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Hence we complete the proof.
\noindent{\bf Proof of \eqref{l8}:}
Since $C^{-1}\le \bar v^\beta \le C$ and $|\bar v^\beta-\tilde v^\beta_\varepsilon |\le C$, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
& \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \Big| \frac{|v^\beta-\tilde v^\beta_\varepsilon |^2}{v^\beta} - \frac{|\bar v^\beta-\tilde v^\beta_\varepsilon |^2}{\bar v^\beta} \Big| \,d\xi \\
&\quad \le \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \left(\frac{1}{v^\beta} \left| |v^\beta-\tilde v^\beta_\varepsilon |^2 -|\bar v^\beta-\tilde v^\beta_\varepsilon |^2 \right| + \frac{|v^\beta-\bar v^\beta|}{v^\beta \bar v^\beta} |\bar v^\beta-\tilde v^\beta_\varepsilon |^2 \right) \,d\xi \\
&\quad \le C \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \left(\frac{1}{v^\beta} |v^\beta-\bar v^\beta|\left( |v^\beta-\bar v^\beta|+2|\bar v^\beta-\tilde v^\beta_\varepsilon | \right) + \frac{|v^\beta-\bar v^\beta|}{v^\beta} \right) \,d\xi \\
&\quad \le C \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \frac{1}{v^\beta} |v^\beta-\bar v^\beta|^2 \,d\xi + C \underbrace{\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \frac{1}{v^\beta} |v^\beta-\bar v^\beta| \,d\xi}_{=:J}.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
By \eqref{l7}, it remains to estimate the term $J$. For that, we separate it into two parts:
\[
J=\underbrace{\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \frac{1}{v^\beta} |v^\beta-\bar v^\beta| {\mathbf 1}_{\{v< v_-/2 \}\cup\{v> 2v_-\} } \,d\xi }_{=:J_1} + \underbrace{\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \frac{1}{v^\beta} |v^\beta-\bar v^\beta| {\mathbf 1}_{\{v_-/2\le v\le 2v_- \}} \,d\xi}_{=:J_2}.
\]
Using the same argument as \eqref{lower-p} together with the definition of $\bar v$, we have
\[
|v^\beta-\bar v^\beta| {\mathbf 1}_{\{v< v_-/2 \}\cup\{v> 2v_-\} } >C>0,
\]
which yields
\[
J_1\le C \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \frac{1}{v^\beta} |v^\beta-\bar v^\beta|^2 \,d\xi.
\]
Since
\[
|v-\bar v|{\mathbf 1}_{\{v_-/2\le v\le 2v_- \}} \le |p'(v_-/2)| |p(v)-p(\bar v)|,
\]
we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
J_2 &=\int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 \frac{1}{v^\beta} \frac{|v^\beta-\bar v^\beta|}{|v-\bar v|} |v-\bar v| {\mathbf 1}_{\{v_-/2\le v\le 2v_- \}} \,d\xi \\
&\le C \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 |v-\bar v| {\mathbf 1}_{\{v_-/2\le v\le 2v_- \}} \,d\xi \\
&\le C \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 v^\beta |p(v)-p(\bar v)| {\mathbf 1}_{\{v_-/2\le v\le 2v_- \}} \,d\xi.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Therefore, \eqref{l3} and \eqref{l7} give the desired result.
\end{proof}
\vspace{0.5cm}
\subsubsection{Proof of Proposition \ref{prop_out}}
\noindent{\bf Proof of \eqref{n1}:}
It follows from \eqref{l5} together with $|\tilde v_\varepsilon '|\le C\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}|a'|$ that
\[
|\mathcal{B}_1(U)-\mathcal{B}_1(\bar U)|\leq C\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)+ \left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right) \right) .
\]
\noindent{\bf Proof of \eqref{n12}:}
By \eqref{ns1}, we have
\[
|\mathcal{B}_2^-(U)| \le \delta_0 \left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right) + \frac{1}{2} \mathcal{G}_1^-(U).
\]
\noindent{\bf Proof of \eqref{n13}:}
We use \eqref{compare1} and \eqref{big2} to have
\[
|\mathcal{B}_2^+(U)-\mathcal{B}_2^+(\bar U)| =\left| \int_\mathbb R a' \left(| p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) |^2 - |p(\bar v_b)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )| \right){\mathbf 1}_{\{p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon ) \le \delta_3\}} d\xi \right| \le \sqrt\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \mathcal{D}(U).
\]
\noindent{\bf Proof of \eqref{n14}:}
Using Young's inequality together with $\frac{1}{2}\le a\le 1$, we first find
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&|\mathcal{B}_3(U)|\le \delta_0 \mathcal{D}(U) + \underbrace{ \frac{C}{ \delta_0} \int_\mathbb R|a'|^2 v^\beta |p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|^2 \,d\xi}_{=:\mathcal{B}_{6}} ,\\
&|\mathcal{B}_4(U)|\le \underbrace{ \int_\mathbb R|a'|| \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )| v^\beta |p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|^2 \,d\xi}_{=:\mathcal{B}_{7}} +
\underbrace{\int_\mathbb R|a'|| \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )| \frac{|v^\beta-\tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta|^2}{v^\beta} \,d\xi}_{=:\mathcal{B}_{8}} ,\\
&|\mathcal{B}_5(U)|\le \delta_0 \mathcal{D}(U) + \underbrace{ \frac{C}{\delta_0} \int_\mathbb R | \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|^2 \frac{|v^\beta-\tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta|^2}{v^\beta} \,d\xi}_{=:\mathcal{B}_{9}} .
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Using \eqref{l4} and \eqref{l8} together with $| \partial_{\xi} p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|\le C\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}|a'|$ and $\delta_0^{-1}\varepsilon <\lambda<\delta_0$, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&|\mathcal{B}_6(U)-\mathcal{B}_6(\bar U)|+|\mathcal{B}_7(U)-\mathcal{B}_7(\bar U)|\le C \delta_0 \left( \mathcal{D}(U) +\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \mathcal{G}_2(U)\right),\\
&|\mathcal{B}_8(U)-\mathcal{B}_8(\bar U)|+|\mathcal{B}_9(U)-\mathcal{B}_9(\bar U)|\le C\delta_0 \left( \mathcal{D}(U) + \left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right)+\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2 \mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)\right) .
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Therefore, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\sum_{i=3}^5 |\mathcal{B}_i(U)| \le \sum_{i=6}^9 |\mathcal{B}_i(\bar U)|+ C\delta_0 \mathcal{D}(U) + C\delta_0 \left(\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right)+\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)\right).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Since $|a'|\le C\varepsilon \lambda$, we have
\[
\sum_{i=6}^9 |\mathcal{B}_i(\bar U)|\le C\frac{\varepsilon \lambda}{\delta_0} \int_\mathbb R|a'| \bar v^\beta |p(\bar v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|^2 \,d\xi
+C \varepsilon ^2 \int_\mathbb R|a'| \frac{|\bar v^\beta-\tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta|^2}{\bar v^\beta} \,d\xi .
\]
Using $C^{-1}\le \bar v\le C$ and \eqref{pQ-equi0} together with $ |p(\bar v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|\le\delta_3$, we have
\[
\int_\mathbb R|a'| \bar v^\beta |p(\bar v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|^2 \,d\xi \le C\int_\mathbb R|a'| Q(\bar v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) \,d\xi \le C \mathcal{G}_2(\bar U).
\]
Moreover, since
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\int_\mathbb R|a'| \frac{|\bar v^\beta-\tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta|^2}{\bar v^\beta} \,d\xi &\le C
\int_\mathbb R|a'| \frac{|\bar v^\beta-\tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta|^2}{Q(\bar v|\tilde v_\varepsilon )}Q(\bar v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) \,d\xi \\
&\le C \int_\mathbb R|a'| Q(\bar v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) \,d\xi \le C \mathcal{G}_2(\bar U),
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
we have
\[
\sum_{i=6}^9 |\mathcal{B}_i(\bar U)|\le C\delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \mathcal{G}_2(\bar U).
\]
Hence we have the desired estimate \eqref{n14}.\\
\noindent{\bf Proof of \eqref{n2}:}
First, using \eqref{p-est1}, \eqref{pQ-equi0} and \eqref{l1}, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
|\mathcal{B}_1(\bar U)|+|\mathcal{B}_2^+(\bar U)| &\leq C\int_\mathbb R |a'| Q(\bar v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\,d\xi \leq C\int_\mathbb R |a'| Q( v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\,d\xi \le C\frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda}.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Then, it follows from \eqref{bad0}, \eqref{n1}-\eqref{n14} and \eqref{l2} that
\[
|\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U)| \le C\frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda} + C\sqrt{\delta_0} \left(\mathcal{D}(U)+\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right) \le C^* \frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda}+ C\sqrt{\delta_0} \mathcal{D}(U).
\]
\noindent{\bf Proof of \eqref{m1}:} We split the proof in three steps.
\vskip0.2cm
\noindent{\it Step 1:}
First of all, we use the notations $Y_1^s, Y_2^s, Y_3^s$ and $Y_4^s$ for the terms of $Y_s$ as follows:
\[
Y_s =\underbrace{-\int_{\Omega^c} a' Q(v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) d\xi}_{=:Y_1^s} \underbrace{-\int_{\Omega^c} a \partial_\xi p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )(v-\tilde v_\varepsilon )d\xi}_{=:Y_2^s} \underbrace{-\int_{\Omega^c} a' \frac{|h-\tilde h_\varepsilon |^2}{2} d\xi}_{=:Y_3^s} \underbrace{+\int_{\Omega^c} a \partial_\xi \tilde h_\varepsilon (h-\tilde h_\varepsilon ) d\xi}_{=:Y_4^s}.
\]
We use \eqref{big1},\eqref{big2}, \eqref{l50} together with \eqref{compare1} to have
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{Ygd}
&|Y_g(U)-Y_g(\bar U)| +|Y_1^s(U)-Y_1^s(\bar U)| +|Y_2^s(U)-Y_2^s(\bar U)| \\
&\quad \le C \int_\mathbb R |a'| \Big(\big| |p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|^2-|p(\bar v_b)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|^2\big| +\big|Q(v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )-Q(\bar v|\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )\big| \\
&\qquad\quad +|v-\bar v|+ |p(v)-p(\bar v_b)|\Big)\,d\xi \leq C\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}}\mathcal{D}(U)+C\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right).
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
On the other hand, \eqref{ns2} yields
\begin{equation}\label{Y12}
|Y_1^s(\bar U)|+|Y_2^s(\bar U)|\le \int_{\Omega^c} |a'| \left( Q(\bar v|\tilde v_\varepsilon ) +|\bar v -\tilde v_\varepsilon | \right) d\xi \le C \sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}} \left(\mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2\mathcal{G}_2(U) \right).
\end{equation}
Next, by the definitions of $\mathcal{G}_1^\pm$ in \eqref{ggd}, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
|Y_3^s(U)|+|Y_b(U)| &\le C\mathcal{G}_1^-(U)+C\mathcal{G}_1^+(U) + C\int_\Omega |a'| |p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|^2 \,d\xi \\
&\le C(\mathcal{G}_1^-(U)+\mathcal{G}_1^+(U)+|\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U)|),
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Moreover, since
\[
\mathcal{G}_1^+(U) \leq C\int_\Omega |a'| \left(|h-\tilde h_\varepsilon |^2+|p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|^2\right)\,d\xi \le C\int_\Omega |a'| |h-\tilde h_\varepsilon |^2\,d\xi +C |\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U)|,
\]
using \eqref{n2}, we have
\[
|Y_3^s(U)|+|Y_b(U)| \le C\int_\mathbb R |a'| |h-\tilde h_\varepsilon |^2 \,d\xi +C^* \frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda}+ C\sqrt{\delta_0} \mathcal{D}(U).
\]
Therefore, using \eqref{l1}, \eqref{l2}, and the assumption $\mathcal{D}(U)\leq C^*\varepsilon ^2/\lambda$, it follows from \eqref{Ygd}, \eqref{Y12} and the above estimate that
\[
|Y_g(U)-Y_g(\bar U)| +|Y_1^s(U)| +|Y_2^s(U)| +|Y_3^s(U)|+|Y_b(U)| \le C\frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda}.
\]
\vskip0.2cm
\noindent{\it Step 2:}
First of all, using Young's inequality and \eqref{pQ-equi0}, \eqref{n13}, we estimate
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\left| \int_\Omega a' \big(p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )\big)\Big(h-\tilde h_\varepsilon -\frac{p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )}{\sigma_\varepsilon }\Big) d\xi \right|\\
&\quad \le\left(\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }\right)^{1/4}\mathcal{G}_1^+(U)+C\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^{1/4}\int_\Omega |a'| |p(v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|^2\,d\xi\\
&\quad \le\left(\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }\right)^{1/4}\mathcal{G}_1^+(U)+C\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^{1/4}\left(\mathcal{B}_2^+(\bar U) + \left( \mathcal{B}_2^+(U)-\mathcal{B}_2^+(\bar U) \right) \right)\\
&\quad \le\left(\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }\right)^{1/4}\mathcal{G}_1^+(U)+C\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^{1/4}\left(\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) +\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}} \mathcal{D}(U) \right).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Therefore, this estimate, \eqref{Ygd} and \eqref{Y12} yield
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&|Y_g(U)-Y_g(\bar U)| +|Y_1^s(U)| +|Y_2^s(U)| +|Y_3^s(U)|+|Y_b(U)| \\
&\le C\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}}\mathcal{D}(U)+C\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right)+C\mathcal{G}_1^-(U) + 2\left(\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }\right)^{1/4}\mathcal{G}_1^+(U) +C\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^{1/4}\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
\vskip0.2cm
\noindent{\it Step 3:}
For the remaining terms, using H\"older's inequality together with $|\tilde{h}_\varepsilon '|\le C\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} |a'|$, we estimate
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&|Y_4^s(U)|^2\leq C\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2 \left(\int_\mathbb R|a'|\,d\xi\right)\int_{\Omega^c} |a'| |h-\tilde{h}_\varepsilon |^2\,d\xi \leq C\frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda} \mathcal{G}_1^-(U),\\
&|Y_l(U)|^2\leq C\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^2 \left(\int_\mathbb R|a'|\,d\xi\right)\int_{\Omega} |a'| \left(h-\tilde h_\varepsilon -\frac{p(\bar v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )}{\sigma_\varepsilon } \right)^2\,d\xi \leq C\frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda} \mathcal{G}_1^+(U).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Therefore, this together with Step1 and Step2 yield
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&|Y_g(U)-Y_g(\bar U)|^2 +|Y_b(U)|^2 +|Y_l(U)|^2+|Y_s(U)|^2 \\
&\le\left(|Y_g(U)-Y_g(\bar U)| +|Y_1^s(U)| +|Y_2^s(U)| +|Y_3^s(U)|+|Y_b(U)|\right)^2 + |Y_4^s(U)|^2 +|Y_l(U)|^2 \\
&\le C\frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda}\left(\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}}\mathcal{D}(U)+\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right)+\mathcal{G}_1^-(U) + \left(\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }\right)^{1/4}\mathcal{G}_1^+(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^{1/4}\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
\subsection{Proof of Proposition \ref{prop:main}}
We now prove the main Proposition \ref{prop:main}. We split the proof into two steps, depending on the strength of the dissipation term $\mathcal{D}(U)$.
\vskip0.2cm
\noindent{\it Step 1:}
We first consider the case of
$
\mathcal{D}(U)\geq 4 C^* \frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda}, $ where the constant $C^*$ is defined as in Proposition \ref{prop_out}.
Then using $\eqref{n2}$ and taking $\delta_0$ small enough, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{R}(U)&\le-\frac{|Y(U)|^2}{\varepsilon ^4}+\left(1+\delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)|\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U)|-\mathcal{G}_1^-(U)-\mathcal{G}_1^+(U) -\left(1-\delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)\mathcal{G}_2(U) -(1-\delta_0)\mathcal{D}(U) \\
&\leq 2|\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U)|-(1-\delta_0)\mathcal{D}(U)\\
& \leq 2C^*\frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda}-\left(1-\delta_0-2C\sqrt{\delta_0}\right)\mathcal{D}(U)\\
& \leq 2 C^* \frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda}-\frac{1}{2}\mathcal{D}(U)\leq 0,
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
which gives the desired result.
\vskip0.2cm
\noindent{\it Step 2:} We now assume the other alternative, i.e., $\mathcal{D}(U)\leq 4 C^* \frac{\varepsilon ^2}{\lambda}.$ \\
We will use Proposition \ref{prop:main3} to get the desired result. First of all, we have \eqref{YC2}, and for the small constant $\delta_3$ of Proposition \ref{prop:main3} associated to the constant $C_2$ of \eqref{YC2}, we have $|p(\bar v)-p(\tilde{v}_\varepsilon )|\leq \delta_3$.\\
Using
$$
Y_g(\bar U)=Y(U)-(Y_g(U)-Y_g(\bar U))-Y_b(U)-Y_l(U)-Y_s(U),
$$
we have
$$
|Y_g(\bar U)|^2\leq 4\left(|Y(U)|^2+|Y_g(U)-Y_g(\bar U)|^2+ |Y_b(U)|^2+|Y_l(U)|^2+|Y_s(U)|^2\right),
$$
which can be written as
$$
-4|Y(U)|^2\leq -|Y_g(\bar U)|^2+4|Y_g(U)-Y_g(\bar U)|^2+ 4|Y_b(U)|^2+4|Y_l(U)|^2+4|Y_s(U)|^2.
$$
Now, let us take $\delta_0$ small enough such that $\delta_0\le\delta_3^9$. (In fact, since we see from the proofs of Lemma \ref{lemma_out1}-\ref{lemma_out4} that the constants $C$ in Proposition \ref{prop_out} depend on $\delta_3$ as algebraically negative power of it, we take $\delta_0$ smaller enough if needed.)\\
Then we find that for any $\varepsilon <\varepsilon _0(\le\delta_3)$ and $\varepsilon /\lambda<\delta_0(\le\delta_3^9)$,
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{R}(U)&\le-\frac{4|Y(U)|^2}{\varepsilon \delta_3}+\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U) +\delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} |\mathcal{B}_{\delta_3}(U)| \\
&\quad -\mathcal{G}_1^-(U)-\mathcal{G}_1^+(U) -\left(1-\delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)\mathcal{G}_2(U) -(1-\delta_0)\mathcal{D}(U) \\
&\leq -\frac{|Y_g(\bar U)|^2}{\varepsilon \delta_3}+ \left(\mathcal{B}_1(\bar U)+\mathcal{B}_2^+(\bar U)\right)+\delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\left(|\mathcal{B}_1(\bar U)|+|\mathcal{B}_2^+(\bar U)|\right)\\
&\quad-\left(1-\delta_3\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)-(1-\delta_3)\mathcal{D}(\bar U)\\
&\quad \underbrace{+\frac{4}{\varepsilon \delta_3}\left(|Y_g(U)-Y_g(\bar U)|^2+|Y_b(U)|^2+|Y_l(U)|^2+|Y_s(U)|^2\right)}_{=:J_1} \\
&\quad \underbrace{+\left(1+\delta_0\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)\left(|\mathcal{B}_1(U)-\mathcal{B}_1(\bar U)|+|\mathcal{B}_2^+(U)-\mathcal{B}_2^+(\bar U)| +|\mathcal{B}_2^-(U)| +\sum_{i=3}^5|\mathcal{B}_i(U)| \right)}_{=:J_2} \\
&\quad -\mathcal{G}_1^-(U) -\mathcal{G}_1^+(U)-\frac{1}{2}\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)\right)-\frac{\delta_3}{2}\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)-(\delta_3-\delta_0)\mathcal{D}(U),
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
where we used $\mathcal{D}(\bar U)\le \mathcal{D}(U)$ by \eqref{eq_D}. We claim that $J_1$, $J_2$ are controlled by the last line above.
Indeed, it follows from \eqref{n1}-\eqref{n14} and \eqref{m1} that for any $\varepsilon /\lambda<\delta_0(\le\delta_3^9)$,
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
J_1&\le \frac{C}{\delta_3}\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\left(\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}}\mathcal{D}(U)+\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right)+\mathcal{G}_1^-(U) + \left(\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }\right)^{1/4}\mathcal{G}_1^+(U) +\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^{1/4}\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right)\\
&\le \frac{C}{\delta_3}\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)^{1/4} \left(\mathcal{D}(U)+\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right)+\mathcal{G}_1^-(U) + \mathcal{G}_1^+(U) +\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right)\\
&\le \frac{1}{4}\delta_3 \left(\mathcal{D}(U)+\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right)+\mathcal{G}_1^-(U) + \mathcal{G}_1^+(U) +\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right),\\
J_2&\le C \sqrt\delta_0 \left( \mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right)+\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)\right)\\
&\le \frac{1}{4}\delta_3\left( \mathcal{D}(U) +\left(\mathcal{G}_2(U)-\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U) \right)+\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda} \mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)\right).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Therefore, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{R}(U) &\le -\frac{|Y_g(\bar U)|^2}{\varepsilon \delta_3}+\left(\mathcal{B}_1(\bar U)+\mathcal{B}_2^+(\bar U)\right)+\delta_3\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\left(|\mathcal{B}_1(\bar U)|+|\mathcal{B}_2^+(\bar U)|\right)\\
&\quad -\left(1-\delta_3\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)\mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)-(1-\delta_3)\mathcal{D}(\bar U).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Since the above quantities $Y_g(\bar U), \mathcal{B}_1, \mathcal{B}_2^+(\bar U), \mathcal{G}_2(\bar U)$ and $\mathcal{D}(\bar U)$ depends only on $\bar v$ through $\bar U$, and
$\mathcal{B}_1(\bar U)=\mathcal{I}_1(\bar v)$ and $\mathcal{B}_2^+(\bar U)=\mathcal{I}_2^+(\bar v)$,
it follows from Proposition \ref{prop:main3} that $\mathcal{R}(U)\le 0$. \\
Hence we complete the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:main}.\\
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm_inviscid}}\label{sec:main}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\subsection{Proof of \eqref{ini_conv} : Well-prepared initial data}
For a given datum $(v^0,u^0)$ satisfying \eqref{basic_ini}, let $\{(v_0^{r},u_0^r)\}_{r>0}$ be a sequence of truncations defined by
\[
v_0^r=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
v^0{\mathbf 1}_{\{r\le v^0\le r^{-1}\}}\quad &\mbox{if } -r^{-1}\le x\le r^{-1},\\
v_-\quad &\mbox{if } x\le -r^{-1},\\
v_+\quad &\mbox{if } x\ge r^{-1}, \end{array} \right.
\]
and
\[
u_0^r=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
u^0{\mathbf 1}_{\{-r^{-1}\le u^0\le r^{-1}\}}\quad &\mbox{if } -r^{-1}\le x\le r^{-1},\\
u_-\quad &\mbox{if } x\le -r^{-1},\\
u_+\quad &\mbox{if } x\ge r^{-1}. \end{array} \right.
\]
Then, we consider a mollification of the above sequence: using $\phi_{\nu}(x):=\frac{1}{\sqrt\nu}\phi_1\big(\frac{x}{\sqrt\nu}\big)$
where $\phi_1$ is a smooth mollifier with supp$\phi_1=[-1,1]$, consider a double sequence $\{(v_0^{r,\nu},u_0^{r,\nu})\}_{r,\nu>0}$ defined by
\[
v_0^{r,\nu}=v_0^{r}*\phi_{\nu},\quad u_0^{r,\nu}=u_0^{r}*\phi_{\nu}.
\]
First, we will show
\begin{equation}\label{claim-con1}
\lim_{r\to 0}\lim_{\nu\to0}\int_\mathbb R Q\big(v_0^{r,\nu}| \tilde v\big(\frac{x}{\nu}\big)\big)dx= \int_{-\infty}^0 Q(v^0|v_-)dx+\int_0^{\infty} Q(v^0|v_+)dx.
\end{equation}
For a fixed $r$, since $v_0^{r,\nu} \to v_0^{r}$ a.e., and $\tilde v\big(\frac{x}{\nu}\big)\to v_-$ a.e. $x<0$ as $\nu\to0$, using
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
& Q\big(v_0^{r,\nu}| \tilde v\big(\frac{x}{\nu}\big)\big)- Q(v_0^r|v_-) = \big(Q(v_0^{r,\nu})-Q(v_0^r)\big) + \Big( Q(v_-)-Q\big( \tilde v\big(\frac{x}{\nu}\big) \big) \Big)\\
&\qquad -\Big( Q'\big( \tilde v\big(\frac{x}{\nu}\big) \big) -Q'(v_-) \Big) \big(v_0^{r,\nu}- \tilde v\big(\frac{x}{\nu}\big) \big)
-Q'(v_-) \Big( \big(v_0^{r,\nu}-v_0^r \big) - \big( \tilde v\big(\frac{x}{\nu}\big) - v_- \big) \Big),
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
we have
\[
Q\big(v_0^{r,\nu}| \tilde v\big(\frac{x}{\nu}\big)\big) \to Q(v_0^r|v_-)\quad \mbox{a.e. } x<0,\quad \mbox{as }~\nu\to0.
\]
Likewise,
\[
Q\big(v_0^{r,\nu}| \tilde v\big(\frac{x}{\nu}\big)\big) \to Q(v_0^r|v_+)\quad \mbox{a.e. } x>0,\quad \mbox{as }~\nu\to0.
\]
Moreover, since
\[
|v_0^{r}-\bar v| \le \max(r^{-1},v_\pm) {\mathbf 1}_{\{|x|\le r^{-1}\}},
\]
we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
Q\big(v_0^{r,\nu}| \tilde v\big(\frac{x}{\nu}\big)\big) &\le C_r \big|v_0^{r,\nu}-\tilde v\big(\frac{x}{\nu}\big)\big|^2
\le C_r \Big( \big|v_0^{r,\nu}- \bar v\big|^2 + \big|\tilde v\big(\frac{x}{\nu}\big) -\bar v\big|^2 \Big)\\
&\le \max(r^{-2},v_\pm^2){\mathbf 1}_{\{|x|\le r^{-1}+1\}} +\big|\tilde v-\bar v\big|^2,\quad \nu<1.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Since ${\mathbf 1}_{\{|x|\le r^{-1}+1\}} +\big|\tilde v-\bar v\big|^2\in L^1(\mathbb R)$, the dominated convergence theorem implies
\[
\lim_{\nu\to0}\int_\mathbb R Q\big(v_0^{r,\nu}| \tilde v\big(\frac{x}{\nu}\big)\big)dx= \int_{-\infty}^0 Q(v_0^r|v_-)dx+\int_0^{\infty} Q(v_0^r|v_+)dx.
\]
Furthermore, since $Q(v_0^r|\bar v)\le Q(v^0|\bar v)\in L^1(\mathbb R)$ and $v_0^r\to v^0$ a.e. as $r\to 0$, we have
\[
\lim_{r\to0} \Big(\int_{-\infty}^0 Q(v_0^r|v_-)dx\,+\,\int_0^{\infty} Q(v_0^r|v_+)dx\Big) = \int_{-\infty}^0 Q(v^0|v_-)dx\,+\,\int_0^{\infty} Q(v^0|v_+)dx,
\]
which completes \eqref{claim-con1}.\\
Hence by the diagonal extraction of \eqref{claim-con1}, there exists a sequence (still denoted by $v_0^\nu$) such that
\[
\lim_{\nu\to0}\int_\mathbb R Q\big(v_0^{\nu}| \tilde v\big(\frac{x}{\nu}\big)\big)dx= \int_{-\infty}^0 Q(v^0|v_-)dx+\int_0^{\infty} Q(v^0|v_+)dx.
\]
In particular, we have from the above construction that $v_0^\nu$ converges to $v^0$ in $L_{loc}^{1}(\mathbb R)$, and especially :
\begin{equation}\label{v-inicon}
v_0^\nu \to v^0 \quad \mbox{in } W_{loc}^{-s,1}(\mathbb R),~ s>0.
\end{equation}
where this convergence will be used in the proof of \eqref{v-conti}.\\
Using the same argument as above, we show
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{claim-con2}
\lim_{r\to0}\lim_{\nu\to0}\int_\mathbb R \frac{1}{2}\left(u_0^{r,\nu} +\nu \left(p(v_0^{r,\nu})^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\right)_x -\tilde u^\nu(x) - \nu \left(p\left(\tilde v^\nu(x) \right)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\right)_x\right)^2 dx = \int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac{|u^0-\bar u|^2}{2}dx,
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
where $\tilde u^\nu(x)=\tilde u (x/\nu)$ and $\tilde v^\nu(x)=\tilde v (x/\nu)$.\\
Indeed, since $|v_0^r|\le r^{-1}$ for any small $r>0$, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\left|\nu \left(p(v_0^{r,\nu})^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\right)_x\right| &=\nu \frac{\alpha}{\gamma}p(v_0^{r,\nu})^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}-1}\left|p'(v_0^{r,\nu})\right| \left| v_0^{r}* \left(\phi_\nu (x)\right)_x \right|\\
& \le \frac{\alpha}{\gamma} p(r^{-1})^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}-1} |p'(r)| r^{-1} \int_\mathbb R \big|\phi_1'\big(\frac{y}{\sqrt\nu}\big)\big|dy\\
&\le C(r) \sqrt{\nu} ,
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
which means
\[
\left\|\nu \left(p(v_0^{r,\nu})^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\right)_x\right\|_{L^{\infty}(\mathbb R)}\to 0\quad \mbox{as}~ \nu\to0.
\]
Moreover, since $\tilde v'\big(\frac{x}{\nu}\big)\to 0$ a.e. as $\nu\to0$, we have
\[
\left(u_0^{r,\nu} +\nu \left(p(v_0^{r,\nu})^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\right)_x -\tilde u\left(\frac{x}{\nu}\right) - \nu \left(p\left(\tilde v\left(\frac{x}{\nu}\right)\right)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\right)_x\right)^2
\to \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
|u_0^r-u_-|^2 \quad \mbox{for a.e. } x<0,\\
|u_0^r-u_+|^2 \quad \mbox{for a.e. } x>0. \end{array} \right.
\]
Furthermore, since
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\left(u_0^{r,\nu} +\nu \left(p(v_0^{r,\nu})^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\right)_x -\tilde u\left(\frac{x}{\nu}\right) - \nu \left(p\left(\tilde v\left(\frac{x}{\nu}\right)\right)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\right)_x\right)^2\\
&\quad \le 2\left( |u_0^{r,\nu}-\bar u|^2 + \left|\tilde u\left(\frac{x}{\nu}\right)-\bar u\right|^2 + \left|\nu \left(p(v_0^{r,\nu})^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\right)_x \right|^2 + \left|\nu \left(p\left(\tilde v\left(\frac{x}{\nu}\right)\right)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\right)_x\right|^2\right)\\
&\quad \le C(r)\left( {\mathbf 1}_{\{|x|\le r^{-1}+1\}} +\big|\tilde u-\bar u\big|^2 +\left| \phi_1'\left(\frac{x}{\sqrt\nu}\right) \right|^2 +\left|\tilde v'\left(\frac{x}{\nu}\right)\right|^2 \right)\\
&\quad \le C(r)\left( {\mathbf 1}_{\{|x|\le r^{-1}+1\}} +\big|\tilde u-\bar u\big|^2 +\left| \phi_1'\left(x\right) \right|^2 +\left|\tilde v'\left(x\right)\right|^2 \right) =: g(x),
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
and $g\in L^1(\mathbb R)$, the dominated convergence theorem implies
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\lim_{\nu\to0}\int_\mathbb R \frac{1}{2}\left(u_0^{r,\nu} +\nu \left(p(v_0^{r,\nu})^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\right)_x -\tilde u\left(\frac{x}{\nu}\right) - \nu \left(p\left(\tilde v\left(\frac{x}{\nu}\right)\right)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\right)_x\right)^2 dx\\
&\quad= \int_{-\infty}^0 \frac{|u_0^r-u_-|^2}{2}dx+\int_0^{\infty} \frac{|u_0^r-u_+|^2}{2}dx.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Furthermore, since $|u_0^r - \bar u|^2\le |u^0 - \bar u|^2 \in L^1(\mathbb R)$ and $u_0^r\to u^0$ a.e. as $r\to 0$, we have
\[
\lim_{r\to0} \Big(\int_{-\infty}^0 \frac{|u_0^r-u_-|^2}{2}dx+\int_0^{\infty} \frac{|u_0^r-u_+|^2}{2}dx\Big) = \int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac{|u^0-\bar u|^2}{2}dx,
\]
which completes \eqref{claim-con2}. Hence, using the diagonal extraction as before, there exists a sequence (still denoted by $u_0^\nu$) such that
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\lim_{\nu\to0}\int_\mathbb R \frac{1}{2}\left(u_0^{r} +\nu \left(p(v_0^{r})^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\right)_x -\tilde u^\nu(x) - \nu \left(p\left(\tilde v^\nu(x) \right)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\right)_x\right)^2 dx = \int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac{|u^0-\bar u|^2}{2}dx.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
\subsection{Proof for the main part of Theorem \ref{thm_inviscid}}
We here present a proof for the second part (ii) of Theorem \ref{thm_inviscid}.
\subsubsection{{\bf Uniform estimates in $\nu$}}
Let $\{(v^{\nu}, u^{\nu})\}_{\nu>0}$ be a sequence of solutions on $(0,T)$ to \eqref{inveq} with the initial datum $(v^{\nu}_0, u^{\nu}_0)$. Our starting point is to apply Theorem \ref{thm_general} to the below functions:
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&v(t,x)=v^{\nu}(\nu t, \nu x),\quad \tilde v(x):= \tilde v^{\nu}(\nu x),\quad u(t,x)=u^{\nu}(\nu t, \nu x),\quad \tilde u(x):= \tilde u^{\nu}(\nu x).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
That is, using \eqref{cont_main} in Theorem \ref{thm_general} together with \eqref{d-weight}, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\int_{-\infty}^\infty E\big((v,u)(t,x)| (\tilde v, \tilde u) (x-X(t))\big) dx \\
&\quad+\int_{0}^{T/\nu} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} |\tilde v' (x)| Q\left(v(t,x)|\tilde v(x-X(t))\right) dx dt \\
&\quad + \int_{0}^{T/\nu}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} v^{\gamma-\alpha}(t,x)\big|\partial_x\big(p(v(t,x))-p(\tilde v(x-X(t)))\big)\big|^2dxdt \\
&\le C\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} E\big((v_0^\nu,u_0^\nu)(\nu x)| (\tilde v, \tilde u)(x)\big) dx.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Then by the change of variables $t\mapsto t/\nu, x\mapsto x/\nu$, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} E_\nu \big((v^{\nu},u^{\nu})(t,x)| (\tilde v^{\nu}, \tilde u^{\nu})(x-X_{\nu}(t))\big) dx \\
&\qquad+\int_{0}^{T}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} |(\tilde v^{\nu})' (x)| Q\left(v^{\nu}(t,x)|\tilde v^{\nu}(x-X_{\nu}(t))\right) dx dt \\
&\qquad +\nu\int_{0}^{T}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} (v^{\nu})^{\gamma-\alpha}(t,x)\big|\partial_x\big(p(v^{\nu}(t,x))-p(\tilde v^{\nu}(x-X_{\nu}(t)))\big)\big|^2dxdt\\
&\quad \le C\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} E_\nu\big((v^{\nu}_0,u^{\nu}_0)(x)| (\tilde v^{\nu}, \tilde u^{\nu})(x) \big) dx,
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
where $X_{\nu}(t):= \nu X(t/\nu)$, and
\begin{equation}\label{E_nu}
E_\nu((v_1,u_1)|(v_2,u_2)) :=\frac{1}{2}\left(u_1 +\nu \Big(p(v_1)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\Big)_x -u_2 -\nu \Big(p(v_2)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\Big)_x \right)^2 +Q(v_1|v_2).
\end{equation}
For simplification, we introduce the variables:
\begin{equation}\label{effective}
h^{\nu}:=u^{\nu}+\nu \Big(p(v^\nu)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\Big)_x,\quad \tilde h^{\nu}:=\tilde u^{\nu}+\nu \Big(p(\tilde v^\nu)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\Big)_x,
\end{equation}
Then, recalling \eqref{eta_def}, the above estimate implies
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \eta\big((v^{\nu},h^{\nu})(t,x)| (\tilde v^{\nu}, \tilde h^{\nu})(x-X_{\nu}(t))\big) dx \\
&\qquad+\int_{0}^{T}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} |(\tilde v^{\nu})' | \, Q\left(v^{\nu}(t,x)|\tilde v^{\nu}(x-X_{\nu}(t))\right) dx dt \\
&\qquad +\nu\int_{0}^{T}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} (v^{\nu})^{\gamma-\alpha}\big|\partial_x\big(p(v^{\nu}(t,x))-p(\tilde v^{\nu}(x-X_{\nu}(t)))\big)\big|^2dxdt\\
&\quad \le C\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} E_\nu\big((v^{\nu}_0,u^{\nu}_0)| (\tilde v^{\nu}, \tilde u^{\nu}) \big) dx.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Therefore, using \eqref{ini_conv}, we find that
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{ineq-m}
&\mbox{for any $\delta\in(0,1)$, there exists $\nu_*$ such that for all $\nu<\nu_*$}, \\
&\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \eta\big((v^{\nu},h^{\nu})(t,x)| (\tilde v^{\nu}, \tilde h^{\nu})(x-X_{\nu}(t))\big) dx\\
&\qquad+\int_{0}^{T}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} |(\tilde v^{\nu})' | \, Q\left(v^{\nu}(t,x)|\tilde v^{\nu}(x-X_{\nu}(t))\right) dx dt \\
&\qquad +\nu\int_{0}^{T}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} (v^{\nu})^{\gamma-\alpha}\big|\partial_x\big(p(v^{\nu}(t,x))-p(\tilde v^{\nu}(x-X_{\nu}(t)))\big)\big|^2dxdt\\
&\quad \le C\mathcal{E}_0 +\delta,
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
where
\[
\mathcal{E}_0:=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \eta\big((v^0,u^0)| (\bar v, \bar u)\big) dx.
\]
\subsubsection{\bf Proof of \eqref{wconv}}
We first prove the weak convergence \eqref{wconv}.\\
$\bullet$ {\bf Convergence of $\{v^\nu\}_{\nu>0}$ :}
For the given two end states $v_\pm$, we first fix a constant $M>1$ such that
\[
\big(\min\{v_-,v_+\},\max\{v_-,v_+\} \big)\subset (M^{-1},M).
\]
Then we fix the constant $k_0>1$ in Lemma \ref{lem_Q1}, and set
\begin{equation}\label{Kdef}
K:=\max\{3M, k_0 \}.
\end{equation}
For the constant $K>1$, let $\overline\psi$ be a continuous function defined by
\begin{equation}\label{psi_k}
\overline\psi(x)=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
x,\quad\mbox{if } K^{-1}\le x\le K,\\
K^{-1},\quad\mbox{if } x< K^{-1},\\
K,\quad\mbox{if } x> K.\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
Then we set
\begin{equation}\label{v-trunc}
\underline v^\nu :=\overline\psi(v^\nu),\quad v_e^\nu := v^\nu- \underline v^\nu.
\end{equation}
Note that the truncation $\underline v^\nu$ will be used in the proof of \eqref{uni-est} below.\\
Since
\[
|v_e^\nu|\le \max\Big\{(K^{-1}-v^\nu)_+, (v^\nu-K)_+ \Big\},
\]
and $M^{-1}<\tilde v^\nu (x-X_{\nu})<M$, we use \eqref{Q1} in Lemma \ref{lem_Q1} to have
\[
|v_e^\nu|\le C Q\big(v^\nu| \tilde v^\nu (x-X_{\nu}) \big).
\]
Then it follows from \eqref{ineq-m} that for all $\nu<\nu_*$,
\[
\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} |v_e^\nu| dx \le C\big( \mathcal{E}_0 +1\big).
\]
Therefore, $\{v_e^\nu\}_{\nu>0}$ is bounded in $L^{\infty}(0,T;L^1(\mathbb R))$.
Moreover, since the definition \eqref{v-trunc} implies that $\{\underline v^\nu\}_{\nu>0}$ is bounded in $L^{\infty}((0,T)\times\mathbb R)\subset L^\infty(0,T;L^1_{loc}(\mathbb R))$, we obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{cpt-v}
\{v^\nu\}_{\nu>0} \mbox{ is bounded in } L^\infty(0,T;L^1_{loc}(\mathbb R)).
\end{equation}
Therefore,
there exists $v_{\infty} $ such that
\begin{equation}\label{vwc}
v^\nu \rightharpoonup v_{\infty} \quad \mbox{in} ~\mathcal{M}_{\mathrm{loc}}((0,T)\times\mathbb R),
\end{equation}
and
\[
v_\infty \in L^\infty(0,T; L^\infty(\mathbb R)+\mathcal{M}(\mathbb R)).
\]
\vskip0.2cm
$\bullet$ {\bf Convergence of $\{u^\nu\}_{\nu>0}$ :}
We split the proof into two steps.
\vskip0.2cm
\noindent{\it Step 1:}
We will first show convergence of $\{h^\nu\}_{\nu>0}$.\\
For the given two end states $u_\pm$, we first fix a constant $L>1$ such that
\[
\big(\min\{u_-,u_+\},\max\{u_-,u_+\} \big)\subset \big(-\frac{L}{2},\frac{L}{2}\big).
\]
Then let $\overline\varphi$ be a continuous function defined by
\begin{equation}\label{phi_k}
\overline\varphi(x)=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
x,\quad\mbox{if } |x|\le L,\\
-L,\quad\mbox{if } x< -L,\\
L,\quad\mbox{if } x> L.\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
Then we set
\begin{equation}\label{h-trunc}
\underline h^\nu :=\overline\varphi(h^\nu),\quad h_e^\nu := h^\nu- \underline h^\nu.
\end{equation}
Note that the truncation $\underline h^\nu$ will be used in the proof of \eqref{uni-est} below.\\
Likewise, since
\[
|h_e^\nu|\le \max\Big\{(-h^\nu-L)_+, (h^\nu-L)_+ \Big\},
\]
and $-L<\tilde h^\nu (x-X_{\nu})<L$, we have
\[
|h_e^\nu|\le \max\Big\{(-h^\nu-L)_+, (h^\nu-L)_+ \Big\}\le |h^\nu- \tilde h^\nu (x-X_{\nu}) |.
\]
Then it follows from \eqref{ineq-m} that for all $\nu<\nu_*$,
\[
\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} |h_e^\nu|^2dx \le C\big(\mathcal{E}_0 +1\big).
\]
Therefore, $\{h_e^\nu\}_{\nu>0}$ is bounded in $L^{\infty}(0,T;L^2(\mathbb R))$.
Moreover, since $\{\underline h^\nu\}_{\nu>0}$ is bounded in $L^{\infty}((0,T)\times\mathbb R)\subset L^\infty(0,T;L^2_{loc}(\mathbb R))$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{cpt-h}
\{h^\nu\}_{\nu>0} \mbox{ is bounded in } L^\infty(0,T;L^2_{loc}(\mathbb R)).
\end{equation}
Therefore,
there exists $u_{\infty} \in L^\infty(0,T;L^2_{loc}(\mathbb R))$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{hwc}
h^\nu \rightharpoonup u_{\infty} \quad \mbox{in} ~L^\infty(0,T;L^2_{loc}(\mathbb R)) .
\end{equation}
\vskip0.2cm
\noindent{\it Step 2:}
We now prove that $u^\nu \rightharpoonup u_{\infty}$ in $\mathcal{M}_{\mathrm{loc}}((0,T)\times\mathbb R)$. \\
Since $u^\nu=h^\nu-\nu \Big(p(v^\nu)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\Big)_x$, it is enough to show that
\begin{equation}\label{pfpr}
\nu \Big(p(v^\nu)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\Big)_x \rightharpoonup 0 \quad \mbox{in} ~\mathcal{M}((0,T)\times\mathbb R).
\end{equation}
In fact, since
\[
\Big(p(v^\nu)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\Big)_x =\frac{\alpha}{\gamma} p(v^\nu)^{\frac{\alpha-\gamma}{\gamma}} p(v^\nu)_x = \frac{\alpha}{\gamma} (v^\nu)^\beta p(v^\nu)_x,\quad \mbox{(recall $\beta=\gamma-\alpha$)},
\]
it is enough to show that
\begin{equation}\label{weak_pv}
\nu (v^\nu)^\beta p(v^\nu)_x \rightharpoonup 0 \quad \mbox{in} ~\mathcal{M}((0,T)\times\mathbb R).
\end{equation}
For that, we separate $\nu (v^\nu)^\beta p(v^\nu)_x$ into two parts:
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\nu (v^\nu)^\beta p(v^\nu)_x = \underbrace{ \nu (v^\nu)^\beta \Big(p(v^\nu) -p(\tilde v^\nu (x-X_{\nu}(t))) \Big)_x }_{=:J_1}+\underbrace{ \nu (v^\nu)^\beta p(\tilde v^\nu (x-X_{\nu}(t)))_x }_{=:J_2}
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
For any $\Psi\in C_c((0,T)\times\mathbb R)$, using \eqref{ineq-m} and \eqref{rel_Q} together with the condition $0<\beta\le1$, we find that for all $\nu<\nu_*$,
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\int_{\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R} J_1\Psi dx dt &\le \nu \sqrt {\int_{\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R} (v^\nu)^\beta \left| \big(p(v^\nu) -p(\tilde v^\nu (x-X_{\nu}(t))) \big)_x \right|^2 \Psi dx dt} \sqrt {\int_{\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R} (v^\nu)^\beta \Psi dx dt} \\
&\le C\sqrt\nu \sqrt{\mathcal{E}_0+1} \sqrt {\int_{\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R} (v^\nu)^\beta \left( {\mathbf 1}_{\{v^\nu\le 3v_-\}}+ {\mathbf 1}_{\{v^\nu\ge 3v_-\}} \right) \Psi dx dt} \\
&\le C\sqrt\nu \sqrt{\mathcal{E}_0+1} \sqrt {1+ \int_{\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R} |v^\nu - \tilde v^\nu (x-X_{\nu}(t)) | {\mathbf 1}_{\{v^\nu\ge 3v_-\}} \Psi dx dt} \\
&\le C\sqrt\nu \sqrt{\mathcal{E}_0+1} \sqrt {1+ \int_{\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R} Q\left(v^\nu | \tilde v^\nu (x-X_{\nu}(t)) \right) \Psi dx dt} \\
&\le C\sqrt\nu \sqrt{\mathcal{E}_0+1} \sqrt {1+ \int_{\mbox{supp} (\Psi)} \eta\big((v^{\nu},h^{\nu})(t,x)| (\tilde v^{\nu}, \tilde h^{\nu})(x-X_{\nu}(t))\big) dx dt} \\
&\le C\sqrt\nu (\mathcal{E}_0+1).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Likewise, we find that for all $\nu<\nu_*$,
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\int_{\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R} J_2\Psi dx dt &\le \nu C \int_{\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R} p(\tilde v^\nu (x-X_{\nu}(t)))_x {\mathbf 1}_{\{v^\nu\le 3v_-\}} \Psi dx dt \\
&\quad + \nu \int_{\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R} (v^\nu)^\beta p(\tilde v^\nu (x-X_{\nu}(t)))_x {\mathbf 1}_{\{v^\nu\ge 3v_-\}} \Psi dx dt \\
&\le \nu C \int_{\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R} |(\tilde v^\nu)' (x) | \Psi dx dt \\
&\quad + C \nu \int_{\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R} |(\tilde v^\nu)' (x) | Q\left(v^\nu | \tilde v^\nu (x-X_{\nu}(t)) \right) {\mathbf 1}_{\{v^\nu\ge 3v_-\}} \Psi dx dt \\
&\le \nu C \int_{\mathbb R} |\tilde v' (x) | dx + C \nu (\mathcal{E}_0+1).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Therefore we have
\[
\int_{\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R} \nu (v^\nu)^\beta p(v^\nu)_x\Psi dx dt \to 0\quad\mbox{as }\nu\to0,
\]
which implies \eqref{weak_pv}, and thus,
\begin{equation}\label{uwc}
u^\nu \rightharpoonup u_{\infty} \quad \mbox{in} ~\mathcal{M}_{\mathrm{loc}}((0,T)\times\mathbb R).
\end{equation}
Hence we complete the proof of \eqref{wconv}.\\
\subsubsection{\bf Convergence of $\{X_{\nu}\}_{\nu>0}$}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem-X}
There exists $X_\infty\in \mbox{BV}(0,T)$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{X-con}
X_\nu \to X_\infty \quad \mbox{in } L^1(0,T),\quad \mbox{up to subsequence as }\nu\to0.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, since $X_{\nu}'(t)=X'(t/\nu)$, it follows from \eqref{est-shift} that
\[
|X_{\nu}'(t)|\le C(1+ f_\nu (t)),
\]
where $f_\nu(t):= f\big(\frac{t}{\nu}\big)$. Notice that \eqref{est-shift} and \eqref{ini_conv} imply that for any $\nu<\nu_*$,
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\|f_\nu \|_{L^1(0,T)}&=\nu\|f \|_{L^1(0,T/\nu)} \le \nu C\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\eta\big((v_0^1,h_0^1)| (\tilde v, \tilde h)\big) dx \\
&\le C\Big(\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \eta\big((v^0,u^0)| (\bar v, \bar u)\big) dx +1 \Big).
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Thus, $f_\nu$ is uniformly bounded in $L^1(0,T)$. Therefore, $X_{\nu}'$ is uniformly bounded in $L^1(0,T)$.\\
Moreover, since $X_\nu (0)=0$ and thus,
\[
|X_{\nu}(t)|\le Ct+ C\int_0^t f_\nu (s) ds,
\]
$X_{\nu}$ is also uniformly bounded in $L^1(0,T)$.\\
Therefore, by the compactness of BV (see for example \cite[Theorem 3.23]{AFP}), we have the desired convergence.
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{\bf Proof of \eqref{uni-est}}
Consider a mollifier
\begin{equation}\label{def-time}
\phi_\varepsilon (t):=\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\phi \big(\frac{t}{\varepsilon }\big)\quad\mbox{for any }\varepsilon >0,
\end{equation}
where $\phi:\mathbb R\to\mathbb R$ is a nonnegative smooth function such that $\int_{\mathbb R}\phi=1$ and $\mbox{supp } \phi = [-1,1]$.\\
For the truncations $\underline v^{\nu}, \underline h^{\nu}$ defined by \eqref{v-trunc}, \eqref{h-trunc} with $L, K$ fixed, we let
\[
L_{\nu}:= \int_0^{T} \phi_\varepsilon (s) \int_\mathbb R \eta \big( (\underline v^{\nu}, \underline h^{\nu})(s,x) | (\tilde v^{\nu},\tilde h^{\nu})(x-X_{\nu}(s)) \big) dxds,
\]
Using the definition of the truncations together with \eqref{ineq-m} and $\int_0^T \phi_\varepsilon = 1$, we find that for all $\nu<\nu_*$,
\begin{equation}\label{L-est}
L_{\nu} \le \int_0^{T} \phi_\varepsilon (s) \int_\mathbb R \eta \big( ( v^{\nu}, h^{\nu})(s,x) | (\tilde v^{\nu},\tilde h^{\nu})(x-X_{\nu}(s)) \big) dxds \le C\mathcal{E}_0 +\delta.
\end{equation}
Then we have the following.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem-LR}
For the fixed constants $L, K$, let
\[
R_{\nu}:= \int_0^{T} \phi_\varepsilon (s) \int_\mathbb R \eta \big( (\underline v^{\nu}, \underline h^{\nu})(s,x) | (\bar v,\bar u) (x-X_{\infty}(s)) \big) dxds.
\]
Then
\[
\Big| L_{\nu} - R_{\nu} \Big| \to 0 \quad\mbox{up to a subsequence as }\nu\to0.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $\underline h^\nu, \tilde h^{\nu}, \bar u$ are bounded, we have
\[
\big| |\underline h^{\nu}-\tilde h^{\nu}(x-X_{\nu})|^2 - |\underline h^{\nu}-\bar u(x-X_{\infty})|^2 \big| \le C\big|\tilde h^{\nu}(x-X_{\nu})-\bar u(x-X_{\infty})\big|.
\]
We separate the right-hand side into two parts:
\[
|\tilde h^\nu(x-X_\nu)-\bar u(x-X_\infty)|\le \underbrace{|\tilde h^\nu(x-X_\nu)-\bar u(x-X_\nu)|}_{=:I_1}+\underbrace{|\bar u (x-X_\nu)-\bar u(x-X_\infty)|}_{=:I_2}.
\]
Since $\tilde h^{\nu}=\tilde u^{\nu}+\nu p(\tilde v^{\nu})_x$, using $\|\tilde u^\nu-\bar u\|_{L^1(\mathbb R)}=\nu \|\tilde u-\bar u\|_{L^1(\mathbb R)}$, we have
\[
\|I_1\|_{L^1(\mathbb R)}=\|\tilde h^\nu-\bar u\|_{L^1(\mathbb R)}\le \|\tilde u^{\nu}-\bar u\|_{L^1(\mathbb R)}+\nu \|p(\tilde v^{\nu})_x\|_{L^1(\mathbb R)} \le C\nu.
\]
Moreover, since $\|I_2\|_{L^1(\mathbb R)}=|u_- -u_+||X_\nu -X_\infty|$, it follows from Lemma \ref{lem-X} that
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\int_0^{T} \phi_\varepsilon (s) \int_\mathbb R \frac{1}{2}\big| |\underline h^{\nu}-\tilde h^{\nu}(x-X_{\nu}(s))|^2 - |\underline h^{\nu}-\bar u(x-X_{\infty}(s))|^2 \big|dxds \\
&\qquad\le C\nu +C\int_0^{\infty} \phi_\varepsilon (s) |X_\nu(s) -X_\infty(s)| ds \to 0.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Likewise, since $\underline v^{\nu}$ is bounded, using the definition of $Q(\cdot|\cdot)$, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\big| Q(\underline v^{\nu} | \tilde v^{\nu}(x-X_{\nu})) - Q(\underline v^{\nu} | \bar v(x-X_{\infty})) \big| \\
&\quad \le \left|Q(\tilde v^{\nu}(x-X_{\nu}))-Q(\bar v(x-X_{\infty})) \right| +\left| Q'(\tilde v^{\nu}(x-X_{\nu})) \right| \big|\tilde v^{\nu}(x-X_{\nu})-\bar v(x-X_{\infty})\big| \\
&\qquad +\left(|\underline v^{\nu}| + \left| \bar v(x-X_{\infty}) \right| \right) \left| Q'(\tilde v^{\nu}(x-X_{\nu}))-Q'(\bar v(x-X_{\infty})) \right| \\
&\quad \le C\big|\tilde v^{\nu}(x-X_{\nu})-\bar v(x-X_{\infty})\big|.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Therefore, following the same computations as above, we have the desired result.
\end{proof}
Recalling \eqref{psi_k} and \eqref{phi_k}, we now consider
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\iint_{(0,T)\times\mathbb R} \phi_\varepsilon (s) \eta \big( ( v^{\nu}, h^{\nu})(s,x) | (\bar v,\bar u)(x-X_\infty(s)) \big) dxds\\
&\quad = \underbrace{\iint_{h^\nu\in [-L,L]} \phi_\varepsilon \frac{\big| \underline h^{\nu} - \bar u (x-X_{\infty}) \big|^2}{2} dxds}_{=:J_1}
+\underbrace{ \iint_{h^\nu\notin [-L,L]} \phi_\varepsilon \frac{\big| h^{\nu} - \bar u (x-X_{\infty}) \big|^2}{2} dxds}_{=:J_2}\\
&\qquad + \underbrace{\iint_{v^\nu\in [K^{-1},K]} \phi_\varepsilon Q \big( \underline v^{\nu} | \bar v (x-X_{\infty}) \big) dxds}_{=:J_3} +\underbrace{ \iint_{v^\nu\notin [K^{-1},K]} \phi_\varepsilon Q \big( v^{\nu} |\bar v (x-X_{\infty}) \big) dxds}_{=:J_4}.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Note that (using \eqref{L-est})
\[
J_1+J_3 \le R_\nu = (R_\nu- L_\nu) +L_\nu \le (R_\nu- L_\nu) +C\mathcal{E}_0 +\delta.
\]
For $J_2$, we use the fact that since $\bar u, \tilde h^\nu \in \big(\min\{u_-,u_+\},\max\{u_-,u_+\} \big)\subset \big(-L/2, L/2\big)$, we find
\[
\big| h^{\nu} - \bar u (x-X_{\infty}) \big| \le 3 \big| h^{\nu} - \tilde h^\nu (x-X_\nu) \big|\quad\mbox{for all }h^\nu\notin [-L,L].
\]
Then using \eqref{ineq-m},
\[
J_2\le \frac{9}{2}\iint_{h^\nu\notin [-L,L]} \phi_\varepsilon \big| h^{\nu} - \tilde h^\nu (x-X_\nu) \big|^2 dxds \le C(\mathcal{E}_0 +\delta).
\]
Likewise for $J_4$, since $\bar v, \tilde v^\nu \in \big(\min\{v_-,v_+\},\max\{v_-,v_+\} \big)\subset \big(M^{-1}, M\big)$, using \eqref{Q2} in Lemma \ref{lem_Q1} with the choice \eqref{Kdef}, we have
\[
J_4\le C \iint_{v^\nu\notin [K^{-1},K]} \phi_\varepsilon Q \big( v^{\nu} |\tilde v^\nu (x-X_\nu) \big) dxds \le C(\mathcal{E}_0 +\delta).
\]
Therefore, we have
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned} \label{last-1}
&\iint_{(0,T)\times\mathbb R} \phi_\varepsilon (s) \frac{|h^\nu(t,x)-\bar u(x-X_{\infty}(s))|^2}{2} ds dx \\
&\quad+ \iint_{(0,T)\times\mathbb R} \phi_\varepsilon (s) Q(v^\nu(t,x) | \bar v (x-X_{\infty}(s))) ds dx \le |R_\nu- L_\nu| +C(\mathcal{E}_0 +\delta).
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
Now, it remains to show that the left-hand side of \eqref{last-1} is lower semi-continuous with respect to the weak convergences \eqref{vwc} and \eqref{hwc}. \\
First of all, using the weak lower semi-continuity of the $L^2$-norm (for example see \cite{evans-w}) together with \eqref{hwc}, we have
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned} \label{conv-hu}
&\iint_{(0,T)\times\mathbb R} \phi_\varepsilon (s) \frac{|u_\infty(t,x)-\bar u(x-X_{\infty}(s))|^2}{2} ds dx \\
&\quad \le \liminf_{\nu\to 0}\iint_{(0,T)\times\mathbb R} \phi_\varepsilon (s) \frac{|h^\nu(t,x)-\bar u(x-X_{\infty}(s))|^2}{2} ds dx .
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
However, since $v_\infty$ is a measure in space as $v_\infty \in L^\infty(0,T; L^\infty(\mathbb R)+\mathcal{M}(\mathbb R))$, we may use the generalized relative functional \eqref{dQ} to handle the measure $v_\infty$. \\
In the following lemma, we show the weakly lower semi-continuity of the functional
\[
dQ(v^\nu | \bar v(x-X_\infty))
\] in the left-hand side of \eqref{last-1}. In fact, Lemma \ref{lem:mlsc} deals with more general case where $\{v^\nu\}_{\nu>0}$ is the sequence of measures.
Without loss of generality, we only handle the case of $v_->v_+$, and set
\begin{equation}\label{def-OM}
\Omega_M :=\{ (t,x)\in(0,T)\times\mathbb R~|~ x< X_\infty(t) \} .
\end{equation}
Since $X_\infty\in BV(0,T)$, we have that
\begin{equation}\label{bdry}
\mbox{Lebesgue measure on $\mathbb R^2$ of $\partial\Omega_M$ (:= the boundary of $\Omega_M$) is zero},
\end{equation}
and the complement of $\overline{\Omega_M}$ (:= the closure of $\Omega_M$) in $(0,T)\times\mathbb R$ is as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{com-Om}
(\overline{\Omega_M})^c=\{ (t,x)\in(0,T)\times\mathbb R~|~ x> X_\infty(t) \}.
\end{equation}
Note that
\begin{equation}\label{def-Omv}
\bar v(x-X_\infty(t))=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
v_- \qquad \mathrm{for \ \ } (t,x)\in \Omega_M,\\
v_+ \qquad \mathrm{for \ \ } (t,x)\in (\overline{\Omega_M})^c .\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:mlsc}
Assume $v_+<v_-$. Consider the set \eqref{def-OM} and the properties \eqref{bdry}, \eqref{com-Om}.\\
Let $\Phi:\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R\to\mathbb R$ be any compactly supported nonnegative function.\\
Let $\{v^k\}_{k=1}^{\infty}$ be a sequence of positive measures in $L^\infty((0,T)\times\mathbb R)+\mathcal{M}((0,T)\times\mathbb R)$ such that for some constant $C_0>0$ (independent of $k$),
\[
\int_{(0,T)\times\mathbb R} \Phi(t,x)~d Q\left(v^k | \bar v(x-X_\infty(t))\right) (t,x) \le C_0 ,
\]
where
\[
dQ\left(v^k |\bar v(x-X_\infty(t))\right)(t,x) := Q\left(v^k_a|\bar v(x-X_\infty(t))\right) dt dx + |Q'(\overline V(t,x))| dv^k_s (t,x) ,
\]
where $d v^k (t,x) := v^k_a(t,x) dtdx + dv^k_s (t,x)$ \mbox{(by Radon-Nikodym's theorem)}, and
\begin{equation}\label{def-vom}
\overline{V}(t,x):=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
v_- \qquad \mathrm{for \ \ } (t,x)\in \overline{\Omega_M},\\
v_+ \qquad \mathrm{for \ \ } (t,x)\in (\overline{\Omega_M})^c .\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
Then, there exists a limit $v_\infty\in L^\infty((0,T)\times\mathbb R)+\mathcal{M}((0,T)\times\mathbb R)$ such that $v^k \rightharpoonup v_\infty$ in $\mathcal{M}_{\mathrm{loc}}(\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R)$,
and
\[
\int_{(0,T)\times\mathbb R} \Phi(t,x)~d Q\left(v_\infty | \bar v(x-X_\infty(t))\right) (t,x) \le C_0.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $v^k$ are positive measures in $L^\infty((0,T)\times\mathbb R)+\mathcal{M}((0,T)\times\mathbb R)$, Radon-Nikodym's theorem implies that there exist positive measures $v^k_a \in L^\infty(\mathbb R) +L^1(\mathbb R)$ and $dv^k_s$ (singular part of $v^k$) such that
\[
d v^k (t,x) = v^k_a(t,x) dtdx + dv^k_s (t,x) .
\]
To truncate $ v^k_a$ by some big constant, we first use the fact that for any $\varepsilon >0$, there exists $\xi>0$ with $\xi>\max(2 v_-, 2 v_+^{-1})$ such that for all $v>\xi$,
\begin{equation} \label{large-con}
(|Q'( {\bf{\bar v}})| +\varepsilon ) v \ge Q(v|{\bf{\bar v}}) \ge (|Q'({\bf{\bar v}})| -\varepsilon ) v ,
\end{equation}
where ${\bf{\bar v}}:=\bar v(x-X_\infty(t))$. Indeed, this is straightforwardly verified by the definition of the relative functional $Q(\cdot|\cdot)$, and $Q(v)\to 0$ as $v\to\infty$. \\
For such a constant $\xi$, we define
\[
v^k_\xi := \inf (v^k_a,\xi) ,
\]
and
\[
Q_\xi (v):=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
Q(v),\quad\mbox{if } v\ge \xi^{-1},\\
Q'(\xi^{-1}) (v-\xi^{-1}) + Q(\xi^{-1}),\quad\mbox{if } v\le\xi^{-1}.\end{array} \right.
\]
Note that $v\mapsto Q_\xi(v)$ is nonnegative and convex $C^1$-function on $[0,\infty)$, and $Q_\xi'({\bf{\bar v}})=Q'({\bf{\bar v}})$ (by $\xi^{-1}<v_+/2<{\bf{\bar v}}$).
Then, we consider its relative functional: for any $v_1,v_2\ge 0$,
\[
Q_\xi(v_1|v_2) := Q_\xi(v_1) -Q_\xi(v_2)-Q_\xi'(v_2)(v_1-v_2) .
\]
Then, using \eqref{large-con}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{Q-cut}
d Q_\xi (v^k | {\bf{\bar v}}) \ge Q_\xi (v^k_\xi | {\bf{\bar v}}) dtdx + (|Q_\xi'(\overline V)| -\varepsilon ) (dv^k - v^k_\xi dtdx) - 2\varepsilon d v^k ,
\end{equation}
which means that $d Q_\xi (v^k | {\bf{\bar v}}) -\big[ Q_\xi (v^k_\xi | {\bf{\bar v}}) dtdx + (|Q_\xi'(\overline V)| -\varepsilon ) (dv^k - v^k_\xi dtdx) - 2\varepsilon d v^k\big]$ is nonnegative measure.
Indeed, this is verified as follows: If $v^k_a\le\xi$, then $v^k_\xi=v^k_a$, and so
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\mbox{LHS} &:=Q_\xi (v^k_a | {\bf{\bar v}}) dtdx+ |Q_\xi'(\overline V)| dv^k_s = Q(v^k_\xi| {\bf{\bar v}}) dtdx+ |Q_\xi'(\overline V)| dv^k_s \ge \mbox{RHS} ,
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
where the last inequality follows from the facts that (by Radon-Nikodym's theorem) the measure $v^k - v^k_\xi$ is positive and
$v^k - v^k_\xi= (v^k_a - v^k_\xi) + v^k_s = v^k_s$.\\
If $v^k_a>\xi$, then $v^k_\xi=\xi$, and using \eqref{large-con}, $\mbox{LHS} \ge (|Q_\xi'({\bf{\bar v}})| -\varepsilon ) v^k_a dtdx + |Q_\xi'(\overline V)| dv^k_s $.
Since ${\bf{\bar v}}=\overline V$ $dtdx$-a.e. (by \eqref{def-Omv} and \eqref{def-vom}), we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\mbox{LHS} &\ge (|Q_\xi'(\overline V)| -\varepsilon ) dv^k = (|Q_\xi'(\overline V)| +\varepsilon ) \xi dtdx + (|Q_\xi'(\overline V)| -\varepsilon ) (d v^k- \xi dtdx) - 2\varepsilon \xi dtdx\\
&= (|Q_\xi'({\bf{\bar v}})| +\varepsilon ) \xi dtdx + (|Q_\xi'(\overline V)| -\varepsilon ) (d v^k- v^k_\xi dtdx) - 2\varepsilon \xi dtdx \\
&\ge Q_\xi (\xi | {\bf{\bar v}}) dtdx + (|Q_\xi'(\overline V)| -\varepsilon ) (d v^k- v^k_\xi dtdx) - 2\varepsilon \xi dtdx .
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Thus, using $\xi=v^k_\xi\le v^k_a \le v^k$, we have \eqref{Q-cut}.\\
Therefore, we use \eqref{Q-cut} to have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
C_0 &\ge \limsup_{k\to\infty}\int_{(0,T)\times\mathbb R} \Phi(t,x)~d Q\left(v^k | \bar v(x-X_\infty(t))\right) (t,x) \\
&\ge \limsup_{k\to\infty}\int_{(0,T)\times\mathbb R} \Phi(t,x) \Big[ Q_\xi (v^k_\xi | \bar v(x-X_\infty(t)))dtdx \\
&\quad\quad \qquad\quad\qquad\qquad\qquad + (|Q'_\xi(\overline V)| -\varepsilon ) d(v^k - v^k_\xi) -2\varepsilon d v^k \Big] .
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
We set $\Omega_m:=(\overline{\Omega_M})^c$, and define
\[
\Omega_m^{\delta} := \{ (t,x)\in \Omega_m~|~ d((t,x)|\Omega_m^c)>\delta \},\quad \forall \delta>0.
\]
Then we define a smooth function $\psi_1^{\delta}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{defpsi1}
\psi_1^\delta (t,x) :=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
1,\quad\mbox{on } (\Omega_m^\delta)^c ,\\
0,\quad\mbox{on } \Omega_m^{2\delta} .\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
Then, using this together with the facts that \eqref{def-Omv}, \eqref{def-vom} and $|Q'_\xi(v_-)|\le |Q_\xi'(v_+)|$ by $v_+<v_-$,
we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
C_0 &\ge \limsup_{k\to\infty} \Big[ \int_{\Omega_M} \Phi Q_\xi (v^k_\xi | v_-)dtdx +\int_{\Omega_m} \Phi Q_\xi (v^k_\xi | v_+)dtdx + (|Q_\xi'(v_-)| -\varepsilon ) \int \Phi \psi_1^\delta d(v^k - v^k_\xi) \\
&\quad + (|Q_\xi'(v_+)| -\varepsilon ) \int \Phi (1-\psi_1^\delta) d(v^k - v^k_\xi) -2\varepsilon \int \Phi d v^k \Big].
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Note that since $|v^k_\xi|\le \xi$ for all $k$, there exists $v_*$ such that
\[
v^k_\xi \rightharpoonup v_* \quad\mbox{in }~ L^\infty .
\]
Moreover, since the function $v\mapsto Q_\xi(v|c)$ with any constant $c$ is convex, the weak lower semi-continuity of convex functions (for example, see \cite{evans-w}) implies
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
& \liminf_{k\to\infty} \Big[ \int_{\Omega_M} \Phi Q_\xi (v^k_\xi | v_-)dtdx +\int_{\Omega_m} \Phi Q_\xi (v^k_\xi | v_+)dtdx \Big] \\
&\quad \ge \int_{\Omega_M} \Phi Q_\xi (v_* | v_-)dtdx +\int_{\Omega_m} \Phi Q_\xi (v_* | v_+)dtdx .
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Also, since $v^k \rightharpoonup v_\infty$ in $\mathcal{M}_{\mathrm{loc}}(\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R)$, and thus
\begin{equation}\label{twoconv}
v^k -v^k_\xi \rightharpoonup v_\infty - v_* \quad\mbox{ in }~\mathcal{M}_{\mathrm{loc}}(\mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R)\quad\mbox{(by the uniqueness of the decomposition)},
\end{equation}
we have
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned} \label{cest1}
C_0 & \ge \int_{\Omega_M} \Phi Q_\xi (v_* | v_-)dtdx +\int_{\Omega_m} \Phi Q_\xi (v_* | v_+)dtdx + (|Q_\xi'(v_-)| -\varepsilon ) \int \Phi \psi_1^\delta d(v_\infty - v_* ) \\
&\quad + (|Q'(v_+)| -\varepsilon ) \int \Phi (1-\psi_1^\delta) d(v_\infty - v_* ) -2\varepsilon \int \Phi d v_\infty =: \mathcal{R} .
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
By Radon-Nikodym's theorem, there exist positive measures $v_a \in L^\infty(\mathbb R) +L^1(\mathbb R)$ and $dv_s$ (singular part of $v_\infty$) such that
\begin{equation}\label{RNv}
d v_\infty (t,x) = v_a(t,x) dtdx + dv_s (t,x) .
\end{equation}
Note that since the measure $v^k -v^k_\xi $ is positive, it follows from \eqref{twoconv} and \eqref{RNv} that $v_\infty -v_* $, $v_a - v_* $ and $dv_s$ are all nonnegative.\\
Since $dv_\infty - v_* dtdx= (v_a-v_* ) dtdx+ dv_s$ (by the uniqueness of the decomposition), we rewrite $\mathcal{R} $ in \eqref{cest1} as
\[
\mathcal{R} = \mathcal{R}_1 +\mathcal{R}_2+\mathcal{R}_3,
\]
where
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{R}_1 & := |Q_\xi'(v_-)| \int \Phi \psi_1^\delta dv_s + |Q_\xi'(v_+)| \int \Phi (1-\psi_1^\delta) dv_s ,\\
\mathcal{R}_2 & := \int_{\Omega_M} \Phi Q_\xi (v_* | v_-) dtdx+ |Q'_\xi(v_-)| \int \Phi \psi_1^\delta (v_a - v_* ) dtdx \\
&\quad +\int_{\Omega_m} \Phi Q_\xi (v_* | v_+) dtdx+ |Q'_\xi(v_+)| \int \Phi (1-\psi_1^\delta) (v_a - v_* ) dtdx ,\\
\mathcal{R}_3 & := - 3\varepsilon \int \Phi d v_\infty +\varepsilon \int \Phi v_* dtdx.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Using $\overline{\Omega_M}\subset (\Omega_m^\delta)^c$ and \eqref{defpsi1}, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{R}_1 & \ge |Q'_\xi(v_-)| \int_{\overline{\Omega_M}} \Phi dv_s + |Q'_\xi(v_+)| \int_{\Omega_m^{2\delta}} \Phi dv_s .
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Since $\Phi dv_s$ is a positive measure, and
\begin{equation}\label{conv-om}
\Omega_m^{2\delta} \nearrow \cup_{\delta>0} \Omega_m^{2\delta} = (\overline{\Omega_M})^c,
\end{equation}
we have
\[
\lim_{\delta\to 0} \int_{\Omega_m^{2\delta}} \Phi dv_s = \int_{ (\overline{\Omega_M})^c} \Phi dv_s .
\]
Thus,
\[
\mathcal{R}_1 \ge \int |Q'_\xi(\overline V)| \Phi dv_s .
\]
For $ \mathcal{R}_2$, we use \eqref{defpsi1} to have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{R}_2 & \ge \int_{\Omega_M} \Phi \Big[ Q_\xi (v_* | v_-) + |Q'_\xi(v_-)| (v_a - v_* ) \Big] dtdx \\
&\quad +\int_{\Omega_m^{2\delta}} \Phi \Big[ Q_\xi (v_* | v_+) + |Q'_\xi(v_+)| (v_a - v_* ) \Big] dtdx .\\
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Then, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{R}_2 & \ge \int_{\Omega_M} \Phi Q_\xi (v_a | v_-) dtdx +\int_{\Omega_m^{2\delta}} \Phi Q_\xi (v_a | v_+) dtdx ,
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
where we used the equality that for any $w_1, w_2\ge 0$ and any $c>0$,
\[
Q_\xi (w_1+w_2 | c) \le Q_\xi (w_1 | c) + |Q'_\xi (c)|w_2.
\]
Indeed, it follows from $Q_\xi'\le 0$ and the definition of $Q_\xi(\cdot|\cdot)$ that
\[
Q_\xi (w_1+w_2 | c) -Q_\xi (w_1 | c) - |Q'_\xi (c)|w_2 = Q_\xi (w_1+w_2)-Q_\xi(w_1) \le 0 .
\]
Since \eqref{conv-om} imiplies
\[
\lim_{\delta\to 0} \int_{\Omega_m^{2\delta}} \Phi Q_\xi (v_a | v_+) dtdx= \int_{ (\overline{\Omega_M})^c} \Phi Q_\xi (v_a | v_+) dtdx ,
\]
we use \eqref{bdry} to have
\[
\mathcal{R}_2 \ge \int \Phi Q_\xi (v_a | \bar v(x-X_\infty(t))) dtdx .
\]
Therefore, we have
\[
\mathcal{R} \ge \int \Phi Q_\xi (v_a | \bar v(x-X_\infty(t))) dtdx + \int \Phi |Q'_\xi(\overline V)| dv_s - 3\varepsilon \int \Phi d v_\infty ,
\]
that is,
\[
\int \Phi Q_\xi (v_a | \bar v(x-X_\infty(t))) dtdx + \int \Phi |Q'_\xi(\overline V)| dv_s \le \mathcal{R} + 3\varepsilon \int \Phi d v_\infty.
\]
Therefore, taking $\xi\to\infty$ and using Fatou's lemma, we have
\[
\int \Phi Q (v_a | \bar v(x-X_\infty(t))) dtdx + \int \Phi |Q'(\overline V)| dv_s \le \mathcal{R} + 3\varepsilon \int \Phi d v_\infty.
\]
Then taking $\varepsilon \to 0$, we have
\[
\int \Phi Q (v_a |\bar v(x-X_\infty(t))) dtdx + \int \Phi |Q'(\overline V)| dv_s \le \mathcal{R}
\]
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
To apply Lemma \ref{lem:mlsc} to \eqref{last-1}, we define a smooth function $\psi_0^R$ such that for any $R>0$,
\[
\mathbf{1}_{|x|\le R} \le \psi_0^R (x) \le \mathbf{1}_{|x|\le 2R} .
\]
Then, it follows from \eqref{last-1} that
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned} \label{last-2}
&\iint_{(0,T)\times\mathbb R} \phi_\varepsilon (s) \frac{|h^\nu(t,x)-\bar u(x-X_{\infty}(s))|^2}{2} ds dx \\
&\quad+ \iint_{(0,T)\times\mathbb R} \phi_\varepsilon (s) \psi_0^R (x) Q(v^\nu(t,x) | \bar v (x-X_{\infty}(s))) ds dx \le |R_\nu- L_\nu| +C(\mathcal{E}_0 +\delta).
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
Thus, using Lemma \ref{lem:mlsc} together with the weak convergence \eqref{vwc}, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
& \iint_{(0,T)\times\mathbb R} \phi_\varepsilon (s) \psi_0^R (x) ~ d Q(v_\infty (t,x) | \bar v (x-X_{\infty}(s))) ds dx \\
&\quad \le \liminf_{\nu\to 0}\iint_{(0,T)\times\mathbb R} \phi_\varepsilon (s) \psi_0^R (x) Q(v^\nu(t,x) | \bar v (x-X_{\infty}(s))) ds dx .
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Here, the measure $v_\infty$ has the decomposition \eqref{RNv}, and
\[
dQ\left(v_\infty |\bar v(x-X_\infty(t))\right)(t,x) = Q\left(v_a|\bar v(x-X_\infty(t))\right) dt dx + |Q'(\overline V(t,x))| dv_s (t,x) ,
\]
where $\overline{V}(t,x)$ is defined by \eqref{def-vom} with \eqref{def-OM}.\\
Then, using $\mathbb R^+\times (-R,R)\nearrow \mathbb R^+\times\mathbb R$ as $R\to\infty$, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
& \iint_{(0,T)\times\mathbb R} \phi_\varepsilon (s) ~ d Q(v_\infty (t,x) | \bar v (x-X_{\infty}(s))) ds dx \\
&\quad \le \liminf_{\nu\to 0}\iint_{(0,T)\times\mathbb R} \phi_\varepsilon (s) \psi_0^R (x) Q(v^\nu(t,x) | \bar v (x-X_{\infty}(s))) ds dx .
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Therefore, this together with \eqref{last-2}, \eqref{conv-hu} and Lemma \ref{lem-LR} yields
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&\iint_{(0,T)\times\mathbb R} \phi_\varepsilon (s) \frac{|u_\infty(t,x)-\bar u(x-X_{\infty}(s))|^2}{2} ds dx \\
& \quad +\iint_{(0,T)\times\mathbb R} \phi_\varepsilon (s) ~ d Q(v_\infty (t,x) | \bar v (x-X_{\infty}(s))) ds dx \le C(\mathcal{E}_0 +\delta) .
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Taking $\varepsilon \to0$ (recall \eqref{def-time}), we obtain that
\[
d Q(v_\infty | \bar v (\cdot-X_{\infty}(\cdot))) \in L^\infty(0,T;\mathcal{M}(\mathbb R)),
\]
and, for a.e. $t\in(0,T)$,
\[
\int_{\mathbb R } \frac{|u_\infty(t,x)-\bar u(x-X_{\infty}(t))|^2}{2} dx + \left(\int_{x\in \mathbb R } d Q(v_\infty | \bar v (x-X_{\infty}(\cdot))) \right)(t) \le C(\mathcal{E}_0 +\delta).
\]
Since $\delta>0$ is arbitrary, we obtain
\[
\int_{\mathbb R } \frac{|u_\infty(t,x)-\bar u(x-X_{\infty}(t))|^2}{2} dx + \left(\int_{x\in \mathbb R } d Q(v_\infty | \bar v (x-X_{\infty}(\cdot))) \right)(t) \le C \mathcal{E}_0 ,
\]
which gives \eqref{uni-est}.
\subsubsection{\bf Weak continuity of the limit $v_\infty$}
In order to prove \eqref{X-control},
we may first prove that $v_\infty$ is weakly continuous in time, and
\begin{equation}\label{v-conti}
\lim_{t\to 0+}\int_\mathbb R\varphi(x) v_\infty(t, dx) = \int_\mathbb R \varphi(x) v^0(x) dx,\qquad \forall \varphi\in C_0(\mathbb R) .
\end{equation}
We first claim that
\begin{equation}\label{prove-u}
\{u^{\nu}\}_{\nu>0} \mbox{ is bounded in } L^2(0,T;L^1_{loc}(\mathbb R)).
\end{equation}
For that, recall from \eqref{effective} that $u^{\nu}=h^{\nu}-\nu \big(p(v^\nu)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\big)_x$. First, we have \eqref{cpt-h}. To get a uniform boundedness of $\nu \big(p(v^\nu)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\big)_x$, we use the same estimates as in Step 2 for the proof of \eqref{pfpr}. Indeed, since
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\nu \Big|\big(p(v^\nu)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\big)_x\Big| &=\nu \frac{\alpha}{\gamma} (v^\nu)^\beta \big|p(v^\nu)_x \big|\\
&\le \nu (v^\nu)^\beta \big|\big(p(v^\nu) -p(\tilde v^\nu (x-X_{\nu}(t))) \big)_x\big|+ \nu (v^\nu)^\beta \big| p(\tilde v^\nu (x-X_{\nu}(t)))_x \big| \\
&\le C\bigg(\sqrt\nu (v^\nu)^\beta \big|\big(p(v^\nu) -p(\tilde v^\nu (x-X_{\nu}(t))) \big)_x\big|^2 + \big(1+Q\left(v^\nu | \tilde v^\nu (x-X_{\nu}(t)) \right) \big) \\
&\qquad + \big|( \tilde v^\nu)' \big| \big( 1+ Q\left(v^\nu | \tilde v^\nu (x-X_{\nu}(t)) \right) \big) \bigg),
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
using \eqref{ineq-m}, we have
\[
\nu \big(p(v^\nu)^{\frac{\alpha}{\gamma}}\big)_x ~\mbox{ is uniformly bounded in } L^2(0,T;L^1_{loc}(\mathbb R)).
\]
Therefore, we have \eqref{prove-u}.\\
Then, \eqref{prove-u} together with the equation $v_t^\nu - u_x^\nu =0$ in \eqref{inveq} implies
\[
v_t^\nu ~\mbox{ is uniformly bounded in } L^2(0,T;W^{-1,1}_{loc}(\mathbb R)).
\]
Hence, by Aubin-Lions lemma, this and \eqref{cpt-v} together with \eqref{vwc} imply that (up to a subsequence)
\[
v^{\nu} \to v_\infty \mbox{ in } C([0,T];W^{-s,1}_{loc}(\mathbb R)),\quad s>0,
\]
which together with \eqref{v-inicon} completes the proof of \eqref{v-conti}.
\subsubsection{\bf Proof of \eqref{X-control}}
First of all, since $X_\infty \in BV ((0,T))$, there exists a positive constant $r=r(T)$ such that $\|X_\infty\|_{L^{\infty}((0,T))}= r$. Then we consider a nonnegative smooth function $\psi: \mathbb R \to\mathbb R$ such that $\psi(x)=\psi(-x)$, and $\psi'(x)\le 0$ for all $x\ge 0$, and $|\psi'(x)|\le 2/r$ for all $x\in\mathbb R$, and
\[
\psi(x)=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
1,\quad\mbox{if } |x|\le r,\\
0,\quad\mbox{if } |x|\ge 2r.\end{array} \right.
\]
On the other hand, let $\theta:\mathbb R\to\mathbb R$ be a nonnegative smooth function such that $\theta (s)=\theta(-s)$, $\int_{\mathbb R}\theta=1$ and $\mbox{supp } \theta = [-1,1]$, and let
\[
\theta_\delta(s):=\frac{1}{\delta}\theta \big(\frac{s-\delta}{\delta}\big)\quad\mbox{for any }\delta>0.
\]
Then for a given $t\in(0,T)$, and any $\delta<t/2$, we define a nonnegative smooth function
\[
\varphi_{t, \delta} (s) := \int_0^s \Big(\theta_\delta (\tau) -\theta_\delta (\tau- t) \Big) d\tau.
\]
Since $v^{\nu}_t - u^{\nu}_x =0$ by $\eqref{inveq}_1$, it follows from \eqref{wconv} that the limits $v_{\infty}$ and $u_{\infty}$ satisfy
\begin{equation}\label{limit-con}
\int_{[0,T]\times\mathbb R} \big( \varphi_{t, \delta}'(s) \psi(x) d v_{\infty}(s,x) - \varphi_{t, \delta} (s) \psi'(x) u_{\infty}(s,x) dsdx \big) =0.
\end{equation}
Since $\varphi_{t, \delta}'(s) = \theta_\delta (s) -\theta_\delta (s-t)$, we decompose the left-hand side above into three parts as
\[
I_1^\delta+I_2^\delta+I_3^\delta=0,
\]
where
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
&I_1^\delta:=\int_{[0,T]\times\mathbb R} \theta_\delta (s) \psi(x) d v_{\infty}(s,x) ,\\
&I_2^\delta:= -\int_{[0,T]\times\mathbb R} \theta_\delta (s-t) \psi(x) d v_{\infty}(s,x) ,\\
&I_3^\delta:= -\int_0^T \int_\mathbb R\varphi_{t, \delta} (s) \psi'(x) u_{\infty}(s,x)dxds.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Using \eqref{v-conti} and the fact that $\int_\mathbb R \psi(x) v_\infty(s, dx) $ is continuous in $s$, we find that as $\delta\to0$ :
\[
I_1^\delta\to \int_\mathbb R \psi(x) v^0 (x) dx,\quad I_2^\delta \to -\int_\mathbb R \psi(x) v_{\infty}(t,dx) ,
\]
and
\[
I_3^\delta \to -\int_0^T \int_\mathbb R \psi'(x) u_{\infty}(s,x) dxds.
\]
Therefore, it follows from \eqref{limit-con} that
\[
\underbrace{\int_\mathbb R \psi(x) \big(v_{\infty}(t,dx) -v^0(x)dx \big) }_{=:J_1} + \underbrace{\int_0^T \int_\mathbb R \psi'(x) u_{\infty}(s,x) dxds}_{=:J_2} =0.
\]
To show \eqref{X-control} from the above equation, we will use the stability estimate \eqref{uni-est} and the Rankine-Hugoniot condition. \\
For that, we decompose $J_1$ into three parts:
\[
J_1=J_{11}+J_{12}+J_{13},
\]
where
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
J_{11} &=\int_\mathbb R \psi(x) \big(v_{\infty}(t,dx) -\bar v(x-X_\infty(t))dx \big) , \\
J_{12} &= \int_\mathbb R \psi(x) \big(\bar v(x-X_\infty(t)) -\bar v(x) \big) dx,\\
J_{13} &=\int_\mathbb R \psi(x) \big(\bar v(x) - v^0(x) \big) dx.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Likewise, we decompose $J_2$ into two parts:
\[
J_2=J_{21}+J_{22},
\]
where
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
J_{21} &=\int_0^t \int_\mathbb R \psi'(x) \big(u_{\infty}(s,x) -\bar u(x-X_\infty(s)) \big) dxds, \\
J_{22} &= \int_0^t \int_\mathbb R \psi'(x) \bar u(x-X_\infty(s)) dx ds.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Since $|X_\infty(t)|\le r$ for all $t\in(0,T)$, we have
\[
J_{12} +J_{22} = (v_--v_+)X_\infty(t) + t (u_--u_+).
\]
Then using the Rankine-Hugoniot condition $\eqref{end-con}_1$, i.e., $\sigma= -\frac{u_--u_+}{v_--v_+}$, we have
\[
J_{12} +J_{22} =\big(X_\infty(t)-\sigma t \big) (v_--v_+).
\]
To control $J_{11}$ by the initial perturbation $\mathcal{E}_0=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \eta\big((v^0,u^0)| (\bar v, \bar u)\big) dx$,
we recall the (unique) decomposition of the measure $v_\infty$ by
\[
d v_\infty (t,dx) = v_a(t,x) dx + v_s (t,dx) .
\]
Using \eqref{rel_Q}, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
|J_{11}| &\le \int_{-2r}^{2r} \big|v_a (t,x) -\bar v(x-X_\infty(t))\big| {\mathbf 1}_{\{v\le 3v_-\}} dx +\int_{-2r}^{2r} \big|v_a (t,x) -\bar v(x-X_\infty(t))\big| {\mathbf 1}_{\{v\ge 3v_-\}} dx \\
&\quad +\int_\mathbb R \psi(x) v_s (t,dx) \\
&\le \frac{1}{\sqrt{c_1}}\int_{-2r}^{2r} \sqrt{Q\big(v_a (t,x)|\bar v(x-X_\infty(t))\big)} dx + \frac{1}{c_2}\int_\mathbb R Q\big(v_a(t,x)|\bar v(x-X_\infty(t))\big) dx\\
&\quad +\frac{1}{|Q'(v_-)|}\int_\mathbb R \psi(x)|Q'(\overline V)| v_s (t,dx) ,
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
where note that $|Q'(\overline V)|\ge |Q'(v_-)|>0$ by \eqref{def-vom}.\\
Thus, we use the stability estimate \eqref{uni-est} to have
\[
|J_{11}| \le C\sqrt{r} \sqrt{\mathcal{E}_0} + C\mathcal{E}_0.
\]
Using the same estimates as above, and \eqref{ini_conv}, we have
\[
|J_{13}| \le C\sqrt{r} \sqrt{\mathcal{E}_0} + C\mathcal{E}_0.
\]
Likewise,
\[
|J_{21}| \le \frac{2}{r} \int_0^t \int_{[-2r,-r]\cup[r,2r]} \big|u_\infty(s,x) -\bar u(x-X_\infty(s))\big| dxds \le \frac{C}{\sqrt{r}}t\sqrt{\mathcal{E}_0}.
\]
Hence we have
\[
(v_--v_+) | X_\infty(t) - \sigma t | \le C\Big( \mathcal{E}_0 + (1+t)\sqrt{\mathcal{E}_0} \Big),
\]
which completes the proof.\\
\begin{appendix}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\section{Proof of Proposition \ref{prop:main3}} \label{app-exp}
We rewrite the functionals $Y_g, \mathcal{I}_1, \mathcal{I}_2, \mathcal{G}_2, \mathcal{D}$ with respect to the following variables
\[
w:=p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon ),\quad y:=\frac{p(\tilde v_\varepsilon (\xi))-p(v_-)}{p(v_+)-p(v_-)}.
\]
Since $p(\tilde v_\varepsilon (\xi))$ is increasing in $\xi$, we use the change of variable $\xi\in\mathbb R\mapsto y\in[0,1]$. \\
Notice that $a=1-\lambda y$ and $|a-1|\leq \delta_3$ by \eqref{weight-a}, and
\begin{equation}\label{change-d}
\frac{dy}{d\xi}= \frac{p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )'}{p(v_+)-p(v_-)},\quad\mbox{where }|p(v_+)-p(v_-)|=\varepsilon .
\end{equation}
As in \cite[Proposition 3.4]{Kang-V-NS17}, we use the same notations:
\[
W:=\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon } w,\quad\quad \alpha_\gamma := \frac{\gamma \sqrt{-p'(v_-)} p(v_-)} {\gamma+1}>0.
\]
First of all, note that $Y_g, \mathcal{I}_1, \mathcal{I}_2, \mathcal{G}_2$ are respectively the same functionals as $Y_g, \mathcal{B}_1, \mathcal{B}_2, \mathcal{G}_2$ in \cite[Proposition 3.4]{Kang-V-NS17} except for the term $\frac{1}{2}\int_\mathbb R a'' |p(v)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )|^2 d\xi$ in $\mathcal{B}_2$, which is negligible by $\mathcal{I}_2$ because of $|a''|\le C\varepsilon |a'|$ (see \cite[(2.29) and (3.31)]{Kang-V-NS17}). \\
Thus, it follows from \cite[(3.39), (3.34), (3.33), (3.35)]{Kang-V-NS17} that
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{all-func}
& -2\alpha_\gamma \frac{\lambda^2}{\varepsilon ^3} \frac{|Y_g|^2}{\varepsilon \delta_3}\leq -\frac{\alpha_\gamma}{\delta_3\sigma^4}\left| \int_0^1W^2\,dy+2\int_0^1 W\,dy\right|^2+C\delta_3\int_0^1W^2\,dy,\\
&{2\alpha_\gamma} \frac{\lambda^2}{\varepsilon ^3}|\mathcal{I}_1|\leq \left(1 +C(\varepsilon _0+\delta_3)\right)\int_0^1 W^2\,dy,\\
&{2\alpha_\gamma} \frac{\lambda^2}{\varepsilon ^3}|\mathcal{I}_2|\leq \left(\frac{\alpha_\gamma}{\sigma}\left(\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }\right)+C(\varepsilon _0+\delta_3)\right)\int_0^1 W^2\,dy,\\
&-2\alpha_\gamma \frac{\lambda^2}{\varepsilon ^3}\mathcal{G}_2\leq \left(-\frac{\alpha_\gamma}{\sigma}\left(\frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon }\right) +C\delta_3 \right)\int_0^1W^2\,dy +\frac{2}{3}\int_0^1W^3\,dy+C\varepsilon _0\int_0^1|W|^3\,dy.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
Therefore, it remains to estimate the diffusion $\mathcal{D}$ as follows:\\
First, by the change of variable, we have
\[
\mathcal{D}=\int_0^1 (1-\lambda y) |\partial_y w|^2 v^\beta \Big(\frac{dy}{d\xi}\Big) dy.
\]
Since it follows from \eqref{small_shock1} that
\[
\tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )'=\sigma_\varepsilon (\tilde v_{\varepsilon }-v_-) + \frac{p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )-p(v_-)}{\sigma_\varepsilon },
\]
using \eqref{change-d}, we find
\begin{equation}\label{inst-vy}
\varepsilon \, \tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta \frac{dy}{d\xi}=\frac{1}{\sigma_\varepsilon }\Big(\sigma_\varepsilon ^2 (\tilde v_{\varepsilon }-v_-) + p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )-p(v_-)\Big).
\end{equation}
Since the right-hand side of \eqref{inst-vy} is the same as the one in the proof of \cite[Lemma 3.1]{Kang-V-NS17}, we have
\[
\frac{\tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta}{y(1-y)}\frac{dy}{d\xi}=\frac{\varepsilon }{\sigma_\varepsilon (v_--v_+)}\left( \frac{\tilde v_{\varepsilon }-v_-}{p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )-p(v_-)}+\frac{\tilde v_{\varepsilon }-v_+}{p(v_+)-p(\tilde v_\varepsilon )} \right).
\]
Thus, it follows from the proof of \cite[Lemma 3.1]{Kang-V-NS17} that
$$
\left|\frac{\tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta}{y(1-y)}\frac{dy}{d\xi} -\frac{\varepsilon }{2\alpha_\gamma}\right|\leq C\varepsilon ^2.
$$
Then, using $|(v^\beta/\tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta)-1| \le C\delta_3$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathcal{D}&\geq&(1-\lambda)\int_0^1 |\partial_y w|^2 v^\beta \Big(\frac{dy}{d\xi}\Big) dy = (1-\lambda)\int_0^1 |\partial_y w|^2 \frac{v^\beta}{\tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta}\tilde v_\varepsilon ^\beta \Big(\frac{dy}{d\xi}\Big) dy\\
&\geq&(1-\lambda) \left(\frac{\varepsilon }{2\alpha_\gamma}-C\varepsilon ^2 -C\delta_3 \right) \int_0^1y(1-y) |\partial_y w|^2 \, dy\\
&\geq&\frac{\varepsilon }{2\alpha_\gamma}(1-C(\delta_3+\varepsilon _0)) \int_0^1y(1-y) |\partial_y w|^2 dy.
\end{eqnarray*}
After the normalization, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{newD}
-2\alpha_\gamma \frac{\lambda^2}{\varepsilon ^3}\mathcal{D}\leq -(1-C(\varepsilon _0+\delta_3))\int_0^1y(1-y) |\partial_y W|^2dy.
\end{equation}
To finish the proof, we first observe that
for any $\delta<\delta_3$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\mathcal{R}_{\varepsilon ,\delta}(v)\leq -\frac{1}{\varepsilon \delta_3}|Y_g(v)|^2 +(1+\delta_3)|\mathcal{I}_1(v)|\\
&&\qquad\qquad\qquad +\left(1+\delta_3\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)\right)|\mathcal{I}_2(v)|-\left(1-\delta_3\left(\frac{\varepsilon }{\lambda}\right)\right)\mathcal{G}_2(v)-(1-\delta_3)\mathcal{D}(v).
\end{eqnarray*}
Then, \eqref{all-func} and \eqref{newD} together with $\varepsilon _0\le\delta_3$ imply
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
2\alpha_\gamma\left(\frac{\lambda^2}{\varepsilon ^3}\right)\mathcal{R}_{\varepsilon ,\delta}(v)
& \leq -\frac{1}{C_\gamma\delta_3}\left(\int_0^1W^2\,dy+2\int_0^1 W\,dy\right)^2+(1+C_* \delta_3)\int_0^1 W^2\,dy\\
&\quad+\frac{2}{3}\int_0^1 W^3\,dy +C_*\delta_3 \int_0^1 |W|^3\,dy -(1-C_* \delta_3)\int_0^1 y(1-y)|\partial_y W|^2\,dy.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
To finish the proof, we use the nonlinear Poincar\'e type inequality \cite[Proposition 3.3]{Kang-V-NS17} as follow:
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:W}{\cite[Proposition 3.3]{Kang-V-NS17}}
For a given $C_1>0$, there exists $\deltat>0$, such that for any $\delta<\deltat$ the following is true.\\ For any $W\in L^2(0,1)$ such that
$\sqrt{y(1-y)}\partial_yW\in L^2(0,1)$, if $\int_0^1 |W(y)|^2\,dy\leq C_1$, then
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{Winst}
&-\frac{1}{\delta}\left(\int_0^1W^2\,dy+2\int_0^1 W\,dy\right)^2+(1+\delta)\int_0^1 W^2\,dy\\
&\qquad\qquad+\frac{2}{3}\int_0^1 W^3\,dy +\delta \int_0^1 |W|^3\,dy -(1-\delta)\int_0^1 y(1-y)|\partial_y W|^2\,dy \leq0.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
\end{proposition}
First, using the same estimate as in \cite[(3.38)]{Kang-V-NS17}, we find the constant $C_1>0$ such that
\[
\int_0^1W^2\,dy\leq C_1.
\]
Then, let us fix the value of the $\delta_2$ of Proposition \ref{prop:W} corresponding to the constant $C_1$.\\
We consider $\bar{\delta}=\max(C_\gamma, C_*) \delta_3$, and choose $\delta_3$ small enough, such that
$\bar{\delta}$ is smaller than $\delta_2$. Then we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& 2\alpha_\gamma\left(\frac{\lambda^2}{\varepsilon ^3}\right)\mathcal{R}_{\varepsilon ,\delta}(v) \leq - \frac{1}{\delta_2}\left(\int_0^1W^2\,dy+2\int_0^1 W\,dy\right)^2+(1+\delta_2)\int_0^1 W^2\,dy\\
&&\qquad\qquad\qquad \qquad +\frac{2}{3}\int_0^1 W^3\,dy +\delta_2\int_0^1 |W|^3\,dy -(1- \delta_2)\int_0^1 y(1-y)|\partial_y W|^2\,dy.
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore, using Proposition \ref{prop:W}, we have
\[
2\alpha_\gamma\left(\frac{\lambda^2}{\varepsilon ^3}\right)\mathcal{R}_{\varepsilon ,\delta}(v) \le 0,
\]
which completes the proof.
\end{appendix}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Galaxy clusters are the largest gravitationally bound structures in the universe. They contain from some to thousands of galaxies of all ages, shapes, and sizes, together totaling a mass about $10^{14}-10^{15}$ times the Sun mass. A hot gas emitting X-rays fills the Galaxy clusters, the mass of the gas may exceed the mass of stars in cluster galaxies.
From the observation of the motions of galaxies near the edge of the Coma cluster (also known as Abell 1656) in the 30's, Zwicky found that the mass cluster derived from the virial method greatly exceed that from visual inspection. There was not enough visible mass to explain these movements. That is the source of the first ideas about the dark matter in the universe.
Besides, according to the Big Bang Cosmology only $\sim 4\%, $ of the Universe is constituted by ordinary matter, the so-called baryonic matter, forming the stars, gas, dust, and planets that we see. However, the cosmology required more $\sim 23\%$ of matter to take into account the observations, this percentage the matter which we do not see is known as dark matter.
Even so, the dark matter still could be baryonic matter in the form of
frozen brown dwarfs or small, dense chunks of heavy elements. These possibilities are known as massive compact halo objects, or ``MACHOs'' \citep{grie93}.
However, the hypothesis the baryonic dark matter destroys an of the pillars of cosmology,
the Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN). The robustness of the BBN indicates
that if there is dark matter, it should not be from a baryonic origin.
Then if dark matter is not baryonic at all, it should be made up of other, more exotic
particles like a heavy lepton or WIMPS (Weakly Interacting Massive Particles).
So, the hunt for MACHOs has reduced, and start the hunt for WIMPs.
However, despite an exhaustive hunt for WIMPs, the results were so far negative \citep{apri18,tan16,aker16}, including
the results of a new experiment, COSINE-100 \cite{cosi10} that constrain the DAMA/LIBRA experiment results, that for 20 years have claimed to have direct evidence for dark matter.
So after years of failed search, the dark matter hunters are now focusing on a theoretical particle, much lighter than the WIMP, the axion; thus the Axion Dark Matter Experiment began to run.
Also, the search of dark particles as super-symmetric particles at LHC (CERN) so far is also negative\footnote{\url{https://atlas.web.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/PHYSICS/CombinedSummaryPlots/SUSY/}} .
The amount of dark matter in the Universe, constitute an of the six free parameters of the
$\Lambda$CDM (Lambda cold dark matter) model \citep{akra18}, it provides a good description of the Planck CMB observations. Even so, some tensions remain, such as the Hubble controversy.
After GAIA DR2, the tension in the Hubble constant between the local measurement
(Gaia DR2 parallaxes and HST photometry) \citep{ries18}, and the Planck CMB measurement increases to 3.8 sigmas.
The new data raises the current tension between the late and early Universe route to the Hubble constant.
If this divergence is real, it means there's basic new physics going on.
The hypothesis of the Dark matter increases from the 70's, to account for the rotation of nearby spiral galaxies, which didn't seem to have enough baryonic matter to have flat rotation curves.
So far, most of the models to describe the galaxy clusters are from the concordance cosmological model or $\Lambda$ CDM and requires two possible elements, whose nature is not yet known, the dark energy and the dark matter.
The main alternative to the dark matter is the so-called modified gravity theories, especially the non-relativistic theories such as the
Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) an empirically motivated modification of Newtonian gravity or inertia suggested by Milgrom in 1983 \citep{milg83a,milg83b}, the Moffat's theory (MOG) \citep{moff13} and the emergent gravity theory \citep{verl17}, among others. These non-relativistic theories explain the galaxies rotation curves in the nearby Universe (z$\sim 0$) without dark matter.
Especially MOND is very well successful to describe the galaxies dynamics \citep{mcga11,fama12,sand90,krou12}. Indeed, MOND predicted the Tully-Fisher relation, a scaling law between the mass and the circular velocity at large radii, observed in nearby spiral galaxies.
However, from all modified theories only MOND has results for the several galaxy cluster relations, such as the mass-temperature relation, (according to \cite{dema17}, it is not clear if MOG can describe the galaxy cluster). Even so, is well known that the MOND has some limitations. The galaxy cluster seems to indicate that still is necessary a residual mass even in MOND, an exotic neutrino, the ``sterile neutrino'', was considered as a promising candidate to the hot dark matter required by MOND \citep{sand07,angu08,angu11}.
So far, there is no direct evidence of these neutrinos \citep{aart16,adam16}.
Indeed, in the central part of clusters, the observed acceleration is usually slightly larger than $a_0$ \citep{bell03}.
This requirement suggests an increase of the acceleration scale in MOND, such as made in
Extended MOND (EMOND) \citep{zhao12}.
In this paper, we present another alternative to describe the dynamic of galaxy clusters from DGT, a thermodynamic gravitational theory. It is an extension for low temperatures of the Entropic Gravity Theory (EGT) (Verlinde, 2011),
DGT is very well successfully describing the galaxies rotation curves in a wide range of redshift \citep{navi17,navi18a}, and the kinematic the dwarf galaxies \citep{navi18b}. Prediction from DGT for the rotation curves of galaxies at
high redshift is in agreement from those obtained from the falling rotation curves, observed by VLT telescope \citep{lang17}.
The organization of this paper is as follow.
In section~\ref{DGT} we present a description of galaxy clusters within the Debye gravitational theory, including the generalized Faber-Jackson relation \ref{faber}, and their applications to obtain the $M-\sigma$ relation \ref{m_sigma}, the X-ray emission \ref{xray_emission}, and the M-Tx relation \ref{m_t} as a function of the temperature of the thermal bath where the galaxy clusters are immersed.
The survey includes comparisons among DGT predictions and data from the literature, as well as, with other models. In section~\ref{toy} we present a toy model to obtain the caustic pattern in the galaxy cluster, and in section~\ref{conclusions} we present some discussions and conclusions.
\section{Galaxy clusters within Debye Gravitational Theory (DGT)}
\label{DGT}
vvvvIn 1912 Debye postulated that the behavior of the specific heat of
a solid a low temperatures is a consequence of the vibrations of the atoms of the lattice of the solid, following the analogy to the photons modes in a cavity (blackbody radiation). In the Debye theory there is a continuous range of frequencies that cuts off at a maximum frequency $\omega_D$, or temperature $T_D=\hbar \omega_D/k_B$, where $\hbar$ is the Planck constant and $k_B$ is the Boltzmann constant. The Debye temperature $T_D$ is characteristic of a particular solid. At high temperatures $T>>T_D$ the Debye theory coincides with the Law of Dulong and Petit, where the specific heat is constant, it does not depend on the temperature.
In the DGT picture, the Newton theory of gravity plays the role of Dulong-Petit law. Also, the Newton theory can be obtained from thermodynamic concepts, more specifically from the Entropic Gravity Theory (EGT) \citep{verl11}. In this sense, in DGT gravity is induced by the entropy variation of a system constituted by oscillating quasi-particles (information bits) on a closed holographic screen and that stores the information of matter enclosed within it \citep{navi17}. In short, DGT introduced the Debye scheme in the entropic gravity theory to explain gravity at low temperatures.
Following this scheme and under a spherical symmetry the main equations of DGT \citep{navi17,navi18b} are
\begin{equation}
a\mathcal{D}_1\left(\frac{T_D}{T}\right)=\frac{GM}{R^2},
\label{eq_1}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{D}_1$ is the Debye first function defined as
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{D}_1\left(\frac{T_D}{T}\right)=\frac{T}{T_0}\int_0^{T_0/T} \frac{x}{\exp{x}-1}dx,
\end{equation}
In the limit for $T_D \gg T$, and considering that the temperature is proportional to the acceleration (Unruh effect), we have the constrain condition $\mathcal{D}_1(T_D/T)=(\pi^2/6)\; T/T_D=a/a_0$, and constitute a bound between the Debye temperature $T_D$ and the acceleration scale $a_0$. So Eq.~\ref{eq_1} becomes
\begin{equation}
a\left(\frac{a}{a_0}\right)=\frac{GM}{R^2}.
\label{eq_3}
\end{equation}
This equation is the root of the MOND theory,known as the deep-MOND regime. In general (for all range the temperatures) the
Eq.~\ref{eq_3} can be parametrized by a power function as
\begin{equation}
a\left(\frac{a}{a_0}\right)^{\alpha}= \frac{GM}{R^2}.
\label{eq:mainDGT}
\end{equation}
The two asymptotically cases are:
\[ \alpha =
\begin{cases}
0 & \quad \text{then } a=GM/R^2 \text{ (Newton-high T)}\\
1 & \quad \text{then } a(a/a_0)=GM/R^2 \text{ (deep-MOND-low T)}.\\
\end{cases}
\]
All values possibles for $\alpha$ can be obtained from
\begin{equation}
\alpha = \frac{\log \mathcal{D}_1\left(\frac{a_0}{a}\right)}{\log \frac{a}{a_0}}.
\label{alpha_a}
\end{equation}
Taking into account the bond between the acceleration and temperature $a/a_0=(\pi^2/6)T/T_D$, the index $\alpha$, can be written as a function of temperature.
On the other hand, the CMB data, at least up to redshift of z$\sim$ 3, is consistent with a linear relation,between the temperature and redshift
\begin{equation}
\frac{T}{T_0}=(1+z),
\end{equation}
where $T_0$ is the temperature at $z=0$, that is, the current temperature, $T_0=2,73\;K$. The last equation can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
\frac{T}{T_D}=\frac{T_0}{T_D} (1+z)=0.43 (1+z),
\end{equation}
where $T_D$ id the Debye temperature, $T_D=T_0/0.43=6.35\;K$. Thus, the only one free parameter of the DGT, the Debye temperaute in DGT is a little more than twice as much of $T_0$. This last equation is an useful expression because allow obtaining $\alpha$ as a function of redshift.
\begin{figure}
\vspace*{-0.0cm}
\hspace*{0.0cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10.0cm]{Fig1.png}
\vspace*{-0.0cm}
\caption{Top panel: distribution of the redshift from 146 galaxy clusters. The data were compiled by \cite{reic11}. Bottom panel: dependence of the index $\alpha$, according to
Eq.~\ref{alpha_a} of DGT. The two vertical arrows at the left indicate the average redshift of the galaxy clusters and it associated average temperature, while the vertical arrow at the right indicates the temperature value that DGT needs to describe the M-$\sigma$ and M-Tx relations of the galaxy clusters up to redshift $z\sim 0.4$.
}
\label{alpha_redshift}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{alpha_redshift} (bottom panel) shows the dependence of the index $\alpha$ with the temperature (lower horizontal axis) and redshift (upper horizontal axis) according Eq.~\ref{alpha_a}. For comparison, we have included the distribution of the redshift, from 146 galaxy clusters in the top panel. The data were compiled by \cite{reic11}, and they claim that this high-quality data, constrain the redshift evolution of X-ray scaling relations of galaxy clusters out to $z\sim 1.5$.
The data clearly shows two groups of galaxy clusters, those with redshift less than 0.4 and they are the majority in this data, and there is a second group of clusters, those with redshift above 0.4. The separation in redshift between these two groups at around $z\sim 0.4$ and is marked for an absence de clusters in the data and coincides with the discontinuity observed in the dependence of the $\alpha$ index with the redshift (temperature).
Considering only the first group of clusters up to $z\sim 0.4$, they have an average redshift value of $<z>=0.19\pm 0.08$(top vertical arrow in Fig.~\ref{alpha_redshift}) and is expected that the average environment temperature, i.e., the thermal bath where they
are immersed, must have in average a temperature of $T_z=3.25$ K (left bottom vertical arrow in Fig.~\ref{alpha_redshift}), and correspond to a index $\alpha \sim 1.65$. However, as will be shown in section~\ref{xray_emission}, the analysis of galaxy clusters in DGT up to $z\sim 4$) requires an index $\alpha=-0.24$ and correspond to a temperature of 6.92 K (right bottom vertical arrow in Fig.~\ref{alpha_redshift}.
This discrepancy, in the environment temperature of galaxy clusters, will be discussed in section~\ref{xray_emission}.
\subsection{Generalized Faber-Jackson relation for galaxy clusters}
\label{faber}
Galaxy clusters have no clearly defined natural outer boundary. One way of determining the size, that is, the cluster radius is to establish this radius in such a way that it describes the same corresponding boundary for clusters of all sizes in the framework of the self-similar cluster structures \citep{kais86}.
For instance, the $r_{\Delta}$ is the cluster radius within which the enclosed average mass density is $\Delta$
times higher than the universe critical density $\rho_c$.
\begin{equation}
M_{\Delta}=\Delta \times \frac{4}{3}\pi\;r_{\Delta}^3\;\rho_c.
\label{m_200}
\end{equation}
In DGT the application of the Eq.-\ref{eq:mainDGT} to the galaxy clusters requires careful analysis because galaxy clusters are three-dimensional stellar systems supported, in some cases, more by random motions than organized rotation.
Under the assumption of spherical symmetry and following the Eq.~\ref{eq:mainDGT}, the asymptotic $(r \rightarrow r_{\Delta})$, allow us calculate the mass of cluster as
\begin{equation}
M_{\Delta}(r\rightarrow r_{\Delta})= \frac{r_{\Delta}^2}{G} a (\frac{a}{a_0})^{\alpha}.
\label{eq:massa_c}
\end{equation}
For a group of objects, such as galaxies forming an open cluster, only the line-of-sight velocities are obtained, measuring the Doppler width of spectral lines of a collection of objects. In general, the line-of-sight velocity of a cluster decrease as the distance to the center increase, forming a caustic structure. Thus, the relevant information in a cluster is the line-of-sight velocity dispersion
$\sigma=<v^2>^{1/2}$, of galaxies in the cluster. Under certain conditions, the measurement of the velocities dispersion permits obtaining the cluster's mass from Virial theorem.
In the 7's \cite{fabe76} found a correlation, an empirical power-law relation between the luminosity of an elliptical galaxy and the velocity dispersion of its stars, expressed as $L\propto \sigma^{\gamma}$, where the index $\gamma$ is a number close to 4.
The Faber-Jackson relation is very similar to the Tully-Fisher relation, where the circular velocity observed in spiral galaxies is replaced by the dispersion velocity of the elliptical galaxies. In this sense, the acceleration can be written as $a=\sigma^2/r$
to obtain through Eq.~\ref{eq:massa_c} the generalized version of the Faber-Jackson relation predicted by DGT as
\begin{equation}
M_{\Delta}(r\rightarrow r_{\Delta})= \frac{r_{\Delta}^{1-\alpha}}{G a_0^{\alpha}} \sigma^{2\alpha+2}.
\label{faber_dgt}
\end{equation}
We can see that for $\alpha=1$, the generalized Faber-Jackson relation is a scaling-law
\begin{equation}
M_{\Delta}(R\rightarrow r_{\Delta})= \frac{1}{G a_0} \sigma^4.
\end{equation}
In \cite{sand94} there is an application of the Faber-Jackson relation (scaling-law) describing galaxy cluster within the MOND paradigm.
In this paper, we will try to a more embracing description of galaxy clusters from the Eq.~\ref{faber_dgt}, the so-called DGT version of Faber-Jackson relation, or maybe with more propriety called as, the generalized Faber-Jackson relation.
\subsection{The M-$\sigma$ relation}
\label{m_sigma}
The cluster mass estimation through the virial theorem requires that the galaxies member of the cluster and their surrounding gas must be in hydrostatic equilibrium, or at least near it. To avoid this limitation is possible to determine a radius of virialization within which the galaxies are in a relaxing regime.
In contrast with the virial method, the gravitational lensing and the caustic technique as cluster mass estimators do not rely on the equilibrium assumption. However, at a large radius, the gravitational lensing is contaminated by line-of-sight structure unrelated to the cluster \citep{hoek11}, already the caustic technique assumes that only that galaxies trace the velocity field \citep{falt05}. In some clusters, at moderate redshift, the caustic masses agree with weak lensing masses \citep{diaf05}, and in general, the caustic mass profiles near the virial radius are consistent with the virial mass profiles.
Data from Cluster Infall Regions in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (CIRS) project and the Hectoscpec Cluster Survey (HECS) project \citep{rine13} show that the caustic mass is slightly larger than virial mass at the same radius. However, the linear correlation between them is better to masses of clusters above $2\times 10^{14}M_{Sun}$. While the dispersion between them increases as the cluster mass decrease, as shown in Fig.~\ref{Mvir_M200} (left panel).
\begin{figure}
\vspace*{-0.0cm}
\hspace*{0.0cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=18.0cm]{Fig2.png}
\vspace*{-4.0cm}
\caption{Left panel: Caustic masses at $r_{200}$ (determined from the caustic
mass profile) compared to virial masses at the same radius,
according to the data from \cite{rine13}.
Solid line has slope unity. Right panel: Redshift distribution of 58 galaxy clusters, according to the data from \cite{rine13}.
}
\vspace*{-0.0cm}
\label{Mvir_M200}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\vspace*{+0.0cm}
\hspace*{0.0cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=15.0cm]{Fig3.png}
\vspace*{-3.0cm}
\caption{Left panel: Red circles, $r_{200}-M_{200-caustic}$ correlation. Data from \citep{rine13}. The solid line is a least squares fit.
Right panel: Blue squares $r_{200}-M_{200-virial}$ correlation.
Red circles $r_{200}-M_{200-caustic}$ correlation. Data from \citep{rine13}. The solid line is a least squares fit.
}
\vspace*{-0.0cm}
\label{r_m}
\end{figure}
Also, the HeCS data represent a cluster population with a wide range of redshift, from $z=0$ to $z=0.3$. Fig.~\ref{Mvir_M200} (right panel) show the redshift distribution. According to data compiled by \cite{reic11}, galaxy clusters up to redshift($\sim$ 0.4) is consistent with none evolution
with the redshift.
An important features of Eq.~\ref{faber_dgt} is the dependence of cluster mass with the radius, the exception is for $\alpha=1$ (deep-MOND regime). The data is consistent with a power-law dependence between the cluster radius and the mass and expresed as
\begin{equation}
r_{\Delta}=c M_{\Delta}^b;
\label{r_m1}
\end{equation}
Fig.~\ref{r_m} shows this correlation for the data of HECS project \citep{rine13}. The left panel shows the correlation between $r_{200}$ and the $M_{200}$ (caustic mass) expressed as $\log r_{\Delta}= \log c+b\log M_{\Delta}$ with $\log c=-1.727\pm 0.049$ and $b=0.327\pm 0.003$ when the radius is measures in kpc and the mass in solar masses ($R-S_{qua}=0.994$). While, in the right panel is also included the mass of the clusters obtained by the virial method, in this case,
$\log c=-1.261\pm 0.107 $ and $b=0.296\pm 0.007$ ($R-S_{qua}=0.933$). We can see that the addition of the virial masses on the analysis, increase the dispersion in the r-M relation.
Substituting Eq.~\ref{r_m1} in Eq.~\ref{faber_dgt} the expression for the cluster mass, can be written as
\begin{equation}
\log \left( M_{\Delta}\right)=A+B\log \sigma,
\end{equation}
where the normalization is given as
\begin{equation}
A=\frac{1}{1-b(1-\alpha)}\left[\log \left( \frac{c^{1-\alpha}}{Ga_0^{\alpha}}\right)\right],
\end{equation}
and the slope as
\begin{equation}
B=\frac{2(\alpha+1)}{1-b(1-\alpha)},
\end{equation}
These equations reproduce the scaling-law predicted by the deep-MOND regime ($\alpha=1$, in DGT), with $A=-\log(Ga_0)$ and slope $B=4$. However, according to \cite{milg18}, this normalization parameter would be valid to an individual member of a galaxy group. But for the case of a group made
of N $\gg$1 galaxies with individual masses $m_i$ and $M=\Sigma m_i$, the normalization becomes
$A\sim \log(81/4)-log(Ga_0)$.
The $\Lambda$CDM prediction to $M-\sigma$ relation comes putting Eq.~\ref{m_200} as a function of velocity $V_{\Delta}$ as
\begin{equation}
M_{\Delta}=(\frac{\Delta}{2})^{-1/2} (GH_0)^{-1} V_{\Delta}^3.
\label{m_200b}
\end{equation}
It is expected in $\Lambda$CDM that the circular velocity of a galaxy is in association with the peak velocity of an
NFW halos \citep{nava97}, as $V_c=f_v V_{\Delta}$ with $f_v\sim 1$ \citep{mcga10} (for $\Delta=500$). Similarly, for galaxy cluster, the relation can be extended as
\begin{equation}
\sigma \sim f_v V_{\Delta},
\label{fv}
\end{equation}
as will be shown below, for $\sigma=f_v V_{200}$, the cluster data is consistent with $f_v \sim 0.75$.
Combining the Eq.~\ref{fv} and Eq.~\ref{m_200b} we have
the $\Lambda$CDM prediction to the $M_{200}-\sigma$ relation, parametrized as
\begin{equation}
M_{200}= (204789\; km^{-3} s^3 M_{sun}^{-1})(\sigma/0.75)^3.
\end{equation}
Fig.~\ref{m_sigma1} shows the $M_{200}-\sigma$ relation, is a comparison among the data from of HECS project \citep{rine13} with DGT predictions ($\alpha =-0.24$, solid red line), including a fit of the data (dotted line), $\Lambda$CDM ($f_v=0.75$, dash dot line) and the MOND prediction \citep{milg18} (dashed line). The upper part of Table ~\ref{m_sigma_table} shows the values for the normalizations (A) and slopes (B). We can see, that the DGT prediction for $\alpha=-0.24$ is practically overlapping to the fit line.
Fig.~\ref{m_sigma2} is similar to the previous one, but including in the analysis the mass of clusters obtained via the virial method.
The lower part of Table ~\ref{m_sigma_table} indicates the values to the normalizations and the slopes.
\begin{figure}
\vspace*{+0.0cm}
\hspace*{0.0cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=14.0cm]{Fig4.png}
\vspace*{-0.0cm}
\caption{Comparison of the $M_{200-caustic}-\sigma$ relation data from Hectoscpec Cluster Survey (HECS) project \citep{rine13} and several theoretical predictions (lines), including a fit on data (dots line)(h$=$0.7).
}
\vspace*{-0.0cm}
\label{m_sigma1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\vspace*{+0.0cm}
\hspace*{0.0cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=14.0cm]{Fig5.png}
\vspace*{-0.0cm}
\caption{Comparison of the $M_{200-caustic}-\sigma$ relation data (red circles) and
the $M_{200-virial}-\sigma$ relation data (blue squares),
from Hectoscpec Cluster Survey (HECS) project \citep{rine13} and several theoretical predictions (lines), including a fit on data (dots line) (h$=$0.7).
}
\vspace*{-0.0cm}
\label{m_sigma2}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[h!]
\begin{center}
\caption{Table with aligned units.}
\begin{tabular}{ l l l l l}
\hline
\hline
Relation & A & B & $\chi^2$& dof=57 \\
\hline
$M_{200}-\sigma$ & $7.17\pm 0.37$ & $2.53\pm 0.13$& 0.045& Fit \\
& 6.90 & 2.57 & 0.059& DGT $\alpha=-0.24$ \\
& 5.69 & 3.00 & 0.067&$\Lambda$CDM \\
& 3.11 & 4.0 & 0.52&MOND (Milgrom, 2018)\\
\hline
$M_{200,vir}-\sigma$ & 6.90 & 2.57 & 0.099 &DGT $\alpha=-0.28$\\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{m_sigma_table}
\end{center}
\end{table}
From these figures, we can see that the data constrain the MOND prediction. We believe that the fact of the cluster mass to be independent of the cluster size, as predicted by MOND impose a severe limitation for the inclination in the $M-\sigma $ relation, a slope with index always equal to 4, is constrained by several cluster surveys.
\subsection{X-ray Emission from Clusters of Galaxies}
\label{xray_emission}
According to the self-similar model \citep{kais86,bowe97}, the properties of clusters
reflect the properties of the Universe at their redshift of observation. Indeed, galaxy clusters are open systems, and the determination of their sizes is possible admitting, e.g., a radius within which the mean density is $\Delta$ times the
critical density ($\rho_c$) of the Universe, at the cluster's redshift. And defines a self-similar structure of the clusters. As $\rho_c$ is a function of the redshift, distant clusters are identical to local clusters if we
include a factor for increasing density of the Universe with
redshift. Thus, galaxy clusters surveys can give valuable information on the evolution of the Universe.
The self-similar model implicates that clusters form via a single gravitational collapse at a redshift of observation and the only source of energy input into the intracluster medium (ICM) is gravitational.
The model predicts that the slopes in the Lx-T, M-T and M-Tx relations are independent of the redshift, and only the normalizations have an evolution with the redshift, for instance, the normalization in the M-T relation can be written as \citep{reic11}
\begin{equation}
\frac{M_{obs}}{M_{z=0}(T)}=E(z)^{\alpha_e},
\end{equation}
where the $E(z)$ is the evolution function and the index as $\alpha_e=-1.0$, is predicted by the self-similar model. E(z) is an increasing function of z that depends on
cosmological parameters (e.g. $\Omega_M$, $\Lambda$).
This evolution is hard to see in the data at redshift range ($z< 6$), it is claimed that in this redshift range, the data has a strong influence by selection bias, constraining the evolution observations \citep{reic11}, in short; there is not an apparent evolution in the data. In contrast to the more distant systems ($z>6$), there is an evolution in the data, but smaller than the predicted by the self-similar model.
This behavior also suggests that some non-gravitational processes can be responsible for the absence of the evolution, at least for galaxy clusters with redshift up to $z \sim 4$.
We show a scenario to describe X-ray galaxy clusters, without an apparent evolution within DGT, assuming that the X-ray emission, results
from thermal bremsstrahlung from a hot diffuse intracluster gas \citep{felt66}.
In DGT, all systems are within a thermal bath, and the dynamic of a system depends on the temperature of the thermal bath. In general, if a system is a ``isolated'' galaxy at redshift z, its thermal bath has a temperature of $T=T_0(1+z)$, where $T_0=2.73$ K.
For example, if the system is an isolated nearby spiral galaxy ($z\sim 0$), it is within a thermal bath at 2.73 K, and this corresponds to ($\alpha =1$) in the DGT equations.
Already, if the system is a dwarf galaxy orbiting a nearby spiral galaxy, its thermal bath has a temperature slightly higher than 2.73 K, because it is subject to additional radiation of its host galaxy \citep{navi18b}. In DGT, dwarf galaxies are described by an index $\alpha > 1$.
So if the system is a ``isolated'' galaxy cluster at a redshift, let's say $z\sim 0.17$ (this is the average redshift in the HECS cluster survey \citep{rine13}),
its thermal bath at this redshift must have a temperature of 3.19 K. However, the analysis of the M-$\sigma$ relation in DGT require an index $\alpha=-0.24$, as shown in the previous section, and according to the $\alpha$-T diagram of DGT (Fig.~\ref{alpha_redshift}), $\alpha=-0.24$ correspond thermal bath with a temperature of 6.92 K.
This discrepancy can be understood assuming that the X-ray emission mechanism is the thermal bremsstrahlung from intracluster gas, as follow.
An exponential behavior dominates the X-ray spectra in galaxy clusters; this means a thermal X-ray emission, with gas temperatures about $10^8$ K. However, in some clusters, there is a contamination
of a power-law spectrum, this means, a no thermal origin.
The origin of this component is due to some individual galaxies within the cluster, such as active galactic nuclei (AGN), or even binary stellar X-ray sources. Also, there are some emission lines, whose origin can be linked to the contamination of the gas by heavy elements.
The gas temperature that fit the exponential spectrum in an X-ray cluster is about $2\times 10^7$ to $10^8$ K. \citep{felt66,sara88}
These temperature values are in agreement with the average temperature $T_X=6.15 \pm 2.14$ K, obtained from 148 galaxy clusters,
as shown in Fig.~\ref{average_T} (right panel), together with the $L_X-T_X$ relation (left panel) and whose data was compiled by \cite{reic11}. The X-ray clusters, have luminosities from $10^{43}$ to $10^{45}$ ergs sec$^{-1}$ and constituting the most common and bright extragalactic X-ray sources.
\begin{figure}
\vspace*{-0.0cm}
\hspace*{0.0cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12.0cm]{Fig6.png}
\vspace*{-0.0cm}
\caption{Left panel the Lx-Tx relation and right panel the ICM temperature distribution, obtained from 148 galaxy clusters according to data compiling by \cite{reic11}.
}
\label{average_T}
\end{figure}
The cluster gas temperature is close to the thermal dispersion velocity of the particles (mostly protons) of the gas
\begin{equation}
\sigma^2 \sim \frac{T_X}{\mu m_p},
\label{thermal_2}
\end{equation}
where $m_p=9.35\times 10^5$ keV is the proton mass, and $\mu=0.62$ is the is the mean atomic weight (for a fully ionized gas
with solar abundances).
The gas temperatures around $Tx\sim 10^8$ K or 8.6 keV can provide high thermal velocities to the gas particles, sometimes above
of the escapement velocity of the gravitational attraction of the cluster and a fraction of the gas would escape as a wind. A favorable condition to this mechanism it's the clusters are open systems. Notice, that the atomic density of the hot gas that fills an X-ray cluster is about
$n\sim 10^{-3}$ cm$^{-3}$, even so, the total mass of the gas can exceed the mass of stars of the galaxies within the cluster.
This hot wind can warm the local environment, the thermal bath, where the cluster is immersed. This mechanism can put all the galaxy clusters immersed in thermal baths, with almost the same temperature $T\sim 6.92$ K (which correspond to $\alpha=-0.24$), independent of the cluster redshift,
and explain the weak (or nearly absent) evolution with the redshift, in the galaxy clusters relations at least up to redshift $z\leq 0.4$.
\subsection{The $M-T_X$ relation}
\label{m_t}
In most cases, the hot gas of galaxy clusters are described by the hydrostatic equation [Sarazin] and that under a spherical symmetry, can be written as
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{\rho_g}\frac{dP}{dr}=-\frac{d\phi (r)}{dr}=-\frac{GM(r)}{r^2},
\end{equation}
where P is the gas pressure, $\rho_g$ is the gas density, $\phi (r)$ is the gravitational potential and $M(r)$ is the total cluster mass within r. The next step is to determine an expression to describe the density distribution of hot gas in clusters. The so-called "$\beta$ model" (or pure gas sphere) allows obtaining a reasonable description of this density distribution.
Also, for large values of $r$ is possible to obtain an asymptotically simple expression.
However, in this work and to avoid free parameters and asymptotic approximations, we will use to obtain the $M-T_X$ correlation of galaxy clusters a different frame from the DGT version to the Faber-Jackson relation, express by Eq.~\ref{faber_dgt},
\begin{equation}
M_{\Delta}(r\rightarrow r_{\Delta})= \frac{r_{\Delta}^{1-\alpha}}{G a_0^{\alpha}} \sigma^{2\alpha+2},
\label{faber_dgt2}
\end{equation}
and taking into account the Eq.~\ref{thermal_2}, that gives the relationship between the hot gas temperature of a cluster, $T_X$, and the velocity dispersion, $\sigma$, \citep{sara88}.
\begin{equation}
T_X=6.03\;keV\;\left[\frac{\sigma}{10^3\;km\;s^{-1}}\right]^2.
\label{thermal}
\end{equation}
In the generalized Faber-Jackson relation the M-$\sigma$ relation is a power-law such $M\propto \sigma^{2(\alpha+1)}$. Thus Eq.~\ref{thermal} can be rewritten as
\begin{equation}
\left(\frac{\sigma}{km\;s^{-1}}\right)^{2(\alpha+1)}=10^{6(\alpha+1)}\left(\frac{T_X}{6.03\;keV} \right)^{\alpha+1}.
\label{sigma_T}
\end{equation}
Considering that the size (radius) of cluster is like $r_{\Delta}=c M_{\Delta}^b$, for instance, the $r_{500}$ is the cluster radius within which the enclosed average mass density is 500
times higher than the universe critical density $\rho_c$. Data the ROSAT All-Sky Survey \citep{ande15} can be expressed as power-law
\begin{equation}
\log(r_{500})= \log(c)+b \log M_{500},
\label{r_500}
\end{equation}
with $\log(c)=-1.725 \pm 0.09)$ and $b=0.323 \pm 0.001$ when $r_{500}$ is expressed in kpc and $M_{500}$ in solar masses.
Combining the Eq.~\ref{r_500}, Eq.~\ref{sigma_T} and Eq.~\ref{faber_dgt2}
the expression to mass of cluster can be written as
\begin{equation}
\log \left( M_{500}\right) =A+B \log\left(\frac{T_X}{keV}\right),
\end{equation}
where the normalization factor is giving by
\begin{equation}
A=\frac{1}{1-b(1-\alpha)}\left[\log\left(\frac{c^{1-\alpha}}{Ga_0^{\alpha}}\right)+(6-\log 6.03)(\alpha+1)\right],
\end{equation}
and the slop as
\begin{equation}
B=\frac{(\alpha+1)}{1-b(1-\alpha)}.
\end{equation}
These equations include the special case predicted by the deep-MOND regime ($\alpha=1$, in DGT). In this case the normalization factor is reduce to
\begin{equation}
A=-\log(Ga_0)+10.44=12.71.
\end{equation}
and the slop as $B=2$. However, this normalization factor differ from an isothermal gas sphere in MOND analysis \citep{sand03}, that predict a higher normalization factor as
$A=13.46$
\begin{figure}
\vspace*{+0.0cm}
\hspace*{0.0cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=14.0cm]{Fig7.png}
\vspace*{-0.0cm}
\caption{$M_{500}$-Tx relation, data from
Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope Lensing Survey and XMM-CFHTLS survey up to $z\sim 0.47$. Red squares from \cite{kett15} and black circles from \cite{mant10} and \cite{sere14}. The lines represent several theoretical predictions, including a fit on data (dots line)
(h$=$0.7).
}
\vspace*{-0.0cm}
\label{m_Tx}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{m_Tx} shows the $M_{500}-T_X$ relation, is a comparison among the data from Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope Lensing Survey and XMM-CFHTLS surveys up to $z\sim 0.47$. \citep{kett15} with DGT predictions (solid red line), including a fit of the data (dotted line) and the MOND prediction (thermal sphere) \citep{sand03} (dashed line). Table ~\ref{m_Tx_table} shows the values for the normalizations (A) and slopes (B). We can see, that the DGT prediction for $\alpha=-0.24$ is practically overlapping to the fit line.
\begin{table}[h!]
\begin{center}
\caption{Table with aligned units.}
\begin{tabular}{ l l l l l}
\hline
\hline
Relation & A & B & $\chi^2$ & \\
\hline
$M_{500}-T_X$ & $13.80\pm 0.15$ & $1.25\pm 0.18$& 0.16 & Fit \\
& 13.62 & 1.30 & 0.27& DGT $\alpha=-0.24$ \\
& 13.75 & 1.54 & 0.36&$\Lambda$CDM (Borgani et al. 2004)\\
& 13.46 & 2.00 & 2.39& MOND (Thermal sphere)Sanders, 2003 \\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{m_Tx_table}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\section{A toy model to the caustic pattern in the galaxy cluster}
\label{toy}
In a group of objects, such as galaxies forming an open cluster, the line-of-sight velocity is obtained by measuring
the Doppler width of spectral lines of a collection of objects. In general, the line-of-sight velocity (in the clustercentric rest-frame) decrease as the
distance to the center increases, forming a Caustic structure.
The Caustic technique \citep{diaf05,rine13}
determines the line-of-sight velocity, as a function of the cluster projected radius, forming the so-called phase space, line-of-sight velocity vs. projected radius. The edge of this phase space traces the galaxy escape velocity from the group, to obtain the Newtonian gravitational potential through the relation
\begin{equation}
v_{esc}^2=-2\phi(r),
\label{escape}
\end{equation}
and from it, can estimate the cluster mass \cite{diaf05}.
The gravitational potential $\phi(r)$ is related with the radial acceleration by the expression
\begin{equation}
\phi(r)=\int a(r)dr.
\label{potential}
\end{equation}
From Eq.~\ref{eq:mainDGT} the radial acceleration in DGT is
\begin{equation}
a(r)=\frac{(GMa_0^{\alpha})^{1/(\alpha+1)}}{r^{2/(\alpha+1)}},
\label{acceleration}
\end{equation}
as expected, for $\alpha=0$, the above expression coincides with the Newtonian radial gravitational acceleration $a(r)=GM/r^2$.
Incorporating Eq.~\ref{acceleration} into Eq.~\ref{potential} and integrating, we have a expression for the radial gravitational potential predicted by DGT as
\begin{equation}
\phi(r)=(GMa_0^{\alpha})^{1/(\alpha+1)} \left(\frac{\alpha+1}{\alpha-1}\right)r^{(\alpha-1)/(\alpha+1)},
\label{potential}
\end{equation}
again, as expected, for $\alpha=0$ the above potential, coincides with the Newtonian gravitational potential as $\phi(r)=-GM/r$
Our toy model take on that $v_{esc}(r)=\pm \sqrt{-2\phi(r)}$ are the upper and lower curves, of the envelop for the cluster velocities dispersion, generated through relation
$u \times \pm \sigma(r)$, where $u$ is a random number between 0 and 1, and $\sigma(r)$ is the velocity dispersion, here obtain from the generalized Faber-Jackson relation, Eq.~\ref{faber_dgt}.
Fig.~\ref{caustic} shows an
example, for a cluster with mass $M=5.0\times 10^{14} M_{sun}$. The top panel takes on a Newtonian potential
($\alpha=0$ in DGT) and the bottom panel takes on a DGT gravitational potential (Eq.~\ref{potential}) with $\alpha=-0.24$.
\begin{figure}
\vspace*{-0.0cm}
\hspace*{0.0cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12.0cm]{Fig8.png}
\vspace*{-0.0cm}
\caption{Prediction for the dispersion velocities versus projected radius, for a galaxy cluster with $M=2.0\times 10^{14} M_{sun}$. The edges follow the caustic form, under two assumptions to the galaxies escape velocity: in the top panel we assume a Newtonian gravitational potential ($\alpha=0$ in DGT) and the bottom panel we assume a DGT gravitational potential (Eq.~\ref{potential}) with $\alpha=-0.24$.
}
\label{caustic}
\end{figure}
The Caustic structure in the data show a variety of forms \cite{rine13}. However, the average behaviour are close to the DGT prediction.
The caustic edge curves in DGT are like the declining rotation curves observed in galaxies at high redshift. DGT predicts that both, the caustic edges in galaxy clusters, and the rotation curves of galaxies at high redshift falling faster than the Newtonian prediction \citep{navi17,navi18a}. Also in both cases, a falling behavior is predicted by DGT,
only when the index $\alpha$ is negative.
In the case, of galaxy clusters, the M-$\sigma$ and M-Tx relations are well described by DGT with an index $\alpha=-0.24$ (see subsection~\ref{m_sigma} and subsection~\ref{m_t}).
\section{Conclusions}
\label{conclusions}
We have presented a novel framework, within DGT picture, that explains the almost absence of evolution with the redshift of the galaxy cluster, at least up to $z\sim 0.4$, DGT is based in an extension to low temperatures, of entropic gravitational theory \citep{verl11}. DGT allows obtaining a generalized version of the Faber-Jackson relation to describe the galaxy clusters relation, such as the M-$\sigma$ and M-Tx relations. The comparison with the data available in the literature, from large galaxy clusters surveys, shows an excellent agreement between them.
Our main result is to show that DGT can make a description of galaxy clusters, without invoking dark matter,
always within the same framework already used to describe the dynamic of dwarf galaxies including the dwarf spheroidal galaxies orbiting the Milke-Way galaxy \citep{navi18b}, as well as, the description of the falling rotation curves, observed by VLT \citep{lang17} at high redshift \citep{navi18a}.
The weak (almost null) evolution with the redshift, in the normalization relations of galaxy clusters in the available data, constrain the simple self-similar predictions, at least up to $z\sim 4$. According to DGT, this behavior is due to
a fraction of the hot gas that fills the clusters is not bound to the groups, escaping as a hot wind and warming the clusters environment, so the clusters are within thermal baths with almost the same effective temperature ($Tx\sim 6.92$ keV or $\alpha=-0.24$) independently of the redshift of the clusters.
DGT predictions to $\alpha=-0.24$ to the M-$\sigma$ and M-Tx relations overlap the fit on data.
Prediction of DGT for the slope ($B=1.30$) of the $M_{500}$-Tx relation is close to the slope ($B=1.25$) of the fit on Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope Lensing Survey and XMM-CFHTLS surveys (up to $z\sim 0.47$). Both, are minors than what is predicted by self-similar models ($B=1.5$) and suggests that simple gravitational collapse is not the only process that governs the heating or cooling of the gas in clusters and their local environments.
Also, $\Lambda$CDM prediction gives a good description of the M-Tx relation. However, the slope ($B=1.55$) is steeper than the fit on the data ($B=1.25$). Besides,
as point out by \cite{sand03}, the mass predicted by
MOND in the M-Tx relation is a factor of 2 or 3 times larger than the observed. While to describe the inner region of galaxy clusters, MOND needs unseen matter.
Finally, we already have shown that DGT, allow a description of galaxies, departing from the local Universe ($z\sim 0$),
up to redshift $\sim 4$, where the linear relation ($T=T_0(1+z)$) between the redshift and temperature of the Universe is guaranteed, as well as, the dwarf galaxies, including of local dwarf galaxies. Now, we show that DGT can describe the galaxy clusters, always with the same framework (without the dark matter paradigm). We are at the beginning, but we already have demonstrated that DGT is a promising theory that can be extended to higher redshift, maybe up to reach the redshift of the origin of the CMB radiation, and it, is our challenge.
\acknowledgments
This work is supported by the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cient\'{i}fico e Tecnol\'{o}lgico (CNPq, Brazil, grants 312066/2016-3, 152050/2016-7, 406331/2015-4),
\newpage
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Meta-heuristics are very successful at finding good solutions
for hard optimization problems in practice. However, due to the nature of such
algorithms and the problems they are applied to, it is generally very difficult
to derive performance guarantees, or to determine the number of steps it takes
until an optimal solution is found. In the present work we propose a simple
adaptation of the particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm
introduced by Kennedy and Eberhart~\cite{eb_ken_1995,ken_eb_1995} to optimization problems over discrete
domains. Our proposed algorithm assumes very little about the problem structure
and consequently, it works naturally for a large class discrete domains. It is reasonable to expect from a meta-heuristic that it solves
black-box versions of tractable problems in expected polynomial time.
We provide a formal analysis based on Markov-chains and establish under
which conditions our algorithm satisfies this basic requirement. More concretely, we
consider two classical problems that are easy to solve in a non-black-box
setting, namely the problem of sorting items by transpositions and the
problem \onemax, which asks to maximize the number of ones in a bitstring. Our
analysis gives precise information about the expected number of steps our
algorithm takes in order to solve these two reference problems.
Our runtime
bounds are essentially tight with respect to the Markov process we use to model
the behavior of the algorithm.
For practical purposes,
a meta-heuristic should, in one way or another, incorporate the following two
general strategies: i) find an improving solution locally
(often referred to as \emph{exploitation}) and ii) move to unexplored parts of
the search space (often referred to as \emph{exploration}).
The first strategy essentially leads the algorithm to a local optimum while the
second one helps the algorithm to avoid getting stuck when it is close to a local optimum. For our proposed algorithm, as for many other meta-heuristics,
the tradeoff between the
two strategies can be conveniently set by an algorithm parameter. Our analysis
shows that there is a sharp threshold with respect to this parameter, where the
expected runtime of the algorithm on the reference problems turns from
polynomial to exponential. Hence, we can maximize the algorithm's ability to
escape local optima while still maintaining polynomial runtime on the reference
problems.
A key tool for the runtime analysis of meta-heuristics for optimization
problems over discrete domains is the \emph{fitness level method} pioneered by
Wegener~\cite{Wegener:02}. The basic idea is to consider the level sets of the
objective function of a problem instance and to determine the expected number
of steps an algorithm takes
to move to a better level set. This approach has been used extensively in the
study of so-called \emph{elitist $(1+1)$-EAs} \cite{Wegener:02,DJW:02,GW:03,S:13}.
These algorithms keep a single ``current'' solution and update this solution
only if a better one is found.
Our analysis of the proposed PSO algorithm also relies on the fitness level
method. However, since our algorithm also considers non-improving solutions in
order to escape local optima, a much more involved analysis is required in
order to determine the time it takes to move to a better fitness level.
We will refer in the following by \emph{expected optimization time} to the
\emph{expected} number of evaluations of the objective function an algorithm
performs until an optimal solution is found. Before giving a precise statement
of our results we provide some background information on the PSO algorithm as well as the
two reference problems we consider.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\matrix[matrix of math nodes,column sep={2.7em,between origins},row sep={2.0em,between origins}]{
&|(0111)| 0111& & & & & &|(1111)| 1111\\
|(0101)| 0101& & & & & &|(1101)| 1101& \\
& & &|(0110)| 0110& &|(1110)| 1110& & \\
& &|(0100)| 0100& &|(1100)| 1100& & & \\
& & &|(0010)| 0010& &|(1010)| 1010& & \\
& &|(0000)| 0000& &|(1000)| 1000& & & \\
&|(0011)| 0011& & & & & &|(1011)| 1011\\
|(0001)| 0001& & & & & &|(1001)| 1001& \\
};
\path[thick](0000) edge [bend right=30] (0001);
\draw[thick](0000) -- (0010);
\draw[thick](0000) -- (0100);
\draw[thick](0000) -- (1000);
\draw[thick](0001) -- (0011);
\draw[thick](0001) -- (0101);
\draw[thick](0001) -- (1001);
\path[thick](0010) edge [bend left=30 ] (0011);
\draw[thick](0010) -- (0110);
\draw[thick](0010) -- (1010);
\draw[thick](0011) -- (0111);
\draw[thick](0011) -- (1011);
\draw[thick](0100) -- (0101);
\draw[thick](0100) -- (0110);
\draw[thick](0100) -- (1100);
\draw[thick](0101) -- (0111);
\draw[thick](0101) -- (1101);
\draw[thick](0110) -- (0111);
\draw[thick](0110) -- (1110);
\draw[thick](0111) -- (1111);
\draw[thick](1000) -- (1001);
\draw[thick](1000) -- (1010);
\draw[thick](1000) -- (1100);
\draw[thick](1001) -- (1011);
\draw[thick](1001) -- (1101);
\draw[thick](1010) -- (1011);
\draw[thick](1010) -- (1110);
\draw[thick](1011) -- (1111);
\draw[thick](1100) -- (1110);
\path[thick](1100) edge [bend left=30 ] (1101);
\draw[thick](1101) -- (1111);
\path[thick](1110) edge [bend right=30] (1111);
;
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Search space for the problem of \onemax on $\lbrace 0,1\rbrace^4$ by
bitflips, i.\,e., the $4$-dimensional hypercube. Two bitstrings $x,y$ are
adjacent iff $x$ and $y$ differ in exactly one position.}
\label{fig:hypercube}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Particle Swarm Optimization}
The PSO algorithm has been introduced by Kennedy and
Eberhart~\cite{eb_ken_1995,ken_eb_1995} and is inspired by the social
interaction of bird flocks. Fields of successful application of PSO are, among
many others, Biomedical Image Processing~\cite{SSW:15,WSZZE:04},
Geosciences~\cite{OD:10}, Agriculture~\cite{YWetal:17}, and Materials
Science~\cite{RPPN:09}. In the continuous setting, it is known that the
algorithm converges to a local optimum under mild
assumptions~\cite{SW:15}. The algorithm has been adapted to various
discrete problems and several results are available, for instance for
binary problems~\cite{SW:10} and the traveling salesperson problem
(TSP)~\cite{HMHW:11}.
A PSO algorithm manages a collection (called \emph{swarm}) of particles. Each
particle consists of an (admissible) solution together with a velocity vector.
Additionally each individual particle knows the \emph{local attractor}, which
is the best solution found by that particle. Information between particles is
shared via a common reference solution called \emph{global attractor}, which is
the best solution found so far by all particles. In each iteration of the
algorithm, the solution of each particle is updated based on its relative
position with respect to the attractors and some random perturbation. Algorithm
parameters balance the influence of the attractors and the perturbation and hence
give a tradeoff between the two general search strategies ``exploration'' and
``exploitation''. Although PSO has originally been proposed to solve
optimization problems over a --- typically rectangular --- domain $X \subseteq
\ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}\xspace^n$,
several authors have adapted PSO to discrete domains. This
requires a fundamental reinterpretation of the PSO movement equation because
corresponding mathematical operations of a vector space are typically lacking
in the discrete setting.
An early discrete PSO variant is the \emph{binary PSO} \cite{KE:97} for optimizing over
$X=\{0,1\}^n$ where velocities determine probabilities such that a
bit is zero or one in the next iteration. A PSO variant for
optimizing over general integral domains $X=\{0,1,\ldots,M-1\}^n$, $M \in \ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}\xspace$, has been proposed in \cite{VO:07}.
\subsection{Problems and Search Spaces}
In this section we briefly define the optimization problems for which we will
study the performance of the proposed PSO algorithm. The problem \onemax asks
for a binary string of length $n$ that maximizes the function
\[
\onemax((x_1,\ldots,x_n)) = \smash[t]{\sum_{i=1}^n x_i}\enspace,
\]
which counts the number of ones in a binary string. A more general version of
this problem asks to minimize the Hamming distance to an unknown binary string
of length $n$. The proposed algorithm works exactly the same on the more
general problem since it is indifferent to the actual bit values and each bit is
handled independently. Therefore, the performance of our algorithm on this more
general version is equal to its performance on \onemax.
The corresponding search space is the $n$-dimensional hypercube: Any binary
string of length $n$ is a (feasible) solution, and two solutions are adjacent
iff they differ by exactly one bitflip. For $n=4$, the search space is shown in
Figure~\ref{fig:hypercube}. More generally, a \emph{pseudo-Boolean function} is
any function $f : \{0, 1\}^n \to \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}\xspace$.
By the \emph{sorting problem} we refer to the task of arranging $n$ items in
non-decreasing order using transpositions. An (algebraic) transposition
$t=(i\,\,\, j)$ is the exchange of the entries at positions $i$ and $j$.
Therefore, the search space is the following (undirected) graph: The vertices
are the permutations on $\{1,2,\ldots,n\}$ and two vertices $x, y$ are adjacent
iff there is a transposition $t$ such that $x \circ t = y$. The objective
function is the transposition distance to the identity
permutation\footnote{Note that a different definition of ``transposition'' is
used in computational biology, so ``transposition distance'' has a
different meaning, e.g., in~\cite{BP:98}.}. Figure~\ref{fig:permutations} shows the
search space for the problem of sorting items $\{1, 2, 3, 4\}$ using
transpositions. Any two permutations drawn in the same vertical layer have the
same objective value.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\matrix[matrix of math nodes,column sep={7.3em,between origins},row sep={1.1em,between origins}]{
& & |(2431)| 2431 & \\
& & & \\
& & |(2314)| 2314 & \\
& & & \\
& & |(3241)| 3241 & \\
& |(2134)| 2134 & & |(2341)| 2341 \\
& & |(2143)| 2143 & \\
& |(3214)| 3214 & & |(2413)| 2413 \\
& & |(3412)| 3412 & \\
& |(1243)| 1243 & & |(3421)| 3421 \\
|(1234)| 1234 & & |(1342)| 1342 & \\
& |(1432)| 1432 & & |(3142)| 3142 \\
& & |(1423)| 1423 & \\
& |(1324)| 1324 & & |(4312)| 4312 \\
& & |(4321)| 4321 & \\
& |(4231)| 4231 & & |(4123)| 4123 \\
& & |(3124)| 3124 & \\
& & & \\
& & |(4213)| 4213 & \\
& & & \\
& & |(4132)| 4132 & \\
};
\node[circle] at ([xshift=-0.6em]1234.east) (1234E){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift=-0.6em]2134.east) (2134E){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift=-0.6em]3214.east) (3214E){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift=-0.6em]1243.east) (1243E){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift=-0.6em]1432.east) (1432E){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift=-0.6em]1324.east) (1324E){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift=-0.6em]4231.east) (4231E){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift=-0.6em]2431.east) (2431E){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift=-0.6em]2314.east) (2314E){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift=-0.6em]3241.east) (3241E){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift=-0.6em]2143.east) (2143E){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift=-0.6em]3412.east) (3412E){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift=-0.6em]1342.east) (1342E){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift=-0.6em]1423.east) (1423E){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift=-0.6em]4321.east) (4321E){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift=-0.6em]3124.east) (3124E){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift=-0.6em]4213.east) (4213E){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift=-0.6em]4132.east) (4132E){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]2134.west) (2134W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]3214.west) (3214W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]1243.west) (1243W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]1432.west) (1432W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]1324.west) (1324W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]4231.west) (4231W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]2431.west) (2431W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]2314.west) (2314W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]3241.west) (3241W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]2143.west) (2143W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]3412.west) (3412W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]1342.west) (1342W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]1423.west) (1423W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]4321.west) (4321W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]3124.west) (3124W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]4213.west) (4213W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]4132.west) (4132W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]2341.west) (2341W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]2413.west) (2413W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]3421.west) (3421W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]3142.west) (3142W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]4312.west) (4312W){};
\node[circle] at ([xshift= 0.6em]4123.west) (4123W){};
\draw[thick](1234E) -- (2134W);
\draw[thick](1234E) -- (3214W);
\draw[thick](1234E) -- (1324W);
\draw[thick](1234E) -- (4231W);
\draw[thick](1234E) -- (1432W);
\draw[thick](1234E) -- (1243W);
\draw[thick](2134E) -- (3124W);
\draw[thick](2134E) -- (2314W);
\draw[thick](2134E) -- (4132W);
\draw[thick](2134E) -- (2431W);
\draw[thick](2134E) -- (2143W);
\draw[thick](3214E) -- (2314W);
\draw[thick](3214E) -- (3124W);
\draw[thick](3214E) -- (4213W);
\draw[thick](3214E) -- (3412W);
\draw[thick](3214E) -- (3241W);
\draw[thick](1324E) -- (3124W);
\draw[thick](1324E) -- (2314W);
\draw[thick](1324E) -- (4321W);
\draw[thick](1324E) -- (1423W);
\draw[thick](1324E) -- (1342W);
\draw[thick](4231E) -- (2431W);
\draw[thick](4231E) -- (3241W);
\draw[thick](4231E) -- (4321W);
\draw[thick](4231E) -- (4132W);
\draw[thick](4231E) -- (4213W);
\draw[thick](1432E) -- (4132W);
\draw[thick](1432E) -- (3412W);
\draw[thick](1432E) -- (1342W);
\draw[thick](1432E) -- (2431W);
\draw[thick](1432E) -- (1423W);
\draw[thick](1243E) -- (2143W);
\draw[thick](1243E) -- (4213W);
\draw[thick](1243E) -- (1423W);
\draw[thick](1243E) -- (3241W);
\draw[thick](1243E) -- (1342W);
\draw[thick](2143E) -- (4123W);
\draw[thick](2143E) -- (2413W);
\draw[thick](2143E) -- (3142W);
\draw[thick](2143E) -- (2341W);
\draw[thick](4213E) -- (2413W);
\draw[thick](4213E) -- (4123W);
\draw[thick](4213E) -- (4312W);
\draw[thick](1423E) -- (4123W);
\draw[thick](1423E) -- (2413W);
\draw[thick](1423E) -- (3421W);
\draw[thick](3241E) -- (2341W);
\draw[thick](3241E) -- (3421W);
\draw[thick](3241E) -- (3142W);
\draw[thick](1342E) -- (3142W);
\draw[thick](1342E) -- (4312W);
\draw[thick](1342E) -- (2341W);
\draw[thick](3124E) -- (4123W);
\draw[thick](3124E) -- (3421W);
\draw[thick](3124E) -- (3142W);
\draw[thick](2314E) -- (4312W);
\draw[thick](2314E) -- (2413W);
\draw[thick](2314E) -- (2341W);
\draw[thick](4321E) -- (3421W);
\draw[thick](4321E) -- (2341W);
\draw[thick](4321E) -- (4123W);
\draw[thick](4321E) -- (4312W);
\draw[thick](4132E) -- (3142W);
\draw[thick](4132E) -- (4312W);
\draw[thick](4132E) -- (4123W);
\draw[thick](3412E) -- (4312W);
\draw[thick](3412E) -- (3142W);
\draw[thick](3412E) -- (2413W);
\draw[thick](3412E) -- (3421W);
\draw[thick](2431E) -- (3421W);
\draw[thick](2431E) -- (2341W);
\draw[thick](2431E) -- (2413W);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Search space for the problem of sorting four items by transpositions. Two permutations
$x,y$ on $\{1,2,3,4\}$ are adjacent iff there is a transposition $t$ such that $x \circ t = y$.}
\label{fig:permutations}
\end{figure}
The sorting problem and \onemax have a unique optimum. Furthermore, the value
of the objective function is the distance to the unique optimal solution in the
corresponding directed graph.
\subsection{Our Contribution}
We propose a simple adaptation of the PSO algorithm to optimization problems
over discrete domains. We refer to this algorithm as \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace. The algorithm works
naturally on a large class of discrete problems, for instance optimization
problems over bitstrings, integral domains, and permutations. The general task is to optimize
a function $f:X\rightarrow\ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}\xspace$, where $X$ is a finite set of feasible
solutions.
Our assumptions on the problem structure are the following. We assume that the
set $X$ is the vertex set of a finite, strongly connected
graph and for any solution $x \in X$, we can sample a neighbor of $x$ efficiently and
uniformly. The \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace algorithm essentially explores this graph, looking for an optimal vertex.
In our analysis, we assume at first a swarm size of one as in~\cite{MRSSW:17},
similar to the analysis of EAs and ACO in~\cite{SW:10}. We refer to the
corresponding specialization of \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace as \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace.
Indeed, for a single particle we have only a single attractor and,
as a consequence, a single parameter is sufficient to control
the tradeoff between the moving towards the attractor
and performing a random perturbation.
\begin{table*}[t]
\caption{ Summary of upper and lower bounds on the expected time
taken by the algorithm \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace to solve the sorting problem and \onemax for
$c \in [0,1]$. The functions $\alpha(c)$ and $\beta(c)$ are given in Lemma
\ref{lemma:lower_bound_sort_small_c} and Lemma
\ref{lemma:lower_bound_1max_small_c}, respectively. Note that
$1<\beta(c)<2$ and $\beta(c)<\alpha(c)<3+2\cdot \sqrt{2}<6$ for all $c\in(0,1/2)$.}
\def\vrule height2.8ex depth1.5ex width 0pt{\vrule height2.8ex depth1.5ex width 0pt}
\def\vrule height3.8ex depth1.5ex width 0pt{\vrule height3.8ex depth1.5ex width 0pt}
\centering
\begin{tabu} to 0.95\linewidth {l|X|X||X|X}
& \multicolumn{2}{c||}{\vrule height2.8ex depth1.5ex width 0pt sorting} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\onemax} \tabularnewline\cline{2-3}\cline{4-5}
& \vrule height2.8ex depth1.5ex width 0pt lower bound & upper bound & lower bound & upper bound \tabularnewline\hline
\vrule height3.8ex depth1.5ex width 0pt $c = 1$ & $\Omega(n^2)$ & $O(n^2 \log n)$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$\Theta(n \log n)$} \tabularnewline
\vrule height2.8ex depth1.5ex width 0pt $c \in (\frac{1}{2},1)$ & $\Omega(n^2)$ & $O(n^2 \log n)$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$\Theta(n \log n)$} \tabularnewline
\vrule height2.8ex depth1.5ex width 0pt $c = \frac{1}{2}$ & $\Omega(n^\frac{8}{3})$ & $O(n^3 \log n)$ & $\Omega(n^\frac{3}{2})$ & $O(n^{\frac{3}{2}} \log n)$ \tabularnewline
\vrule height2.8ex depth1.5ex width 0pt $c \in (0,\frac{1}{2})$ & $\Omega(\alpha(c)^n \cdot n^2)$ & $O\left( \left(\frac{1-c}{c}\right)^n n^2 \log n\right)$ & $\Omega(\beta(c)^n \cdot n)$ & $O\left( \beta(c)^n \cdot n^2 \log n\right)$ \tabularnewline
\vrule height2.8ex depth1.5ex width 0pt $c = 0$ & \multicolumn{2}{c||}{$\Theta(n!)^\dag$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$\Theta(2^n)$}
\end{tabu}
\\$^\dag$ {The upper bound $O(n!)$ is conjectured. All other bounds --- including the lower bound $\Omega(n!)$ --- are proved formally in this work.}
\label{tab:summary}
\end{table*}
Our main results are upper and lower bounds on the expected optimization time
of the proposed \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace algorithm for solving the sorting problem and \onemax
in a black-box setting shown in Table~\ref{tab:summary}. Certainly there are
faster algorithms for the sorting problem or \onemax in a non-black-box setting, e.\,g., quicksort for
the sorting problem.
The upper bounds we prove for \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace naturally hold for \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace and the bounds are
tight with respect to our Markov-model.
The algorithm parameter $c$ determines the probability
of making a move towards the attractor. Depending on the parameter $c$, we
obtain a complete classification of the expected optimization time of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace.
The results are summarized in Table~\ref{tab:summary}. For $c=0$, \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace
performs a random walk on the search space, and for $c=1$, the algorithm
behaves like randomized local search (see~\cite{P:90} for results on local search variants).
For $c\in(1/2,1)$ the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace behaves essentially like the \ensuremath{(1+1)}-EA\xspace
variants from~\cite{DJW:02,STW:04}, since \ensuremath{(1+1)}-EA\xspace variants perform in expectation a
constant number of elementary mutations to obtain an improved solution
and \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace with $c\in(1/2,1)$ in expectation also performs a
constant number of elementary mutations to find an improved solution, before
it returns to the current best solution. Therefore, \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace in
a sense generalizes the \ensuremath{(1+1)}-EA\xspace algorithm since a parameter choice in
$c\in[0,1]$ supplies a broader range of behavior options than exploring
solutions which are in expectation a constant number of elementary mutations
away from the current best solution. If $c<1$ then the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace uses similar
subroutines as the Metropolis algorithm (see~\cite{M:53}), but for \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace new
positions are always accepted and guidance to good solutions is instead
implemented by a ``drift'' to the best position found so far.
Indeed bounds on the expected optimization time for \onemax and upper bounds on
the expected optimization time for the sorting problem of the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace with
parameter $c\in(1/2,1]$ match the respective bounds on the expected
optimization time for \ensuremath{(1+1)}-EA\xspace variants from~\cite{DJW:02,STW:04}.
We show that
for $c \in [1/2, 1)$, the expected optimization time of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace for sorting and
\onemax is polynomial and for $c \in (0, 1/2)$, the expected optimization time
is exponential. For $c$ in the latter range we provide lower bounds on the base
of the exponential expression by $\alpha(c)$ for sorting and $\beta(c)$ for
\onemax such that $1 < \beta(c) < \alpha(c) < 6$ (see
Figure~\ref{fig:alphabeta}). Please note that $\alpha$ and $\beta$ have been
significantly improved compared to the conference version \cite{MRSSW:17} and
the upper bound on \onemax has also been reduced heavily to an exponential term
with base $\beta(c)$. This means that the lower and upper bound on the base of
the exponential expression for the expected optimization time is equal.
Note that for $c=1/2$ the expected time it takes to visit the attractor again
after moving away from it is maximal while keeping the expected optimization
time polynomial.
Hence, this parameter choice maximizes the time until the attractor is visited
again, i.\,e., the particles can explore the search space to the largest
possible extent, provided that \onemax and the sorting problem are solved
efficiently in a black-box setting.
In order to obtain the bounds shown in Table~\ref{tab:summary}, we use a
Markov model which captures the behavior of the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace algorithm between two
consecutive updates of the attractor.
Depending on whether we derive upper or lower bounds on the expected optimization time, the Markov model is
instantiated in a slightly different way. The relevant quantity we extract from
the Markov model is the expected number of steps it takes until the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace
algorithm returns to the attractor. We determine $\Theta$-bounds on the
expected return time by an analysis of appropriate recurrence equations.
Similar recurrences occur, for example, in the runtime analysis of randomized
algorithms for the satisfiability problem~\cite{P:91,S:99}. Thus, our analysis
of the Markov model presented in Section~\ref{sec:model} may be of independent
interest.
For $c > 1/2$, the recurrence equations can be solved using standard methods.
For the parameter choice $c \leq 1/2$ however,
we need to solve recurrence equations with
non-constant coefficients in order to get sufficiently accurate bounds from the
model.
The gaps between upper and lower bounds on the expected optimization times
shown in Table~\ref{tab:summary} result from choosing best-case or worst-case
bounds on the transition probabilities in the Markov model, which are specific
to the optimization problem. Since our bounds on the transition probabilities
are essentially tight, we can hope to close the gap between the upper and lower
bounds only by using a more elaborate model.
Furthermore, based on Wald's equation and the Blackwell-Girshick equation we
obtain also the \emph{variance} of the number of function evaluations needed to
find an optimal solution with respect to the Markov model.
\emph{Upper Bounds.} To obtain the upper bounds shown in Table~\ref{tab:summary}
we use the established fitness level method (e.\,g., see
\cite{Wegener:02}). We instantiate our Markov model such that improvements of
the attractor are only accounted for if the current position is at the
attractor. The main difficulty is to determine the expected number of steps
needed to return to the attractor. We obtain this quantity from the analysis of
the corresponding recurrences with constant and non-constant coefficients.
Furthermore, we obtain by integration closed-form expressions of the expected
number of steps it takes to return to the attractor after an unsuccessful
attempt to improve the current best solution.
\emph{Lower Bounds.} The runtime of the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace algorithm is dominated by the time required
for the last improvement of the attractor, after which the global optimum has
been found. We again use the Markov model and observe that in this situation,
the global optimum can be reached only when the Markov model is in a specific
state. We argue that the optimal solution is included in a certain set
$\hat{Y}$ of indistinguishable states. Therefore, in expectation, this
set needs to be hit $\Omega(\vert\hat{Y}\vert)$ times until the optimum
has been found. By evaluation of the return time to the attractor we also
obtain bounds on the return time to the set $\hat{Y}$.
Furthermore, for \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace with a constant number of particles, we give a lower
bound of $\Omega(\log n)$ for optimizing a pseudo-Boolean function and for $P =
\rm poly(n)$ particles a stronger lower bound of $\Omega(P\cdot n)$ for the
same task.
\emph{Open Problems.}
Finally, we conjecture that the expected optimization time of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace for
sorting $n$ items is asymptotically equivalent to $n!$ if the attractor is not
used at all ($c = 0$). An equivalent statement is that a random walk on the set of
permutations of $n$ items using single transpositions as neighborhood relation
asymptotically takes expected time $n!$ to discover a fixed given
permutation starting at a random position. We provide theoretical evidence for this
conjecture in~\ref{subsec:randomwalkconjecture}. Furthermore, we
conjecture stronger lower bounds for \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace for sorting $n$ items for $c > 0$
and provide evidence in~\ref{subsec:approxOptTime}.
\subsection{Related Work}
\label{sec:runtime:related}
Runtime results are available for several other meta-heuristics for
optimization problems over discrete domains, for example evolutionary
algorithms (EAs)~\cite{DJW:02,GW:03,Wegener:02,ADFH:2018,ADY:2019} and ant colony optimization
(ACO)~\cite{DNFW:07,NW:07,ST:2012}.
Most of the results relevant to this work concern the binary PSO algorithm
and the \ensuremath{(1+1)}-EA\xspace algorithm. For
the binary PSO, the authors of \cite{SW:08,SW:10} provide various runtime
results. For instance, they give general lower bound of $\Omega(n/\log n)$ for
every function with a unique global optimum and a bound of $\Theta(n \log n)$
on the function \onemax. Note that the binary PSO studied in~\cite{SW:10} has
been designed for optimizing over $\{0,1\}^n$ and it is different from our
proposed \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace, which can be applied to a much wider range of discrete
problems. Sudhold and Witt show the following bound for the binary PSO.
\begin{theorem}[\hspace{1sp}{\cite[Thm.~3]{SW:10}}]
Under certain as\-sump\-tions
on the algorithm parameters, the expected optimization time of the binary PSO for optimizing $f : \{0,1\}^n
\rightarrow \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}\xspace$ is $O(mn\log n) + \sum_{i=1}^{m-1} 1/s_i$, where $m$ is the number of level sets of $f$ and $s_i$ is a lower bound on the probability to move from level $i$ to level $i-1$.
\label{thm:sw10:general}
\end{theorem}
Essentially, this result reflects the fact that the binary PSO
converges to the attractor in expected time $O(n\log n)$ unless the attractor
has been updated meanwhile. This happens once for each fitness level. For
\onemax, this result yields an expected optimization time of $O(n^2 \log n)$. By a more careful
analysis of the binary PSO on \onemax, the following improved
bound is established:
\begin{theorem}[\hspace{1sp}{\cite[Thm.~5]{SW:10}}]\label{thm:sw10:onemax}
The expected
op\-ti\-miza\-tion time of the binary PSO with a single particle optimizing \onemax is $O(n \log n)$.
\end{theorem}
The \ensuremath{(1+1)}-EA\xspace
considered in~\cite{STW:04} is reminiscent of stochastic hill climbing: In each
iteration, a random solution is sampled and the current solution is replaced if
and only if the solution is better. In order to escape local optima, the
distance between the current solution and the new one is determined according
to Poisson distributed random variables.
In~\cite{STW:04}, Scharnow et al.~provide bounds on the expected optimization time of a
\ensuremath{(1+1)}-EA\xspace sorting $n$ items. They consider various choices of objective functions (e.\,g., Hamming
distance, transposition distance, \ldots) as well as mutation operators (e.\,g.,
transpositions, reversing keys in a certain range, \ldots). A
general lower bound of $\Omega(n^2)$ is proved, which holds for all permutation
problems having objective functions with a unique
optimum~\cite[Thm.~1]{STW:04}. The most relevant runtime result for a
comparison with our \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace algorithm is the following:
\begin{theorem}[\hspace{1sp}{\cite[Thm.~2/Thm.~4]{STW:04}}]
The expected op\-ti\-miza\-tion
time of the \ensuremath{(1+1)}-EA\xspace for sorting $n$ items is $\Theta(n^2
\log n)$ if the objective function is the transposition distance to the
sorted sequence and mutations are transpositions.
\label{thm:easorting}
\end{theorem}
The upper bound can be obtained by the fitness level method and a lower bound of
$\Omega(k/n^2)$ on the probability of improvement when the current solution is at
transposition distance $k$ to the attractor. The lower bound follows from a
similar argument. In addition, for determining the lower bound the authors of \cite{STW:04} consider the
Hamming distance to evaluate the distance between the current position and the optimum
although the algorithm still uses the transposition distance to decide which
position is better.
In contrast to the \ensuremath{(1+1)}-EA\xspace algorithm, the binary PSO studied in~\cite{SW:10}
allows for non-improving solutions, but it converges to the attractor exactly
once per fitness level. After the convergence occurred, the binary PSO behaves
essentially like the \ensuremath{(1+1)}-EA\xspace.
Additionally, \cite{RSW:19} is based on a preliminary version of the present paper.
There the authors applied the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace to the single-source shortest path problem.
For this purpose they extend the Markov-model presented here by allowing self loops.
They also used the bounds by integration which are proved in this work without repeating the proof.
The following upper and lower bounds on the expected optimization time are
given which are dependent on the algorithm parameter $c$ specifying the
probability of movement towards the attractor.
\begin{theorem}[\hspace{1sp}{\cite[Thm.~5/Thm.~7]{RSW:19}}]
The expected optimization time $T(n)$, to solve the single-source shortest path problem with $n$ nodes is bounded by\\
\begin{minipage}{0.46\textwidth}
\begin{equation*}
T(n)=\begin{cases}
O(n^3)&\text{if }c\in(\frac{1}{2},1]\\
O(n^{\nicefrac{7}{2}})&\text{if }c=\frac{1}{2}\\
O(n^4\cdot \varphi(c)^n)&\text{if }c\in(0,\frac{1}{2})\\
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
\end{minipage}
and
\begin{minipage}{0.46\textwidth}
\begin{equation*}
T(n)=\begin{cases}
\Omega(n^2)&\text{if }c\in(\frac{1}{2},1]\\
\Omega(n^{\nicefrac{5}{2}})&\text{if }c=\frac{1}{2}\\
\Omega( (\varphi(c)-\varepsilon)^n)&\text{if }c\in(0,\frac{1}{2})\\
\end{cases}
\enspace,
\end{equation*}
\end{minipage}
\\[0.5\baselineskip]
where $\varphi(c)=e^{-(1-2c)/(1-c)}\cdot(\frac{1-c}{c})$ and any arbitrarily small $\varepsilon>0$.
\end{theorem}
\subsection{Organization of the Paper}
In Section~\ref{sec:dpso} we introduce the algorithm \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace for solving
optimization problems over discrete domains.
In Section~\ref{sec:model} we provide a Markov-model for the behavior of the
algorithm \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace --- a restriction of \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace to one particle --- between two
updates of the local attractor.
Section~\ref{sec:tools} contains a comprehensive analysis of this Markov model.
The results from this section are used in Section~\ref{sec:runtime} in
order to obtain the bounds on the expected optimization time for \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace shown in
Table~\ref{tab:summary} as well as lower bounds for \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace on pseudo-Boolean
functions. Section~\ref{sec:conclusion} contains some concluding remarks.
\endinput
\section{Discrete PSO Algorithm}
\label{sec:dpso}
In this section we introduce the \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace algorithm, a PSO
algorithm that optimizes functions over discrete domains.
A simplified version of the algorithm that uses just a single particle will be referred to as \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace.
Note that \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace is different from the 1-PSO studied in \cite{SW:10}, which
is tailored to optimization over bitstrings.
The \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace and \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace algorithm sample items from a finite
set $X$ in order to determine
some $x^{*} \in X$ that minimizes a given \emph{objective function} $f:X
\longrightarrow \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}\xspace$. In order to have a discrete PSO that remains true to
the principles of the original PSO for optimization in the
domain $\ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}\xspace^n$ from~\cite{eb_ken_1995,ken_eb_1995}, we need some additional
structure on $X$: For each $x \in X$ we have a set of \emph{neighbors} $\ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}_X(x)$.
If the set $X$ is clear from the context we may drop the subscript. The
neighborhood structure induces a solution graph with nodes $X$ and arcs $\{xy
\mid x, y \in X, y \in \ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}(x)\}$. The \emph{distance} $\ensuremath{d}\xspace(x, y)$ of solutions
$x, y \in X$ is the length of a shortest (directed) $xy$-path in this graph.
We assume that the solution graph is strongly connected, so the PSO cannot get
``trapped'' in a particular strongly connected component. The search spaces of
our reference problems in combination with the used neighborhood relationship
satisfy this assumption.
\begin{algorithm}[ht]
\caption{\textsc{D-PSO}\xspace}
\label{alg:dpso}
\SetStartEndCondition{ }{}{}%
\SetKwFunction{Range}{range
\SetKw{KwTo}{to}%
\SetKw{KwAnd}{and}%
\SetKwFor{For}{for}{ do}{}%
\SetKwIF{If}{ElseIf}{Else}{if}{ then}{else if}{else}{}%
\SetKwFor{While}{while}{ do}{fintq}%
\AlgoDontDisplayBlockMarkers\SetAlgoNoLine\SetAlgoNoEn
\DontPrintSemicolon
\SetKwInOut{Input}{input}
\SetKwInOut{InOut}{in/out}
\SetKwInOut{Output}{output}
\Input{Function $f:X \rightarrow \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}\xspace$, $P\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}\xspace$,\\ $c_{loc} \in [0,1]$, $c_{glob}\in[0,1-c_{loc}]$}
\BlankLine\;
\For(\tcc*[f]{initialization})
{$i=1$ \KwTo $P$}
{
pick position $x_i \in X$ u.a.r.\xspace\;
$l_i \longleftarrow x_i$\tcc*{local attractor}
}
$g\longleftarrow {\mathrm{argmin}}_{x_i}\lbrace f(x_i)\rbrace$\tcc*{\!\!\!global attractor\!\!\!}
\While(\tcc*[f]{PSO iterations})
{\texttt{True}}
{
\For
{$i=1$ \KwTo $P$}
{
pick $q \in [0,1]$ u.a.r.\xspace\;
\uIf
{$x_i \neq l_i$ \KwAnd $l_i \neq g$ \KwAnd $q \in[0,c_{loc}]$}
{
\tcc{towards local attractor (if not equal to global attractor)}
\nl \label{alg:sample:local}$x' \in \{ y \in \ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}(x_i) \mid \ensuremath{d}\xspace(y,l_i) < \ensuremath{d}\xspace(x_i, l_i)\}$ \!u.a.r.\xspace\!\!\! \;
}
\uElseIf
{$x_i \neq g$ \KwAnd $q \in]1-c_{glob},1]$}
{
\tcc{towards global attractor}
\nl \label{alg:sample:global}$x' \in \{ y \in \ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}(x_i) \mid \ensuremath{d}\xspace(y,g) < \ensuremath{d}\xspace(x_i, g)\}$\,u.a.r.\xspace\;
}
\uElse(\tcc*[h]{random direction})
{
\nl \label{alg:sample:random}$x' \in \ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}(x_i)$ u.a.r.\xspace\;
}
$x_i \longleftarrow x'$\tcc*{update position}
\tcc{update attractors}
\If
{$f(x_i) < f(l_i)$}
{
\nl \label{alg:improvement:local} $l_i \longleftarrow x_i$\;
}
\If
{$f(x_i) < f(g)$}
{
\nl \label{alg:improvement:global} $g \longleftarrow x_i$\;
}
}
}
\end{algorithm}
The \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace algorithm performs the steps shown in Algorithm~\ref{alg:dpso}. The
initial positions of the particles are chosen uniformly at random (u.a.r.\xspace) from
the search space $X$. The parameter $c_{loc}$ determines the importance of the local attractor
$l_i$ of each particle, which is the best solution a single particle has found so
far, and the parameter $c_{glob}$ determines the importance of the global
attractor $g$, which is the best solution all particles have found so far. In each
iteration each particle moves towards the local attractor with probability
$c_{loc}$, moves towards the global attractor with probability $c_{glob}$ and
otherwise move to a random neighbor. If $l_i$ equals $g$ then the particles
still move only with probability $c_{glob}$ to $g$.
Note that the attractors $l_i$ and $g$
are updated in lines~\ref{alg:improvement:local}
and~\ref{alg:improvement:global} whenever a strictly better solution has been found.
Alternatively, one could choose to update local and global attractors whenever
the new position is at least as good as the position of the attractor (use $\leq$
instead of $<$ in lines~\ref{alg:improvement:local}
and~\ref{alg:improvement:global}). The theorems presented here can also be
carried over to this modified setting. Admittedly, for functions with plateaus
this version potentially performs better, since a plateau is traversed easily
by the modified algorithm. However, for the problems considered in this work
there are no plateaus and the probability to improve the objective function in
the situation where position and attractor differ but have equal objective
function value is higher than in the situation where the position is placed at
the attractor.
At first glance, Algorithm~\ref{alg:dpso} may not seem like an implementation of the PSO ideas, since we are choosing only a
single attractor on each move or even make a random move whereas the classical
PSO uses local and global attractor at each move, but looking at several
consecutive iterations we retain the tendency of movement towards all the
attractors. We consider the PSO to be an infinite process, so we do not give a
termination criterion.
We assume that sampling of $x'$ in lines~\ref{alg:sample:local},
\ref{alg:sample:global} and~\ref{alg:sample:random} can be performed
efficiently. This is the case for the neighborhood structures we consider.
The algorithm \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace is simply given by Algorithm~\ref{alg:dpso} with a single particle, i.e., we have $P = 1$.
Note that there is only a
single attractor in this case. Hence, \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace has just a single parameter $c=c_{glob}$ that
determines the probability of moving towards the (global) attractor $g$. In all other
aspects it behaves like the \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace algorithm.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=6.5em,vertex/.style={shape=ellipse, minimum height=0.8cm, minimum width=1.1cm}]
\node[draw, thick, vertex] (s4) {};
\node[draw, thick, vertex,right of=s4] (s3) {};
\node[ thick, right of=s3] (pause) {$\ldots$};
\node[draw, thick, vertex,right of=pause] (s1) {};
\node[draw, thick, vertex,right of=s1] (s0) {};
\node[vertex] (s4t) at (s4) {$S_{n}$};
\node[vertex] (s3t) at (s3) {$S_{n-1}$};
\node[vertex] (s1t) at (s1) {$S_1$};
\node[vertex] (s0t) at (s0) {$S_0$};
\path[thick,->]
(s4) edge [bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt]above:{$p_{n}=1$}}] {} (s3)
(s3) edge [bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt]above:{$p_{n-1}$}}] {} (pause)
(pause) edge [bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt]above:{$p_{2}$}}] {} (s1)
(s1) edge [bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt]above:{$p_{1}$}}] {} (s0)
;
\path[thick,->]
(s0) edge [bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt]below:{$1$}}] {} (s1)
(s1) edge [bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt]below:{$1-p_{1}$}}] {} (pause)
(pause) edge [bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt]below:{$1-p_{n-2}$}}] {} (s3)
(s3) edge [bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt]below:{$1-p_{n-1}$}}] {} (s4);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{State diagram of the Markov model}
\label{fig:markov}
\end{figure*}
\section{Markov Model of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace}
\label{sec:model}
We present a simple Markov model that captures the behavior of the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace
algorithm between two consecutive updates of the attractor. This model has been
presented already in \cite{MRSSW:17} but we repeat it here to present a self
contained overview on the presented approach. As an extension to
\cite{MRSSW:17} we also present how the variance can be computed. This is
essential for experiments and if \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace and \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace are actually used.
Using this model we
can infer upper and lower bounds on the expected optimization time of
the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace algorithm on suitable discrete functions.
For our analysis, we assume that the objective function $f: X \rightarrow
\ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}\xspace$ has the property that every local optimum is a global one. That is, the
function is either constant or any non-optimum solution $x$ has a neighbor $y
\in \ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}(x)$ such that $f(x) > f(y)$. Functions with that property are
called \emph{unimodal} functions. Although this restriction
certainly narrows down the class of objective functions to which our analysis
applies, the class seems still appreciably large, e.\,g., it properly contains
the class of functions with a unique global optimum and no further local optima.
Assume that the attractor $g \in X$ is fixed and $g$ is not a minimizer of $f$.
Under which conditions can a new ``best'' solution be found? Certainly, if the
current position $x$ is equal to $g$, then, by the described structure of $f$ we get an
improvement with positive probability. If $x \neq g$ then the attractor may
still be improved. However, for the purpose of upper bounding the expected
optimization time of the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace we dismiss the possibility that the attractor
is updated if $x \neq g$. As a result, we obtain a reasonably simple
Markov model of the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace behavior. Quite surprisingly, using the same Markov model,
we are also able to get good lower bounds on the expected optimization time of
the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace (see Section~\ref{sec:runtime:lb} for the details).
Recall that we think of the search space in terms of a strongly connected graph.
Let $n$ be the diameter of the search space $X$, i.e., the maximum distance of any two points in $X$. We partition the search space
according to the distance to the attractor $g\in X$. That is,
for $0 \leq i \leq n$, let $X_i = \{ x \in X \mid \ensuremath{d}\xspace(x, g) = i\}$. Note
that this partition does not depend on the objective function. If the search
space is not symmetric as in our case it could also be possible that some $X_i$
are empty, because the maximal distance to a specific solution in the search
space could be less than the diameter. The model consists of $n+1$ states
$S_0,S_1,\ldots,S_n$. Being in state $S_i$ indicates that the current solution
$x$ of the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace is in $X_i$.
For each $x\in X_i$ we denote by $p_x$ the transition probability from $x$ to an element in $X_{i-1}$.
The probabilities $p_x$ in turn depend on the parameter $c$, which
is the probability that the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace explicitly moves towards the attractor.
If the current position $x$ is in $X_{i}$ and
the algorithm moves towards the attractor, then the new position is in $X_{i-1}$.
On the other hand, if the PSO updates $x$ to any neighbor chosen
u.a.r.\xspace from $\ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}(x)$, then the new position is in $X_{i-1}$ with probability
$|\ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}(x) \cap X_{i-1}|/|\ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}(x)|$.
So we obtain the transition probability
\[
p_x = c + (1-c) \cdot\frac{|X_{i-1} \cap \ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}(x)|}{|\ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}(x)|} \enspace.
\]
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:noInternalTransitions}
In this work we assume that the probability that we move from a position $x\in X_i$ to an element in $X_i$ is zero, i.\,e., if we move from a position $x$ to a neighboring position $x'\in\ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}(x)$ then the distance to the attractor does always change ($\ensuremath{d}\xspace(x,g)\neq\ensuremath{d}\xspace(x',g)$).
\end{remark}
This assumption holds for both problems we investigate in
Section~\ref{sec:runtime}. Nevertheless, an extensions allowing transitions
inside a level $X_i$ is possible and has been considered already in follow-up
work ~\cite{RSW:19}.
Using the assumption in Remark~\ref{rem:noInternalTransitions} and the fact that
$X_i$ is defined by distance to a fixed position $g$ the probability of moving
from $x$ to an element in $X_j$, $j \notin \{i-1, i+1\}$, is zero.
Consequently, the probability of moving from $x$ to an element in $X_{i+1}$ is then $1-p_x$.
Furthermore, if the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace is at position $x \in X_n$ then any move brings us
closer to the reference solution; so $p_x = 1$ in these cases.
Please note that $p_{x}$ and $p_{x'}$ can differ even if $x,x'$ are contained
in the same set $X_i$. Therefore we do not necessarily obtain a Markov-model
if we use the states $S_i$ and the transition probabilities $p_i=p_x$ for some
$x\in X_i$ as this value is not necessarily equal for all $x'\in X_i$.
Nevertheless, we can analyze Markov-chains using bounds on the transition
probabilities. To be more precise, we can use $p_i:=\min_{x\in X_i}p_x$ as
lower bound and $p_i:=\max_{x\in X_i}p_x$ as upper bound on the transition
probabilities in the direction to the attractor to obtain an upper bound and
lower bound on the expected number of iterations until the distance to the
attractor is decreased respectively.
Figure~\ref{fig:markov} shows the state diagram of this model.
\begin{definition}
\label{defi:model}
By
$\ensuremath{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}\xspace}\left((p_i)_{1 \leq i \leq n}\right)$ we denote an instance of the
Markov model with states $S_0,S_1,\ldots,S_n$ and data $p_i\in\real_{\geq 0}$, $1 \leq i \leq n$.
Suppose we are in state $S_i$. Then we move to state $S_{i-1}$ with probability
\begin{align*}
1 &\text{ if } i = n\\
\min \{ 1, p_i \} &\text{ if } 1 \leq i < n
\end{align*}
and otherwise we move to state $S_{i+1}$.
\end{definition}
Please note that the data need not be in $[0,1]$ but for the ease of
presentation we will refer to them as probabilities. Furthermore supposed we
are in state $S_{n}$ even if $p_n\neq 1$ the probability of moving to $S_{n-1}$
is $1$. This notation allows us to succinctly specify the currently used
Markov-model, e.\,g., the model which is used to obtain upper bounds is
described by $\ensuremath{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}\xspace}\left( (\min_{x\in X_i}p_x)_{1\leq i\leq n} \right)$.
Our goal is to determine the expected number of steps needed to hit a solution
which is better than the attractor after starting in $S_0$. Let $p_g$ be the
probability to improve the attractor if we are currently in state $S_0$, hence
at the attractor. Then the probability $p_g$ depends on $f$ and the choice of
$g$. We have that $p_g$ is positive since $f$ is unimodal. In order to reach a
better solution from $S_0$ we need in expectation $1/p_g$ tries. If we are
unsuccessful in some try, then the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace moves to $S_1$. For upper bounds we
can ignore the chance to improve the attractor through other states. Thus we
need to determine the expected number of steps it takes until we can perform
the next try, that is, the expected first hitting time for the state $S_0$,
starting in $S_1$. The expected number $h_i$ of steps needed to move from $S_i$
to $S_0$ is given by the following recurrence:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
h_{n} &= 1 + h_{n-1}\enspace ,\enspace h_0=0 \\
h_{i} &= 1 + p_i \cdot h_{i-1} + (1 - p_i)\cdot h_{i+1}\enspace, & 1 \leq i < n\enspace.
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:recmarkov}
\end{equation}
\section{Analysis of the Markov Model}
\label{sec:tools}
In this section we prove upper and lower bounds on the expected return time to
the state $S_0$ of the Markov-model from Section~\ref{sec:model}. These bounds
are of key importance for our runtime analysis in Section~\ref{sec:runtime}.
For the lower bounds we also introduce a notion of indistinguishability of
certain states of a Markov-model.
In our analysis the probabilities $p_i$ are generally not constant. If
we assume that $p_1 = p_2 = \ldots = p_n = p$, then we obtain a non-homogeneous
recurrence of order two with constant coefficients. In this case, standard
methods can be used to determine the expected time needed to move to the
attractor state $S_0$ as a function of $n$~\cite[Ch.~7]{GKP:94}. Note also that
for $p=1/k$ this is exactly the
recurrence that occurs in the analysis of a randomized algorithm for
$k$-\textsc{SAT}~\cite{P:91,S:99} and~\cite[pp.~160f.]{MU:05}.
If $p_i$ is a non-constant function of $i$, then the recurrence can in some
cases be solved, see e.\,g., \cite[Ch.~7]{GKP:94} and~\cite{Petkovsek:94}. Here,
due to the structure of the recurrence, we can use a more pedestrian approach,
which is outlined in the next section.
\subsection{Reformulation of the Recurrence}
\label{sec:reformulation}
We first present a useful reformulation of Recurrence~\eqref{eq:recmarkov}.
From this reformulation we will derive closed-form expressions and asymptotic
properties of the return time to the attractor of the transition probabilities.
Let $W_{i}$ be the number of steps needed to
move from state $S_i$ to state $S_{i-1}$ and let $H_i:={\rm E}[W_i]$ be its
expectation. Then $H_i$ can be determined from
$H_{i+1}$ as follows: In expectation, we need $1/p_i$ trials to get from $S_i$
to $S_{i-1}$, and each trial, except for the successful one, requires
$1+H_{i+1}$ steps. The successful trial requires only a single step, so
$H_{i}$ is captured by the following recurrence:
\begin{align}
H_i &= \frac{1}{p_i} \left( 1 + H_{i+1} \right) - H_{i+1}\enspace =\frac{1}{p_i}+\frac{1-p_i}{p_i}\cdot H_{i+1} , & 1 \leq i < n \label{eq:recreform}\\
H_n &= 1\enspace. \label{eq:recinitial}
\end{align}
Another interpretation is the following:
$W_i$ is equal to one
with probability $p_i$, the direct step to $S_{i-1}$, and with probability
$1-p_i$ it takes the current step which leads to state $S_{i+1}$, then
$W_{i+1}$ steps to go from $S_{i+1}$ back to
$S_i$ and then again $W_i$
steps. For the expected value of $W_i$ this interpretation leads to the formula
$$
H_i=p_i + (1-p_i)\cdot(1+H_{i+1}+H_i)\enspace,
$$
which is equivalent to Equation~\ref{eq:recreform} after solving for $H_i$.
Please note that the probabilities $p_i$ are mostly determined by some
function depending on $n$ and $i$.
Unfolding the recurrence specified in Equation~\eqref{eq:recreform} $k$ times,
$1 \leq k \leq n$, followed by some rearrangement of the terms yields
\begin{equation}
H_1=\sum_{i=1}^{k-1}\left( \frac{1}{p_i}\cdot\prod_{j=1}^{i-1}\frac{1-p_j}{p_j}\right) + H_k\cdot\prod_{j=1}^{k-1}\frac{1-p_j}{p_j}\enspace.\label{eq:partialunfold}
\end{equation}
Thus, for $k=n$ we obtain the following expression for $H_1$:
\begin{equation}
H_1 = \sum_{i=1}^n \left( \frac{1}{p_i} \cdot \prod_{j=1}^{i-1} \frac{1-p_j}{p_j}\right) - \prod_{j=1}^{n}\frac{1-p_j}{p_j}\enspace,
\label{eq:recclosed}
\end{equation}
where the second term is a correction term which is required whenever $p_n <
1$ (see Definition \ref{defi:model}) in order to satisfy the initial condition given in
Equation~\eqref{eq:recinitial}. Equation~\eqref{eq:recclosed} has also been
mentioned in \cite[Lemma 3]{DJW:01} in the context of the analysis of randomized local search or in \cite[Theorem 3]{KK:18}.
$H_k$ can be obtained analogously, which leads to
\begin{equation}
H_k = \sum_{i=k}^n \left( \frac{1}{p_i} \cdot \prod_{j=k}^{i-1} \frac{1-p_j}{p_j}\right) - \prod_{j=k}^{n}\frac{1-p_j}{p_j}\enspace.
\label{eq:recclosedk}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Constant Transition Probabilities} \label{section:constant_probabilities}
\label{subsec:const}
If the probabilities $p_i = p$ for some constant $p \in [0,1]$ and $1 \leq i <
n$, then Recurrences~\eqref{eq:recreform} become linear recurrence equations
with constant coefficients. Standard methods can be used to determine
closed-form expressions for $h_i$ and $H_i$. However, we are mainly interested
in $H_1$ and are able to determine closed-form expressions directly from
Equation~\eqref{eq:recclosed}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:returntime}
Let $0 < p < 1$. Then the expected return time $H_1$ to $S_0$ is
\begin{equation}
H_1 = h_1 =
\begin{cases}
\dfrac{1-2p \left( \dfrac{1-p}{p} \right)^n }{2p-1} & \text{if $p \neq \frac{1}{2}$}\\
2n-1 & \text{if $p = \frac{1}{2}$}\enspace.
\end{cases}
\label{eq:constreturn}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By setting $p_i = p$ in Equation~\eqref{eq:recclosed} and performing some
rearrangements the theorem is proved.
\end{proof}
It is easily verified that this expression for $h_1$ satisfies
Equation~\eqref{eq:recmarkov}. So, with $p_i = p$ we have that the time it takes to
return to the attractor is bounded from above by a constant, a linear function,
or an exponential exponential function in $n$ if $p > 1/2$, $p = 1/2$, or $p <
1/2$, respectively.
\subsection{Nonconstant Transition Probabilities}
\label{subsec:nonconst}
Motivated by the runtime analysis of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace applied to optimization problems
such as sorting and \onemax, we are particularly interested in the expected
time it takes to improve the attractor if the probabilities $p_i$ are
\emph{slightly} greater than $1/2$. By \emph{slightly} we mean $p_i = 1/2 +
i/(2A(n))$ which appears in the analysis of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace optimizing \onemax and the
sorting problem, or $p_i=1/2+A(i)/(2A(n))$ which appears in the
analysis of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace optimizing the sorting problem,
where $A:\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}\xspace \rightarrow \ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}\xspace$ is some non-decreasing function of $n$ such
that $\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} A(n) = \infty$.
Recall from Definition~\ref{defi:model} that if $p_i>1$ then we move from state
$S_i$ to state $S_{i-1}$ with probability $1$. Clearly, in this setting we
cannot hope for a recurrence with constant coefficients. Our goal in this
section is to obtain the asymptotics of $H_1$ as $n \rightarrow \infty$ for
$A(n) = n$ and $A(n) = \binom{n}{2}$. We show that for $p_i=1/2+i/(2\cdot
A(n))$ and $A(n) = n$ the return time to the attractor is $\Theta(\sqrt{n})$,
while for $A(n) = \binom{n}{2}$ the return time is $\Theta(n)$.
\begin{lemma}
Let $M=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}\xspace}((1/2+i/(2n))_{1\leq i\leq n})$. Then
\[
H_1 = \frac{4^n}{\binom{2n}{n}} - 1
\sim\sqrt{\pi n}=\Theta(\sqrt{n})\enspace.
\]
\label{lemma:sqrt_return}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We have $p_n = 1$ so the correction term in Equation~\eqref{eq:recclosed} is zero.
We rearrange the remaining terms of Equation~\eqref{eq:recclosed} and find that
\begin{align*}
H_1 &= \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{2n}{n + i} \prod_{j=1}^{i-1} \frac{n-j}{n+j}
= 2\, \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{n!\,n!}{(n-i)!\cdot(n+i)!}
\overset{i'=n-i}{=} \frac{2}{\binom{2n}{n}} \sum_{i'=0}^{n-1} \binom{2n}{i'}
= \frac{4^n}{\binom{2n}{n}} - 1\enspace.
\end{align*}
Applying the well-known relation
$$
\frac {4^n}{\sqrt{\pi n}} \left(1-\frac 1 {4n}\right)
<\binom{2n}{n}
< \frac {4^n}{\sqrt{\pi n}}
$$
(for an elegant derivation, see~\cite{H:15})
finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
This lemma can be generalized for linearly growing probabilities.
\begin{theorem}
Let $M = \ensuremath{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}\xspace}\left( (p_i)_{1 \leq i \leq n}\right)$, where $p_i = 1/2 + i
/(2A(n))$.
Then $H_1 = \Theta(\min(\sqrt{A(n)},n))$ with respect to $M$.
\label{thm:h1_lin_theta}
\end{theorem}
\begin{figure*}[tb]
\begin{center}
\subfloat[][$M$ (below arrows) and its extended version $\tilde M$ (above arrows) with $n'>n$ states.]
{
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=5.1em,vertex/.style={shape=ellipse, minimum height=0.8cm, minimum width=1.1cm}]
\node[draw, ultra thick, vertex] (s7){};
\node[draw, ultra thick, vertex,right of=s7 ] (s6) {};
\node[ thick, right of=s6 ] (pause2) {$\ldots$};
\node[draw, thick, vertex,right of=pause2] (s4) {};
\node[draw, thick, vertex,right of=s4 ] (s3) {};
\node[ thick, right of=s3 ] (pause) {$\ldots$};
\node[draw, thick, vertex,right of=pause ] (s1) {};
\node[draw, thick, vertex,right of=s1 ] (s0) {};
\node[vertex] (s7t) at (s7) {$S_{n'}$};
\node[vertex] (s6t) at (s6) {$S_{n'-1}$};
\node[vertex] (s4t) at (s4) {$S_{n}$};
\node[vertex] (s3t) at (s3) {$S_{n-1}$};
\node[vertex] (s1t) at (s1) {$S_1$};
\node[vertex] (s0t) at (s0) {$S_0$};
\path[thick,->]
(s7) edge [ultra thick, bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt] above:{$\tilde p_{n'}=1$}}] {} (s6)
(s6) edge [ultra thick, bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt] above:{$\frac{1}{2}\!+\!\frac{n'-1}{2A(n)}$}}] {} (pause2)
(pause2) edge [ultra thick, bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt] above:{$\frac{1}{2}\!+\!\frac{n+1}{2A(n)}$}}] {} (s4)
(s4) edge [ bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt] above:{$\frac{1}{2}\!+\!\frac{n}{2A(n)}$}}, label={below:{$p_{n}$}}] {} (s3)
(s3) edge [ bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt] above:{$\tilde p_{n-1}=p_{n-1}$}}, label={below:{$p_{n-1}$}}] {} (pause)
(pause) edge [ bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt] above:{$\tilde p_{2}=p_{2}$}}, label={below:{$p_2$}}] {} (s1)
(s1) edge [ bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt] above:{$\tilde p_{1}=p_{1}$}}, label={below:{$p_1$}}] {} (s0)
;
\end{tikzpicture}
\label{fig:markovExtendedMTilde}
}\\
\subfloat[][$M$ (below arrows) and its reduced version $\hat M$ (above arrows) with $\hat n<n$ states and larger probabilities in direction to $S_0$.]
{
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=5.1em,vertex/.style={shape=ellipse, minimum height=0.8cm, minimum width=1.1cm}]
\node[draw, dashed, thick, vertex] (s7) {};
\node[draw, dashed, thick, vertex,right of=s7] (s6) {};
\node[ thick, right of=s6] (pause2) {$\ldots$};
\node[draw, thick, vertex,right of=pause2] (s4) {};
\node[draw, thick, vertex,right of=s4] (s3) {};
\node[ thick, right of=s3] (pause) {$\ldots$};
\node[draw, thick, vertex,right of=pause] (s1) {};
\node[draw, thick, vertex,right of=s1] (s0) {};
\node[vertex] (s7t) at (s7) {$S_{n}$};
\node[vertex] (s6t) at (s6) {$S_{n-1}$};
\node[vertex] (s4t) at (s4) {$S_{\hat n}$};
\node[vertex] (s3t) at (s3) {$S_{\hat n-1}$};
\node[vertex] (s1t) at (s1) {$S_1$};
\node[vertex] (s0t) at (s0) {$S_0$};
\path[thick,->]
(s7) edge [dashed, bend left=30] node[label={below:{$p_{n}$}}] {} (s6)
(s6) edge [dashed, bend left=30] node[label={below:{$p_{n-1}$}}] {} (pause2)
(pause2) edge [dashed, bend left=30] node[label={below:{$p_{\hat n+1}$}}] {} (s4)
(s4) edge [ bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt] above:{$\hat p_{\hat n}=1$}}, label={below:{$p_{\hat n}$}}] {} (s3)
(s3) edge [ bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt] above:{$\frac{1}{2}\!+\!\frac{1}{2\hat n}$}}, label={below:{$p_{\hat n-1}$}}] {} (pause)
(pause) edge [ bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt] above:{$\frac{1}{2}\!+\!\frac{1}{2\hat n}$}}, label={below:{$p_2$}}] {} (s1)
(s1) edge [ bend left=30] node[label={[label distance=-5pt] above:{$\frac{1}{2}\!+\!\frac{1}{2\hat n}$}}, label={below:{$p_1$}}] {} (s0)
;
\end{tikzpicture}
\label{fig:markovReducedMHat}
}
\end{center}
\caption{State diagram of the Markov model $M$ and its modified versions $\tilde M$ and $\hat M$ used in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:h1_lin_theta}.}
\label{fig:markovModifiedModels}
\end{figure*}
\begin{proof}
Let $A(n) \leq n^2$ and let $n' = A(n)$, which is the smallest
number such that $p_{n'} = 1/2 + n'/(2A(n)) \geq 1$. First, assume that $n'
\leq n$ and consider the ``truncated'' model $M' = \ensuremath{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}\xspace}\left( (p_i)_{1 \leq
i \leq n'} \right)$. Please note that there is actually no difference
between $M$ and $M'$ because the removed states are never visited as
$p_{n'}$, the probability to move from $S_{n'}$ to $S_{n'-1}$, is already one
and $S_{n'+1}$ is never visited. Let $H_1'$ be the expected time to
reach state $S_0$ starting at state $S_1$ with respect to $M'$. By
Lemma~\ref{lemma:sqrt_return} we have $H_1'=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace(\sqrt{A(n)})$, which is by
the construction of $M'$ equal to $H_1$. On the other hand, assume that
$n' > n$ and consider the ``extended'' model $\tilde M = \ensuremath{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}\xspace}\left(
(p_i)_{1 \leq i \leq n'} \right)$. $M$ and $\tilde M$ are visualized in
Figure \ref{fig:markovExtendedMTilde} with omitted probability of worsening.
Let $\tilde H_1$ be the expected time to reach state $S_0$ starting at state
$S_1$ with respect to $\tilde M$. By Lemma~\ref{lemma:sqrt_return} we have
$\tilde H_1 = \ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace(\sqrt{A(n)})$ and since $\tilde H_1 \geq H_1$ we obtain
$H_1 = O(\sqrt{A(n)})$.
To obtain a lower bound on $H_1$ for the case $n' > n$ we consider the model
$\hat M = \ensuremath{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}\xspace}\left( (\hat p_i)_{1\leq i\leq \hat n} \right)$, where $\hat
n = \min(n,\lfloor\sqrt{A(n)}\rfloor)$ and $\hat p_i = 1/2 + 1/(2\hat n)$ for
$1 \leq i < \hat n$, and $\hat p_{\hat n} = 1$. For $1\leq i < \hat n$ we
have that $\hat p_i \geq p_i$ because $1/\hat n=\hat n/\hat n^2\geq \hat
n/(A(n))$. A schematic representation of $M$ and $\hat M$ can be found in
Figure \ref{fig:markovReducedMHat}. Let $\hat H_1$ denote the expected time
to reach state $S_0$ starting at state $S_1$ in $\hat M$. Since $\hat p_i
\geq p_i$ for $1 \leq i \leq \hat n$, $\hat H_1$ is a lower bound on $H_1$.
Since $p := \hat p_i$ is constant for $1 \leq i < \hat n$ we get from
Theorem~\ref{thm:returntime} that
\[
\hat H_1 = \frac{1-2p\left(\dfrac{1-p}{p}\right)^{\hat n}}{2p-1}\enspace .
\]
Substituting $p = 1/2 + 1/{(2 \hat n)}$ gives
\begin{align*}
\hat H_1 &= {\hat n}-({\hat n}+1)\cdot\left(\frac{{\hat n}-1}{{\hat n}+1}\right)^{\hat n
= {\hat n}-\frac{({\hat n}+1)^2}{{\hat n}-1}\cdot\left(1-\frac{2}{{\hat n}+1}\right)^{{\hat n}+1
\geq{\hat n}-\frac{({\hat n}+1)^2}{{\hat n}-1}\cdot {\rm e}^{-2}=\Omega({\hat n})\enspace.
\end{align*}
Therefore $H_1=\Omega({\hat n})=\Omega(\min(n,\sqrt{A(n)}))$.
It remains to show that the statement holds if $A(n) > n^2$. In this
case, $H_1 = O(n)$ is obtained by setting $p_i = 1/2$, which is a lower bound
on the probabilities of moving towards $S_0$, for $1 \leq i < n$ and
invoking Theorem~\ref{thm:returntime}. On the other hand, setting
$\breve{A}(n) = n^2$ and using $\breve M=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}\xspace}((1/2+i/(2\breve{A}(n)))_{1 \leq
i \leq n})$ gives a lower bound on $H_1$, because $1/2+i/(2\breve{A}(n))$ is
an upper bound on $1/2 + i/(2A(n))$. As discussed above, for
the case ${A}(n) \leq n^2$, the expected time to reach state $S_0$ starting at
state $S_1$ in $\breve M$ is $\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(\min(n,\sqrt{\breve{A}(n)}))$. Therefore,
$H_1 = \ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(\min(n,\sqrt{\breve{A}(n)}))=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(n)$, which completes the proof.
\end{proof}
For our application, the sorting problem, the following special case of
Theorem~\ref{thm:h1_lin_theta} will be of interest:
\begin{corollary}
Let $M = \ensuremath{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}\xspace}((1/2(1+i/\binom{n}{2}))_{1 \leq i \leq n})$, then $H_1=\Theta(n)$.
\label{cor:returntime}
\end{corollary}
We will now consider a slightly different class of instances of the
Markov model in order to obtain a lower bound on the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace runtime for
sorting in Section~\ref{sec:runtime}. For this purpose we consider transition
probabilities $p_i$ that increase in the same order as the divisor $A(n)$,
which suits our fitness level analysis of the sorting problem.
This class of models is
relevant for the analysis of the \emph{best case} behavior of the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace
algorithm for sorting $n$ items (see Theorem~\ref{thm:probabilities}).
Although we will only make use of a lower bound on $H_1$ in this setting later
on, we give the following $\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace$-bounds:
\begin{theorem}
Let $M = \ensuremath{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}\xspace}\left((\frac{1}{2}\left(1+A(i)/A(n)\right))_{1\leq i\leq n}\right)$ where
$A:\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}\xspace\rightarrow \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}\xspace^+$ is a non-decreasing function and $A(n)=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace(n^d)$ for some $d> 0$.
Then $H_1 =
\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace(n^{d/(d+1)})$ with respect to $M$.
\label{thm:h1_quad_theta}
\end{theorem}
This theorem is a significant extension to \cite[Thm. 5]{MRSSW:17} which covers only the special case $p_i=1/2\cdot(1+\binom{i+1}{2}/\binom{n}{2})$.
\begin{proof}
Consider the expression for $H_1$ given in Equation~\eqref{eq:partialunfold}.
Since $p_i > 1/2$ for $1 \leq i \leq n$ the products are at most $1$ and
$1/p_i$ is at most $2$. Therefore for any $k\in\lbrace 1,\ldots,n\rbrace:
H_1\leq 2k+H_{k+1}$. As $H_{k+1}$ is the expected number of steps to move
from state $S_{k+1}$ to $S_k$, the states $S_0$ to $S_{k-1}$ are irrelevant
for the calculation of $H_{k+1}$ since they are never visited in between.
Therefore also probabilities $p_1$ to $p_{k}$ do not matter. We truncate the
model to states $S_{k},\ldots,S_n$. For these states the minimal probability
of moving towards the attractor is $p_{k+1}\geq p_k$. Therefore we can set
$p_i=p_{k}$ for $i\in\lbrace k+1,\ldots,n\rbrace$ to get an upper bound
on the return time. By reindexing the states we obtain the model $\tilde
M=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}\xspace}((p_{k})_{1\leq i \leq n-k})$ and, because of the truncation and the
decrease of probabilities, $\tilde H_1$ is an upper bound on $H_{k+1}$, where
$\tilde H_1$ is the expected number of steps to move from state $S_1$ to
$S_0$ in model $\tilde M$. In $\tilde M$ we have the constant probabilities
$p_{k}$ and can therefore apply Theorem \ref{thm:returntime} to determine
$\tilde H_1$. Therefore
\begin{equation*}
H_{k+1}\leq \tilde H_1
=\frac{1-2p_{k}\left(\frac{1-p_{k}}{p_{k}}\right)^{n-k}}{2p_{k}-1}
\leq\frac{1}{2p_{k} -1}
=\frac{A(n)}{A(k)}\enspace.
\end{equation*}
Altogether we have $H_1\leq 2k+\frac{A(n)}{A(k)}$.
With $k=n^{d/(d+1)}$, where $d$ is the degree of $A$, we get
\begin{align*}
H_1&
\leq 2n^{\frac{d}{d+1}}+\frac{A(n)}{A(n^{d/(d+1)})
=\Theta(n^{\frac{d}{d+1}})+\frac{\Theta(n^d)}{\Theta((n^{d/(d+1)})^d)
=\Theta(n^{\frac{d}{d+1}})+\Theta(n^{d-d^2/(d+1)})=\Theta(n^{\frac{d}{d+1}})\enspace,
\end{align*}
which certifies that $H_1=O(n^{d/(d+1)})$.
By using Equation~\eqref{eq:partialunfold}
we have the following lower bound on $H_1$:
\begin{align*}
H_1&\geq\sum_{i=1}^{k} \frac{1}{p_i} \prod_{j=1}^{i-1} \frac{1-p_j}{p_j}
\geq\sum_{i=1}^{k} \prod_{j=1}^{i-1} \frac{1-p_j}{p_j}\\
\intertext{\centering{$\prod_{j=1}^{i-1} \frac{1-p_j}{p_j}$ is monotonically decreasing as $p_j\geq 1/2$.}}
&\geq k\prod_{j=1}^{k-1} \frac{1-p_j}{p_j}
= k\prod_{j=1}^{k-1} \left(1-\frac{2\cdot A(j)}{A(n)+A(j)}\right
\geq k\left(1-\sum_{j=1}^{k-1} \frac{2\cdot A(j)}{A(n)+A(j)}\right
\geq k\left(1-\sum_{j=1}^{k-1} \frac{2\cdot A(j)}{A(n)}\right)\\
\intertext{\centering{$A(j)$ is non-decreasing.}}
&\geq k\left(1-k \cdot\frac{2\cdot A(k)}{A(n)}\right)
\end{align*}
As this equation holds for any $k\in\lbrace 1,\ldots,n\rbrace$ we can choose $k=g\cdot n^z$ with a not yet fixed constant $g\in(0,1)$ and $z=d/(d+1)$, $z\in(0,1)$. Please note that $g\cdot n^z$ tends to infinity if $n$ tends to infinity and therefore asymptotic expressions can also be applied if $g\cdot n^z$ is the argument. Please also note that $k$ has to be an integer but errors can be captured by some $\Theta(1)$ expressions. Substituting $k$ by $g\cdot n^z$ in the previous inequality results in
\begin{align*}
H_1&\geq \lceil g\cdot n^{z}\rceil\left(1-\lceil g\cdot n^{z}\rceil \cdot\frac{2\cdot A\left(\lceil g\cdot n^z\rceil\right)}{A(n)}\right)
= g\cdot n^{z}\cdot\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace(1)\left(1-g\cdot n^{z} \cdot \ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace(1)\cdot\frac{\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace\left((g\cdot n^z)^d\right)}{\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace(n^d)}\right)\\&
= g\cdot n^{z}\cdot \ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace(1)\left(1-g^{d+1}\cdot n^{z+d\cdot z-d}\cdot \ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace(1)\right)\\
\intertext{\centering{$z+d\cdot z-d=z\cdot(d+1)-d=d-d=0$.}}
&
= g\cdot n^{z} \cdot \ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace(1)\left(1- g^{d+1}\cdot \ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace(1)\right)\\
\intertext{This $\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace(1)$ can be bounded from above by some constant $c_{\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace}$ for large $n$ (by definition of $\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace$).
Choose $g=\sqrt[d+1]{1/(2\cdot c_{\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace})}$.
Then the expression in parentheses may be negative for small $n$ but is at least $1/2$ for large $n$ which implies that it is in $\Omega(1)$.}
&\geq g\cdot n^{z}\cdot\Omega\left(1\right
=\Omega\left(n^{\frac{d}{d+1}}\right)\enspace.
\end{align*}
It may be verified that
$$
g=\sqrt[d+1]{\frac{\liminf\limits_{n\rightarrow\infty}(A(n)/n^d)}{\limsup\limits_{n\rightarrow\infty}(A(n)/n^d)}\cdot \frac{1}{4}\cdot (1-\varepsilon)}\enspace ,
$$
is a suitable choice for any $0 < \varepsilon < 1$, to replace $k$ by $g\cdot
n^z$ to obtain the previous inequalities. To see this, note that
the first fraction of $\liminf$ and $\limsup$ counterbalances the fluctuation
of $A(k)/A(n)$ relative to its $\Theta$-bound. Furthermore, the factor
$1/4$ compensates the factor $2$ which is hidden by $\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace$ and supplies the
desired factor of $1/2$ to ensure that the expression in parentheses is
positive and at least $1/2$ for large $n$.
Finally, the factor of $1 - \varepsilon$ is needed for some
tolerance, because without it $g$ is only sufficiently small in the limit\footnote{Similar as $(n+1)/n$ has the limit one and there is no $n$ such that $(n+1)/n\leq 1$ but for any $\varepsilon\in(0,1)$ and large $n$ we have $(1-\varepsilon)(n+1)/n\leq 1$.} but
not necessarily for large $n$.
\end{proof}
This theorem is a generalization of Lemma~\ref{lemma:sqrt_return} and implies the $\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace$-bound stated in that lemma by using $A(n)=n$.
\subsection{Bounds by Integration \texorpdfstring{(Extension compared to~\cite{MRSSW:17})}{(Extension compared to conference version)}}
\label{subsec:integrationbounds}
Reformulations \eqref{eq:partialunfold} and \eqref{eq:recclosed} of the
recurrence~\eqref{eq:recmarkov} given Section~\ref{sec:reformulation} do not yield closed-form
expressions of $H_1$, the expected number of steps it takes to return to the
attractor after an unsuccessful attempt to improve the current best solution.
In this section we derive closed-form expressions for $H_1$.
In order to get rid of the sums and products in
equations~\ref{eq:partialunfold} and~\ref{eq:recclosed}, we use the following
standard approaches.
First, sums may be approximated by their integral. This approach works quite
well if the summand/integrand is monotonic, which is true in our case.
Second, products can be transformed to integrals by reformulating the product
by the exponential function of the sum of logarithms.
This approach is an extension to \cite{MRSSW:17} as it is not present there at all.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:boundsbyintegration}
Let $M=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}\xspace}((p(i))_{1\leq i\leq n})$ and $p:[0,n]\rightarrow(0,1]$ be a
non-decreasing function assigning the probabilities in the model, then
\begin{align*}
H_1=&\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace\left(\mathrm{base}(p,n)^n
\right)\enspace,
\\
H_1=&O\left(
n\cdot \mathrm{base}(p,n)^n\right)\enspace\text{and}\\
H_1=&\Theta^*\left(\mathrm{base}(p,n)^n
\right)\enspace,\text{ where}
\end{align*}
$$
\mathrm{base}(p,n)=\sup_{k\in[0,n]}\exp \left(\int_0^{\frac{ k}n}\ln\left(\frac{1-p(n\cdot x)}{p(n\cdot x)}\right)\mathrm{d}x\right)\enspace.
$$
The integral in $\mathrm{base}(p,n)$ is maximized by $k=\inf\lbrace x\mid x\in[0,n]\wedge p(x)\geq 1/2\rbrace$ or $k=n$ if the infimum is taken on the empty set.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
$p(i)$ is non-decreasing in $i$ and has values in $]0,1]$ and therefore
$\frac{1-p(i)}{p(i)}$ and also $\tau(i):=\ln\left(\frac{1-p(i)}{p(i)}\right)$ are non-increasing as the numerator is non-increasing and
the denominator is non-decreasing.
In the following series of equations, let $k \in [0, n)$.
Using Equation (\ref{eq:partialunfold}), we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
H_1\!\!\! &=& \sum_{i=1}^{n-1}\left(\frac1{p(i)}\cdot\prod_{j=1}^{i-1}\frac{1-p(j)}{p(j)}\right)+H_n\cdot\prod_{j=1}^{n-1}\frac{1-p(j)}{p(j)}
\ge \sum_{i=1}^{n-1}\left(\prod_{j=1}^{i-1}\frac{1-p(j)}{p(j)}\right)
\ge\prod_{j=1}^{\lfloor k\rfloor-1}\frac{1-p(j)}{p(j)}
\\&& =\exp\left(\sum_{j=1}^{\lfloor k\rfloor-1}\tau(j)\right)\\
\lefteqn{\tau(j)=\ln\left((1-p(j))/p(j)\right)\text{ is non-increasing.}}\allowdisplaybreaks\\
&\ge& \exp\left(\int_1^{\lfloor k\rfloor}\tau(x)\mathrm{d}x\right
= \exp \left(n\int_\frac1n^{\frac{\lfloor k\rfloor}n}\tau(n\cdot x)\mathrm{d}x\right)\allowdisplaybreaks\\
&=& \exp \left(n\cdot\left(\int_0^{\frac{ k}n}\ln\left(\frac{1-p(n\cdot x)}{p(n\cdot x)}\right)\mathrm{d}
- \int_0^{\frac{ 1}n}\ln\left(\frac{1-p(n\cdot x)}{p(n\cdot x)}\right)\mathrm{d}
- \int_{\frac{\lfloor k\rfloor}n}^{\frac kn}\ln\left(\frac{1-p(n\cdot x)}{p(n\cdot x)}\right)\mathrm{d}x\right)\right)\allowdisplaybreaks\\
&\ge& \exp \left(n\cdot\left(\int_0^{\frac{ k}n}\ln\left(\frac{1-p(n\cdot x)}{p(n\cdot x)}\right)\mathrm{d}
-\frac{2}{n}\ln\left(\frac{1-p(0)}{p(0)}\right)\right)\right)\allowdisplaybreaks\\
&=& \left(\frac{p(0)}{1-p(0)}\right)^2\exp \left(\int_0^{\frac{ k}n}\ln\left(\frac{1-p(n\cdot x)}{p(n\cdot x)}\right)\mathrm{d}x\right)^n\enspace.
\end{eqnarray*}
As $k$ can be chosen arbitrarily we get the claimed lower bound for $H_1$, because $\frac{p(0)}{1-p(0)}$ is a constant. As any integral is a continuous function also the whole expression in the supremum is a continuous function and therefore $k=n$ can be allowed in the supremum without changing the value.
Quite similar steps lead to the upper bound for $H_1$. We start with
Equation (\ref{eq:recclosed}).
\begin{align*}
H_1 &= \sum_{i=1}^{n}\left(\frac1{p(i)}\cdot\prod_{j=1}^{i-1}\frac{1-p(j)}{p(j)}\right)-\prod_{j=1}^{n}\frac{1-p(j)}{p(j)}
\leq\sum_{i=1}^{n}\left(\frac{1}{p(1)}\cdot\prod_{j=1}^{i-1}\frac{1-p(j)}{p(j)}\right)\\
&\leq\frac{n}{p(1)}\cdot \max_{i\in\lbrace 1,\ldots,n\rbrace}\left(\prod_{j=1}^{i-1}\frac{1-p(j)}{p(j)}\right)
=\frac{n}{p(1)}\cdot \max_{i\in\lbrace 1,\ldots,n\rbrace}\exp\left(\sum_{j=1}^{i-1}\ln\left(\frac{1-p(j)}{p(j)}\right)\right)\\
&\leq\frac{n}{p(1)}\cdot \max_{i\in\lbrace 1,\ldots,n\rbrace}\exp\left(\int_{0}^{i-1}\ln\left(\frac{1-p(x)}{p(x)}\right)\mathrm{d}x\right)
\overset{k=i-1}{\leq}\frac{n}{p(1)}\cdot \sup_{k\in[0,n]}\exp\left(\int_{0}^{k}\ln\left(\frac{1-p(x)}{p(x)}\right)\mathrm{d}x\right)\\
&\leq\frac{n}{p(1)}\cdot \sup_{k\in[0,n]}\exp\left(\int_{0}^{\frac{k}{n}}\ln\left(\frac{1-p(n\cdot x)}{p(n\cdot x)}\right)\mathrm{d}x\right)^n\enspace.\\
\end{align*}
This proves the claimed upper bound and as the base of the exponential part is equal for upper and lower bound we obtain the claimed $\Theta^*$ bound.
The logarithm in $\mathrm{base}(p,n)$ is positive as long as $1-p(n\cdot x)\geq
p(n\cdot x)$. Therefore the integral is maximized if we use the smallest possible $k$ (the infimum) which satisfies the condition $1-p(k)\leq p(k)\Leftrightarrow p(k)\geq\frac{1}{2}$.
\end{proof}
$p(n\cdot x)$ can in most cases be tightly bounded by a value independent of
$n$. This is the case if for example $p(i)=c+(1-c)i/n$, which we have for the
model solving \onemax by \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace. The $k$ which maximizes the integral in the
expression of $\mathrm{base}(p,n)$ is usually obtained by solving the simple
equation $p(k)=1/2$.
Therefore the integral can be evaluated and the base of the exponential
part of the runtime can be determined.
\subsection{Variance of the Improvement Time \texorpdfstring{(Extension compared to~\cite{MRSSW:17})}{(Extension compared to conference version)}}
We show that the standard deviation of the return time is in the same order as the return
time. Therefore in experiments the average of such return times can be
measured such that a small relative error can be achieved.
Also the variance of $W_i$, the number of steps needed to move from state $S_i$ to state $S_{i-1}$, can be computed recursively.
Let $V_i:={\rm Var}[W_i]$ be the variance of $W_i$.
To evaluate this variance we need the expectation and variance of a random
variable which is the sum of random variables where the number of summed up
random variables is also a random variable. Such random variables appear in the
Galton-Watson process (see \cite{durrett2010probability}) from one generation to the next generation.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:composedrandomvariablevariance}
Let $T$ be a random variable with non-negative integer values and let
$(Y_i)_{i\in {\mathbb{N}}}$ be independent identically distributed random variables
$Y_i\sim Y$ which are also independent of $T$. Additionally let
$Z=\sum_{i=1}^{T}Y_i$.
Then ${\rm E}[Z]={\rm E}[T]\cdot{\rm E}[Y]$ and ${\rm Var}[Z]={\rm E}[T]\cdot{\rm Var}[Y]+E[Y]^2\cdot{\rm Var}[T]$.
\end{lemma}
The statement on expected values is also known as Wald's equation and the
statement on the variance is known as the Blackwell-Girshick equation. The
Blackwell-Girshick equation can be obtained by application of the law of total
variance:
\[
{\rm Var}[Z]={\rm E}[{\rm Var}[Z|T]]+{\rm Var}[{\rm E}[Z|T]]={\rm E}[T{\rm Var}[Y]]+{\rm Var}[T{\rm E}[Y]]={\rm E}[T]{\rm Var}[Y]+{\rm E}[Y]^2{\rm Var}[T]\enspace.
\]
Also $W_i$ can be specified as a sum of random variables where the number of
summed up random variables is also a random variable. If we are currently in
state $S_i$ we have some success probability to move to $S_{i-1}$ in the next
iteration. Therefore the number of trials in $S_i$ until we move to $S_{i-1}$
follows a geometric distribution. In case of failure we move to $S_{i+1}$ and
need additional $W_{i+1}$ steps until we can make our next attempt to move to
$S_{i-1}$.
Therefore
$$
W_i=\sum_{j=1}^{T-1}(\tilde W_{i+1,j}+1) + 1\enspace,
$$
where $T$ is a random variable according to a geometric distribution with
success probability equal to the probability of moving to $S_{i-1}$ from $S_i$
and each $\tilde W_{i+1,j}$ is an independent copy of $W_{i+1}$.
\begin{theorem}
\begin{align}
{\rm Var}[W_i]=V_i=&\,\frac{1-p_i}{p_i}\cdot V_{i+1}+\frac{1-p_i}{p_i^2}\cdot(H_{i+1}+1)^2
\nonumber\\
=&\frac{1-p_i}{p_i}\cdot V_{i+1}+\frac{1}{1-p_i}\cdot(H_{i}-1)^2\enspace,&1\leq i<n\label{eq:varrec}\\
{\rm Var}[W_n]=V_n=&\,0\enspace,\label{eq:varinitial}
\end{align}
where $p_i$ is the probability of moving to $S_{i-1}$ from $S_i$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
$W_n={\rm E}[W_n]=H_n=1\Rightarrow {\rm Var}[W_n]=V_n={\rm Var}[1]=0$.\\
Let $T$ be a random variable according to a geometric distribution with
success probability $p_i$ and let all $(\tilde W_{i+1,j})_{y\in{\mathbb{N}}}$ be independent
copies of $W_{i+1}$.
\begin{align*}
{\rm Var}[W_i]&
={\rm Var}[W_i-1]
={\rm Var}\left[ \sum_{j=1}^{T-1}(\tilde W_{i+1,j}+1) \right]
\overset{\text{Lem.~\ref{lem:composedrandomvariablevariance}}}{=}\\&={\rm E}[T-1]\cdot{\rm Var}[W_{i+1}+1]+{\rm E}[W_{i+1}+1]^2\cdot{\rm Var}[T-1]\\
&=\frac{1-p_i}{p_i}\cdot {\rm Var}[W_{i+1}]+({\rm E}[W_{i+1}]+1)^2\cdot{\rm Var}[T]
=\frac{1-p_i}{p_i}\cdot V_{i+1}+\frac{1-p_i}{p_i^2}\cdot(H_{i+1}+1)^2
\end{align*}
Finally the rightmost expression of Equation~\eqref{eq:varrec} is obtained by
replacing $H_{i+1}$ according to Equation~\eqref{eq:recreform}.
\end{proof}
Therefore one can evaluate $H_i$ by
Equations~\eqref{eq:recreform} and \eqref{eq:recinitial} and then one can evaluate
$V_i$ by Equations~\eqref{eq:varrec} and \eqref{eq:varinitial}.
Please note that $V_i$ will always be in the same order as $H_i^2$. If
$(1-p_i)/p_i$ is less than one then the recursively needed values of $V_{j}$
for $j>i$ become less important and we have mainly $H_i^2$ and if $(1-p_i)/p_i$
is greater than one then $H_i^2$ is growing by at least $((1-p_i)/p_i)^2$ (see
Equation~\eqref{eq:recreform}) which is the square of the growing factor of
$V_i$.
And as $V_i$ is in the same order as $H_i^2$ we obtain by an arithmetic average
of $T$ evaluations of $W_i$ a relative error of approximately $1/\sqrt{T}$.
This is indeed a relevant statistic if evaluations are performed and is consolidated in the following corollary.
\begin{corollary}
Let $\tilde W_{i,j}\sim W_i$ be independent random variables. Then
$$
{\rm E}\left[\frac{\vert \sum_{j=1}^{T}\frac{\tilde W_{i,j}}{T} -H_i\vert}{H_i}\right]
=O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{T}}\right)\enspace.
$$
\end{corollary}
\section{Fitness Levels for Sorting}
\label{sec:sorting}
In this section we analyze the search space of the sorting problem in order to
get good bounds on the transition probabilities $p_i$ in our
Markov model of the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace for the sorting problem. The presented results in
this section are already presented in \cite{MRSSW:17}. The search space $X$ is
the set
of permutations of $\{1,2,\ldots,n\}$. We will provide insights about the
structure of sets $X_i$ of permutations with distance $i$ to a specified
position $a$ , e.\,g., an attractor. Based on these observations we obtain
tight best-case and worst-case bounds on the number of transpositions that let
the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace move from $X_i$ to $X_{i-1}$. The notion of \emph{distance}
$d(x,y)$ of two permutations $x$ and $y$ employed here is the minimum number of
transpositions needed to transform $x$ into $y$. As a motivating example,
consider the case that the specified position is at the global optimum. Then
$\{X_i\}_{0 \leq i \leq n-1}$ is a partition of the search space into
\emph{fitness levels}. Fitness levels are used heavily for analyzing the
expected optimization time of nature-inspired optimization
algorithms~\cite{STW:04,SW:10,Wegener:02}.
In the following we denote by $T_n$ the
set of all
transpositions on $\{1,2,\ldots,n\}$,
that is, $T_n = \{ (i\;j) \mid i, j \in \{1,\ldots,n\}, i \neq j\}$.
The structure of this search space has been mentioned already in~\cite{STW:04}.
Furthermore we use the estimations for the probabilities appearing during a
random walk through this search space, which are described in~\cite{MRSSW:17}.
This enables us to focus on how the provided technical tools can be applied to
different settings.
The goal is to bound the worst case and best case probabilities of moving
closer to the specified position. Let $\pi \in X_i$, $1 \leq i \leq n$, and
let
\[
L_i(\pi) = |\{ \tau \in T_n \mid \tau \circ \pi \in X_{i-1}\}|
\]
be the number of transpositions that bring the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace from $\pi$ closer to
the specified position.
The number of transpositions in $T_n$ that let the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace move from $X_i$ to
$X_{i-1}$ can be bounded. The minimum and maximum over all
permutations in $X_i$ are considered.
\begin{theorem}[\hspace{1sp}{\cite[Thm.~9]{MRSSW:17}}]
Let $1 \leq i \leq n$. Then
\begin{enumerate}
\item
$\min_{\pi \in X_i} \{L_i(\pi)\} \geq i$
and equality holds for $1 \leq i \leq \lfloor n/2 \rfloor$, and
\item
$\max_{\pi \in X_i} \{L_i(\pi)\} = \binom{i+1}{2}$.
\end{enumerate}
\label{thm:probabilities}
\end{theorem}
The minimum is achieved if the difference permutation of the current position
and the specified position $a$ has cycle lengths which differ by at most one
and the maximum is achieved if the difference permutation has many singleton
cycles and one large cycle.
\fi
\section{Runtime Analysis of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace and \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace}
\label{sec:runtime}
We present a runtime analysis of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace for two combinatorial problems, the
sorting problem and \onemax. Our analysis is based on the \emph{fitness level
method}~\cite{Wegener:02}, in particular its application to the runtime
analysis of a \ensuremath{(1+1)}-EA\xspace for the sorting problem in~\cite{STW:04}. Consider a
(discrete) search space $X$ and an objective function $f:X \rightarrow \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}\xspace$,
where $f$ assigns $m$ distinct values $f_1 < f_2 < \ldots < f_m$ on $X$. Let
$S_i \subseteq X$ be the set of solutions with value $f_i$. Assuming
that some algorithm \ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}\xspace optimizing $f$ on $X$ leaves fitness level $i$ at
most once then the expected runtime of \ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}\xspace is bounded from above by $\sum_{i=1}^m
{1}/{s_i}$, where $s_i$ is a lower bound on the probability of \ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}\xspace leaving
$S_i$. The method has also been applied successfully, e.\,g., in~\cite{SW:10} to
obtain bounds on the expected runtime of a binary PSO proposed
in~\cite{KE:97}.
\subsection{Upper Bounds on the Expected Optimization Time}
\label{sec:runtime:ub}
Similar to~\cite{STW:04,SW:10}, we use the fitness-level method to prove upper
bounds on the expected optimization time of the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace for sorting and
\onemax. In contrast to the former, we allow non-improving solutions and
return to the attractor as often as needed in order to sample a neighbor of the
attractor that belongs to a better fitness level. Therefore, the time needed to
return to the attractor contributes a multiplicative term to the expected
optimization time, which depends on the choice of the algorithm parameter $c$.
We first consider the sorting problem. The structure of the search space of
the sorting problem has been discussed already in~\cite{STW:04} and a detailed
analysis of its fitness levels is provided in~\cite{MRSSW:17}.
In the following lemma we bound the transition probabilities for the
Markov model for the sorting problem. This allows us to bound the runtime of
\textsc{OnePSO}\xspace for the sorting problem later on.
\begin{lemma}
For the sorting problem on $n$ items, $c = 1/2$ and $x\in X_i$, the probability $p_x$
that \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace moves from $x$ to an element in $X_{i-1}$ is bounded from below by $p_i =
\frac{1}{2} (1+ i/\binom{n}{2})$. Furthermore, this bound is tight.
\label{thm:probabilities}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The lower bound $p_i$ on $p_x$ can be obtained by
\[
p_x
= \left(c+(1-c)\frac{\vert \ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}(x)\cap X_{i-1}\vert}{\vert\ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}(x)\vert}\right)
= \frac{1}{2}\left(1+\frac{\vert \ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}(x)\cap X_{i-1}\vert}{\binom{n}{2}}\right) \geq p_i
\enspace.
\]
To show the last inequality, consider the attractor $a$ and a permutation
$\tau$ such that $x \circ \tau = a$.
For each cycle of length $k$ of $\tau$, exactly $k-1$
transpositions are needed to adjust the elements in this cycle and there are
$\binom{k}{2}\geq k-1$ transpositions which decrease the transposition
distance to the attractor $a$. Therefore the number of ways to decrease the
transposition distance to $a$ is bounded from below by the transposition
distance to $a$. Hence, we have $\vert \ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}(x)\cap X_{i-1}\vert \geq i$.
The lower bound is tight as it appears if only cycles
of length two (or one) appear. A more detailed discussion on improvement
probabilities can be found in~\cite[Sec.~4]{MRSSW:17}.
\end{proof}
Using Lemma~\ref{thm:probabilities} we prove the following bounds on the
expected optimization time $T_{\rm sort}(n)$ required by \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace for sorting
$n$ items by transpositions.
\begin{theorem}[\hspace{1sp}{\cite[Thm.~13]{MRSSW:17}}]
\label{thm:onepso:sorting}
The expected optimization time $T_{\rm sort}(n)$ of the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace sorting $n$ items is bounded from above by
\[
T_{\rm sort}(n) =
\begin{cases}
O(n^2 \log n ) & \text{if $c \in (\frac{1}{2}, 1]$} \\
O(n^{{3}} \log n) & \text{if $c = \frac{1}{2}$} \\
O\left(\left( \frac{1-c}{c} \right)^n\cdot n^2\log n\right) & \text{if $c \in (0, \frac{1}{2})$\enspace.}
\end{cases}
\]
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Consider the situation that the attractor has just been updated. Whenever the
\textsc{OnePSO}\xspace fails to update the attractor in the next iteration it will take in
expectation $H_1$ iterations until the attractor is reached again and then it
is improved with probability at least $i/\binom{n}{2}$. Again, if the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace
fails to improve the attractor we have to wait $H_1$ steps, and so on. Since
we do not consider the case that the attractor has been improved meanwhile,
the general fitness level method yields an expected runtime of at most
$\sum_{i=1}^n((H_1+1)(1/s_i-1)+1) = H_1 \cdot O(n^2 \log n)$.
We now bound the expected return time $H_1$. Let $c \in (\frac{1}{2}, 1]$ and
recall that $p_i$ is the probability of moving from state $S_i$ to state
$S_{i-1}$. Then $1 \geq p_i > c > \frac{1}{2}$. Then the expression for $H_1$
given in Theorem~\ref{thm:returntime} is bounded from above by the constant
$1/(2c-1)$, so $T_{\rm sort}(n)=O(n^2\log n)$.
Now let $c = \frac{1}{2}$, so $p_i \geq \frac{1}{2} (1+ i/\binom{n}{2})$ by
Lemma~\ref{thm:probabilities}. Then, by Corollary~\ref{cor:returntime}, we
have $H_1 = O(n)$, so $T_{\rm sort}(n)=O(n^3\log n)$. Finally, let $c \in (0, \frac{1}{2})$. Then $p_i > c > 0$,
and by Theorem~\ref{thm:returntime}, $H_1$ is bounded from above by
\[
H_1 \leq \frac{2c}{1-2c}\left( \frac{1-c}{c} \right)^n = O\left(\left(\frac{1-c}{c}\right)^n\right)\enspace,
\]
so $T_{\rm sort}(n)=O\left(\left( \frac{1-c}{c} \right)^n\cdot n^2\log n\right)$.
\end{proof}
For $c = 0$, \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace always moves to a uniformly drawn
adjacent solution. Hence, the algorithm just behaves like a random walk on the
search space. Hence, in this case, $T_{\rm sort}(n)$ is the expected number of
transpositions that need to be applied to a permutation in order to obtain a
given permutation. We conjecture that $T_{\rm sort}(n)$ has the following
asymptotic behavior and provide theoretical evidence for this conjecture in
the \ref{subsec:randomwalkconjecture}.
\begin{conjecture}
\label{conject:random_walk}
$T_{\rm sort}(n)\sim n!$ if $c=0$.
\end{conjecture}
Please note that the conjecture is actually only a conjecture on the upper
bound as Theorem~\ref{thm:onepso:sortinglb} supplies a proof that $T_{\rm
sort}(n)=\Omega(n!)$ if $c=0$.
Using a similar approach as in Theorem~\ref{thm:onepso:sorting}, we now bound
the expected optimization time $T_{\onemax}(n)$ of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace for \onemax.
\begin{theorem}
The expected optimization time $T_{\onemax}(n)$ of the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace solving
\onemax is bounded from above by
\[
T_{\onemax}(n) =
\begin{cases}
O(n \log n) & \text{if $c \in (\frac{1}{2}, 1]$},\\
O(n^\frac{3}{2} \log n) & \text{if $c = \frac{1}{2}$},\\
O\left(\beta(c)^n\cdot n^2\log n\right) & \text{if $c \in (0, \frac{1}{2})$, and}\\
O(2^n) & \text{if $c = 0$\enspace.}
\end{cases}
\]
where $\beta(c)=2^{{1}/({1-c})}\cdot (1-c)\cdot c^{{c}/({1-c})}\enspace$.
\label{thm:onepso:onemax}
\end{theorem}
See Figure~\ref{fig:alphabeta} for a visualization of $\beta(c)$.
\begin{proof}
The argument is along the lines of the proof of
Theorem~\ref{thm:onepso:sorting}. We observe that on fitness level $0 \leq i
\leq n$ there are $i$ bit flips that increase the number of ones in the
current solution. Therefore, $s_i = i/n$ and the fitness level method yields
an expected runtime of at most $\sum_{i=1}^n (H_1 + 1)(1/s_i-1)+1 =
H_1 \cdot O(n \log n)$. The bounds on $H_1$ for $c > \frac{1}{2}$ are as
in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:onepso:sorting}. For $c = \frac{1}{2}$ we
invoke Lemma~\ref{lemma:sqrt_return} and have $H_1 = O(\sqrt{n})$. For $c <\frac{1}{2}$ we use Theorem~\ref{thm:boundsbyintegration}.
The probabilities in the Markov model for $H_1$ are $p_i=c+(1-c)i/n$ which can be continuously extended to the non-decreasing function $p(i)=c+(1-c)i/n$.
Here $k=n\cdot\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}$ solves the equation $p(k)=\frac{1}{2}$.
Hence, we need the value of
\begin{align}
& \mathrm{base}(p,n)
=\exp\left(\int_0^\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}\ln\left(\frac {1-c-(1-c)\cdot x}{c+(1-c)\cdot x}\right)\mathrm{d}x\right)\nonumber\allowdisplaybreaks\\
& =\exp\left(\int_0^\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}\left(\ln\left({1- x}\right)-\ln\left({\frac{c}{1-c}+x}\right)\right)\mathrm{d}x\right)\nonumber\\
& =\exp\left((x-1)\ln(1-x)
\left.\left(\frac{c}{1-c}+x\right)\ln\left(\frac{c}{1-c}+x\right)\right\vert^\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}_0\right)\nonumber\\
& =2^{{1}/({1-c})}\cdot (1-c)\cdot c^{{c}/({1-c})}=\beta(c)\enspace.\label{eq:calculatebaseonemax}
\end{align}
Now Theorem~\ref{thm:boundsbyintegration} gives the upper bound
$H_1=O(n\cdot\beta(c)^n)$.
It remains to consider the case that $c=0$. The claimed bound
on $T_{\rm \onemax}$ can be obtained by using the model
$\ensuremath{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}\xspace}((\frac{i}{n})_{1\leq i\leq n})$. Each state represents the distance
to the optimal point. By Equation~\eqref{eq:recclosedk} we have
\begin{align*}
H_k
&=\sum_{i=k}^n\frac{n}{i}\prod_{j=k}^{i-1}\frac{n-j}{j}
=\prod_{j=1}^{k-1}\frac{j}{n-j}\sum_{i=k}^n\frac{n}{i}\prod_{j=1}^{i-1}\frac{n-j}{j}
=\frac{1}{\binom{n-1}{k-1}}\sum_{i=k}^n\binom{n}{i}\leq\frac{2^n}{\binom{n-1}{k-1}}\enspace .
\end{align*}
The maximal expected time to reach the optimal point is the sum of all $H_k$:
\begin{align*}
T_{\onemax}(n)
&\leq \sum_{k=1}^n H_k
\leq \sum_{k=1}^n \frac{2^n}{\binom{n-1}{k-1}}
=2^n\cdot\left(2+O\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)\right)
=O(2^n)\enspace .
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
We remark that the upper bounds given in Theorem~\ref{thm:onepso:onemax} for
$c\in[\frac{1}{2},1]$ were presented in \cite[Thm.~14]{MRSSW:17} and that the
upper bound for $c\in(0,\frac{1}{2})$ is newly obtained using the
\emph{bounds-by-integration} from Section~\ref{subsec:integrationbounds}
and the proof of the upper bound for $c=0$ is also new.
Furthermore, note that for $c=\frac{1}{2}$ it is not sufficient to use the
lower bound $p_i \geq p_1=\frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{2n}$ in order to obtain the runtime
bound given in Theorem~\ref{thm:onepso:onemax}.
\subsection{Lower Bounds via Indistinguishable States}
\label{sec:runtime:lb}
In this section we will provide lower bounds on the expected optimization time
of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace that almost match our upper bounds given in
Section~\ref{sec:runtime:ub}. We will use the Markov model from
Section~\ref{sec:model} to obtain these lower bounds. The main difference to
the previous section is that we restrict our attention to the \emph{last}
improvement of the attractor, which dominates the runtime, both for sorting and
\onemax.
We will introduce the useful notion of \emph{indistinguishability} of certain
states of a Markov chain.
Note that our lower bounds are significantly improved compared to
the conference version \cite{MRSSW:17} by using the newly introduced
bounds-by-integration from Section~\ref{subsec:integrationbounds}.
\subsubsection{Indistinguishable States}
We now introduce a notion of \emph{indistinguishability} of certain
states of a Markov chain already presented in~\cite{MRSSW:17}. We will later use this notion to prove lower bounds
on the expected optimization time of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace for sorting and \onemax as
follows: We show that the optimum is contained in a set $\hat{Y}$ of
indistinguishable states. Therefore, in expectation, the states $\hat{Y}$ have
to be visited $\Omega(|\hat{Y}|)$ times to hit the optimum with positive
constant probability.
\begin{definition}[Indistinguishable states]
\label{defi:symmetric}
Let $M$ be a Markov process with a finite set $Y$ of states and let $\hat{Y}\subseteq Y$.
Furthermore, let $(Z_i)_{i\geq0}$ be the sequence of visited states of $M$ and let $T=\min\lbrace t>0\mid Z_t\in\hat{Y}\rbrace$. Then
$\hat{Y}$ is called \emph{indistinguishable} with respect to $M$ if
\begin{enumerate}
\item \label{statement:equal_prob}the initial state $Z_0$ is uniformly
distributed over $\hat{Y}$, i.\,e., for all $y\in Y$:
\[
\Pr[Z_0=y]=\ensuremath{\mathds{1}}\xspace_{y\in\hat{Y}}/\vert\hat{Y}\vert =
\begin{cases}
1/\vert\hat{Y}\vert & \text{if }y\in\hat{Y}\\
0 & \text{if }y\not\in\hat{Y} \enspace.
\end{cases}
\]
\item \label{statement:symmetric_prob}and the probabilities to reach states in
$\hat{Y}$ from states in $\hat{Y}$ are symmetric, i.\,e., for all $y_1,y_2\in \hat{Y}$:
\[
\Pr[Z_T=y_2\mid Z_0=y_1]=\Pr[Z_T=y_1\mid Z_0=y_2] \enspace.
\]
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
Now we can prove a lower bound on the expected time for finding a specific state.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:lower_bound}
Let $M$ be a Markov process as in Definition~\ref{defi:symmetric} and let
$\hat{Y}$ be indistinguishable with respect to $M$. Let $h(M)$ be a
positive real value such that ${\rm E}[T]\geq h(M)$, then the expected time to reach
a fixed $y\in\hat{Y}$ is bounded below by
$h(M)\cdot\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(\vert\hat{Y}\vert)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $T_i$ be the stopping time when $\hat{Y}$ is visited the $i$-th time.
\[
T_i=\min\lbrace t\geq 0 \mid \vert\lbrace k\mid 0\leq k \leq t \wedge Z_k\in\hat{Y}\rbrace\vert\geq i\rbrace \enspace.
\]
With Statement~\ref{statement:equal_prob} of Definition \ref{defi:symmetric}
$Z_0$ is uniformly distributed over $\hat{Y}$. Therefore $T_1=0$ and
$T_2=T$. Statement \ref{statement:symmetric_prob} of Definition
\ref{defi:symmetric} implies that
$\Pr[Z_{T_i}=y]=\ensuremath{\mathds{1}}\xspace_{y\in\hat{Y}}/\vert\hat{Y}\vert$ for all $i\geq 1$
by the following induction. The base case for $i=1$ and $T_i=0$ is ensured by
the Statement~\ref{statement:equal_prob} of Definition \ref{defi:symmetric}.
The induction hypothesis is
$\Pr[Z_{T_{i-1}}=y]=\ensuremath{\mathds{1}}\xspace_{y\in\hat{Y}}/\vert\hat{Y}\vert$. The
inductive step is verified by the following series of equations.
\begin{align*}
\Pr[Z_{T_i}=y]
&=
\sum_{\hat{y}\in\hat{Y}}\Pr[Z_{T_{i-1}}=\hat{y}]\cdot \Pr[Z_{T_i}=y\mid Z_{T_{i-1}}=\hat{y}]
\allowdisplaybreaks\\
\stackrel{\mathclap{\text{ind. hyp.}}}{=}\hspace*{1.5em}&
\sum_{\hat{y}\in\hat{Y}}1/\vert\hat{Y}\vert\cdot \Pr[Z_{T_i}=y\mid Z_{T_{i-1}}=\hat{y}]
\allowdisplaybreaks\\
\stackrel{\mathclap{\text{Def.\ref{defi:symmetric} st.\ref{statement:symmetric_prob}}}}{=}\hspace*{1.5em}&
1/\vert\hat{Y}\vert\cdot\sum_{\hat{y}\in\hat{Y}}\Pr[Z_{T_i}=\hat{y}\mid Z_{T_{i-1}}=y]
=
1/\vert\hat{Y}\vert \enspace.
\end{align*}
It follows that for all $i>0$ the difference $T_{i+1}-T_i$ of two consecutive
stopping times has the same distribution as $T$ and also
\[
{\rm E}[T_{i+1}-T_{i}]={\rm E}[T]\geq h(M)\enspace.
\]
Now let $y\in\hat{Y}$ be fixed. The probability that $y$ is not reached within
the first $T_{\lfloor\vert\hat{Y}\vert/2\rfloor-1}$ steps is bounded from above
through union bound by
\[
1-\sum_{i=1}^{\lfloor\vert\hat{Y}\vert/2\rfloor-1}\Pr[Z_{T_i}=y]-\Pr[Z_0=y]\geq1/2
\]
and therefore the expected time to reach the fixed $y\in\hat{Y}$ is
bounded below by
$\frac{1}{2}\cdot
{\rm E}[T_{\lfloor\vert\hat{Y}\vert/2\rfloor-1}]=\frac{1}{2}\cdot\sum_{i=2}^{\lfloor\vert\hat{Y}\vert/2\rfloor-1}{\rm E}[T_i-T_{i-1}]\geq
\frac{1}{2}\cdot\sum_{i=2}^{\lfloor\vert\hat{Y}\vert/2\rfloor-1}h(M)=h(M)\cdot\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(\vert\hat{Y}\vert).$
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{Lower Bounds on the Expected Optimization Time for Sorting}
In this section we consider the sorting problem. Our first goal is to provide lower
bounds on the expected return time to the attractor for the parameter choice
$c\in(0,\frac{1}{2})$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:lower_bound_sort_small_c}
Let $c\in(0,\frac12)$. For the sorting problem on $n$ items, assume that the attractor has transposition distance one to the identity permutation. Then the expected return time $H_1$ to the attractor is bounded from below by $\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(\alpha(c)^n)$, where
$$
\alpha(c)=\left(\frac{1+\sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}}}{1-\sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}}}\right)\cdot\exp\left(
-2\sqrt{\frac{c}{1-c}}\arctan\left(\sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2c}}\right)\right)\enspace.
$$
\end{lemma}
See Figure~\ref{fig:alphabeta} for a visualization of $\alpha(c)$.
\begin{proof}
The probability of decreasing the distance to the attractor in state $S_i$ can be bounded from above by
$$
p_{i-1} \le c+(1-c)\cdot\frac{\binom{i}{2}}{\binom{n}{2}} = c+(1-c)\cdot\frac{i(i-1)}{n(n-1)} \le c+(1-c)\cdot\frac{i^2}{n^2}
$$
We increase all indices by one such that $\tilde p_i=p_{i-1}$ such that we have $n$ states again.
Please note that $H_2=\Omega(H_1)$ as with Equation~\ref{eq:recreform}
$$
H_2
=\frac{p_1}{1-p_1}H_1-\frac{1}{1-p_1}
\geq \frac{c}{1-c}H_1-\frac{1}{1-c-o(1)}=\Omega(H_1)$$
if $H_1\geq \frac{1}{1-c}$ which is the case here.
We use Theorem~\ref{thm:boundsbyintegration} to get a lower bound on $H_1$ by using $p(i)=c+(1-c)\cdot\frac{i^2}{n^2}$.
Here $k=n\cdot \sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}}$ maximizes the integral, because it solves the equation $p(k)=\frac{1}{2}$.
An application of Theorem~\ref{thm:boundsbyintegration} supplies
$$
H_1\!=\!\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace\left(
\exp \left(\int_0^{\sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}}}\ln\left(\frac{1-c-(1-c)x^2}{c+(1-c)x^2}\right)\mathrm{d}x\right)^{\!\!\!n}\right)\enspace .
$$
In the following we calculate the exact value of this integral.
The integrand can be converted to the expression
\begin{align*}
&\ln\left(\frac{1-c-(1-c)x^2}{c+(1-c)x^2}\right)
=\ln\left(\frac{1-x^2}{\frac{c}{1-c}+x^2}\right)
=\ln(1-x^2)-\ln\left(\frac{c}{1-c}+x^2\right)\enspace.
\end{align*}
The indefinite integral of $\ln(1-x^2)$ is
$$
x\cdot \ln(1-x^2)-2x+\ln\left(\frac{1+x}{1-x}\right)\enspace.
$$
It can be evaluated for values $x\in[0,1[$, but this is fine as $0\leq k/n<1$.
Furthermore the indefinite integral of $\ln\left(\frac{c}{1-c}+x^2\right)$ is
$$
x\cdot \ln\left(\frac{c}{1-c}+x^2\right)-2x+2\sqrt{\frac{c}{1-c}}\arctan\left({x}\cdot{\sqrt{\frac{1-c}{c}}}\right)\enspace,
$$
which can be evaluated for all values, because $\frac{c}{1-c}$ is positive.
The indefinite integral of the whole expression is obtained by the subtraction of both
\begin{align*}
&x\cdot \ln(1-x^2)+\ln\left(\frac{1+x}{1-x}\right)
-x\cdot \ln\left(\frac{c}{1-c}+x^2\right)
-2\sqrt{\frac{c}{1-c}}\arctan\left({x}\cdot{\sqrt{\frac{1-c}{c}}}\right)
\end{align*}
and evaluation of the bounds $k/n=\sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}}$ and $0$ results in
\begin{align*}
&\left[\sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}}\cdot \ln\left(1-\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}\right)+\ln\left(\frac{1+\sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}}}{1-\sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}}}\right)\right
-\sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}}\cdot \ln\left(\frac{c}{1-c}+\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}\right)\\
&\phantom{\bigg[}\left.
-2\sqrt{\frac{c}{1-c}}\arctan\left(\frac{\sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}}}{\sqrt{\frac{c}{1-c}}}\right)\right]-\left[0+\ln(1)-0-0\right]\\
=&\sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}}\cdot \ln\left(\frac{1}{2(1-c)}\right)+\ln\left(\frac{1+\sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}}}{1-\sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}}}\right)
-\sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}}\cdot \ln\left(\frac{1}{2(1-c)}\right)
\\&-2\sqrt{\frac{c}{1-c}}\arctan\left(\sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2c}}\right)\\
=
&\ln\left(\frac{1+\sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}}}{1-\sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2(1-c)}}}\right)
-2\sqrt{\frac{c}{1-c}}\arctan\left(\sqrt{\frac{1-2c}{2c}}\right)\enspace.
\end{align*}
An application of the $\exp$ function on this result gives the claimed lower bound.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[
baseline,
declare function={ arctanh(\x) = 0.5*ln((1+\x)/(1-\x));
arctan(\x) = rad(atan(\x));}
]
\begin{axis}[
xlabel={$c$},
ymin=1, ymax=6,
xmin=0, xmax=0.5,
samples=200,
legend entries={$\alpha(c)$,$\beta(c)$,$\frac{1-c}{c}$},
legend style={draw=none},
]
\addplot[red,thick,domain=0:0.5] {( (1+ sqrt((1-2*x)/(2*(1-x))))/(1- sqrt((1-2*x)/(2*(1-x))))*exp( -2*sqrt(x/(1-x))*arctan(sqrt((1-2*x)/(2*x)))))};
\addplot[dashed, thick, blue,domain=0:0.5] {( 2^(1/(1-x))*(1-x)*(x^(x/(1-x))))};
\addplot[dashdotted, thick, green,domain=0:0.5] {(1-x)/x};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The functions $\alpha(c)$ and $\beta(c)$ for $c \in (0,\frac{1}{2})$}
\label{fig:alphabeta}
\end{figure}
This lower bound is the best possible bound which can be achieved with this
model as the probability $p_i = c+(1-c)\cdot{\binom{i+1}{2}}/{\binom{n}{2}}$
actually appears at distance $i$ if the permutation transforming the current
position to the attractor consists of one cycle of length $i+1$ and the
remaining permutation consists of singleton cycles. For this improvement
probability the bound is $\Theta^*(\alpha(c)^n)$.
The following theorem supplies lower bounds on the expected optimization
time of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace on the sorting problem.
\begin{theorem}
The expected optimization time $T_{\rm sort}(n)$ of the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace sorting $n$
items is bounded from below by
\[
T_{\rm sort}(n) =
\begin{cases}
\Omega(n^2) & \text{if }c \in (\frac{1}{2}, 1] \\
\Omega(n^{\frac{8}{3}}) & \text{if }c = \frac{1}{2} \\
\Omega \left(\alpha(c)^n\cdot n^2\right) & \text{if }c \in (0, \frac{1}{2})\\
\Omega\left(n!\right) & \text{if $c =0 \enspace$.}
\end{cases}
\]
\label{thm:onepso:sortinglb}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The situation where already the initial position is the optimum has probability $1/n!$.
As $1-1/n!>1/2$ for $n\geq 2$ we have the same $\Omega$ bound if we ignore this case.
In all other cases we can consider the situation that the attractor has just been updated to a solution
that has distance one to the optimum. Without loss of generality, we assume
that the attractor is the identity permutation and the optimum is the
transposition $(0\,1)$. The number of steps required for the next (hence
final) improvement of the attractor is a lower bound on the expected optimization
time for the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace. We determine a lower bound on this number for various
choices of~$c$.
For all $c \in (0,1]$ we apply Theorem~\ref{thm:lower_bound}. We use all
permutations as set of states $Y$ in the Markov process $M$. Let
$\hat{Y}=X_1$ be the subset of states which are a single swap away from the
attractor. Therefore the optimal solution is contained in $\hat{Y}$, but up
to the point when the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace reaches the optimal solution it is
indistinguishable from all other permutations in $\hat{Y}$. We will
immediately prove that $\hat{Y}$ is actually indistinguishable with respect
to $M$. Initially the particle is situated on the attractor and after a
single step it is situated at a permutation in $\hat{Y}$, where each
permutation has equal probability. We use the permutation after the first
step as the initial state of the Markov process $Z_0$ and all other $Z_i$ are
the successive permutations. Therefore Statement~\ref{statement:equal_prob}
of Definition~\ref{defi:symmetric} is fulfilled. Let $T=\min\lbrace t>0\mid
Z_t\in\hat{Y}\rbrace$ the stopping time of Theorem~\ref{thm:lower_bound}. For
each sequence of states $Z_0,\ldots,Z_T$ there is a one to one mapping to a
sequence $\tilde Z_0=Z_T,\tilde Z_1,\ldots,\tilde Z_{T-1},\tilde Z_{T}=Z_0$
which has equal probability to appear. The sequence $\tilde Z_0,\ldots,\tilde
Z_T$ is not the reversed sequence, because the forced steps would then lead
to the wrong direction, but the sequence can be obtained by renaming the
permutation indices. The renaming is possible because the permutations $Z_0$
and $Z_T$ are both single swaps. As this one to one mapping exists also the
Statement~\ref{statement:symmetric_prob} of Definition~\ref{defi:symmetric}
is fulfilled. Finally we need a bound on the expectation of $T$. If we are in
$X_1=\hat{Y}$ we can either go to the attractor by a forced move or random
move and return to $X_1$ in the next step or we can go to $X_2$ by a random
move and return to $X_1$ in expectation after $H_2$ steps.
${\rm E}[T]=\left(c+(1-c)/\binom{n}{2}\right)\cdot 2 +
(1-c)\cdot\left(1-1/\binom{n}{2}\right)(1+H_2)=\Omega(H_2)=:h(M)$.
Theorem~\ref{thm:lower_bound} provides the lower bound
$\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(\vert\hat{Y}\vert\cdot H_2)$ for the runtime to find the fixed
permutation $(0,1)\in\hat{Y}$ which is the optimal solution. From
Equation~\ref{eq:recreform} we get $H_2=(p_1\cdot H_1-1)/(1-p_1)\geq(c\cdot
H_1-1)/(1-c)$. As $H_1=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(n^{2/3})$ for $c=\frac{1}{2}$ (see
Theorem~\ref{thm:h1_quad_theta}) and $H_1=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(\alpha(c)^n)$ for
$c\in(0,\frac{1}{2})$ (see Lemma~\ref{lemma:lower_bound_sort_small_c}) also
$H_2=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(H_1)$ for $c\in (0,\frac{1}{2}]$ which results in the lower
bounds $T_{\rm sort}(n)=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(\vert\hat{Y}\vert\cdot
H_1)=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(\binom{n}{2}\cdot n^{2/3})=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(n^{8/3})$ for $c=\frac{1}{2}$
and $T_{\rm sort}(n)=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(\vert\hat{Y}\vert\cdot
H_1)=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(\binom{n}{2}\cdot \alpha(c)^n)=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(n^2\cdot \alpha(c)^n)$ for
$c\in(0,\frac{1}{2})$. Trivially the return time to $X_1$ in $M$ can be
bounded by $2$, which results in the lower bound $T_{\rm
sort}(n)=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(n^2)$ for the case $c\in(\frac{1}{2},1]$.
The lower bound for $c=0$ can be
derived directly from the indistinguishability property: Let $\hat{Y} =
Y$. It is readily verified that the initial state is uniformly distributed
over $\hat{Y}$. Furthermore, any $\hat{Y}$-$\hat{Y}$-path can be reversed and
has the same probability to occur. Therefore,
Condition~\ref{statement:symmetric_prob} of Definition~\ref{defi:symmetric}
is satisfied and the lower runtime bound follows from
Theorem~\ref{thm:lower_bound} by choosing $h(M) = 1$.
\end{proof}
Beside that formally proved lower bounds we conjecture the following lower
bounds on the expected optimization time of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace for sorting $n$ items.
\begin{conjecture}
\label{con:sorting:lb}
\[
T_{\rm sort}(n) =
\begin{cases}
\Omega(n^2) & \text{if $c \in (\frac{1}{2}, 1]$} \\
\Omega(n^{3}) & \text{if $c = \frac{1}{2}$} \\
\Omega \left(\left(\frac{1-c}{c}\right)^n\cdot n^2\right) & \text{if $c \in (0, \frac{1}{2})$}\enspace.
\end{cases}
\]
\end{conjecture}
Note that these lower bounds differ from our upper bounds given in
Theorem~\ref{thm:onepso:sorting} only by a $\log$-factor. Evidence supporting this conjecture is given in
\ref{subsec:approxOptTime}. We obtain our theoretical evidence by
considering the \emph{average} probability to move towards the attractor,
instead of upper and lower bounds as before.
\subsubsection{Lower Bounds on the Expected Optimization Time for \onemax}
First we provide a lower bound on the expected return time to the attractor.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:lower_bound_1max_small_c}
Let $c\in(0,\frac{1}{2})$. For \onemax, assume that
the attractor has Hamming distance one to the optimum $1^n$. Then
the expected return time $H_1$ to the attractor is bounded from below by
$H_1=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(\beta(c)^n)$, where
\[
\beta(c)=2^{{1}/({1-c})}\cdot (1-c)\cdot c^{{c}/({1-c})}\enspace.
\]
\end{lemma}
See Figure~\ref{fig:alphabeta} for a visualization of $\beta(c)$.
\begin{proof}
We use Theorem~\ref{thm:boundsbyintegration}. The value $\beta(c)$ is already calculated in Theorem~\ref{thm:onepso:onemax} Equation~\ref{eq:calculatebaseonemax}.
\end{proof}
This result enables us to prove lower bounds on $T_{\onemax}(n)$.
\begin{theorem}
The expected optimization time $T_{\onemax}(n)$ of the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace for solving
\onemax is bounded from below by
\[
T_{\onemax}(n) =
\begin{cases}
\Omega(n \log n) & \text{if $c \in (\frac{1}{2}, 1]$}\\
\Omega(n^\frac{3}{2}) & \text{if $c = \frac{1}{2}$}\\
\Omega\left(\beta(c)^n\cdot n\right) & \text{if $c \in (0, \frac{1}{2})$}\\
\Omega\left(2^n\right) & \text{if $c =0 \enspace$.}
\end{cases}
\]
\label{thm:onepso:onemaxlb}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
First, let $c \in (\frac{1}{2}, 1]$. Then, with probability at least
$\frac{1}{2}$, the initial solution contains at least $k = \lfloor n/2
\rfloor = \Omega(n)$ zeros. Each zero is flipped to one with probability
$1/n$ in a random move, and none of the $k$ entries is set to one in a move
towards the attractor. The expected time required to sample the $k$ distinct
bit flips is bounded from below by the expected time it takes to obtain all
coupons in the following instance of the coupon collector's problem: There
are $k$ coupons and each coupon is drawn independently with probability
$1/k$. The expected time to obtain all coupons is $\Omega(k \log k)$~
\cite[Section~5.4.1]{MU:05}. It follows that the expected optimization time is
$\Omega(n \log n)$ as claimed.
For $c \in (0,\frac{1}{2}]$ we use the same approach as in the proof of
Theorem~\ref{thm:onepso:sortinglb}. Also here the event that the initial
solution is optimal can be ignored. Consider the situation that the attractor
has just been updated to a solution that has distance one to the optimum. We
use the set of all bit strings as set of states $Y$ in the Markov process
$M$. Let $\hat{Y}=X_1$ the subset of bit strings which is a single bit flip
away from the attractor, hence $\hat{Y}$ contains the optimum. $Z_i$ and $T$
are instantiated as in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:onepso:sortinglb}.
Therefore Statement~\ref{statement:equal_prob} of
Definition~\ref{defi:symmetric} is fulfilled. Again for each sequence of
states $Z_0,\ldots,Z_T$ we have a one to one mapping to a sequence $\tilde
Z_0=Z_T,\tilde Z_1,\ldots,\tilde Z_{T-1},\tilde Z_{T}=Z_0$ which has equal
probability to appear. This sequence is again obtained by renaming the
indices plus some bit changes according to the shape of the attractor. Hence
also Statement~\ref{statement:symmetric_prob} of
Definition~\ref{defi:symmetric} is fulfilled. Hence $\hat{Y}$ is
indistinguishable with respect to $M$. ${\rm E}[T]=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(H_2)=:h(M)$.
Theorem~\ref{thm:lower_bound} provides the lower bound
$\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(\vert\hat{Y}\vert\cdot H_2)$ for the runtime to find the optimal
solution. $H_2\geq(c\cdot H_1-1)/(1-c)$. As $H_1=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(n^{1/2})$ for
$c=\frac{1}{2}$ (see Theorem~\ref{thm:h1_lin_theta}) and
$H_1=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(\beta(c)^n)$ for $c\in(0,\frac{1}{2})$ (see
Lemma~\ref{lemma:lower_bound_1max_small_c}) also $H_2=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(H_1)$ for $c\in
(0,\frac{1}{2}]$ which results in the lower bounds
$T_{\onemax}(n)=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(\vert\hat{Y}\vert\cdot H_1)=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(n\cdot
n^{1/2})=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(n^{3/2})$ for $c=\frac{1}{2}$ and
$T_{\onemax}(n)=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(\vert\hat{Y}\vert\cdot H_1)=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(n\cdot
\beta(c)^n)=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Omega}}\xspace(n\cdot \beta(c)^n)$ for $c\in(0,\frac{1}{2})$.
Again the lower bound for $c=0$ can be obtained by the indistinguishability
property. The proof for this case is identical to the corresponding part of
Theorem~\ref{thm:onepso:sortinglb}.
\end{proof}
Finally all runtime bounds claimed in Table~\ref{tab:summary} are justified
and for this purpose all of the presented tools in Section~\ref{sec:tools}
are used.
\subsection{Bounds on the Expected Optimization Time for \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace \texorpdfstring{(Extension compared to~\cite{MRSSW:17})}{(Extension compared to conference version)}}
\label{sec:dpsobounds}
The upper bounds on the runtime of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace in Theorem
\ref{thm:onepso:sorting} and Theorem \ref{thm:onepso:onemax} directly imply
upper bounds for \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace. Recall that we denote by $c$ the parameter of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace
and by $T_\onemax(n)$ and $T_{\rm sort}(n)$ the expected optimization time of
\textsc{OnePSO}\xspace for \onemax and sorting, respectively.
\begin{corollary}
Let $T'_{\onemax}(n)$ and $T'_{\rm sort}(n)$ be the expected optimization
time of \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace for \onemax and sorting, respectively. If $c = c_{glob}$,
then $T'_{\onemax}(n) = O(P\cdot T_{\onemax}(n))$ and $T'_{\rm sort}(n)
=O(P\cdot T_{\rm sort}(n))$, where $P$ is the number of particles.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
In each trial to improve the value of the global attractor at least the
particle which updated the global attractor has its local attractor at the
same position as the global attractor. This particle behaves exactly like
the single particle in \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace until the global attractor is improved.
Therefore we have at most $P$ times more objective function evaluations than \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace,
where $P$ is the number of particles.
\end{proof}
One can refine this result by again looking on return times to an attractor.
If the global attractor equals the local attractor then this particle performs the same
steps as all other particles having equal attractors. As all those particles
perform optimization in parallel in expectation no additional objective
function evaluations are made compared to the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace.
For particles where the global attractor and the local attractor differ
we can use previous arguments applied to the local attractor.
With two different attractors alternating movements to the local
and global attractor can cancel each other out.
Therefore if (only) $c_{loc}$ is fixed then for the worst case we can assume only
$c_{loc}$ as probability of moving towards the local attractor and
$1-c_{loc}$ as probability of moving away from the local attractor.
This enables us to use Theorem~\ref{thm:returntime} to calculate the
expected time to reduce the distance to an attractor from one to zero.
We denote the return time from Theorem~\ref{thm:returntime} as $\Psi(n,p)$
\begin{equation*}
\Psi(n,p):=\left.\begin{cases}
\dfrac{1-2p \left( \dfrac{1-p}{p} \right)^n }{2p-1} & \text{if $p \neq \frac{1}{2}$}\\
2n-1 & \text{otherwise}
\end{cases}\right\rbrace
=\begin{cases}
\Theta(1) & \text{if $\frac{1}{2}<p\leq 1$}\\
\Theta(n) & \text{if $p = \frac{1}{2}$}\\
\Theta\left( \left( \frac{1-p}{p} \right)^n \right) & \text{if $0<p < \frac{1}{2}$}\enspace .
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
If the position equals the local attractor and consequently differs from the
global attractor the probability for improving the local attractor can be
bounded from below by a positive constant.
E.\,g., for the problem \onemax this constant is $c_{glob}/2$ because for a move
towards the global attractor for at least half of the differing bits the
value of the global attractor equals the value of the optimal solution as the
global attractor is at least as close to the optimum as the local attractor.
Therefore the number of trials until the local attractor is improved is constant.
As such an update occurs at most once for each particle and fitness level we
obtain an additional summand of $O(\Psi(n,c_{loc})\cdot P\cdot n)$ instead of
the factor $P$ for the problems \onemax and the sorting problem.
In contrast to the upper bounds, the lower bounds for \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace do not apply for \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace for the
following reason. The bottleneck used for the analysis of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace is the very last improvement
step. However, \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace may be faster at finding the last improvement because
it may happen that the local and global attractor of a particle have both
distance one to the optimum but are not equal. In this case, as described above, there is a
constant probability of moving to the optimum if a particle is at one of the
two attractors whereas for \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace the probability of moving towards
the optimum if the particle is located at the attractor tends to zero for
large $n$.
An analysis of experiments of \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace with small number of particles and
\textsc{OnePSO}\xspace applied to the sorting problem and \onemax revealed only a small
increase in the optimization time of \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace compared to \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace. This increase
is way smaller than the factor $P$.
For some parameter constellations also a significant decrease of the
optimization time of \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace compared to \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace is achieved.
\subsection{Lower Bounds for Pseudo-Boolean Functions \texorpdfstring{(Ext. of~\cite{MRSSW:17})}{(Extension compared to conference version)}}
\label{sec:pseudoboolean:lb}
Also for general pseudo-Boolean functions $f:\lbrace 0,1\rbrace^n\rightarrow \real$ we can prove lower bounds on the expected optimization time.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:pseudoboolean:const}
If $P=\Theta(1)$, where $P$ is the number of particles, then the expected
optimization time of \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace optimizing pseudo-Boolean functions ($\lbrace
0,1\rbrace^n\rightarrow\real$) with a unique optimal position is in
$\Omega(n\log(n))$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
If there are $P=\Theta(1)$ particles, then in expectation there are $n/2^P=\Omega(n)$ bits such that there is no particle where this bit of the optimal position equals the corresponding bit of the initial position.
The expected optimization time is therefore bounded by the time that each such bit is flipped in a random move at least once.
This subproblem corresponds to a coupon collectors problem and therefore we have the claimed lower bound of $\Omega(n\log(n))$.
\end{proof}
For larger values of $P$ we obtain an even higher lower bound by the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:pseudoboolean:poly}
If $P=O(n^k)$, where $P$ is the number of particles and $k$ is an arbitrary non-negative
real value, then the expected optimization time of \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace optimizing
pseudo-Boolean functions ($\lbrace 0,1\rbrace^n\rightarrow\real$) with a unique
optimal position is in $\Omega(n\cdot P)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
To bound the probability to be at least some distance apart from the attractor after initialization we can use Chernoff bounds.
For a fixed particle we can define
$$Y_i=\begin{cases}
1 & \text{if the }i\text{th bits of the initial position and the unique optimal position differ}\\
0 & \text{otherwise}\enspace.
\end{cases}
$$
Therefore $Y=\sum_{i=1}^n Y_i$ is exactly the initial distance of the fixed particle to the unique optimal position.
For each $i$ we have that $\Pr[Y_i=1]=\frac{1}{2}$ and ${\rm E}[Y]=\frac{n}{2}$.
By Chernoff bounds we obtain the lower bound
$$
\Pr\left[Y > \frac{n}{4}\right]
=1-\Pr\left[Y\leq\left(1-\frac{1}{2}\right){\rm E}[Y]\right]
\geq 1-\exp\left(-\frac{\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^2\cdot \frac{n}{2}}{2}\right)
=1-\exp\left( -\frac{n}{16} \right)\enspace.
$$
The probability that the initial position of all $P$ particles have distance
at least $\frac{n}{4}$ to the unique optimal position is the $P$th power of
this probability and can be bounded from below for large $n$ by
$$
\left(1-\exp\left( -\frac{n}{16} \right)\right)^P
\geq 1-P \cdot \exp\left( -\frac{n}{16} \right)
\overset{n\geq 16\ln(2P)}{\geq} \frac{1}{2}\enspace.
$$
Please note that one can choose such an $n$ as $P=O(n^k)$ and
$16\cdot \ln(2\cdot{\rm poly}(n))=o(n)$ for any polynomial.
If the distance of the positions of all particles is at least $\frac{n}{4}$
then it takes at least $\frac{n}{4}$ iterations until the optimal position can
be reached as the distance can change only by one in each iteration. For each
iteration $P$ evaluations of the objective function are performed.
Therefore we have at least $\frac{n\cdot P}{4}$ objective function evaluations
with probability at least $\frac{1}{2}$ for large $n$ which results in the
claimed optimization time of $\Omega(n\cdot P)$.
\end{proof}
This means if we choose , e.\,g., $P=n^{10}$ we would have at least
$\Omega(n^{11})$ function evaluations in expectation.
\subsection{Bounds on the Expected Optimization Time with High Probability \texorpdfstring{(Extension compared to~\cite{MRSSW:17})}{(Extension compared to conference version)}}
We derive upper bounds on the expected optimization
time of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace that hold with high probability.
\begin{theorem}
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a randomized Las Vegas algorithm with expected runtime
$T(n)$. If $\mathcal{A}$ is executed $\lambda\cdot\log_2(n)$ times and each time
$\mathcal{A}$ gets a time budget of $2\cdot T(n)$, then $\mathcal{A}$ terminates
successfully at least once with high probability.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
From Markov's inequality we have that each repetition of the algorithm
independently terminates successfully with probability at least $1/2$.
Therefore, all runs of $\mathcal{A}$ are unsuccessful with probability at
most
\[
\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^{\lambda\cdot\log_2(n)}=n^{-\lambda}\enspace,
\]
which completes the proof.
\end{proof}
This result implies the following bounds for \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace.
\begin{corollary}
If the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace is repeated $\lambda\cdot\log_2(n)$ times but each repetition
is terminated after $2\cdot T(n)$ iterations, where $T(n)$ is the upper bound
on the expected number of iterations to find the optimum specified in
theorems~\ref{thm:onepso:sorting} and~\ref{thm:onepso:onemax} with suitable
constant factor, then \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace finds the optimal solution with high
probability.
\end{corollary}
\section{Towards a General Framework}
\label{sec:application}
In the previous section we applied the tools from Section \ref{sec:tools} to
prove bounds on the runtime of \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace. In this section we provide some remarks
on how our tools can be applied to other settings. In particular, our tools are
useful for analyzing randomized search heuristics that are not elitism-based.
If an algorithm is elitism-based, such as the $(1+1)$-EA, then the standard
fitness-level arguments are all that is needed to obtain runtime results.
To compute the expected runtime of elitism-based algorithms and even
algorithms, which are not elitism-based, one can use Markov models.
We used them in two different settings. First we use the Markov model to
determine the expected time until the attractor is reached again. For this
purpose we used the Markov model such that each state represents all positions
that have a specific distance to the attractor. After we have calculated the
return time to the attractor we combined the result with the fitness level
method to get upper bounds. For lower bounds we combined the result of the
Markov model with the fact that in the Markov model containing all solutions as
states the optimal solution is indistinguishable (in the sense of
Definition~\ref{defi:symmetric}) to many other positions.
Therefore we could multiply the number of solutions indistinguishable to the
optimum by the expected return time to the attractor to get lower bounds.
This was possible because $H_2$, the expected return time to decrease the
distance to the attractor at the state of distance two to the attractor, has
the same magnitude as $H_1$, the expected return time to decrease the distance
to the attractor at the state of distance one. In most cases it can be verified
easily that these expected return times have the same magnitude for at least
all states which represent solutions with a constant distance, i.\,e.,
$H_i=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace(H_1)$ for $i=O(1)$.
In most cases the search space can be separated into sets of solutions with a
common distance to another fixed solution. This could be the optimal position,
a best so far solution as in our case or something else. For all those
separations it is true that a solution either moves a single step towards that
distinguished solution, stays in the same distance, or moves a single step away
of the distinguished solution. This almost maps to the described Markov model
in Definition~\ref{defi:model}, because it differs in the fact that in the
presented Markov model one could not stay in the same state. In most cases one
can slightly transform the model to get the needed condition. For example
one can divide all probabilities by one minus the probability to stay in the
same state and also divide the result of the expected time by that factor and
set the probability to stay at the same state to zero.
After the probabilities are bounded one can directly apply
Theorem~\ref{thm:returntime} if the probability bounds are constant,
Theorem~\ref{thm:h1_lin_theta} if the probabilities are larger than $1/2$ and
grow linearly, Theorem~\ref{thm:h1_quad_theta} if the probabilities are at
least $1/2$ and the numerator of the probability grows in the same magnitude as
the denominator, Theorem~\ref{thm:boundsbyintegration} if the probabilities
start at a value lower than $1/2$ or if nothing matches then the actual formula
described in Equation~\ref{eq:recclosed} needs to be analyzed in the individual
situation.
An additional opportunity is given by the property of indistinguishability
specified in Definition~\ref{defi:symmetric}. One may find a Markov model,
probably the complete solution space, where some or many solutions look equal
to the optimizing algorithm as long as the solutions are not visited. In that
case Theorem~\ref{thm:lower_bound} directly supplies a lower bound on the
expected time to reach the optimum. Actually this argument can also be used if
the analyzed solution or solutions are not the optimum.
\fi
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
We propose a simple and general adaptation of the PSO algorithm for a broad class of discrete optimization
problems. For one particle, we provide upper and lower bounds on its
expected optimization time for the sorting problem and \onemax and generalize
the upper bounds to \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace with arbitrary number of particles and we also prove
lower bounds of \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace optimizing pseudo-Boolean functions. Depending on the
parameter $c$, which is the probability of moving towards the
attractor, the expected optimization time may be polynomial ($c \geq 1/2$) and
exponential ($c < 1/2$), resp. The cornerstone of our analysis are $\Theta$-bounds
on the expected time it takes until the PSO returns to the attractor. Our analysis also provides the variance of this value.
We analyze Markov chains and provide tools to evaluate
expected return times for certain classes of transition probabilities.
Additionally we establish a useful general property of indistinguishability
of a Markov process for obtaining lower
bounds on the expected first hitting time of a special state.
Application of the presented tools on other Markov chains,
often appearing in the analysis of randomized algorithms, would obviously be possible.
For future work, it would be interesting to see if the upper and lower bounds
on the expected optimization time for \onemax given in Theorems~\ref{thm:onepso:onemax}
and~\ref{thm:onepso:onemaxlb} are valid for any linear function $f : \{0,1\}^n
\rightarrow \ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}\xspace$, $f(x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n) = \sum_i w_i x_i$. Furthermore, we
conjecture that the upper bounds on the sorting problem for $c=0$ is $n!$ and
that the other proved upper bounds on the sorting problem are tight.
Another direction for future work is to apply our technical tools to other
meta-heuristics. In particular, our tools may be useful in the analysis of
``non-elitist'' meta-heuristics, for instance the
Strong Selection Weak Mutation (SSWM)
evolutionary regime introduced in~\cite{Gil:83} as an example of non-elitist
algorithm.
Finally, it would be interesting to determine the return time to the state
$S_0$ in a more general Markov model $\ensuremath{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}\xspace}((p_i)_{1 \leq i \leq n})$, where
$p_i = 1/2 + z(i, n)$ such that $z(i, n) = \operatorname{poly}(i) /
\operatorname{poly}(n)$, where the degrees of the polynomials differ, and
$z(i,n)$ is non-decreasing for $1 \leq i \leq n$.
This would generalize Theorems~\ref{thm:h1_lin_theta}
and~\ref{thm:h1_quad_theta}, and shed some light on the relation between
$z(i,n)$ and the return time to state $S_0$. Here, we conjecture that for
$z(i,n)$ as defined above the return time is in $poly(n)$.
Finally a proof for the claimed upper bound of $O(n!)$ on the expected time to
reach a specified permutation in the graph of permutations by an actual random
walk searching for the optimum would be beneficial.
To the best of our knowledge no proof exists so far.
\section{Evidence for Conjecture~\ref{conject:random_walk} \texorpdfstring{(Ext. compared to~\cite{MRSSW:17})}{(Extension compared to conference version)}}
\label{subsec:randomwalkconjecture}
In this section we provide computational evidence for
Conjecture~\ref{conject:random_walk}. To this end we compute exact
values for $T_{\rm sort}(n)$ for $n \leq 40$. For the calculation of
$T_{\rm sort}(n)$ for small $n$ a system of linear equations similar to
Equation~\ref{eq:recmarkov} is used. Let $\tau_0$ be the optimal
permutation (say, the identity) then
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
h_{\tau_0} &= 0 , &\\
h_{\tau} &= 1 + \sum_{\nu\in\ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}(\tau)}\frac{1}{\vert \ensuremath{\mathcal{N}}(\tau)\vert} h_{\nu}, & \tau \text{ a permutation}\enspace.
\label{eq:htau}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
This simple approach works only for very small $n$ since one variable for
each permutation is used. Our results are based on the following insight: For
each permutation $\tau$ we examine the permutation $\nu$ such that
$\tau\circ\nu=\tau_0$. Since the value $h_\tau$ is equal for all permutations
with the same cycle lengths of the cycle decomposition of $\nu$ the number of
variables in the system of linear equations can be reduced to the number of
integer partitions of $n$, where $n$ is the number of items to sort. Hence,
for $n = 40$, we have reduced the number of variables from $40!$ to $37\,338$,
which is a manageable number. $T_{\rm sort}(n)$ is then just a linear
combination of the calculated values.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[
auto
]
\tikzset{>={Stealth[length=2.5mm]}}
\node[ellipse, draw] (v1111) {$(1,1,1,1)$};
\node[ellipse, draw, right = of v1111] (v211) {$(2,1,1)$};
\node[right = of v211] (vhelpa) {};
\node[right = of vhelpa] (vhelpb) {};
\node[right = of vhelpb] (vhelpc) {};
\node[ellipse, draw, above = of vhelpb] (v31) {$(3,1)$};
\node[ellipse, draw, below = of vhelpb] (v22) {$(2,2)$};
\node[ellipse, draw, right = of vhelpc] (v4) {$(4)$};
\path[]
(v1111) edge [->,bend right] node [below] {$1$} (v211)
(v211) edge [->,bend right] node [above] {$\frac{1}{6}$} (v1111)
(v211) edge [->,out=10,in=-130] node [above left] {$\frac{2}{3}$} (v31)
(v211) edge [->,bend right] node [below left] {$\frac{1}{6}$} (v22)
(v22) edge [->,out=130,in=-10] node [below left] {$\frac{1}{3}$} (v211)
(v22) edge [->,bend right] node [below right] {$\frac{2}{3}$} (v4)
(v31) edge [->,bend right] node [above left] {$\frac{1}{2}$} (v211)
(v31) edge [->,out=-50,in=-190] node [above right] {$\frac{1}{2}$} (v4)
(v4) edge [->,out=190,in=50] node [below right] {$\frac{1}{3}$} (v22)
(v4) edge [->,bend right] node [above right] {$\frac{2}{3}$} (v31)
;
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Search space for the problem of sorting four items by transpositions. The states are partitioned by their cycle lengths.}
\label{fig:cycles4}
\end{figure}
In Figure~\ref{fig:cycles4} we can see the search space of the sorting problem
for four items partitioned by their cycle lengths. This results
in states which are represented by the integer partitions of $n=4$. The
complete search space with all permutations with $n=4$ items is already
visualized in Figure~\ref{fig:permutations}. In Figure~\ref{fig:cycles4} each state is labeled by the
cycle lengths of the current permutation and can represent different
permutations. $(1,1,1,1)$ is only a single permutation - the identity
permutation $1234$ - where each cycle is a singleton cycle - a cycle with
length one. All neighboring permutations of $(1,1,1,1)$ contain two swapped
items and two items which stay at their position. Therefore the cycle lengths
are $(2,1,1)$ and there are six permutations with these cycle lengths. The
neighbors of permutations with cycle lengths $(2,1,1)$ can have cycle lengths
$(1,1,1,1)$, $(3,1)$ or $(2,2)$. Out of the six possible exchange operations
one splits the cycle of length two into two cycles of length one, one exchange
operation merges the two singleton cycles to one cycle of length two getting
two cycles of length two and the remaining four exchange operations merge the
cycle of length two with a singleton cycle getting cycle lengths $(3,1)$. The
respective transition probabilities for a random walk are also visualized in
Figure~\ref{fig:cycles4}. Furthermore, there are three permutations with cycle
lengths $(2,2)$ - the permutations $2143$, $3412$ and $4321$. The remaining
eight permutations of the third column in Figure~\ref{fig:permutations} have
cycle lengths $(3,1)$ and the six permutations in the last column in
Figure~\ref{fig:permutations} have only a single cycle of length four.
The values of $h_\tau$ satisfying Equation~\ref{eq:htau} are $h_{(1,1,1,1)}=0$,
$h_{2,1,1}=23$, $h_{(2,2)}=27$, $h_{(3,1)}=\frac{105}{4}$,
$h_{(4)}=\frac{55}{2}$ and then we have
$T_{\rm sort}(4)=\frac{1}{4!}\cdot(h_{(1,1,1,1)}+6\cdot h_{2,1,1}+3\cdot h_{(2,2)}+6\cdot h_{(3,1)}+6\cdot h_{(4)})=\frac{99}{4}=4!+\frac{3}{4}$.
Please note that this value does not rely on experiments. Instead the
evaluations result in the exact expected optimization time.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\input{random_walk_sorting.tex}
\caption{Expected time it takes for the random walk to reach the sorted
sequence of $n$ items in the graph of permutations divided by $n$ factorial.}
\label{fig:random_walk_sorting}
\end{figure}
In Figure~\ref{fig:random_walk_sorting} the exact value of $T_{\rm sort}(n)$
divided by $n!$ tends to one. Proving that this holds for large $n$ implies that $T_{\rm sort}(n)
=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\Theta}}\xspace(n!)$ and also Conjecture~\ref{conject:random_walk}.
\section{Evidence for Conjecture~\ref{con:sorting:lb} \texorpdfstring{(Ext. compared to~\cite{MRSSW:17})}{(Extension compared to conference version)}}
\label{subsec:approxOptTime}
For the sorting problem, the lower and upper bound on the return time to the
attractor have the following gaps. For $0<c<1/2$ the expected number of
iterations to return to the attractor vary from $\Omega^{*}(\alpha(c)^n)$ to
$O^*\left( \left( (1-c)/{c} \right)^n \right)$ and for $c=1/2$ these values
vary from $\Omega(n^{2/3})$ to $O(n)$.
We provide a simplified Markov model based on an averaging argument. We
conjecture that the simplified model and the actual model are asymptotically
equivalent.
To improve the understanding of the search space of permutations we will
approximate the improvement probabilities to obtain approximations of the expected return time to
the attractor. For this purpose, instead of using upper and lower bounds on the
probability to move towards the attractor, we use the average value.
If the probability to be in a specific permutation equals the probability to be
in any other permutation with the same distance to the attractor then this
approximation would also result in the exact values.
\begin{conjecture}
Let $H_1$ be the expected number of iterations until the \textsc{OnePSO}\xspace returns to the attractor $g$ if the current distance to the attractor is one while optimizing the sorting problem.
Let $p_x$ be the probability to move from permutation $x$ to a permutation $y$ such that $\ensuremath{d}\xspace(x,g)=1+\ensuremath{d}\xspace(y,g)$.
Let
\[\hat p_i={\displaystyle\sum_{x\in X_i} p_x}/{\vert X_i\vert}\]
be the average probability to reduce the distance to the attractor.
Let $\hat H_1$ be the expected number of iterations in $\hat M=\ensuremath{\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}\xspace}( (\hat p_i)_{1\leq i\leq n-1}))$ to move from state $S_1$ to $S_0$ (see Def.~\ref{defi:model}).
We conjecture that $H_1\sim\hat H_1$.
\end{conjecture}
To provide evidence we compute these average improvement probabilities and
compare the number of expected iterations.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:average_improvement}
The average improvement probability of moving towards the attractor while optimizing the sorting problem is
$$
\hat p_i=c+(1-c)\cdot\frac{\displaystyle\sum_{k=1}^{i+1}\left( \frac{k-1}{n-1}\cdot\frac{(n-1)!}{(n-k)!}\cdot\stirling{n-k}{n-i-1} \right)}{\displaystyle\stirling{n}{n-i}}\enspace,
$$
where $i$ is the distance to the attractor and $\stirling{n}{m}$ are the unsigned Stirling numbers of the first kind.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The unsigned Stirling numbers of the first kind $\stirling{n}{m}$ represent
the number of permutations of $n$ elements with exactly $m$ cycles which can easily be calculated by the recursive formula
\begin{align*}
\stirling{n}{m}=\begin{cases}
1&\text{if }n=0\wedge m=0\\
0&\text{if }n=0\wedge m\neq 0\\
\stirling{n-1}{m-1}+(n-1)\cdot \stirling{n-1}{m}&\text{if }n>0
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
W.l.o.g let the attractor be the identity permutation. Then the attractor has $n$ singleton cycles.
An increase of the distance to the attractor by one is equivalent to a decrease of the number of cycles by one.
Therefore a permutation with distance $i$ to the attractor has exactly $n-i$ cycles.
This means that the number of permutations with distance $i$ is $\stirling{n}{n-i}$.
The probability that a fixed item is in a cycle of length $k$ among all permutations with distance $i$ from the attractor is
$$\frac{\binom{n-1}{k-1}\cdot(k-1)!\cdot\stirling{n-k}{n-i-1}}{\stirling{n}{n-i}}=\frac{\frac{(n-1)!}{(n-k)!}\cdot\stirling{n-k}{n-i-1}}{\stirling{n}{n-i}} \enspace.$$
Choosing the remaining $i-1$ items in the cycle of length $k$ from the
remaining $n-1$ items has $\binom{n-1}{k-1}$ options. There are $(k-1)!$
orderings of these items within the cycle. The remaining $n-k$ items have to
be partitioned into $n-i-1$ cycles which results in another factor of
$\stirling{n-k}{n-i-1}$ options. In combination with the first cycle of length
$k$ a permutation with $n-i$ cycles is achieved.
This probability does not change if we choose a random item instead of a fixed
item. Furthermore the probability of moving towards the attractor is
determined by the probability that a cycle is split into two cycles which
happens if two items of the same cycle are picked for an exchange. If the
first picked item is in a cycle of length $k$ then the probability that the
second item is in the same cycle is $\frac{k-1}{n-1}$. Summing up these
probabilities over all possible cycle lengths for the first picked item
results in the claimed result for $\hat p_i$, but there also the constant $c$
of the \textsc{D-PSO}\xspace comes into play which forces a move towards the attractor.
Please note that the maximal cycle length at distance $i$ from the attractor
is $i+1$ which explains the upper limit of the sum.
\end{proof}
By using these average probabilities of moving towards the attractor we obtain
a Markov chain where it is only possible to move to state $S_{i-1}$ or
$S_{i+1}$ from state $S_i$ (and not to any other state) in a single step. For
Markov chains with this property the return times can be computed as in
Section~\ref{subsec:const}.
The result helps us to estimate the expected return time to the attractor. If
$c$ is zero then the expected return time if we are at distance one to the
attractor is exactly $n!-1$ which is also obtained exactly by the model with
average probabilities.
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:approx}
\hfill
\begin{enumerate}
\item
Assuming $T(n)=\gamma(c)^n\cdot f(n)$ where $f$ is a
polynomial then
$\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}T(n)/T(n-1)=\gamma(c)$.
\item
Assuming $T(n)=f(n)$ where $f$ is again a polynomial then
$\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\log_{\frac{n}{n-1}}\left( T(n)/T(n-1) \right)$ is the maximal degree of $f(n)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
Let $f(n)=a\cdot n^b+o(n^b)$, $b>0$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
Assuming $T(n)=\gamma(c)^n\cdot f(n)$ leads to
$$
\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\frac{T(n)}{T(n-1)}
=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\gamma(c)\frac{n^b+o(n^b)}{(n-1)^b+o((n-1)^b)}
=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\gamma(c)\frac{(\frac{n}{n-1})^b+o(1)}{1+o(1)}
=\gamma(c)
$$
\item
Assuming $T_{\rm sort}(n)=f(n)$ leads to
$$
\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\log_{\frac{n}{n-1}}\left(\frac{T(n)}{T(n-1)}\right)
=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\log_{\frac{n}{n-1}}\left(\frac{(\frac{n}{n-1})^b+o(1)}{1+o(1)}\right)
=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\log_{\frac{n}{n-1}}\left(\left(\frac{n}{n-1}\right)^b\right)
=b $$
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
Let $q_{ex}(n,c):=\frac{H_1}{H_1'}$ where $H_1$ and $H_1'$ are the expected
return times to the attractor for the sorting problem on $n$ and $n-1$ items
respectively if the attractor has transposition distance one to the current
position (actual \textbf{ex}act model).
Let additionally $q_{av}(n,c):=\frac{H_1}{H_1'}$ where $H_1$ and $H_1'$ are the
corresponding return times in the Markov model with \textbf{av}erage success probability
specified in Theorem~\ref{thm:average_improvement}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\input{returntime_average.tex}
\caption{Quotients of return times $q_{ex}$ and $q_{av}$ for different values
of $n$ and the upper and lower bound on the limit of $q_{ex}$ if $n$ tends to
infinity.}
\label{fig:returntime_average}
\end{figure}
In Figure~\ref{fig:returntime_average} $q_{ex}$ and $q_{av}$ for different
values of $n$ and the upper bound $(1-c)/c$ and the lower bound $\alpha(c)$ on
the base of the exponential part of the return time for the sorting problem.
With the first part of Remark~\ref{rem:approx} we also notice that $(1-c)/c$ is also an upper
bound and $\alpha(c)$ is a lower bound on the limit of $q_{ex}$ if $n$ tends to
infinity as $q_{ex}$ tends to the actual base of the exponential part of the
expected return time.
As $q_{ex}$ has to be calculated by a system of linear equations where the
number of variables equals the number of integer partitions of $n$ (see
description after Conjecture~\ref{conject:random_walk}) we can not evaluate
$q_{ex}$ for large $n$. The values of $q_{av}$ are quite similar to the values
of $q_{ex}$ for corresponding $n$. For $c=0$ the values are exactly the same
and for $n=30$ the relative error is less than $0.04$.
Therefore we conjecture that the limit of $q_{av}$ if $n$ tends to infinity is
close or even equal to the limit of $q_{ex}$. But as we can see
in Figure~\ref{fig:returntime_average} the values of $q_{av}$ tend to the upper
bound of $(1-c)/c$. We omitted the graph of $q_{av}(10\,000,c)$ as it overlaps the
graph of the upper bound almost completely. So it is reasonable to conjecture
that the limit
of $q_{ex}$ is close to the upper bound $(1-c)/c$. If this is actually true
then for all runtime results the value of $\alpha(c)$ can be replaced by
$((1-c)/c)-\varepsilon$ for some small non-negative value $\varepsilon$ which
could probably be even zero.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\input{returntime_average05.tex}
\caption{Quotients of return times $q_{ex}$ and $q_{av}$ for $c=1/2$.}
\label{fig:returntime_average05}
\end{figure}
By using the second part of Remark~\ref{rem:approx} the limit of
$\log_{\frac{n}{n-1}}q_{ex}(n,1/2)$ if $n$ tends to infinity supplies us the exponent
of the largest monomial (probably omitting logarithmic factors) of the return
time if $c=1/2$. In Figure~\ref{fig:returntime_average05} we can see the
quotients $q_{ex}(n,1/2)$ for n up to $40$ and $q_{av}(n,1/2)$ for even larger
values of $n$. Also here $q_{av}$ can be used as an approximation on $q_{ex}$
and it is reasonable to assume that the limit is one. Please note that
Theorem~\ref{thm:onepso:sorting} tells us that the limit
$\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}q_{ex}(n,1/2)\leq 1$.
Similarly to the exponential case with $c<1/2$ we conjecture that the actual
expected value $H_1$ is close to the proposed upper bound on $H_1$ described in
the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:onepso:sorting}.
Using this results for lower bounds on the expected optimization time we would have
\[
T_{\rm sort}(n) =
\begin{cases}
\Omega(n^2) & \text{if $c \in (\frac{1}{2}, 1]$} \\
\Omega(n^{3}) & \text{if $c = \frac{1}{2}$} \\
\Omega \left(\left(\frac{1-c}{c}\right)^n\cdot n^2\right) & \text{if $c \in (0, \frac{1}{2})$}
\end{cases}
\]
as specified in Conjecture~\ref{con:sorting:lb}.
These bounds are only a factor of $\log(n)$ apart from the upper bounds
specified in Theorem~\ref{thm:onepso:sorting}.
Please note that the results in this section do not rely on
experiments. Instead, exact values for the expectation are computed.
Nevertheless, we have done some experiments with small values of $n$ and the
measured optimization times comply with the evaluated exact optimization
times.
Especially for values $c$ close to
zero, optimization times of up to $n!$ are claimed which can not be
confirmed in reasonable time for larger values of $n$.
|
\section{Introduction}
From SVM kernels to hidden layers in neural nets, the similarity structure of representations
plays a fundamental role in how well classifiers generalize from training data.
Representations are also instrumental in enabling well-calibrated confidence estimates for model
predictions.
This is particularly important when the model is likely to
be presented with outlier test data: {\it e.g.} to assist with
medical diagnostics when a patient has an unknown condition,
or more generally when safety or security are at stake.
In this paper, we use the labels of the data points to illuminate the class similarity structure of the internal representations learned by discriminative training.
Our study of internal representations is structured around a loss function,
the \textit{soft nearest neighbor loss}~\cite{salakhutdinov2007learning}, which we explore to measure the lack of separation of class manifolds in representation space---in other words,
the \textit{entanglement} of different classes.
We expand upon the original loss by introducing a notion of temperature to
control the perplexity at which entanglement is measured.
We show several use cases of this loss including
as an analytical tool for the progress of discriminative and generative training.
It can also be used to measure the entanglement of synthetic and real data in generative tasks.
We focus mainly on the effect of deliberately {\it maximizing} the entanglement of hidden representations in a classifier. Surprisingly, we find that, unlike the penultimate layer, hidden layers that perform feature extraction benefit from being entangled. That is, they should \textit{not} be forced to disentangle
data from different classes. In practice, we promote the entanglement of hidden layers
by adding our soft nearest neighbor loss as a bonus to the training objective.
We find that this bonus regularizes the model by encouraging representations that are already similar to become more similar if they have different labels.
The entangled representations form
class-independent clusters which capture other kinds of similarity that is helpful for eventual discrimination.
In addition to this regularization effect, entangled representations
support better estimates of uncertainty on outlier data, such as
adversarial examples or test inputs from a different distribution.
In our empirical study, we measure uncertainty with the Deep k-Nearest Neighbors (DkNN): the approach relies on a nearest neighbor search in the representation spaces of the model
to identify support in the training data for a given test input~\cite{papernot2018deep}.
Since entangled representations exhibit a similarity structure
that is less class-dependent, entangled models
more coherently project outlier data
that does not lie on the training manifold. In particular, data that is not from the training distribution has fewer than the normal number of neighbors in the predicted class. As a consequence,
uncertainty estimates provided by the DkNN are better
calibrated on entangled models.
The contributions of this paper are the following:
\vspace*{-0.1in}
\begin{itemize}
\item We explore and expand the soft nearest neighbor loss to characterize the class similarity structure in representation space (Section~\ref{sec:entanglement-loss}). Informally, the loss measures how entangled class manifolds are and can be used to track progress in both discriminative and generative tasks (Section~\ref{sec:entanglement-metric}).
\item We show that {\it maximizing} representation entanglement by adding a bonus proportional to the soft nearest neighbor loss to the training objective serves as a regularizer (Section~\ref{sec:entangling}).
\item We find that entangled representations deal better with outlier data far from the training manifold, thus supporting better confidence estimates on adversarial examples or different test distributions (Section~\ref{sec:entanglement-adversarial}).
\end{itemize}
\section{Soft Nearest Neighbor Loss}
\label{sec:entanglement-loss}
In the context of our work, the \textit{entanglement} of class manifolds characterizes how close pairs of representations from the same class are, relative to pairs of representations from different classes. If we have very low entanglement, then every representation is closer to representations in the same class than it is to representations in different classes. In other words, if entanglement is low then a nearest neighbor classifier based on those representations would have high accuracy.
The \textit{soft nearest neighbor loss}~\cite{salakhutdinov2007learning} measures entanglement over labeled data. The loss computation can be approximated over a batch of data.
Intuitively, we can think about this metric by imagining we are going to sample a neighboring point $j$ for every point $i$ in a batch, à la~\cite{goldberger2005neighbourhood},\footnote{The set of nearest neighbors for a given training point is also at the core of unsupervised techniques for nonlinear dimensionality reduction like locally-linear embeddings~\cite{roweis2000nonlinear}.}
where the probability of sampling $j$ depends on the distance between points $i$ and $j$. The soft nearest neighbor loss is the negative log probability of sampling a neighboring point $j$ from the same class as $i$. Our definition introduces a new parameter, the temperature, to control the relative importance
given to the distances between pairs of
points.
\paragraph{Definition.} The \textit{soft nearest neighbor loss} at temperature $T$, for a batch of $b$ samples $(x,y)$, is:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ent-loss}
l_{sn}(x,y,T) = -\frac{1}{b} \sum_{i\in 1..b} \log \left( \frac{\sum\limits_{\substack{j\in1..b \\j \neq i\ \\ y_i = y_j}}e^{-\frac{||x_i-x_j||^2}{T}}}{\sum\limits_{\substack{k\in1..b \\ k \neq i}} e^{-\frac{||x_i-x_k||^2}{T}}}\right)
\end{equation}
where $x$ may be either the raw input vector or its representation in some hidden layer.
At low temperatures, the loss is dominated by the small distances and the actual distances between widely separated representations are almost irrelevant.
We include TensorFlow code outlining the matrix operations needed to compute this loss efficiently with our submission.
\begin{figure}[t]
\minipage{0.24\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{ent1.png}
\endminipage\hfill
\minipage{0.24\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{ent2.png}
\endminipage\hfill
\minipage{0.24\textwidth}%
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{ent3.png}
\endminipage
\minipage{0.24\textwidth}%
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{ent4.png}
\endminipage
\caption{A set of 200 2D points is sampled from a Gaussian and labeled randomly. Then, using gradient descent on the x and y coordinates of the points, the soft nearest neighbor loss is minimized to decrease entanglement. The 4 classes become more isolated. While a direct comparison with other losses like cross-entropy is not possible for this experiment, we inspect and compare non-entangled and entangled representation spaces later in the paper.}
\label{fig:ent_vis_1}
\end{figure}
We plot different distributions annotated with their entanglement in Figure~\ref{fig:ent_vis_1}.
As we minimize the soft nearest neighbor loss to decrease entanglement, the result is not necessarily each class collapsing to a {\it single} point. The loss is low when each point is closer to members of its own class than to other classes, but this can be achieved by having several widely separated pure cluster for each class. This is illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:ent_vis_2} (Appendix~\ref{ap:bimodal}) by introducing a second mode in each of the classes, which is preserved when entanglement is minimized by gradient descent on the soft nearest neighbor.
Like the triplet loss~\citep{hoffer2015deep}, the soft nearest neighbor loss compares intra- to inter-class distances.
However, a notable difference is that the triplet loss samples a single positive and negative point to estimate the separation of classes, whereas the soft nearest neighbor loss uses all positive and negative points in the batch. As visualized in Figure~\ref{fig:triplet_vs_ent2}: when maximizing the soft nearest neighbor loss, this results in representations that are more spread out than the triplet loss.
We show that this is a useful property of the soft nearest neighbor loss in Section~\ref{sec:entangling} and defer a more complete treatment of the triplet loss to Appendix~\ref{ap:triplet}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{triplet_vs_ent2}
\label{fig:triplet_vs_ent2}
\caption{Comparing the triplet and soft nearest neighbor losses. The middle plot shows the initial condition where each point is labeled by its color, the left plot shows the effect of minimizing either loss, and the right shows the effect of maximizing it.}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Temperature.}
By varying the temperature $T$, it is possible to alter the value of the loss function significantly. As outlined in Equation~\ref{eq:ent-loss}, temperature divides the squared distance between points before it is negatively exponentiated. Thus, when temperature is large, the distances between widely separated points can influence the soft nearest neighbor loss. In the rest of this paper, we eliminate temperature as a hyperparameter by defining the entanglement loss as the minimum value over all temperatures:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:temp-ent-loss}
l^{\prime}_{sn}(x,y) = \arg\min_{T\in \mathbb{R}} l_{sn}(x,y,T)
\end{equation}
We approximate this quantity by initializing $T$ to a predefined value and, at every calculation of the loss, optimizing with gradient descent over $T$ to minimize the loss.\footnote{In practice, we found optimization to be more stable when we learn the inverse of the temperature.}
\section{Measuring Entanglement during Learning}
\label{sec:entanglement-metric}
The soft nearest neighbor loss serves as an analytical tool to characterize the class similarity structure of representations throughout learning. In classifiers trained with cross-entropy, the soft nearest neighbor loss illuminates how models learn to compose entangled layers for feature extraction with disentangled layers for classification. In generative models the loss shows how well they learn to entangle the synthetic data they generate with the real data from the distribution being modeled.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{resnet_entangle_third_block}
\caption{Entanglement of each layer within the last block of a ResNet on CIFAR-10, as measured with the soft nearest neighbor loss. Despite each layer initially disentangling data, as training progresses and features are co-opted as representations of sub features instead of classes, entanglement rises in all layers except for the final layer, which remains discriminative.}
\label{fig:resnet}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Discriminative Models}
\label{ssec:discriminative-models}
With the soft nearest neighbor loss, we measure the entanglement of representations learned by each layer
in the final block of a ResNet on CIFAR-10.
In Figure~\ref{fig:resnet}, we distinguish two regimes. After an initial sharp decrease, the entanglement of lower layers of the block increases as training progresses. This suggests that the lower layers are discovering features shared by multiple classes.
By contrast, the entanglement of the block's output layer consistently decreases throughout training because the last hidden layer must allow linear separation of the logit for the correct class from all the other logits.
Qualitatively consistent conclusions can be drawn at the granularity of blocks (rather than layer), as demonstrated by an experiment found in Appendix~\ref{ap:discriminative}. Later in Section~\ref{sec:entangling}, we build on this perhaps counter-intuitive finding and propose maximizing a soft nearest neighbor loss to regularize gradient descent on the cross-entropy loss.
\subsection{Generative Models}
We now turn to
generative models, and verify that they eventually entangle synthetic data with real data.
Then, we demonstrate how the soft nearest neighbor loss can act as an alternative to existing training objectives, in particular effectively replacing the discriminator used in GANs when semantics are captured by a distance in the input domain.
\paragraph{Entanglement in GANs. }
Synthetic data generated by GANs should be be highly entangled with real data because the generator is trained against a discriminator whose task is to discriminate between synthetic and real data~\cite{goodfellow2014generative}.
Here, we are no longer calculating the (self) entanglement of a training batch, but rather calculating the entanglement between a batch of real data %
and a batch of synthetic data. %
This comes down to applying the soft nearest neighbor loss on a data batch containing equal splits of real and synthetic points, labeled as `real' or `synthetic'.
In Figure~\ref{fig:gan-entanglement}, we report this measurement of entanglement at different stages of training a GAN on CIFAR10. We also
visualize real and synthetic data using t-SNE~\cite{maaten2008visualizing}.
We observe that some modes of the input space are ignored by the generator,
and conversely that some modes of the generated space are not representative of the true data distribution.
Note, however, how the real and synthetic data become less separable as training progresses, and how this is reflected in the entanglement score. This coherency between t-SNE and the soft nearest neighbor loss
is to be expected given that both rely on similar calculations.
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{cifar10_gan_ent_vis}
\caption{As training of vanilla GANs progresses, here on CIFAR10, the generator learns to entangle synthetic and training data, as confirmed by their increasing overlap in the t-SNE visualization as well as the larger soft nearest neighbor loss values. }
\label{fig:gan-entanglement}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{entangle_gans_cifar10}
\caption{Entanglement of real and synthetic (generated) data throughout training, as measured with the soft nearest neighbor loss on two types of GAN architectures trained on CIFAR10.}
\label{fig:cifar_gan}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\linewidth]{entangle_gans_mnist_grid}
\caption{Images sampled from a generative model trained to maximize entanglement between synthetic and training data. The grid was created by extrapolating over 2 dimensions of the input noise.}
\label{fig:ent_gan}
\end{figure}
Similarly to the aforementioned use of the soft nearest neighbor loss as a metric to evaluate class manifold separation during classifier training, we measure entanglement between the real and generated data throughout training. In the context of generative models, there is only one soft nearest neighbor loss evaluation per architecture, because entanglement is only defined in the input domain. In Figure~\ref{fig:ent_gan}, we see that two
variants of GANs exhibit different regimes of entanglement between synthetic and real CIFAR10 data as training progresses. We repeat the experiment on MNIST with qualitatively identical results in the Appendix~\ref{ap:gen}.
\paragraph{Soft nearest neighbor loss as an objective.}
\label{sec:gan-snnl-objective}
Given that GANs implicitly maximize entanglement, it is natural to ask whether the soft nearest neighbor loss can be used directly as a training objective for the generator.
To test this hypothesis, we replaced the discriminator (and its loss) with an inverse soft nearest neighbor loss in the GAN implementation used in our previous experiments on MNIST: i.e., the generator is now encouraged to maximize entanglement computed over a batch of real and synthetic data directly in pixel space.
On MNIST, this results in realistic and varied generated images (see Figure~\ref{fig:ent_gan}), which include all classes. Modes of the classes are captured by the generator, with for instance both the curly and straight ``2''. They are however noticeably smoother than data generated by traditional GANs. As a possible explanation, the generator maximizes the soft nearest neighbor loss evaluated on a batch when its output lies in between two training examples.
However, this strategy does not generalize to more complex datasets like CIFAR10, most likely because the Euclidean distance in pixel space used in the soft nearest neighbor loss does not adequately capture the underlying semantics of images.
This limitation may most likely be overcome by measuring entanglement in a learned space, instead of pixel space. A potential preliminary instantiation of this intuition is explored in Appendix~\ref{ap:gan-sn}: we replace the cross-entropy loss that a normal discriminator minimizes with the soft nearest neighbor loss applied to a learned space. In this way, the discriminator learns a projection of the real and synthetic data that separates one from the other.
Our proof-of-concept from Appendix~\ref{ap:gan-sn} demonstrates that this strategy succeeds on MNIST.
This may also overcome the previously mentioned limitations for CIFAR10 image generation.
However, our focus being classification, we leave a comprehensive investigation of the interplay between entanglement and generative modeling as future work.
\section{Entangling Representation Spaces}
\label{sec:entangling}
Apart from its characterization of similarity in representation spaces, we found that the soft nearest neighbor may also serve as a training objective for generative models. At first, it appears that for discriminative models, one should encourage lower entanglement of internal representations by minimizing the soft nearest neighbor loss. Indeed, this would translate to
larger margins between
different classes~\cite{elsayed2018large}.
However, we show here that \textit{maximizing} entanglement---in addition to minimizing cross-entropy---regularizes learning.
Specifically, training a network to minimize cross-entropy and maximize soft nearest neighbor loss reduces overfitting and achieves marginally better test performance. In Section~\ref{sec:entanglement-adversarial}, we will furthermore show that it promotes a class similarity structure in the hidden layers that better separates in-distribution from out-of-distribution data.
\subsection{Intuition behind Maximizing Entanglement}
Clustering data based on its labels is a natural avenue
for learning representations that discriminate: once a
test point is assigned to a cluster of training points,
its label can be inferred. This is referred to as the cluster assumption in the semi-supervised learning literature~\cite{chapelle2009semi}.
However if test data is not represented in one of these class-homogeneous clusters, the behaviour of the network and the subsequent predicted label may be inconsistent. We argue that projecting all points in a class to a homogeneous clusters can be harmful to generalization and robustness.
Instead, we propose
regularizing the model by maximizing entanglement (through the soft nearest neighbor loss) to
develop
class-independent
similarity structures. This not-only promotes
spread-out intraclass representations, but also turns out to be good for recognizing data that is not
from the training distribution by observing that in the hidden layers,
such data has fewer than the normal number of neighbors from the predicted class.
Concretely, we minimize an objective that balances a cross-entropy term on logits and a soft nearest neighbor term on each hidden representation with a hyper-parameter $\alpha<0$, we represent the network as a series of transformations $f^k$, where $f^1$ is the first layer and $f^k$ is the logit layer.
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:total-loss}
l(f, x, y) = -\sum_j y_j \log f^k(x_j) + \alpha \cdot \sum_{i\in k-1} l^{\prime}_{sn}(f^i(x), y)
\end{equation}
This may seem counter-intuitive but we note that many regularizers take on the form of two seemingly mutually exclusive objectives. For example label smoothing~\citep{pereyra2017regularizing} can be thought of trying to train a network to make accurate and confident predictions, but not overly confident. Similarly, dropout prompts individual neurons to operate independently from other---randomly deactivated---neurons, while still learning features that can be meaningfully combined \citep{srivastava2014dropout}.
Here,
our training objective simultaneously minimizes cross-entropy and maximizes the soft nearest neighbor loss. In other words, the model is constrained to learn representations whose similarity structure facilitates classification (separability) but also entanglement of representations from different
classes (inseparability).
\subsection{Soft Nearest Neighbor Loss as a Regularizer}
We first measure the generalization of models
that maximize the soft nearest neighbor loss in
addition to minimizing
cross-entropy.
We trained a convolutional network\footnote{The architecture we used was made up of two convolutional layers followed by three fully connected layers and a final softmax layer. The network was trained with Adam at a learning rate of 1e-4, a batch size of 256 for 14000 steps.} on MNIST, Fashion-MNIST and SVHN, as well as a ResNet\footnote{The ResNet v2 with 15 layers was trained for 106 epochs with a exponential decreasing learning rate starting at 0.4.} on CIFAR10.
Two variants of each model were trained with a different objective: (1) a \textit{baseline} with cross-entropy only and (2) an \textit{entangled} variant balancing both cross-entropy and the soft nearest neighbor loss as per Equation~\ref{eq:total-loss}. As reported in Table~\ref{tbl:ent-regularizer}, all entangled models outperformed their non-entangled counterparts to some extent.
While we note that baseline accuracies we report are below the current state-of-the-art for the corresponding datasets, this is an intentional experimental design choice we made. Indeed, we wanted to isolate the behavior of our soft nearest neighbor loss from other factors (e.g., dropout or other regularizers) that may impact representation spaces.
\begin{table}[p]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
CNN Model & Test Accuracy & Entangled & Baseline \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}MNIST\end{tabular}} & Best & \textbf{99.23\%} & 98.83\% \\ \cline{2-4}
& Average & \textbf{99.16\%} & 98.82\% \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Fashion-\\ MNIST\end{tabular}} & Best & \textbf{91.48\%} & 90.42\% \\ \cline{2-4}
& Average & \textbf{91.06\%} & 90.25\% \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}SVHN\end{tabular}} & Best & \textbf{88.81\%} & 87.63\% \\ \cline{2-4}
& Average & \textbf{89.90\%} & 89.71\% \\ \hline
\hline
ResNet Model & Test Accuracy & Entangled & Baseline \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}CIFAR10\end{tabular}} & Best & \textbf{91.220\%} & 90.780\% \\ \cline{2-4}
& Average & \textbf{89.900\%} & 89.713\% \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Using a composite loss, which minimizes cross entropy loss and maximizes entanglement through the soft nearest neighbor loss, marginally increases test performance on all datasets studied. A CNN was used for MNIST, FashionMNIST and SVHN. ResNet was used for CIFAR10. Values are averaged over 4 runs for the CNN and 100 runs for the ResNet. No additional regularizers were used and thus we achieve less than state-of-the-art performance, but are able to study the Soft Nearest Neighbor loss in isolation.}
\label{tbl:ent-regularizer}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\linewidth]{VizierRunsAccVsEntMult}
\caption{Test accuracy as a function of the soft nearest neighbor hyper-parameter $\alpha$ for 64 training runs of a ResNet v2 on CIFAR10. These runs are selected by a strategy to tune the learning rate, entanglement hyper-parameter $\alpha$, and initial temperature $T$.}
\label{fig:VizierRunsAccVsEntMult}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{SVHN_v_steps_entanglement_2}
\caption{Accuracy and cross-entropy for baseline (blue) and entangled (red) models as a function of the number of training steps. In addition to increased test accuracy (left), the smaller gap between cross-entropy on training and test data (right) for entangled models illustrates how they begin to overfit much later and to a much lesser degree than non-entangled counterparts. Curves are averaged over two runs for both models.}
\label{fig:SVHN_v_steps_entanglement}
\end{figure}
To validate that maximizing entanglement is beneficial for generalization, we fine-tuned the hyperparameter $\alpha$ that balances the cross-entropy and soft nearest neighbor terms in our objective. The search was conducted on our CIFAR10 model using a strategy based on Batched Gaussian Process Bandits~\cite{desautels2014parallelizing}. Because both positive and negative values of $\alpha$ were considered, this search explored respectively both minimization and maximization of representation entanglement. As illustrated by Figure~\ref{fig:VizierRunsAccVsEntMult}, the search independently confirmed that maximizing entanglement led to better test performance as it eventually converged to large negative values of $\alpha$.
To explain the increased test performance of entangled models, we hypothesized that the entanglement term added to our training objective serves as a regularizer. To verify this, we measured the cross-entropy loss on training and test
data while training the non-entangled and entangled variants of our models for a large number of steps. This allowed for overfitting.
We draw the corresponding learning curves for SVHN in Figure~\ref{fig:SVHN_v_steps_entanglement} and observe that the entangled model not only overfits at a later stage in training (about 5,000 steps later), it also overfits to a much lesser degree.
\section{Entangled Models in Adversarial Settings}
\label{sec:entanglement-adversarial}
Given the improved---more class-independent---similarity structure of entangled representations obtained through maximizing the soft nearest neighbor loss, we hypothesize that entangled models also offer better estimates of their uncertainty. Here, we do \textit{not} claim robustness to adversarial examples but rather show that entangled representations help distinguish outliers from real data.
We validate this by considering two types of out-of-distribution test data: first, maliciously-crafted adversarial examples, and second, real inputs from a different test distribution. We find that hidden layers of entangled models consistently represent outlier data far away from the expected distribution's manifold.
It is natural to ask if reduced class margins make entangled representations more vulnerable to adversarial perturbations. This is not necessarily the case. In fact, we show in Appendix~\ref{ap:adv} that models with state-of-the-art robustness on MNIST have higher entanglement than non-robust counterparts.
Furthermore, recent work has found that when models concentrate data, they are more vulnerable to adversarial examples~\cite{mahloujifar2018curse}, whereas entangled models encourage intraclass clusters to spread out.
\vspace*{-0.05in}
\paragraph{Attack techniques.}
Our study considers both white-box and black-box threat models.
Given access to gradients in the white-box setting, various heuristics and optimization algorithms allow the adversary to
create adversarial examples
~\citep{biggio2013evasion,szegedy2013intriguing}. Here, we use both single-step and iterative attacks: the Fast Gradient Sign Method~\cite{goodfellow2014explaining} and Basic Iterative Method~\cite{kurakin2016adversarial}. When
gradients are unavailable, as is the case
for black-box interactions
(i.e., the
adversary only has access to the label predicted), a common strategy is to first find adversarial examples
on a substitute model and then transfer them to the victim model~\citep{szegedy2013intriguing,papernot2017practical}.
Adversarial perturbations are said to be \textit{universal} if they change a model's prediction into a chosen class
once added to \textit{any} input \citep{goodfellow2014explaining,moosavi2017universal}.
\vspace*{-0.05in}
\paragraph{Uncertainty estimation.} Estimating the epistemic uncertainty that stems from the finite nature of datasets analyzed by models during learning remains an open problem. In our work, we apply a recent proposal called the Deep k-Nearest Neighbors~\cite{papernot2018deep} that computes the credibility of each test-time prediction; a metric that reflects how well the training data supports this prediction. The approach consists in running a k-nearest neighbors search in the representation space learned by each hidden layer so as to extract the k training points whose representation is closest to the predicted representation of the test point considered. If the labels of these nearest training points largely agree with the test label being predicted, the prediction is assigned high credibility. Otherwise, it is assigned a low credibility score, which implies it should not be relied upon. A holdout dataset is used to calibrate the expected level of agreement between the training and test data.
\subsection{Entangled Representations support more Calibrated DkNN Estimates of Uncertainty}
\label{ssec:sn-dknn}
In the original proposal, the DkNN is applied to vanilla neural networks without modifying the way they are trained. Intuitively, training with the soft nearest neighbor loss should impact the credibility predicted by the DkNN because it modifies the class similarity structure of hidden representations that are core to the analysis performed by the DkNN.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{SVHN_all_dknn_scatter_plots_1000_4}
\caption{DkNN credibility (i.e., uncertainty estimate) as a function of prediction accuracy on SVHN (averaged over two runs). Each point corresponds to adversarial examples generated with $\varepsilon \in [0.01, 0.5]$. Iterative attacks use a fixed number of steps (1000) and a fixed $\alpha = 0.01$ for all $\varepsilon$. Plots are shown for white-box FGSM attack (top left), white-box BIM attack (top right), black-box attacks with source knowledge (bottom left), black-box attacks with zero knowledge (bottom right). Source knowledge implies the adversary is aware of the defense and transfers adversarial examples from a model trained with the same loss, whereas zero knowledge adversaries always transfer from a model trained with cross-entropy. This allows us to rule out most common forms of gradient masking. In all cases, entangled models yield credibility estimates that are more correlated with accuracy, and the two bottom graphs show that they suffer less from transferability.}
\label{fig:dknn_svhn}
\end{figure}
Using MNIST, Fashion-MNIST and SVHN, we compare two models : one trained with cross-entropy only and one with the composite loss from Equation~\ref{eq:total-loss} that includes a cross-entropy term and soft nearest neighbor term.
We compare how the two models' credibility estimates correlate with their predictive accuracy. Ideally, the relationship between the two should be the identity; if a DkNN system was perfectly calibrated then inputs that were correctly classified would have 100\% credibility while inputs that were incorrectly classified would have 0\% credibility.
We tested each model on FGSM and BIM adversarial examples assuming white-box access to the model, with progressively larger perturbations ($\varepsilon$ gradient step). We also considered adversarial examples crafted with the BIM attack but transferred from a different model. This black-box attack enables us to test for gradient masking. In Figure~\ref{fig:dknn_svhn}, we then plotted the average DkNN credibility (low credibility corresponds to higher uncertainty) with respect to the classification accuracy. Each point corresponds to a different perturbation magnitude. While the credibility is not perfectly linear with respect to the accuracy for either the standard or entangled model, the correlation between credibility and accuracy is consistently higher for entangled models in both the white-box and black-box settings.
To explain this, we t-SNE representations in Appendix~\ref{ap:intuition} and find that entangled models better separate adversarial data from real data in activation space. This in turn implies that adversarial data can be recognized as not being part of the distribution by observing that it has fewer than the normal number of neighbors from the predicted class.
\subsection{Transferability and Representation Entanglement}
\label{ssec:Transferability}
Transferability---the fact that adversarial examples for one model are also often misclassified by a different model---was empirically found to apply to a wide range of model pairs, despite these models being trained with different ML techniques (e.g., decision trees and neural nets) or subsets of data. Several hypotheses were put forward to explain why this property holds in practice, including gradient alignment.
This is visualized in Figure~\ref{fig:tsne_gradients}, which plots gradients followed by a targeted FGSM attack in two dimensions using t-SNE. The plot stacks the visualizations for two different models. One can see that coherent clusters exist across the two individual models. This means that gradients that are adversarial to one model are likely to be aligned with gradients that are adversarial to a second model.
However, this gradient alignment does not hold in entangled models. When we repeat the same experiment with a standard cross-entropy model and an entangled model, or two entangled models, the clusters are no longer coherent across pairs of models---as illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:tsne_gradients_entangled}. This suggests that while adversarial examples can still be found in the white-box setting by following the gradients of a specific entangled model, it is harder to find perturbations that are universal (i.e., apply to any test input) or transferable (i.e., apply across different entangled models).
\subsection{Out-of-Distribution Test Inputs}
\label{ssec:outlier-data}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{adv_gradients_2_baseline}
\caption{t-SNE visualization of gradients computed by a FGSM attack targeting class 1 on two vanilla models, one in green the other in blue.}
\label{fig:tsne_gradients}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{adv_gradients_2_ent}
\caption{t-SNE visualization of gradients computed by a FGSM attack targeting class 1 on two entangled models, one in red the other in orange.}
\label{fig:tsne_gradients_entangled}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{TSNE_logits_cifarVssvhn_baseline_3}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{TSNE_logits_cifarVssvhn_entangled_3}
\caption{t-SNE visualization of logits for in-distribution (SVHN--- green) and out-of-distribution (cifar10---blue) test data learned by a baseline (left) and entangled (right) model. We can see that the out of distribution data is easier to separate from the true data for the entangled model than it is for the baseline model.}
\label{fig:svhn_cifar10}
\end{figure}
Unlike techniques like adversarial training~\cite{szegedy2013intriguing}, training with the soft nearest neighbor loss relies only on the original training data and makes no assumptions about a particular algorithm used to generate the out-of-distribution examples.
Hence, having shown that training a network to maximize entanglement leads to representations that better separate adversarial data from real data, we expect this behaviour to be consistent across any data sampled from something other than the expected test distribution. This includes inputs from a different test distribution.
To test this we can train a network on SVHN and see what its behavior is like on CIFAR10: test examples from CIFAR10 should be represented very differently from the SVHN test examples. This is indeed what we observe in Figure~\ref{fig:svhn_cifar10}, which uses t-SNE to visualize how the logits represent SVHN and CIFAR10 test inputs when a model is trained with cross-entropy only or with the soft nearest neighbor loss to maximize entanglement. The vanilla model makes confident predictions in the SVHN classes for the CIFAR10 inputs (because they are represented close to one another), whereas the entangled model separates all of the CIFAR10 data in a distinct cluster and preserves the SVHN clusters. A similar experiment on a MNIST model using notMNIST as out-of-distribution test inputs is found in Appendix~\ref{ap:outlier}.
\section{Conclusions}
We expanded on and explored novel use cases of the soft nearest neighbor loss. It can serve as a tool to characterize the class similarity structure of representations, allowing us to measure learning progression of discriminative models. The loss also captures how generative models entangle synthetic and real data, and can thus serve as a generative loss itself. Furthermore, by adding the loss as a bonus to a classifier's training objective, we are able to boost test performance and generalization. Because entangled representations are encouraged to spread out data further in activation space (see Figure~\ref{fig:triplet_vs_ent2}), they represent outlier data more consistently apart from real data (see Figure~\ref{fig:adv-data-projection}). This in turn means outlier data is easily rejected by observing that it is supported by fewer neighbors from the predicted class, as captured by our improved uncertainty estimates.
\subsubsection*{Acknowledgments}
The authors would like to thank Martin Abadi, Samy Bengio, Nicholas Carlini, Yann Dauphin, Ulfar Erlingsson, Danijar Hadner, Ilya Mironov, Sara Sabour, Kunal Talkwar and Nithum Thain for insightful comments on this project.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:introduction}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{figures/time_lapse_long.pdf}
\caption{\centering}
\label{subfig:frs_for_carsim_fusion}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{figures/reach_set.pdf}
\caption{\centering}
\label{subfig:carsim_fusion}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{ Simulation of the vehicle performing two lane change maneuvers on a $90$ m section of a $1$ km test track,beginning from the right side of the figure.
It uses the presented RTD method to drive safely while avoiding randomly generated obstacles in real time.
Subfigure (a) depicts the vehicle in Carsim; (b) depicts the RTD planner, which generates trajectories autonomously using an optimization toolbox in MATLAB.
Orange boxes are obstacles.
The vehicle is solid blue at the same time instances in both plots; in (a), the vehicle is transparent at intermediate times to illustrate its motion.
The green contours in (b) represent the forward reachable set corresponding to the trajectory at each planning iteration.
The vehicle begins the first lane change at approximately $15$ m/s, then slows down to approximately $8$ m/s while completing the second.
A video is available at \protect\url{http://www.roahmlab.com/acc2019_rtd_video}.}
\label{fig:carsim_and_matlab_intro}
\end{figure}
Autonomous vehicles typically operate with a limited sensor horizon in unpredictable environments.
To do so, they often employ a three-level hierarchy for receding-horizon motion planning, wherein a short trajectory is executed while the next trajectory is being planned \cite{buehler2009darpa,gray2012predictive,theta_star_rrt}.
In this hierarchy, the high-level planner provides coarse route information without considering vehicle dynamics.
The mid-level planner, or trajectory planner, creates dynamically-feasible trajectories and associated control inputs that guide the vehicle along the high-level planner's route while avoiding obstacles.
The low-level controller translates the mid-level planner's control inputs into commands for the vehicle's actuators, without considering the vehicle's surroundings.
To ensure safety, the trajectory planner must compensate for uncertainty in a vehicle's model, which can appear as state estimation error and tracking error between planned and executed trajectories.
Furthermore, the trajectory planner must be \emph{persistently feasible}, meaning that it is always able to find a new, safe trajectory while executing the previous trajectory.
This means that the trajectory planner must produce safe, dynamically-feasible trajectories in real time.
This is challenging because the dynamics of a vehicle are typically nonlinear and high-dimensional \cite{carsim, orosznonholonomic, kuwata2009rrt}.
In this work, we apply a recent proposed trajectory planner that is provably safe and persistently feasible, called Reachability-based Trajectory Design (RTD) \cite{RTD_big_paper}, to a passenger vehicle as depicted in Figure \ref{fig:carsim_and_matlab_intro}.
In this work, we only consider static obstacles; dynamic obstacles are left as future work.
\subsection{Literature Review}\label{subsec:lit_review}
A variety of approaches have been proposed to attempt safe, persistently-feasible trajectory planning.
We briefly review existing trajectory planning methods, which can be broadly divided into sampling-based, model predictive control, and reachability-based approaches.
Sampling-based approaches operate by discretizing the vehicle's state or control space and time to find trajectories that follow high-level routes \cite{elbanhawi2014sampling}.
For example, the Rapidly-exploring Random Tree (RRT) and Probabilistic RoadMaps (PRM) algorithms attempt to find dynamically-feasible trajectories by growing graphs of nodes in the vehicle's state space, with edges between the nodes associated with control inputs; since vehicles have complex dynamic models, new nodes for such systems are created by forward-integration of the dynamics \cite{karaman2011sampling}.
However, it is difficult to guarantee safety of these approaches for two reasons.
First, they typically only track a vehicle's center of mass (as opposed to the vehicle's body), which can make collision checking for a vehicle's entire body challenging; and second, for complex nonlinear models, one must typically specify a temporal and state space discretization granularity for collision checking \cite{elbanhawi2014sampling}.
Importantly, the finer the discretization, the slower a collision checker runs; i.e. there is a tradeoff between speed and safety.
To encourage safety and persistent feasibility, one can plan a braking trajectory at the same time as a non-braking trajectory (i.e. one that attempts to satisfy the high-level plan) \cite{kuwata2009rrt}; or use an Extended Kalman Filter when propagating an RRT to compensate for a vehicle's inability to perfectly follow a planned trajectory \cite{pepy2006rrt}.
However, to the best of our knowledge, no sampling-based method has been proposed that is provably safe and persistently feasible.
Model-predictive control (MPC) trajectory planners formulate an optimization program over the vehicle's control inputs over a short time horizon by treating the vehicle's dynamics and environment as constraints.
These approaches typically plan around a reference trajectory, which must be known a priori or generated at runtime; without a reference trajectory, MPC for nonlinear systems and non-convex constraints is typically too slow for real-time application
\cite{katrakazas2015_motionplanning}.
Depending on the reference trajectory, the MPC problem may be infeasible, but it is unclear how best to generate the reference in arbitrary scenarios.
In structured scenarios, objects such as a road centerline can used as a reference \cite{Frash2013_ACADO_MPC}.
To compensate for uncertainty, Robust MPC has been proposed for linear systems, but vehicle dynamics are nonlinear \cite{Gao2014_robustMPC,orosznonholonomic}.
Methods have also been proposed to ensure \emph{recursive} feasibility for MPC, meaning a solution is available at every planning iteration, for linear systems \cite{lofberg2012mpc} and for nonlinear systems either with two states in discrete time \cite{strief2014robustmpc} or with up to five states with slow dynamics \cite{ma2012robustmpc}; each of these has a tradeoff between discretization granularity and solve time.
For nonlinear systems, MPC approaches typically approximate the dynamics by linearization, or with polynomials \cite{gpopsii}.
To solve the trajectory planning problem, MPC requires discretizing the vehicle's control inputs and trajectory so that each discrete point can be treated as a decision variable \cite{katrakazas2015_motionplanning}.
However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no provable method for discretization to ensure the MPC solution compensates for tracking error and obstacle avoidance.
Reachability-based approaches attempt to ensure safety and persistent feasibility by computing a reachable set to capture a family of possible trajectories given a model of the vehicle's uncertainty.
One such technique, the funnel libraries approach, precomputes reachable ``funnels'' of the vehicle's tracking error around a pre-defined library of trajectories, then links these funnels end-to-end to perform trajectory planning at runtime \cite{majumdar2016funnel}.
Recently, a Hamilton-Jacobi based approach was proposed to compute the reachable set of a vehicle's tracking error to produce lookup table of controllers that bound the tracking error of the vehicle at runtime; this approach requires that the vehicle tracks a reference trajectory produced by, e.g. RRT or MPC \cite{herbert2017fastrack}.
Sums-of-Squares (SOS) programming and control barrier functions have been similarly applied to bound tracking error to ensure safety about a reference trajectory while enabling real-time planning \cite{singh2018sosrealtime,chen2018obstacle}.
For each of these methods, it is unclear how to either ensure that a solution remains persistently feasible or how to represent obstacles so that collision checking operates in real time without sacrificing safety.
For example, intersecting reachable sets with obstacles represented as semi-algebraic sets can be too slow in practice \cite[Section 6.1]{RTD_big_paper}.
The aforementioned RTD approach achieves safety by computing a Forward Reachable Set (FRS) that includes the vehicle's tracking error and ensures that the vehicle always has a braking trajectory available \cite{kousik2017safe}.
RTD is persistently feasible because it enables the user to enforce a timeout on the online trajectory planning without sacrificing safety; and, real-time planning is possible with a prescription for how to discretize obstacles without losing safety guarantees \cite{RTD_big_paper}.
However, thus far, RTD has only been applied to small mobile robots.
The contribution of this work is demonstrating that RTD is applicable to passenger vehicles with nonlinear dynamics describing the powertrain, chassis, and tires.
We compute an FRS for such a car simulated in CarSim \cite{carsim}, and use RTD to perform safe and persistently feasible maneuvers around static obstacles, as depicted in Figure \ref{fig:carsim_and_matlab_intro}.
\subsection{RTD Overview and Paper Organization}\label{subsec:rtd_overview}
RTD uses a high-fidelity model of the vehicle (Section \ref{sec:high-fidelity_model}) to track desired trajectories in a lower-dimensional subspace (Section \ref{sec:traj-prod_and_track_models}).
An FRS is computed for trajectories of the high-fidelity model in the lower-dimensional subspace by accounting for tracking error (Section \ref{sec:FRS_computation}).
To enable real time operation, obstacles are represented as discretized, finite sets, while still ensuring safety; and to ensure persistent feasibility, specifications are placed on the braking behavior of the vehicle (Section \ref{sec:safety_and_pers_feas}).
Finally, the FRS is used at run-time to map obstacles to constraints for an online optimization step that ensures RTD can only pick safe trajectory plans in a receding horizon fashion (Section \ref{sec:online_planning}).
The method is applied to a CarSim vehicle model (Section \ref{sec:sim_results}).
\subsection{Notation}\label{subsec:notation}
For a set $A$, its boundary is $\partial A$ and its complement is $A^C$, its interior is $\text{int}(A)$, and its power set is $\P(A)$.
The degree of a polynomial is the degree of its largest multinomial; the degree of the multinomial $x^\alpha,\,\alpha\in \N$ is $|\alpha|=\|\alpha\|_1$.
The set $\R_{\geq 0}$ is $[0,\infty)$.
If $z$ is a state, then $\dot{z}$ is its time derivative.
Subscripts denote the index or subspace to which a state belongs.
\section{High-Fidelity Model}\label{sec:high-fidelity_model}
This paper implements RTD on a passenger car model in CarSim.
The inputs are throttle, steering wheel angle, and brake master cylinder pressure.
We say \emph{vehicle} to refer to the Carsim model.
A \emph{high-fidelity model} is used to predict the motion of the vehicle and design a trajectory tracking controller.
Denote the state of the high-fidelity model as $z_\regtext{hi} \in Z_\regtext{hi} \subset \R^{n_\regtext{hi}}$, with dynamics $\dot{z}_\regtext{hi}: [0,T]\times Z_\regtext{hi} \times U \to \R^{n_\regtext{hi}}$.
Initial conditions for these dynamics occupy the space $Z_{\regtext{hi},0} \subseteq Z_\regtext{hi}$; $T$ is the \emph{time horizon} of each trajectory plan; and the control input is drawn from $U \subset \R^{n_U}$.
We use a bicycle model similar to \cite[(1)]{liniger2015optimization} as the high-fidelity model:
\begin{align} \label{eq:high-fidelity_model}
\dot{z}_\regtext{hi}= \frac{d}{dt}\begin{bmatrix} x_c \\ y_c \\ x \\ y \\ \theta\\ v_x \\ v_y\\ \omega \end{bmatrix}=
\begin{bmatrix}
v_x\cos\theta-v_y\sin\theta\\
v_x\sin\theta+v_y\cos\theta\\
v_x\cos\theta-v_y\sin\theta - \omega(y - y_c) \\
v_x\sin\theta+v_y\cos\theta + \omega(x - x_c) \\
\omega\\
\frac{1}{m}F_x-\frac{1}{m}F_{\regtext{f},y}\sin \delta+v_y\omega\\
\frac{1}{m}F_{\regtext{f},y}\cos \delta+\frac{1}{m}F_{\regtext{r},y}-v_x\omega\\
\frac{l_f}{I_z}F_{\regtext{f},y}\cos \delta -\frac{l_r}{I_z}F_{\regtext{r},y}
\end{bmatrix},
\end{align}
where $x_c$ and $y_c$ are the position of the vehicle's center of mass; $x$ and $y$ are the position of any point on the vehicle's body; $\theta$ is the vehicle's heading in the global coordinate frame; $v_x$, $v_y$ are longitudinal and lateral speed of the center of mass; and $\omega$ is yaw rate.
The constants $m$, $I_z$, $l_f$, and $l_r$ are the vehicle's mass, yaw moment of inertia, distance from the front wheel to center of mass, and distance of the rear wheel to center of mass.
To identify the model parameters, the vehicle is run through a series of open-loop acceleration, and deceleration inputs.
We fit polynomials relating the throttle and brake inputs to the driving force, $F_x$, and we find a linear relationship between wheel angle, $\delta$, and steering wheel angle.
Cornering maneuvers produce data to fit a simplified Pajecka tire model \cite[(2a, 2b)]{liniger2015optimization} to the lateral tire forces, $F_{\regtext{f},y}$ and $F_{\regtext{r},y}$.
Since $F_x$, $F_{\regtext{f},y}$, and $F_{\regtext{r},y}$ are continuous, the dynamics \eqref{eq:high-fidelity_model} are continuous.
Recall that \eqref{eq:high-fidelity_model} cannot perfectly capture the motion of the vehicle.
However, since the time horizon $[0,T]$, is compact, we can bound prediction error as follows.
\begin{assum}\label{ass:predict_within_epsilon}
Future state predictions given by the high-fidelity model \eqref{eq:high-fidelity_model} predict each state of the vehicle within an error bound $\varepsilon_i > 0$ for $i=1,\cdots,n_\regtext{hi}$ at each time $t \in [0,T]$.
\end{assum}
\noindent By this assumption, the high-fidelity model lies within $\varepsilon_x, \varepsilon_y$ of the vehicle in its $x$ and $y$ coordinates, as required by \cite[Assumption 9]{RTD_big_paper}.
We simulate the high-fidelity model and compare its state to Carsim data to empirically find the error bounds: $|\varepsilon|\leq [0.1,\, 0.1,\, 0.12,\, 0.15,\, 0.02,\, 0.4,\, 0.08,\, 0.05]^\top$ where $|\cdot|$ is taken elementwise.
Notice that the dynamics of all points on the vehicle's body are included in \eqref{eq:high-fidelity_model}.
This is because the vehicle has nonzero volume, so it is insufficient to only consider the center-of-mass dynamics for trajectory planning.
Approaches that only plan with the center of mass typically expand the size of obstacles in the vehicle's environment such that, if the center of mass does not lie within expanded obstacles, then no point on the vehicle's body can lie in the actual obstacle \cite{elbanhawi2014sampling}.
In such approaches either the vehicle's footprint is a disk, so that obstacles can be expanded uniformly; or, the obstacle representation requires tuning parameters in a trial-and-error fashion to compensate for the vehicle's shape and possible range of headings, making it hard to ensure safety.
In contrast, RTD directly addresses planning trajectories with the vehicle's entire body.
\begin{rem}\label{rem:X_and_X0_rigid_body}
The state space $Z_\regtext{hi}$ has a two-dimensional \emph{spatial subspace} $X \subset Z_\regtext{hi}$ with coordinates $x$ and $y$.
The vehicle has a rectangular \emph{footprint} $X_0 \subset X$ that represents all points on the vehicle's body at the beginning of each planning iteration.
The states $x_c$ and $y_c$ evolve in a \emph{center-of-mass subspace} $X_c \subset X$.
According to the dynamics of $x$ and $y$ in \eqref{eq:high-fidelity_model}, the vehicle's footprint acts as a rigid body \cite[Lecture 7]{dynamics_MIT_OCW}.
\end{rem}
\section{Producing and Tracking Trajectories}\label{sec:traj-prod_and_track_models}
Since the high-fidelity vehicle model is nonlinear with saturating inputs, it is difficult to use for planning in real-time.
Instead, RTD plans \emph{desired trajectories} with a lower-dimensional \emph{trajectory-producing model}, which has \emph{shared states} $z \in Z \subset Z_\regtext{hi}$, where $\dim(Z) = n_Z < \dim(Z_\regtext{hi})$.
The model includes \emph{trajectory parameters}, $k$, that are drawn from a \emph{parameter space}, $K$.
The trajectory-producing model produces desired trajectories with dynamics $\dot{z}_\regtext{des}: [0,T]\times Z\times K \to \R^{n_Z}$ with a space $Z_0 \subset Z_{\regtext{hi},0}$ of initial conditions.
We use the following trajectory-producing model:
\begin{align}
\dot{z}_\regtext{des}(t,z(t),k) = \begin{bmatrix} \dot{x}(t) \\ \dot{y}(t) \end{bmatrix} &= \begin{bmatrix} k_2-k_1(y(t)-y_c(0))\\ v_y^*+k_1(x(t)-x_c(0)) \end{bmatrix}\label{eq:traj-producing_model}\\
v_y^*&=k_1\left(l_r-\frac{m\,l_f}{C_r\,(l_r+l_f)}k_2^2\right)\label{eq:steady_state_vy},
\end{align}
where $z = [x,y]^\top$; $k_1$ (resp. $k_2$) specifies a constant desired yaw rate (resp. longitudinal speed); and $C_r$ is the rear cornering stiffness from the tire force model in \eqref{eq:high-fidelity_model}.
The lateral speed, $v_y^*$, is derived from steady-state, linear tire force assumptions \cite[Section 10.1.2]{schramm2014vehicle}.
Notice that \eqref{eq:traj-producing_model} only has the two states $x$ and $y$, i.e. the center of mass and heading dynamics are omitted.
This is because the desired trajectories of the states $x_c,\ y_c$, and $\theta$ are treated as functions of the parameters $k$ and time, which lets us compute explicit solutions for their trajectories.
Consequently, \eqref{eq:traj-producing_model} produces trajectories of the vehicle's entire footprint in $X$, with initial conditions anywhere in the footprint $X_0$.
So, the shared state subspace $Z \subset Z_\regtext{hi}$ is in fact the spatial subspace $X$.
We use the trajectory-producing model as follows.
For every trajectory parameter $k \in K$, the high-fidelity model generates a feedback controller $u_k: [0,T] \times Z_\regtext{hi} \to U$ that attempts to track the trajectory parameterized by $k$; to shorten vocabulary, when applying $u_k$, we say that the vehicle \emph{tracks $k$}.
In our case, the vehicle uses linear MPC to track trajectories, implemented with MATLAB's MPC toolbox.
MPC was chosen to incorporate input saturation and rate limits, but any feedback controller can be used with RTD.
We now address the fact that desired trajectories produced by \eqref{eq:traj-producing_model} are not necessarily dynamically feasible for the high-fidelity model \eqref{eq:high-fidelity_model}.
This is because the dynamics and dimension of the two models differ, and because state estimation error can accumulate as a trajectory is tracked using feedback.
We refer to the difference between the high-fidelity model and the trajectory-producing model as \emph{tracking error}.
We bound tracking error with a function $g: [0,T]\times Z\times K \to \R^{n_Z}$, and use it to create a \emph{trajectory-tracking model} that matches the desired trajectories to the high-fidelity model; this requires the following assumption.
\begin{assum}\label{ass:compact_sets_and_cont_dyn}
The spaces $Z_\regtext{hi}$, $Z_{\regtext{hi},0}$, $U$, $Z$, $Z_0$, and $K$ are compact subsets of Euclidean space that admit semi-algebraic representations.
\end{assum}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{figures/g_b1_12_0_green.pdf}
\caption{Example of tracking error plotted for a reference trajectory of $k_1=0$ rad/s and $k_2=12$ m/s and $T=2.1$ s.
The top and bottom plots show the time derivative of absolute error in $x$ and $y$ states respectively.
Data (blue) is from CarSim and captures initial velocities and yaw rates between 10.78 to 13.26 ms and -0.25 to 0.25 rad/s.
The green lines are the error functions $g_x$ and $g_y$ as in \eqref{eq:g_tracking_error_defn}.}
\label{fig:actual_data_g}
\end{figure}
Now, for the states $x$ and $y$ in \eqref{eq:traj-producing_model}, we find functions $g_x, g_y: [0,T]\times K \to \R_{\geq 0}$ such that
\begin{align}
\max_{z_\regtext{hi} \in A_\regtext{hi}} |z_{\regtext{hi},i}(t,z_\regtext{hi},u_k) - z_{\regtext{des},i}(t,z,k)| \leq \textstyle\int_0^t g_i(\tau,k)d\tau,\label{eq:g_tracking_error_defn}
\end{align}
for all $t \in [0,T]$, $z \in Z$, and $k \in K$.
The subscript $i = x, y$ selects the corresponding components; the set $A_\regtext{hi} = \{z_\regtext{hi} \in Z_\regtext{hi}~\mid~z_{\regtext{hi},i} = z_i~\regtext{for}~i = x, y\}$.
Arguments to $z_\regtext{hi}$, $u_k$, and $z$ are dropped to lighten notation.
The \emph{tracking error function} is $g = [g_x,g_y]^\top$.
In this work, $g_x$ and $g_y$ are polynomials of degree 2 that overapproximate tracking error data found by simulating the high-fidelity model tracking reference trajectories from a variety of initial conditions.
Importantly, state estimation error in $z_{\regtext{hi},0}$ is added to the initial conditions, so $g$ conservatively approximates the prediction errors described in Assumption \ref{ass:predict_within_epsilon}.
Although not considered in this paper, state estimation error due to imperfect sensors and observer design can also be accounted for in $g$.
Figure \ref{fig:actual_data_g} shows data collected in CarSim of the vehicle tracking a reference trajectory of 12 m/s and 0 rad/s from initial velocities between 10.78 to 13.26 m/s and yaw rates between -0.25 and 0.25 rad/s, along with the computed error functions.
Constructing $g$ is not the focus of this work, but it can be conservatively approximated with, e.g., SOS programming \cite[Chapter 7]{lasserre2009moments}.
The tracking error function lets the trajectory-producing model ``match'' the high-fidelity model in the shared states:
\begin{lem}\label{lem:hi-fid_matches_traj-prod}
Let $L_d = L^1([0,T],[-1,1]^{n_Z})$ denote the space of absolutely integrable functions from $[0,T]$ to $[-1,1]^{n_Z}$ and recall that $n_Z = 2$ in \eqref{eq:traj-producing_model}.
Let $z_\regtext{hi}: [0,T] \to Z_\regtext{hi}$ denote a trajectory of \eqref{eq:high-fidelity_model} from arbitrary $z_{\regtext{hi},0} \in Z_{\regtext{hi},0}$ and tracking arbitrary $k \in K$.
Then, there exists $d \in L_d$ such that, almost everywhere $t \in [0,T]$,
\begin{align}\label{eq:error_equation}
z_{\regtext{hi},i}(t) = z_{\regtext{hi},0,i} + \textstyle\int_0^t \left(z_{\regtext{des},i}(\tau,z,k) + g_i(\tau,k)\cdot d_i(\tau)\, \right)d\tau
\end{align}
where $i = x, y$ selects each shared state in $Z \subset Z_\regtext{hi}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
From \eqref{eq:g_tracking_error_defn}, $g$ bounds the maximum absolute error in $x$ and $y$ that can accumulate by any $t\in[0,T]$.
Taking both the positive and negative case of the term inside the absolute value on the left hand side, then taking time derivatives, gives us the following inequalities: $\dot{z}_{\regtext{hi},i}(t,z_\regtext{hi},u_k) \leq \dot{z}_{\regtext{des},i}(t,z,k)+g_i(t,k)$ and
$\dot{z}_{\regtext{hi},i}(t,z_\regtext{hi},u_k) \geq \dot{z}_{\regtext{des},i}(t,z,k)-g_i(t,k)$.
Therefore, for all $t\in[0,T]$, we can pick $d_i(t)\in[-1,1]$ and integrate from $0$ to $t$ such that \eqref{eq:error_equation} is satisfied.
\end{proof}
We now define the \emph{trajectory-tracking model}, with state $z = [x,y]^\top \in Z$, as:
\begin{align}
\dot{z}_i(t) = \dot{z}_{\regtext{des},i}(t,z(t),k) + g_i(t,k)\cdot d_i(t),\label{eq:traj-tracking_model}
\end{align}
where $i = x, y$ and $d = [d_x,d_y]^\top \in L_d$.
The utility of \eqref{eq:traj-tracking_model} is that, by Lemma \ref{lem:hi-fid_matches_traj-prod}, it can match any trajectory of the high-fidelity model in the shared states over the time horizon $[0,T]$; and, since the shared states occupy a lower-dimensional space than $Z_\regtext{hi}$, we can compute an FRS of the trajectory-tracking model.
\section{The Forward-Reachable Set}\label{sec:FRS_computation}
We now briefly discuss the FRS, detailed in \cite[Section 3]{RTD_big_paper}. The FRS is all points in $X$, and associated parameters in $K$, that are reachable by the trajectory-tracking model:
\begin{align}\begin{split}\label{eq:Xfrs}
\X\frs = \{&(\hat{z},\hat{k}) \in X\times K~\mid~\exists~t \in [0,T],\ z_0 \in Z_0,\ d \in L_d\\
&\regtext{s.t.}\ \dot{z}_i(\tau) = \dot{z}_{\regtext{des},i}(\tau,z(\tau),\hat{k}) + g_i(\tau,\hat{k})\cdot d_i(\tau),\\
&z(0) = z_0,\ \regtext{and}\ z(t) = \hat{z} \},
\end{split}\end{align}
where $i = x, y$.
By Lemma \ref{lem:hi-fid_matches_traj-prod}, $\X\frs$ contains all points in $X$ that are reachable by the high-fidelity model tracking any trajectory parameterized by any $k \in K$.
\begin{rem}\label{rem:w_geq_1_in_Xfrs}
Recall that the dynamics $\dot{z}_\regtext{des}$ from \eqref{eq:traj-producing_model} and $g$ from \eqref{eq:g_tracking_error_defn} are polynomials.
Furthermore, the spaces $[0,T],\ Z$, and $K$ are compact and admit semi-algebraic representations by Assumption \ref{ass:compact_sets_and_cont_dyn}
Therefore, by \cite[Lemma 14 and Remark 18]{RTD_big_paper}, we can use SOS programming to find a polynomial $w_\alpha: X\times K \to \R$ of degree $2\alpha \in \N$ for which
\begin{align}
\X\frs \quad\subseteq\quad \{(z,k) \in X\times K~|~ w_\alpha(z,k) \geq 1\},
\end{align}
that is, the 1-superlevel set of $w_\alpha$ overapproximates the FRS.
\end{rem}
\noindent We use Remark \ref{rem:w_geq_1_in_Xfrs} to ensure safety and persistent feasibility of the vehicle in Section \ref{sec:safety_and_pers_feas}.
See \cite[Theorem 6]{majumdar2014convex} for a proof, and \cite[Program $(D^l)$]{RTD_big_paper} to compute $w_\alpha$.
In Section \ref{sec:sim_results}, the vehicle will be run on a test track with a max speed of 15 m/s.
We compute six FRSes (i.e. six $w_\alpha$ polynomials) for commanded velocities of 3--5, 5--7, 7--9, 9--11, 11--13, and 13--15 m/s.
The vehicle only goes below 3 m/s when braking to a stop.
Each $w_\alpha$ has $\alpha = 6$.
We use polynomial error functions $g$ of degree 2; we fit a $g$ for each FRS.
Computing more FRSes with finer ranges of initial conditions and commands, would reduce conservatism; however, we found empirically that using 6 FRSes led to the vehicle completing the experiments of Section \ref{sec:sim_results}.
Any number of FRSes could be used as long as, together, they cover the vehicle's initial conditions.
Per \cite[Appendix 14.2]{RTD_big_paper}, at each planning iteration, the vehicle picks the FRS with the highest possible commanded speed that contains its current initial condition, which maintains the safety guarantee presented in the following section.
\section{Safety and Persistent Feasibility}\label{sec:safety_and_pers_feas}
We now define safety and persistent feasibility by using $w_\alpha$ from Remark \ref{rem:w_geq_1_in_Xfrs} to project the FRS into $X$ and $K$.
Note that we have computed multiple FRS's for separate speed ranges in Section \ref{sec:FRS_computation}; the material in this section holds for each FRS independently.
\subsection{Ensuring Safety}\label{subsec:obs_rep_for_safety}
We ensure safety by representing obstacles with discrete points in $X$ that become nonlinear constraints for the online trajectory planner.
This representation lets the trajectory planner run in real time \cite[Section 6.1]{RTD_big_paper}.
First, we specify how obstacle data must be received from sensors:
\begin{assum}\label{ass:obs_and_D_sense}
Obstacles, denoted $X\obs \subset X$, are closed polygons that are static with respect to time.
There are at most $n\obs \in \N$ obstacles within the vehicle's \emph{sensor horizon} distance $D_\regtext{sense} > 0$ at any time.
The vehicle senses all obstacles within $D_\regtext{sense}$ of its center of mass.
Obstacles do not appear spontaneously within the sensor horizon.
\end{assum}
\noindent Note that $X\obs$ can contain more than one disjoint polygonal obstacle.
This assumption is reasonable for obstacles represented by occupation grids or line segments fit to lidar data.
Occlusions can be treated as static obstacles.
To relate obstacles to trajectory parameters, we define the \emph{FRS parameter projection map} $\pi_K: \P(X) \to \P(K)$ for which
\begin{align}
\pi_K(X') = \{k \in K~\mid~\exists~z \in X'~\regtext{s.t.}~w_\alpha(z,k) \geq 1\}.\label{eq:pi_K}
\end{align}
Then, the safe set of parameters corresponding to an obstacle $X\obs \subset X$ is $K\safe = \pi_K(X\obs)^C$.
To conservatively approximate $K\safe$ in real time, we use the approach proposed in \cite[Section 6]{RTD_big_paper}, wherein $X\obs$ is \emph{buffered}, then its boundary is \emph{discretized}.
For a chosen buffer distance $b \geq 0$, the \emph{buffered obstacle} is:
\begin{align}
X\obs^b = \left\{z \in X~\mid~\exists~z' \in X\obs~\regtext{s.t.}~\norm{z - z'}_2 \leq b\right\}. \label{eq:buffered_obs}
\end{align}
Since $X\obs$ is a polygon, the boundary of $X\obs^b$ consists of a finite number of line segments and circular arcs of radius $b$ \cite[Section 9.2]{minkowski_sum_fogel}.
Let $L = \{L_1,\cdots,L_{n_L}\}$ and $A = \{A_1,\cdots,A_{n_A}\}$ denote the sets of line segments and arcs, respectively, so that $\bd X\obs^b = \left(\bigcup_{i = 1}^{n_L}L_i\right) \cup \left(\bigcup_{i = 1}^{n_A}A_i\right)$.
It is shown in \cite[Section 6]{RTD_big_paper} that these line segments and arcs $\bd X\obs^b$ can be sampled to produce a finite \emph{discretized obstacle} $X_p \subset X$ that conservatively approximates the obstacle, i.e. $\pi_K(X_p)^C \subseteq K\safe$.
To understand why $X_p \subset \bd X\obs^b$, note that the spatial component of the vehicle's dynamics is continuous, so the vehicle cannot collide with the obstacle without passing through the obstacle's boundary first.
Example buffered and discretized obstacles are shown in Figure \ref{fig:braking}.
We construct $X_p$ as follows, summarizing \cite[Algorithm 1]{RTD_big_paper}.
Given a connected, compact curve $S: [0,1] \to \R^2$ and a distance $s > 0$, let \texttt{sample}$(S,s)$ return a (finite) set $P$ of points spaced along $S$ such that, for any point $p \in P$, there exists at least one other point $p' \in P$ no farther than $s$ away in the 2-norm, i.e. $\norm{p - p'}_2 \leq s$.
We also require that $S(0), S(1) \in P$, i.e. the ``endpoints'' of $S$ are in $P$.
Then,
\begin{align}
X_p = \left(\bigcup_{i=1}^{n_L}\texttt{sample}(L_i,s_L)\right)\cup \left(\bigcup_{i=1}^{n_A}\texttt{sample}(A_i,s_A)\right),\label{eq:construct_X_p}
\end{align}
where $s_L > 0$ is the \emph{point spacing} and $s_A > 0$ is the \emph{arc point spacing}.
By construction, $X_p$ is a set of points that ``surround'' the obstacle.
So, to ensure safety, we must guarantee that no point on the vehicle's footprint can travel ``between'' any pair of adjacent points in $X_p$ farther than a chosen buffer distance $b$, otherwise the vehicle can collide with $X\obs$.
This means that $s_L$ and $s_A$ must be small enough that points in $X_p$ are close to each other in the 2-norm.
The values of $s_L$ and $s_A$ depend upon the shape of the vehicle's footprint $X_0$; which, in this work, is a rectangle (as per Remark \ref{rem:X_and_X0_rigid_body}).
We ensure safety with the following lemma that follows from \cite[Example 66 and Theorem 68]{RTD_big_paper}.
\begin{lem} \label{lem:X_p_is_safe}
Suppose $X\obs$ is a set of obstacles as in Assumption \ref{ass:obs_and_D_sense}, and $X_0$ has width $W$.
Pick a buffer distance $b \in (0,W/2)$.
Set $s_L = 2b$ and $s_A = 2b\sin(\pi/4)$.
Then, if $X_p$ is constructed as in \eqref{eq:construct_X_p}, the unsafe parameters corresponding to $X_p$ are a conservative approximation of the unsafe parameters corresponding to $X\obs$, i.e. $\pi_K(X_p) \supseteq \pi_K(X\obs) = K\safe^C$.
\end{lem}
\noindent By Lemma \ref{lem:X_p_is_safe}, the vehicle is safe over a time horizon $[0,T]$, i.e. the duration of a single planned trajectory, when tracking any $k \in \pi_K(X_p)^C$.
For the vehicle, we pick $b = 0.05$ m, so $s_L = 0.1$ m and $s_A = 0.07$ m.
\subsection{Ensuring Persistent Feasibility}\label{subsec:pers_feas}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{figures/braking_with_obs.pdf}
\caption{Examples of safe braking along a trajectory, of discretized obstacles, and of the maps $\pi_K$ and $\pi_X$.
The left subplot is $K$.
The green circle indicates the parameters for the selected trajectory, $k = (0.28~\mathrm{rad/s},\ 10~\mathrm{m/s})$.
The filled orange contours are the parameter projection map, $\pi_K(X_p)$, for the orange obstacle points in the right subplot.
The right subplot is $X$.
The initial speed and yaw rate of the vehicle are $0.027$ rad/s and $11.1$ m/s.
The vehicle's pose, taken from CarSim data, is plotted every 0.5 s; it is blue when initially tracking the trajectory, and red when braking.
The green contour is the spatial projection map of the forward reachable set, $\pi_X(k)$.
Notice that the FRS does not intersect the obstacles, meaning that the chosen $k$ is safe for the actual vehicle to track.}
\label{fig:braking}
\end{figure}
We now ensure the vehicle is able to always find a safe trajectory while planning with a receding-horizon strategy by specifying a minimum duration $T$ for each planned trajectory and a minimum sensor horizon $D_\regtext{sense}$.
\begin{rem}
We assume that sensor data is processed and passed to the trajectory planner instantaneously.
Then, trajectory planning is limited to a duration $\tau_\regtext{plan} \in (0,T)$ every planning iteration; a new $k \in K$ is found every $\tau_\regtext{plan}$ seconds, otherwise the vehicle begins braking.
Note that, in practical applications, $\tau_\regtext{plan}$ can be increased to include the time it takes to process sensor data.
\end{rem}
\noindent In this work, $\tau_\regtext{plan} = 0.5$ seconds.
We now consider how the vehicle must brake to be safe.
To understand how the vehicle tracks parameters, we define the \emph{FRS spatial projection map} $\pi_X: \P(K) \to \P(X)$ for which
\begin{align}
\pi_X(K') = \{z \in X~\mid~\exists~k \in K'~\regtext{s.t.}~w_\alpha(z,k) \geq 1\}\label{eq:pi_X}.
\end{align}
By Remark \ref{rem:w_geq_1_in_Xfrs}, for any $k \in K$, $\pi_X(k) \subset X$ contains all points in $X$ reachable by any point on the vehicle's body, with dynamics \eqref{eq:high-fidelity_model}, over the time horizon $[0,T]$.
Now, we use $\pi_X$ to define safe braking behavior.
\begin{assum}\label{ass:brake}
While tracking any $k \in K$ over the time horizon $t \in [0,T]$, if the vehicle begins braking at $t = \tau_\regtext{plan}$, then all points on the vehicle's body lie within $\pi_X(k)$, the spatial projection of the parameter $k$.
\end{assum}
\noindent In other words, the FRS is large enough that the vehicle can brake within it for any trajectory parameter; as discussed next, this requires choosing $T$ so the vehicle can satisfy Assumption \ref{ass:brake} as shown in Figure \ref{fig:braking}.
To ensure Assumption \ref{ass:brake} can be fulfilled, the time horizon $T$ must be large enough that, when tracking any $k \in K$, the vehicle travels farther than the maximum braking distance it can achieve by braking at $\tau_\regtext{plan}$ from any state $z_\regtext{hi} \in Z_\regtext{hi}$ that results from tracking $k$.
Notice that \eqref{eq:traj-producing_model} creates trajectories that maintain a fixed speed over $[0,T]$.
Furthermore, the vehicle has a maximum stopping distance of $D\stp$ at the max speed considered in the FRS; and, the vehicle's stopping distance increases with the square of its speed.
Therefore, by \cite[Remark 73]{RTD_big_paper}, picking
\begin{align}
T \geq \tau_\regtext{plan} + D\stp / {v_\mathrm{max}}
\end{align}
ensures that the trajectories in the FRS are long enough to satisfy Assumption \ref{ass:brake} \cite[Appendix 14]{RTD_big_paper}.
For example, for an FRS with ${v_\mathrm{max}}=11$ and $\tau_\regtext{plan}=0.5$ s, $D\stp=15.4$ m and $T=1.9$ s.
Note that this assumes no delay in braking actuation; if there is delay, then $T$ must be increased to include it.
Also, recall that, since we compute multiple FRSes, the max speed of each FRS determines its time horizon $T$.
Finally, to ensure persistent feasibility, recall by Remark \ref{ass:predict_within_epsilon} that the vehicle's state estimation error is bounded in $x$ and $y$ by $\varepsilon_x$ and $\varepsilon_y$ respectively.
To compensate for this error, we expand obstacles by $\varepsilon_x$ in $x$ and $\varepsilon_y$ in $y$ before creating the discretized obstacle with \eqref{eq:construct_X_p}.
Recall that state estimation error, and the resulting tracking error, is accounted for in $g$ as in \eqref{eq:g_tracking_error_defn}.
We conclude this section by specifying the sensor horizon required for persistent feasibility.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:T_sense_pers_feas}
\cite[Theorem 35]{RTD_big_paper}.
Let $X\obs \subset X$ be obstacles as in Assumption \ref{ass:obs_and_D_sense}.
Let $\varepsilon = \sqrt{\varepsilon_x^2 + \varepsilon_y^2}$.
Let ${v_\mathrm{max}}$ denote the vehicle's max speed.
Suppose that the vehicle has known safe $k_0 \in K$ at $t = 0$.
Then, if the sensor horizon is
\begin{align}
D_\regtext{sense} \geq (T+\tau_\regtext{plan})\cdot{v_\mathrm{max}} + 2\varepsilon,
\end{align}
the vehicle can always either find a new trajectory parameter $k \in K$ or begin braking safely at every $t = j\tau_\regtext{plan}$ where $j \in \N$.
\end{lem}
\noindent See \cite[Theorem 35]{RTD_big_paper} for the proof.
In this work, $D_\regtext{sense} \geq 42.4$ m; note that this is within the reported range of many commercial lidar units such as \cite{velodyne2007whitepaper}.
\section{Vehicle RTD Implementation}\label{sec:vehicle_rtd_implementation}
The main contribution of this paper is implementing RTD on a realistic passenger vehicle model in CarSim \cite{carsim}.
The Carsim model has 3 inputs: throttle position, brake pressure, and steering wheel angle.
This section has four parts.
First, we approximate the high-fidelity model via system identification, then use this approximate model to control the vehicle with linear MPC.
Second, we present the trajectory producing model.
Third, we find the error function $g$ as in Assumption \ref{ass:error_fn} using \eqref{prog:SOS_compute_g} to create the trajectory-tracking model and compute the FRS.
Fourth, we use the FRS for online planning.
\subsection{System Identification}\label{subsec:sys_ID}
We first approximate the high-fidelity model with an \emph{approximate model}, which occupies a state space $Z_\regtext{approx} \subset Z_\regtext{hi}$ such that $X \subset Z_\regtext{approx}$.
For this vehicle we use a bicycle model, similar to \cite[(1)]{liniger2017real}.
The approximate model consists of a simplified Pajecka model for the lateral tire forces, and polynomial functions relating the throttle and braking inputs to driving force.
To identify the model parameters, the CarSim model is run through a series of open-loop acceleration, and deceleration inputs to fit polynomial functions relating the throttle and brake inputs to the driving force, $F_x$.
This is used to identify a linear relationship between wheel angle, $\delta$, and steering wheel angle.
Cornering maneuvers produce data to fit a simplified Pajecka tire model to the lateral tire forces, $F_{f,y}$ and $F_{r,y}$.
The parameters for this model were fit by having the vehicle perform a variety of cornering, accelerating, and deceleration maneuvers.
This high-fidelity model is used: as the dynamic model in the trajectory tracking controller; to predict the future state of the vehicle, during Algorithm X; and to aid in fitting the error function, $g$.
\subsection{Trajectory-Producing Model}\label{subsec:traj-prod_model_implem}
The reference trajectories passed to MPC are produced by the following trajectory-producing model (as in \eqref{eq:traj-producing_model}):
\subsection{Trajectory-Tracking Model and FRS Computation}\label{subsec:traj-track_and_FRS_implem}
\section{Online Planning}\label{sec:online_planning}
We now apply RTD's online trajectory optimization (see \cite[Section 7 Algorithm 2]{RTD_big_paper}) to the vehicle.
Per Lemma \ref{lem:T_sense_pers_feas}, at each planning iteration, the vehicle either finds a new safe plan (i.e., picks a new $k \in K$) or begins braking safely.
First, we state how to find a new safe plan.
Let $w_{\alpha}$ be as in Remark \ref{rem:w_geq_1_in_Xfrs}.
Suppose the vehicle is at planning iteration $j \in \N$ and tracking the previous iteration's safe parameter $k_{j-1}$.
Suppose that $X\obs \subset X$ is an obstacle as in Assumption \ref{ass:obs_and_D_sense}, sensed as in Lemma \ref{lem:T_sense_pers_feas}.
Let $J: K \to \R$ be an arbitrary cost function.
Let $X_p$ be the discretized obstacle constructed as in Lemma \ref{lem:X_p_is_safe}.
We find $k_j$ with the program:
\begin{align}\label{prog:OptK}
k_j = \underset{k}{\regtext{argmin}} \left\{ J(k)~\mid~w_{\alpha}(z,k) < 1 ~\forall~z\in X_p. \right\}
\end{align}
By Remark \ref{rem:w_geq_1_in_Xfrs}, the constraint $w_\alpha(z,k) < 1$ ensures that, for any feasible $k$, no point on the vehicle's body can reach any $z \in X_p$ at any $t \in [j\tau_\regtext{plan},(j+1)\tau_\regtext{plan}]$.
By Lemma \ref{lem:X_p_is_safe}, this means that no point on the vehicle's body can reach $X\obs$.
In practice, feasible solutions to \eqref{prog:OptK} can be found quickly because $X_p$ becomes a finite list of point constraints on the decision variable $k$.
We implement \eqref{prog:OptK} with MATLAB's \texttt{fmincon} general nonlinear solver.
The cost function at each planning iteration is the vehicle's position and velocity relative to a desired waypoint and velocity, respectively, which are given by a high-level planner described in Section \ref{subsec:implementation}.
Recall that, by Assumption \ref{ass:brake}, if a new safe $k$ cannot be found within $\tau_\regtext{plan}$, then the car can always brake safely within the FRS of the previous plan.
\section{Simulation}\label{sec:sim_results}
This section compares RTD to Rapidly-Exploring Random Tree (RRT) and Nonlinear Model-Predictive Control (NMPC) trajectory planners.
The simulations are run on a 2.6 GHz computer with 128 GB RAM.
Planning times are reported using Matlab's \texttt{tic} and \texttt{toc} functions.
All planners use a receding horizon strategy where they must plan a new trajectory every $\tau_\regtext{plan} = 0.5$ s.
In the first experiment, all three planners are run with a real-time planning limit enforced.
In the second experiment, RRT and NMPC are given extra time.
The vehicle runs on a $1036$ m, counter-clockwise, closed loop test track with 7 turns (with approximate curvatures of 0.005--0.04 m$^{-1}$) and two $4$ m wide lanes.
Twenty stationary obstacles (with random length of 3.3--5.1 m length and width of 1.7--2.5 m) are distributed around the track in random lanes, with random longitudinal spacing of 40-55 m along the road.
Each obstacle is placed in the lane center with its heading in the direction of the lane.
We generated ten such random tracks; even though the mean obstacle spacing is the same, the tracks vary in difficulty.
For example, some tracks require the vehicle to perform overtaking maneuvers while cornering.
The vehicle begins each simulation at the northwest corner of the track in the left lane, with first obstacle at least 50 m away.
The obstacle spacing means the vehicle should be able to navigate every test track.
A road-block scenario, where RTD is forced to brake to a stop, is also shown in the video linked in \ref{subsec:results}.
A high-level planner places waypoints ahead of the vehicle at a \emph{lookahead distance} proportional to the vehicle's current speed.
If the lane centerline from the vehicle's current position and lane to the waypoint intersects an obstacle, the waypoint is switched to the other lane to encourage a lane change.
Lane keeping is not explicitly enforced but is encouraged via the cost function.
Each simulation is deemed successful if the vehicle completes one lap of the track.
\subsection{Trajectory Planner Implementations}\label{subsec:implementation}
RTD is implemented as discussed in Sections \ref{sec:high-fidelity_model}--\ref{sec:online_planning}.
Constraints in the online optimization program \eqref{prog:OptK} limit the commanded change in velocity to 1 m/s and yaw rate to less than 0.25 rad/s in each planning iteration.
These constraints create initial condition ranges over which the tracking error functions, described in Section \ref{sec:FRS_computation}, are valid.
FRSes can be computed for more aggressive maneuvers, but, even without them, the vehicle is able to successfully navigate the test track.
To keep the vehicle on the road, RTD buffers the road boundaries by 2.5 m (outside the road) and incorporates these buffers as obstacles.
Since the FRS includes the full vehicle body, this ensures that the vehicle's center of mass stays in the road boundaries when tracking any trajectory planned by RTD.
The RRT planner is implemented based on \cite{kuwata2009rrt}.
To compensate for the vehicle's footprint, obstacles are buffered by 4 m in length and 1.5 m in width.
New nodes are creating by first selecting a random existing node, then forward-integrating the vehicle's high-fidelity model with randomly-chosen control inputs held for 0.5 s.
This creates 50 points spaced 0.01 s apart; the last such point is the new node, which is discarded if any of the points leave the track or enter a buffered obstacle.
Two trees are built in parallel: one with throttle inputs, and one with braking inputs.
The cost at each node is the distance to the current waypoint, plus penalties for being near obstacles or road boundaries, and for commanding large control inputs.
The NMPC planner uses GPOPS-II, a commercially available pseudo-spectral nonlinear MPC solver \cite{gpopsii}.
GPOPS-II uses a kinematic bicycle model, similar to \cite[Section 9.2.3]{RTD_big_paper}, with acceleration and steering wheel angle rate as inputs.
Reducing the number of inputs and complexity of the dynamics was found to reduce solve time.
Obstacles are buffered by 4 m in length and 1.25 m in width.
The track is discretized and represented as a set of adjacent rectangles.
Constraints are created as half-planes to ensure that the planned trajectory (of the center of mass) does not enter buffered obstacles or exit rectangles defining the track.
To reduce the number of constraints, only obstacles and road boundaries within the lookahead distance of the high-level planner are considered.
\subsection{Results}\label{subsec:results}
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{tabular}{|c|r|r|r|r|c|c|}
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Planner} & \multicolumn{2}{l|}{Planning Time (s)} & \multicolumn{2}{l|}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}\% of Track \\ Complete\end{tabular}} & \multirow{2}{*}{Crashes} & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Safe \\ Stops\end{tabular}} \\ \cline{2-5}
& Avg & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{Max} & Avg & Max & & \\ \hline
RTD & \cellcolor{Gray}\textbf{0.09} & \cellcolor{Gray}0.50 & \cellcolor{Gray}\textbf{100} & \cellcolor{Gray}100 & \cellcolor{Gray}0 & \cellcolor{Gray}0 \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{RRT} & 5.00 & 5.00 & 31 & 86 & 0 & 10 \\ \cline{2-7} & \cellcolor{Gray}0.50 & \cellcolor{Gray}0.50 & \cellcolor{Gray}13 & \cellcolor{Gray}38 & \cellcolor{Gray}1 & \cellcolor{Gray}9
\\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{GPOPS} & 3.71 & 72.58 & \textbf{100} & 100 & 0 & 0\\ \cline{2-7} & \cellcolor{Gray}0.50 & \cellcolor{Gray} 0.50 & \cellcolor{Gray}0 & \cellcolor{Gray}0 & \cellcolor{Gray}0 & \cellcolor{Gray}10
\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Simulation results comparing RTD, RRT, and GPOPS-II on 10 simulated tracks.
The first experiment, with the real-time planning limit, is shown in gray, and the second experiment in white.
The fourth and fifth columns show the average and max percent of each track completed.
The six and seventh columns count the number of crashes or safe stops if the vehicle did not complete the track.}
\label{tab:sim_results}
\vspace{-3mm}
\end{table}
Results are shown in Table \ref{tab:sim_results}.
A video of RTD planning in real time is available at \url{http://www.roahmlab.com/acc2019_rtd_video}.
In the first experiment, RTD successfully navigates the track in all 10 trials, with an average planning time of 0.086 s.
With the 0.5 s time limit, RRT on average, navigates 13\% of the track on average.
When the vehicle approaches obstacles, the planner struggles to generate feasible nodes that both avoid the obstacle and stay on the track.
Since the algorithm penalizes nodes near obstacles and plans a braking trajectory at each iteration, it is able to stop safely (without colliding with an obstacle) in 9 trials.
RRT has 1 crash because it cannot always generate a feasible braking trajectory.
Increasing the buffer size of the obstacles could reduce collisions, but would impact performance.
GPOPS-II is unable to plan trajectories in less than 0.5 seconds due to the number of track constraints; hence, it records 10 safe stops.
In the second experiment, the extended planning time allows RRT to generate more nodes per planning iteration, and complete more of the track: 31\% on average, with a maximum of 86\%.
Although unable to reach the goal, RRT uses the extended planning time to find safe stopping paths.
GPOPS-II successfully reaches the goal in all 10 trials; however, it achieves an average planning time of 3.71 s.
The planning times for GPOPS-II have a standard deviation of 4.20 s; the large standard deviation is expected because the number of constraints vary based on the track curvature.
Heuristics may reduce the amount of constraints, but would be obstacle- or track-specific.
In contrast, the average planning time and standard deviation of RTD is 0.09 s and 0.06 s; hence we expect changes in the track will not affect its ability to perform in real time.
Additionally due to Lemma \ref{lem:T_sense_pers_feas}, when RTD is unable to plan a trajectory within the 0.5 s time limit, it is always able to safely brake.
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:conclusion}
To design trajectories for autonomous cars while ensuring safety and persistent feasibility, one must have real-time performance despite model uncertainty and error in the vehicle's ability to track a planned trajectory.
In this work, we apply the Reachability-based Trajectory Design (RTD) method, which is provably safe and persistently feasible, to a full-sized passenger vehicle in CarSim.
RTD has been applied to small mobile robots in prior work; here, we demonstrate that the method can plan dynamically-feasible, safe trajectories for autonomous cars.
In ten simulated trials, RTD successfully drives the vehicle around an entire 1 km test track at up to 15 m/s around randomly generated obstacles (only known when detected at runtime) safely and in real-time.
Currently, RTD is limited to static obstacles, and requires that braking is implicitly included in the offline reachability computation.
Future work will address these limitations, apply RTD on a physical car, explore new online algorithms for globally-optimal planning, and address vehicle-specific types of uncertainty such as road friction. |
\section{Introduction}
Let $d$ be field discriminant, that is $d\equiv 1\pmod 4$ is
square free, or
$d\equiv 0\pmod 4$ and $\frac{d}{4}$ is square free with
$\frac{d}{4}\equiv 2$ or $3\pmod 4$.
A lattice in $\mathbb{R}^n$ is a $\mathbb{Z}$ module generated by $n$ linearly independent
vectors in $\mathbb{R}^n$.
Recently ideal lattices have come into the forefront as
a new tool for cryptography and coding theory, claiming to defeat the
possible threats of a quantum attack on the hitherto established
systems.
Non-zero vectors in a lattice with
least Euclidean norm play a key role as it is
considered to be computationally difficult to find them. Therefore one is interested
in a lattice that has a basis comprising of only such vectors.
We call such a lattice well-rounded.
Our focus will be on lattices that arise from ideals in the full ring of integers
of a real quadratic field
$\mathbb Q(\sqrt{d})$. The reader is directed to
\cite{DK}, \cite{FT} and \cite{FT2} for more information and results on the topic.
In \cite{FT} the authors exhibit infinite families of real and imaginary
quadratic fields with ideals that give rise to well-rounded lattices.
In \cite{FT2} the authors consider divisors of $d$ that satisfy
$\sqrt{\frac{d}{3}}<a<\sqrt{d}$
and show that this condition is necessary and sufficient for the
existence of well-rounded ideals lattices for imaginary quadratic fields $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{-d})$.
In the case of real quadratic fields, they pose a question about
whether well-rounded ideals lattices can exist when this condition
is not satisfied. Our main theorem below answers this question in the affirmative.
Indeed the necessary
and sufficient condition given in the following theorem includes the condition given above.
Note that an ideal is called well-rounded if the corresponding lattice well-rounded.
\begin{theorem}
Let $K=\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{d})$ be a real quadratic field where
$d$ is a field discriminant.
A primitive ideal $I$ in the ring of integers
is well-rounded
if and only if
$I=a\mathbb Z+\frac{a-\sqrt{d}}{2}\mathbb Z$
and $a$ is a positive integer that satisfies
$\sqrt{\frac{d}{3}}<a<\sqrt{3d}.$
\end{theorem}
\begin{rem}
The ideal $I$ in the above theorem has order dividing $2$ in the class group.
Indeed, $d=a^2-4ac$ for some integer $c$, and hence
$a=N(I)$, the norm of the ideal $I$
divides $d$.
If an ideal $I$ is not primitive, then
$I=(\gamma )J$, where $J$ is a primitive ideal and $\gamma $ is a positive integer.
It is easy to see that $I$ is well-rounded if and only if $J$ is well-rounded.
Note also that if $d=4d_1$ in Theorem 1.1,
then well-rounded ideals exist only
if $d_1\equiv 3\pmod 4$. This is because
if $d$ is even, then $a=2a_1$ so that
$d_1=a_1^2-2a_1c$, from which it follows that $d_1\equiv 3\pmod 4$. This
completes the answer to
\cite[Question 2]{FT2} where the authors asked whether principal WR ideals
exist in the case when $d\not\equiv 1\pmod 4$. We have show above that
$d_1\equiv 2\pmod 4$ is not possible and
\cite[Proposition 4]{Ray},
states that there are infinitely many real quadratic fields
with WR principal ideals in the case when $d_1\equiv 3\pmod 4$.
\end{rem}
\section{Binary quadratic forms, ideals and lattices}
\subsection{Forms}
A {\sl binary quadratic form} is
a function $f(x, y)=ax^2+bxy+cy^2$, where $a, b,c $ are real numbers
(called the coefficients of $f$)
and
$d=b^2-4 a c$ is the {\it discriminant}.
A form is called {\it positive definite} if the discriminant
is negative. We consider only
integral forms,
that
is $a, b, c$ are integers. In the case when
$\gcd(a, b, c)=1$, the form is {\it primitive}.
Often we will suppress the variables $x$ and $y$,
writing a form $f(x,y)$ as simply $f=(a, b, c)$.
Two forms $f$ and $f'$ are said to be {\it equivalent}, written as
$f\sim f'$, if for some
$A=\begin{pmatrix} \alpha &\beta \\ \gamma & \delta \end{pmatrix}
\in SL_2(\mathbb Z)$ we have
$f'(x,y)=f(\alpha x+\beta y, \gamma x+\delta y)$. It is easy to see
that $\sim$ is an equivalence relation on the set of forms of
discriminant $d$.
A form $f$ is said to {\it represent} an integer $m$ if there exist
coprime integers $x$ and $y$, such that $f(x,y)=m$.
Note that equivalent forms represent the same integers and hence
sometimes we refer to a class of forms $f$ that represents a
given integer.
The set of equivalence classes of primitive
forms is an abelian group called the {\it form class group}, with
group law as composition given in Definition 2.1 in the next section.
If $f=(a, b, c)$, then the form $(a,-b,c)$ is the inverse of $f$.
The {\it identity form} $e$ is defined as the form
$(1,0,\frac{-d}{4})$
or $(1, 1, \frac{1-d}{4})$
depending on whether $d$ is even or odd
respectively.
A useful fact is that any form that represents the integer $1$ is
equivalent to the identity form.
The {\it infimum} of a binary quadratic form $f$
is defined as
$m(f)=\inf\{|f(x,y)|: x, y\in \mathbb Z\}$, where
$x, y$ are not both $0$.
Note that $m(f)=m(f^{-1})$ and $m(kf)=km(f)$ for any
real number $k$.
A form $(a, b, c)$ of negative discriminant is {\it reduced} if
$|b|\le a\le c$
where $b>0$ in the case when $|b|=a$ or $a=c$.
{\it Symmetric} forms satisfy $a=c$.
\subsection {Ideals}
Recall that
$d\equiv 0, 1\hskip2mm\!\!\!\!\!\pmod 4$ denotes a field discriminant and
all ideals are in the ring of integers.
We present below a description of an ideal and the rule
for composing two primitive ideals. The reader may refer to
\cite[Sections 1.1 and 1.2]{Mo} for more information.
Let
$$w=\begin{cases}
\frac{1+\sqrt{d}}{2}, & d\equiv 1\pmod 4 \\
\sqrt{\frac{d}{4}}, & d\equiv 0\pmod 4
.
\end{cases}
$$
The ring of algebraic integers is the module with basis
$[1, w]$.
A primitive ideal $I$ can be written in the form
\begin{equation}
I=a\mathbb Z+\frac{-b+\sqrt{d}}{2}\mathbb Z,
\end{equation}
where $a, b$ are integers such that $a>0$ is the norm of the ideal,
$0\le b<2a$
and $4a$ divides $b^2-d$.
If $c=\frac{b^2-d}{4a}$ then $\gcd(a, b, c)=1$ as $d$ is a field discriminant
and so $(a, b, c)=ax^2+bxy+cy^2$ is a primitive form of discriminant $d$.
Also, if $I$ is not primitive then there is a primitive ideal $J$
such that $I=(\gamma)J$ for some integer $\gamma$.
In the following definition we
present the formula for the product
of ideals which leads to composition of forms.
\begin{definition}\emph{(Composition law)}
Let $I_k=a_k\mathbb Z+\frac{-b_k+\sqrt{d}}{2}\mathbb Z,\hskip2mm
k=1, 2,$ be two primitive ideals. Let $f_1=(a_1, b_1, c_1) \text{ and }
f_2=(a_2, b_2, c_2)$ be the corresponding binary quadratic forms
of discriminant $d$.
Let $g=gcd(a_1, a_2, (b_1+b_2)/2)$ and let $v_1, v_2, w $ be integers
such that $$v_1a_1+v_2a_2+w(b_1+b_2)/2=g.$$ If $a_3$ and
$b_3$ are given by
\[
\begin{split} a_3&=\frac{a_1a_2}{g^2},\\
b_3&= b_2+2\,\frac{a_2}{g}\,\left(\frac{b_1-b_2}{2}\,\,v_2-c_2w\right)
\mod {2a_3},
\end{split}
\]
then $I_1\cdot I_2$ is the ideal
$a_3\mathbb Z +\frac{-b_3+\sqrt{d}}{2}\mathbb Z$.
Also, the composition of the forms $(a_1, b_1, c_1)$ and
$(a_2, b_2, c_2)$ is the form $(a_3, b_3, c_3)$, where $c_3$ is
computed using the discriminant equation.
\end{definition}
Note that this gives the multiplication in the class group.
\subsection{Lemmas on binary quadratic forms}
The following lemma contains some elementary results on
binary quadratic forms that we use in the proof of the main theorem.
\begin{lemma}\emph{
\begin{enumerate}
\item
The form $(a, b, c)$ is equivalent to the
form $(a, b+2a\delta, a\delta^2+b\delta+c)$ for any integer $\delta$.
\item
The form $(a, b, c)$ is equivalent to the form
$(c, -b, a)$.
\item
If $f=(a, b, c)$ is a reduced form of negative discriminant,
then $a$ and $c$ are the two smallest
integers represented by $f$.
\end{enumerate}
}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Parts are 1 and 2 are achieved by the transformation matrices
$\begin{pmatrix} 1 & \delta \\ 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix}
$
and
$\begin{pmatrix} 0 & -1 \\ 1 & 0 \end{pmatrix}
$.
For the third part see
\cite[Chapter 6, Section 8]{Ri}.
\end{proof}
In the following lemma we present an elementary fact on forms
of order dividing two that is the principal tool in proving our main result.
\begin{lemma}
Let $f=(a, b, c)$ be a positive definite form of discriminant $d$
such that $f^2\sim e$. Then either
$a$ divides $b$ or
$\frac{a^2}{(\gcd(a, b))^2}\ge \frac{|d|}{4}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let the composition of $f$ with itself using the composition law (Definition 2.2) be
$(A, B, C)$. Then
$A=\left(\frac{a}{\gcd(a, b)}\right)^2$, and as equivalent forms represent the
same integers, the identity form $e$ represents
$A$. As
$e$ is either $(1,0,\frac{-d}{4})$
or $(1, 1, \frac{1-d}{4})$
(depending on the parity of $d$), from Lemma
2.1, part 3,
if $A\ne 1$
then
$A=\left(\frac{a}{\gcd(a, b)}\right)^2\ge \frac{|d|}{4}$.
Note that $A=1$ corresponds to $a| b$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Real quadratic ideal lattices}
Let $I$ be an ideal in the ring of integers of a real quadratic field
$\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{d})$ with basis
$\left[a, \frac{b-\sqrt{d}}{2}\right]$. The lattice
associated to $I$ denoted by $L_I$ has a basis matrix
$$A_I=\begin{pmatrix} a& \frac{b-\sqrt{d}}{2} \\
a& \frac{b+\sqrt{d}}{2}
\end{pmatrix}
,$$
so that if
$\begin{pmatrix}m\\n\end{pmatrix}\in \mathbb{Z}^2$,
the elements of the lattice
are given by
${\bf x}=A_I
\begin{pmatrix}m\\n\end{pmatrix}
$,
with norm form
\begin{equation}
Q_I=||{\bf x }||^2=
\begin{pmatrix}m& n\end{pmatrix}
A_I^T A_I
\begin{pmatrix}m\\n\end{pmatrix}
.
\label{eq: norm}
\end{equation}
The lattice is {\it well-rounded } or WR if there is a basis of elements
both of which have the shortest norm.
We call an ideal well-rounded if the corresponding lattice is WR.
\begin{lemma}
An ideal $I$ is WR if and only if its norm
form
$Q_I=t Q$, for some positive integer $t$ and $Q$ a primitive form
that is equivalent to a reduced symmetric form.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $I=(\gamma) J$ where $J$ is a primitive ideal.
Then
$A_I=\gamma A_J$ and
from the norm equation (2),
it follows that
$Q_I=\gamma^2 Q_J$. Let $Q$ be the primitive form obtained
by dividing
the three coefficients of $Q_J$ by their
greatest common divisor $g$. Then
$Q_I=\gamma^2 g Q$ and
the least positive integers represented satisfy
$m(Q_I)=\gamma^2 g m(Q)$.
Clearly $I$ is WR if and only if $Q$ is WR.
By Lemma 2.1, part 3, $Q$ is WR if and only if it
is equivalent to a reduced symmetric form and the result follows.
\end{proof}
\section{ Proof of Theorem 1.1}
Let
$I=a\mathbb Z+\frac{b-\sqrt{d}}{2}\mathbb Z$ be a primitive ideal.
Recall
that $d$ is a field discriminant and hence $\gcd(a, b, c)=1$,
where $d=b^2-4ac$.
The corresponding lattice $L_I$
has norm form (given by (2))
$$Q_I=
2a^2m^2+2abmn+\frac{b^2+d}{2} n^2.$$
Note that $Q_I$ is a positive definite form of discriminant $-4a^2 d$.
Let $g=\gcd(2a^2,2ab,\frac{b^2+d}{2})$.
As $d=b^2-4ac$
we have $g\le \gcd(a, b)$.
It follows that
$$ Q=\frac{Q_I}{g}=\frac{2a^2}{g}m^2+\frac{2ab}{g}mn+\frac{b^2+d}{2g} n^2$$
is a primitive form
of discriminant $-4\frac{a^2d}{g^2}$.
{\noindent{\bf Claim 1}}
$ Q^2 \sim e$ if and only if
$a|b$.
\begin{proof}
It is easy to see from Definition 2.2 that for any primitive form
$(A, B, C)$, if $A|B$, then the composition of the form with itself
gives the identity form (as $a_3=1$ in Definition 2.1 ).
Therefore if $a|b$ then $ Q^2\sim e$. Now assume that
$ Q^2\sim e$.
We have $\gcd(\frac{2a^2}{g},\frac{2ab}{g})=
\frac{2a}{g}\gcd(a, b)$.
By Lemma 2.2 either $a|b$ or
$$\frac{\left(\frac{2a^2}{g}\right)^2}
{\left(\frac{2a}{g}\gcd(a, b)\right)^2}=
\frac{a^2}{\gcd(a, b)^2}
\ge \frac{a^2}{g^2}d.$$
The above gives
$d\le \frac{g^2}{\gcd(a, b)^2}\le 1$
(as $g\le \gcd(a, b)$),
which is not
possible.
\end{proof}
{\noindent \bf Claim 2} If $a|b$ then $ Q$
is equivalent to a reduced symmetric form if and only if
$a=b$ and $\sqrt{\frac{d}{3}}<a<\sqrt{3d}$.
\begin{proof}
We first consider the case when $d\equiv 1\pmod 4$.
As $0\le b< 2a$, if $a|b$ it follows that $b=a$ (as $b\equiv d\pmod 4$ is odd)
and $Q_I=(2a^2, 2a^2, \frac{a^2+d}{2})$.
Moreover $d=a^2-4ac$ and
$\gcd(a, c)=1$ gives
$Q=(2a, 2a, a-2c)$.
Using the equivalences given in parts 1 and 2 of Lemma 2.1, we have
$Q\sim (a-2c, -2a, 2a)\sim (a-2c, 4c, a-2c)=f_0$.
Observe that $f_0$ is symmetric.
Also, $f_0$ is reduced
if and only if
$|4c|\le a-2c$.
Using $c=\frac{a^2-d}{4a}$, it is easy to show that
the condition $|4c|\le a-2c$
is equivalent to
$\sqrt{d}<a<\sqrt{3d}$ when
$c>0$ and to
$\sqrt{\frac{d}{3}}<a<\sqrt{d}$
when $c<0$.
Now consider the case $d\equiv 0\pmod 4$.
Let $d=4d_1$ and $b=2b_1$.
In this case $a|b$ gives $b=a$ or $b=0$.
We look first at the case when $a=b$.
As $d_1=b_1^2-2b_1c$ and $\gcd(a, b, c)=1$, it
follows that $b_1$ and $c$ are odd.
Therefore
$Q_I=(2a^2, 2ab, 2(b_1^2+d_1))
=2(a^2, ab, 2b_1^2-ac)
=
8b_1(b_1, b_1, \frac{b_1-c}{2})$
and thus
$Q=(b_1, b_1, \frac{b_1-c}{2})$.
We have the equivalences (using Lemma 2.3)
$$
\left(b_1, b_1, \frac{b_1-c}{2}\right)
\sim \left(\frac{b_1-c}{2}, -b_1, b_1\right)
\sim \left(\frac{b_1-c}{2}, -b_1+2\frac{b_1-c}{2},
\frac{b_1-c}{2}\right)
$$
$$\sim \left(\frac{b_1-c}{2}, c,
\frac{b_1-c}{2}\right)=f_0.$$
The form $f_0$ is reduced iff
$|c|\le \frac{b_1-c}{2}$.
In an identical fashion to the case above, noting that $a=b=2b_1$ we obtain
that $f_0$ is reduced if and only if
$\frac{\sqrt{d}}{3}<a<\sqrt{3d}$.
To complete the proof of Claim 2 it remains to consider the case $b=0$.
We have $d_1=-ac$ and hence
$Q_I=(2a^2, 0, -2ac)$
and $Q=(a, 0, -c)$.
One of $(a, 0, -c)$ or $(-c, 0, a)$
is reduced and clearly neither is symmetric
as $a\ne -c$ ($\gcd(a,c)=1$).
\end{proof}
From Lemma 2.3 the ideal
$I$ is WR if and only if
$ Q$ is equivalent to a reduced symmetric form.
From Claims 1 and 2
it follows that
$I$ is WR if and only if
$a=b$ and
$\sqrt{\frac{d}{3}}<a<\sqrt{3d}$.
\qed
|
\section{Introduction}
\noindent With the recent rise of deep neural networks, reinforcement learning has shown remarkable achievements in many complex environments.
In the Atari 2600 video game environment, agents trained with deep reinforcement learning methods have succeeded in achieving human-level, or even super-human performance in most of the games~\cite{DQN2015,a3c2016,HybridRewardArchitecture2017}.
However, in the domain of real-time strategy (RTS) games, which are considered to be one of the next grand AI challenges after Chess and Go~\cite{elf2017,AlphaZero2017}, current AI is yet to defeat top human players~\cite{StarCraft2_2017}.
To tackle this challenging domain, several platforms for conducting experiments on RTS games have been developed~\cite{muRTS2013,TorchCraft2016,StarCraft2_2017}. The ELF platform~\cite{elf2017} is such a platform and is an extensive, lightweight, and flexible platform designed for reinforcement learning research. It provides a small but nontrivial RTS game called Mini-RTS, and this game runs an order of magnitude faster than existing RTS environments, while capturing all the basic dynamics of RTS games, e.g., fog-of-war, resource gathering, troop building, and attacking with troops.
In this work, we aim to find a game-theoretic solution to Mini-RTS; that is, we attempt to compute an equilibrium strategy profile, as a first step toward solving more realistic and complex RTS games. Developing an AI for RTS involves many difficulties, including strategic and tactical decision making, real-time planning, and domain knowledge exploitation~\cite{RTSSurvey2013,RTSSurvey2014}. In this paper, we particularly focus on the multi-agent property: RTS games are multi-agent games and thus are not stationary for a learning agent, which breaks an assumption of single-agent reinforcement learning that the environment can be modeled as a Markov Decision Process (MDP).
\citet{FSP2015} proposed a game-theoretic self-play approach called Fictitious Self-Play (FSP). In FSP, an agent calculates the best response strategy to its opponents with reinforcement learning and averages its strategies in a sampling-based fashion. This process forms Fictitious Play (FP)~\cite{FP1951,GWFP2006} in extensive-form games, and can be applied to a large-scale imperfect-information game.
Since FP has a theoretical guarantee of convergence to a Nash equilibrium with minimal restrictions, FSP has a reliable theoretical background on convergence, and is more likely to converge than raw self-play methods.
Neural Fictitious Self-Play (NFSP)~\cite{NFSP2016}, a variant of FSP that uses deep reinforcement learning for its best response component, learned an approximate Nash equilibrium in small games of Poker without any prior domain knowledge.
In this paper, we show that NFSP can be effectively combined with policy gradient reinforcement learning and be used in the Mini-RTS domain. Our experimental results also show that the scalability of NFSP can be substantially improved by pretraining the models with simple self-play using a policy gradient method, which is efficient and by itself gives a strong strategy despite its lack of theoretical guarantee of convergence.
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first attempt to find a convergent strategy profile in a non-trivial RTS game, hereby presenting a promising direction toward finding Nash equilibrium strategies for RTS games (i.e., solving RTS games).
\section{Task}
\subsection{ELF and Mini-RTS}
Our objective is to compute an equilibrium strategy that is not exploitable for the Mini-RTS game in the ELF platform.
In Mini-RTS, the goal of the agent is to destroy the opponent's base with its troops. Each agent has its base, units, and resource. With its base and some resource, the agent can build a worker. A worker can build a barrack, and some attackers with the barrack.
The ELF game engine is tick-driven: at each tick, each agent makes decisions by sending commands on units based on the observation. The game state changes according to the commands and new observations are given to the agents. Because there is fog-of-war in mini-RTS as in other RTS games, agents cannot observe units of its opponents in fog-of-war, and thus the game is imperfect information.
A screenshot of the game is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:example_mini_rts}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=40mm]{elf_with_fow.png}
\caption{A game screenshot of Mini-RTS. Here the sight is for the lower-left agent whose health bars are enclosed by a blue line. Because of the fog-of-war, the agent cannot see the vicnity of the opponent's base, so it does not know whether the opponent has any troops or not.}
\label{fig:example_mini_rts}
\end{figure}
In addition to the low- and micro-level commands like ``move left by two pixels'' for each unit, the ELF engine has more hierarchical and strategic commands like ``make someone go to some available place and build a barrack'' or ``defend our base from the enemy's attackers'' for its all units. We use these commands instead of raw commands.
Specifically, agents have nine discrete strategic actions. Four of these are about building units: a worker, a barrack, a melee attacker, and a range attacker. The next four are about tactical commands: attack, attack-in-range, hit-and-run, and all-defend. The last command is Idle, which means doing nothing. These actions are global, i.e., they affect all units in one command.
Agents receive a low-level observation matrix shaped $22\times 20 \times 20$ at each tick, where $20\times 20$ represents the resolution of the observation for the game map, and $22$ channels contain the number of each kind of units like a worker or the base.
\section{Background}
\subsection{Markov Decision Process and Reinforcement Learning}
An MDP is an environment model for standard reinforcement learning.
In reinforcement learning with an MDP, an agent interacts with an MDP environment $\mathcal{E}$. At each time step $t$, the agent receives a state $s_t \in \mathcal{S}$ and selects an action $a_t$ from a set of possible actions $\mathcal{A}$ with a probability distribution $\pi: \mathcal{S} \times \mathcal{A} \rightarrow \left[0, 1\right]$, which is called a policy. In $\mathcal{E}$ the action is executed, and it returns a next state $s_{t+1}$ with reward $r_{t+1}$. The goal of the agent is to maximize its expected cumulative reward $\mathbb{E}\left[R_t\right] = \mathbb{E} \left[\sum_{k=0}^\infty \gamma^k r_{t+k}\right]$, where $\gamma$ is a discount factor.
If the agent cannot distinguish between some states of the environment, the environment is called a Partially Observable MDP (POMDP). In a POMDP environment $\mathcal{E}_p$, the agent receives an observation $o_t=O(s_t)$, where $s_t$ is a true state of $\mathcal{E}_p$ and $O$ is a function that maps a state to an observation of the agent. The agent selects an action $a_t$ from $\mathcal{A}$ as in an MDP, but the policy $\pi$ depends on the observation $o_t$ and not on the state $s_t$, because the agent cannot observe the true state.
We will use the following standard definitions of the state-action value function $Q_\pi \left(s_t, a_t\right) = \mathbb{E}\left[\sum_{k=0}^\infty \gamma^k r_{t+k}\right]$, the value function $V_\pi \left(s_t\right) = \sum_{a\in \mathcal{A}} \pi\left(a\,|\, s_t\right) Q_\pi\left(s_t, a\right)$, and the advantage function $A_\pi \left(s_t, a_t\right) = Q_\pi \left(s_t, a_t\right) - V_\pi \left(s_t\right)$.
\subsection{Extensive-Form Games}
In this work, we regard RTS games as extensive-form games. An extensive-form game is a model for a sequential multi-agent game. The representation is based on a finite rooted game tree.
In an extensive-form game, for each agent $i\in \mathcal{N}$, there are some indistinguishable states. An information set $u_i \in U_i$ contains such states; namely, the agent $i$ cannot distinguish $s_1$ and $s_2$ and is forced to act in the exact same way if the two states are in the same information set $u_i$.
If the agents in the game never forget their acquired information, the game is called perfect recall. In a perfect recall game, the graph of information sets forms a tree. And if the game has only two agents and $R_1 + R_2 = 0$ for all states, the game is called a two-player zero-sum game.
Each agent has its own strategy $\pi_i$, which specifies the probability distribution over the possible actions $A(s)$ in the given state $s$. A strategy profile $\pi = \left\{\pi_1, \cdots, \pi_N\right\}$ is a tuple of strategies for all agents. We can consider the expected cumulative reward $R(\pi)$ given a fixed strategy profile. A strategy of the agent $i$ is called the best response strategy to its opponents' strategy $\pi_{-i}=\left\{\pi_j \,|\, j\neq i\right\}$ if the strategy maximizes its expected reward $R\left(\cdot, \pi_{-i}\right)$. A Nash equilibrium of an extensive-form game is a strategy profile such that for each agent its strategy is the best response strategy to the others' strategies.
We can combine this game-theoretic model with MDPs. In an extensive-form game, if we pick an agent and fix other agents' strategies, then the environment can be regarded as a single-agent POMDP for the picked agent. In addition, if the game is perfect recall, this POMDP can be converted into an MDP environment, because the probability distribution of reaching indistinguishable states is stationary and thus these states can be degenerated into one state.
\subsection{Neural Fictitious Self-Play}
NFSP~\cite{NFSP2016} is a variant of FSP that uses neural networks and Deep-Q Networks (DQN)~\cite{DQN2015} for its approximation functions. FSP is a scalable method that uses FP in extensive-form representations.
In FP, a popular game-theoretic model of learning, agents repeatedly play a game, choosing the best response strategy to their opponents' average strategies at each iteration. The average strategies converge to a Nash equilibrium when the game has certain properties, e.g., two-player zero-sum or potential games.
FP is a theory on a normal-form representation, where each agent acts only once per one game, which is not suited to large-scale applications. To overcome the limitation, \citet{FSP2015} proposed a full-width extensive-form fictitious play and FSP. Both methods are developed for an extensive-form representation, and the former is a full-width method and the latter is an appropriately approximated (hence scalable to large-scale games) method.
As with FP, agents in FSP repeatedly play a game, storing their experience in memory. Instead of computing the full-width best response strategy, they learn an approximate best response using reinforcement learning (RL). And instead of averaging their full-width strategies, they learn an approximate average strategy by using supervised learning (SL).
NFSP is not a method that simply applied neural networks to FSP. In NFSP, agents memorize their experiences in a reservoir replay buffer~\cite{Reservoir1985} to avoid windowing experiences due to sampling from a finite memory. NFSP also uses anticipatory dynamics~\cite{DFSP2005} to enable each agent to effectively track changes in its opponents' behavior.
The resulting NFSP algorithm is as follows. Each agent $i$ has its RL network $\beta_i$, SL network $\pi_i$, and SL reservoir replay buffer $\mathcal{M}_i^{SL}$. At the beginning of the game, each agent decides whether it uses $\beta_i$ or $\pi_i$ as its strategy in this episode, with probability $\eta$ and $1-\eta$, respectively. At each time step, agents sample an action from the selected strategy, and if the selected strategy is $\beta_i$, a tuple of the observation and the taken action is stored in $\mathcal{M}_i^{SL}$. $\beta_i$ is trained as it maximizes the expected cumulative reward against $\pi_{-i}$ and $\pi_i$ is trained as it represents the probability distribution over actions in $\mathcal{M}_i^{SL}$.
Since $\mathcal{M}_i^{SL}$ is a reservoir buffer and tuples in $\mathcal{M}_i^{SL}$ are taken from $\beta_i$, $\pi_i$ demonstrates the average strategy over the past RL strategies.
In addition, since the mixed strategy representated by choosing one from two extensive-form strategies at the beginning of episodes forms a realization equivalent strategy to the mixed strategy of the two normal-form strategy, the behavior strategy in each episode is $\eta \beta^t_i + (1-\eta)\pi^t_i = \pi^t_i + \eta (\beta^t_i - \pi^t_i) \simeq \pi^t_i + \eta \alpha \frac{d}{dt} \pi^t_i \simeq \pi_i^{t+\Delta t} $, which is a short-term prediction of $\pi^t_i$. Thus, for any agent $i$, it computes an approximated best response strategy to its opponents' average strategy (with some time prediction) $\pi_{-i}$, and an approximated average strategy over the past best response strategies $\beta_i$, which forms an approximated FP.
\subsection{Proximal Policy Optimization}
For the reason discussed later in the Method section, we do not use a value-based reinforcement learning method such as DQN as our reinforcement learning algorithm. Instead, we use a policy-based reinforcement learning method called Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO)~\cite{PPO2017}, which extends and simplifies Trust Region Policy Optimization (TRPO)~\cite{TRPO2015}.
In TRPO, an objective function $\mathbb{E}_t\left[\frac{\pi_\theta\left(a_t\,|\, s_t\right)}{\pi_{\theta_{\text{old}}}\left(a_t\,|\, s_t\right)}\hat{A}_t\right]$ is maximized, subject to a constraint on the policy update represented as the Kullback-Leibler divergence between $\pi_\theta\left(\cdot \,|\, s_t\right)$ and $\pi_{\theta_{\text{old}}}\left(\cdot \,|\, s_t\right)$, where $\theta_{\text{old}}$ is the fixed parameters before the update.
The constraint in this optimization problem is introduced to prevent an excessively large policy update. PPO uses a clipping term instead of this constraint, i.e., maximizing the following function under the unconstrained condition:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:PPO_loss}
L(\theta) = \hat{\mathbb{E}}_t \left[\min \left(r_t \hat{A}_t, \, \mathop{\rm clip}\left(r_t, \, 1-\epsilon, \, 1+\epsilon\right)\hat{A}_t\right)\right]\, ,
\end{align}
where $r_t$ is the probability ratio $r_t = \frac{\pi_\theta \left(a_t\,|\, s_t\right)}{\pi_{\theta_{\text{old}}}\left(a_t\,|\, s_t\right)}$, $\epsilon$ is a hyperparameter that determines the threshold, and $\hat{A}_t$ is an estimator of the advantage function $A_t$. This scheme is much simpler to implement and empirically has better performance than original TRPO.
\section{Method}
We regard RTS games as two-player zero-sum perfect recall extensive-form games and apply self-play methods to them. This view is justified as follows:
although there are many units in an RTS game, agents can control all of them and have all information about them, and hence the game is essentially a two-player zero-sum game.
Because of the existence of fog-of-war, the game is an imperfect information game. An RTS game is originally real-time and is not tick-driven, but in practice almost all of the RTS games have discrete time steps and therefore the game can be regarded as an extensive-form game.
If each agent collects all observation histories and treats the set of them as a new observation, then the game is modeled as a perfect recall game. In this work we do not memorize past histories. We will discuss it in the section of future work.
\begin{algorithm}[t!]
\caption{NFSP with PPO}
\label{alg:NFSP_PPO}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Statex $\Gamma$ is an ELF interface and $N$ is the number of agents
\Function{Main}{$\Gamma$, $N$}
\For{$p = 1, 2, \cdots, N$ in parallel} \Comment{$p$ is a learning agent}
\State $\Gamma$.Initialize()
\State $\Gamma$.RegisterCallback($p$, Trainer)
\State $\Gamma$.RegisterCallback($p$, RL\_Actor)
\For{$q = 1, \cdots, p-1, p+1, \cdots, N$ }
\State $\Gamma$.RegisterCallback($q$, SL\_Actor)
\EndFor
\Repeat
\Repeat \label{line:do_step_begin}
\State batch$\gets\Gamma$.StepAndAccumulate() \Comment{Multiple games are executed asyncronously and observation data is accumulated into the batch}
\Until{The number of accumulated data reaches certain batch size}
\State $\Gamma$.CorrespondingCallback(batch) \label{line:do_step_end}
\Until{Time steps exceed the certain limits}
\EndFor
\EndFunction
\Function{Trainer}{$p$, batch}
\State $\left\{S_\tau, A_\tau, \Pi_\tau, R_\tau\right\}_{\left\{\tau=t,\cdots,t+T-1\right\}} \gets$ batch
\label{line:batch_trainer}
\Comment{State, action, probability distribution, and reward}
\Comment{$\Pi_t$ is a probability distribution of $\text{NN}_{RL}$ at $t$}
\State Calculate $\mathcal{L}_{RL}$ with eq. (\ref{eq:rl_cost})
\label{line:calc_rl_loss}
\State Memorize $\left\{S_{\tau}, \Pi_{\tau}\right\}$ in buffer $\mathcal{M}_{SL}$
\label{line:memorize_exp}
\State Sample $S, \Pi \gets \mathcal{M}_{SL}$
\label{line:get_batch_from_sl_memory}
\State Calculate $\mathcal{L}_{SL}$ with eq. (\ref{eq:sl_cost})
\label{line:calc_sl_loss}
\State Optimize $\text{NN}_{RL}$ and $\text{NN}_{SL}$ with $\mathcal{L}_{RL}$ and $\mathcal{L}_{SL}$
\EndFunction
\Function{RL\_Actor}{$p$, batch}
\State $S \gets$ batch
\label{line:batch_RL}
\State $\pi \gets$ $\text{NN}_{RL}(S)$
\State \Return Sampled $a \gets \pi$
\EndFunction
\Function{SL\_Actor}{$p$, batch}
\State $S \gets$ batch
\label{line:batch_SL}
\State $\pi \gets$ $\text{NN}_{SL}(S)$
\State \Return Sampled $a \gets \pi$
\EndFunction
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
While the original NFSP uses DQN with a replay buffer as its RL algorithm, there can be an on-policy problem. Value-based RL methods including DQN are known to be off-policy algorithms; that is, one can use any data sampled by any behavior policies to train the target policy. However, in NFSP, we cannot use the off-policy data because the opponents' strategies are not stationary. Although we do not need to sample the training data with the target policy, we still need to sample the data along the environment, and the transition rules of the environment now depends on the behavior policy of the opponent. Using a circular replay buffer in self-play requires the strict assumption that the training speed of its opponent is sufficiently slower than the reinforcement learning.
To exploit this fact efficiently, we use a policy gradient algorithm, which is by nature on-policy.
Specifically, we combine NFSP and PPO, a state-of-the-art policy gradient algorithm, applying PPO as the RL method of NFSP. Algorithm~\ref{alg:NFSP_PPO} shows the overview.
In this algorithm, action or training functions are formed into callbacks and registered to a game process. In steps from line~\ref{line:do_step_begin} to line~\ref{line:do_step_end}, multiple games are executed in parallel threads in the process, and one of the registered callback functions is called with appropriate batch information.
In this work, we launch $N$ processes in parallel, and for each process we register agent $p$'s action function that follows the strategy produced by the RL component and other agents' action functions that follow the strategies produced by the SL components, and build multiple game threads in parallel. Here $N$ is the number of agents (in this work $N=2$) and $p$ is the index of a process.
This algorithm is different from the original NFSP, which mixes RL and SL actors and choose either of them at the beginning of each game.
This is again due to an on-policy problem. In the original NFSP, an agent $p$ has four types of experiences, namely, $(\pi_p, \pi_{-p})$, $(\pi_p, \beta_{-p})$, $(\beta_p, \pi_{-p})$, and $(\beta_p, \beta_{-p})$, where $\pi$ is a SL strategy and $\beta$ is a RL strategy. If the RL method is off-policy as in the original NFSP, then we can use all experiences. However, since it is now on-policy, we can only use $(\beta_p, \cdot)$ experiences, which significantly reduces its sample efficiency. Launching $N$ processes in parallel and assigning each agent $i$ for them, we can reduce inefficient data $(\pi_p, \pi_{-p})$ and $(\beta_p, \beta_{-p})$.
Here is another reason for the modification.
Although the ELF platform is general and flexible, there is a difficulty in implementing original NFSP on the platform. In original NFSP, agents need to decide whether they follow the RL component to perform the best response strategy to its opponents, or the SL component to act as the average strategy of its past best response strategies, at the beginning of the game. However, in the ELF platform, in order to calculate the forward computing efficiently, observation data are accumulated, bundled, and sent with a callback function to a corresponding agent as a batch. We thus need to divide the given batch into RL and SL batches, and search for the terminal observation to decide which components to use in each game, spoiling the computing efficiency. The proposed algorithm overcomes the problem and is easier to implement than the original one, because we do not have to decide which component to follow, but just separately build $N$ ELF processes in parallel.
During RL training in line~\ref{line:calc_rl_loss}, $\mathcal{L}_{RL}$ is calculated in almost the same way as in PPO. That is,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:rl_cost}
\mathcal{L}_{RL} = \mathcal{L}_{policy} + \alpha \mathcal{L}_{entropy} + \beta \mathcal{L}_{value}\,,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{L}_{policy}$ is the main PPO cost function defined by the negation of the equation \eqref{eq:PPO_loss}, $\mathcal{L}_{entropy} = \sum_{a} \pi_{\theta}(a\,|\, s) \log \pi_{\theta} (a\,|\, s)$ is a bonus term that encourages exploration for the agent, and $\mathcal{L}_{value}$ is a squared mean error between $V_\theta$ and the target value $V_{target} = \hat{A}_t + V_{\theta_{old}}$. The estimator $\hat{A}$ is calculated by $\hat{A}_t = \delta_t + k\delta_{t+1} + \cdots + k^{T-t+1} \delta_{T-1}$, where $\delta_t = r_t + \gamma V_{\theta}(s_{t+1}) - V_{\theta}(s_{t})$.
Following the implementation in the OpenAI Baselines~\cite{OpenAIBaselines2017}, we use the clipped value loss as $\mathcal{L}_{value}$,
\begin{align*}
V_{clip}(s) =&\; \text{clip}\left( V_{\theta}(s) - V_{\theta_{old}}(s), -\epsilon_{v}, \epsilon_{v} \right) + V_{\theta_{old}}(s)\,,\\
\mathcal{L}_{value}^{nonclip} =& \left(V_{\theta}(s_{t}) - V_{target}(s_{t})\right)^2 \,,\\
\mathcal{L}_{value}^{clip} =& \left(V_{clip}(s_t) - V_{target}(s_{t})\right)^2 \,,\\
\mathcal{L}_{value} =& \max \left(\mathcal{L}_{value}^{nonclip}, \mathcal{L}_{value}^{clip}\right)\,,\\
\end{align*}
and normalize the average and variance of the advantages in a batch.
During SL training in line~\ref{line:calc_sl_loss}, $\mathcal{L}_{SL}$ is calculated by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sl_cost}
\mathcal{L}_{SL} = -\sum_{a}\pi_{\theta_{RL}}(a|s_t) \log \pi_{\theta}(a | s_t)\,,
\end{equation}
which is the cross entropy between the probability distribution of SL and RL.
For memorizing the experiences in line~\ref{line:memorize_exp}, we use reservoir sampling~\cite{Reservoir1985} as a sampling method for the replay buffer like original NFSP~\cite{NFSP2016}.
A reservoir replay buffer $\mathcal{M}_{RRB}$ maintains $N_{RRB}$ data tuples $\left\{s_{t_i}, \pi_{t_i}\right\}_{i=1,\cdots,N_{RRB}}$ and the number of given tuples $M_{RRB}$. When served $\left\{s_t, \pi_t\right\}$, $\mathcal{M}_{RRB}$ memorizes it with probability $\frac{N_{RRB}}{M_{RRB}+1}$, or otherwise rejects it. When a new tuple is memorized, each old tuple in $\mathcal{M}_{RRB}$ is discarded with equal probability, i.e., in $\frac{1}{N_{RRB}}$. It follows that for any time $T$, each data tuple $\{s_t, \pi_t\}_{t\le T}$ is stored in $\mathcal{M}_{RRB}$ with probability $\frac{N_{RRB}}{M_{RRB}}$, which means that this replay buffer contains a uniform random sample of the given tuples.
We also use the raw self-play method with PPO. The algorithm is the same as the NFSP shown in Algorithm~\ref{alg:NFSP_PPO}, except that the SL\_Actor function and SL training in the Trainer function are omitted and all agents act with the RL\_Actor function.
\section{Experiments}
\subsection{Experimental Settings}
Unless otherwise specified, all experiments are conducted on the following settings.
The batch size is 128 and the batch time is 50; namely, in line~\ref{line:batch_trainer} in Algorithm~\ref{alg:NFSP_PPO} the batch contains $128$ sequences of tuple $\left\{S_\tau, A_\tau, \Pi_\tau, R_\tau\right\}_{\left\{\tau=t,\cdots,t+T-1\right\}}$ where $T=50$, and in line~\ref{line:batch_RL} and \ref{line:batch_SL} the batch contains 128 states. In the reservoir sampling in line~\ref{line:get_batch_from_sl_memory}, we sample 512 states. The frame skip is set to 50, and thus each agent makes its decisions every 50 frames. In a process, 512 games are executed. We use Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) as the RL and SL models. Specifically, we use four blocks and some head layers for the CNN, where each block consists of a $3\times 3$ convolutional layer with 64 channels and appropriate zero paddings, batch normalization, and leaky ReLU activation with $\alpha=0.1$. For every two blocks, we use a $2\times 2$ max pooling layer. The head layer is fully-connected and maps the flattened input to an output. There are three heads: $\pi_{SL}$, $\pi_{RL}$, and $V_{RL}$. The heads for $\pi_{SL}$ and $\pi_{RL}$ have nine outputs and a softmax layer to form a probability distribution, whereas the head for $V_{RL}$ has only one output and does not have the softmax layer. The parameters of body blocks for $\pi_{RL}$ and $V_{RL}$ are shared, while $\pi_{SL}$ and $\pi_{RL}$ are not. Note that all agents use the same networks and their $RL$ and $SL$ networks are entirely shared. We use stochastic gradient descent with gradient clipping to optimize the models. The maximum gradient norm is set to 0.5. We use 0.01 and 0.001 for the learning rate of the RL model and the SL model respectively. In the RL loss function in the equation~\eqref{eq:rl_cost}, we use $\alpha=0.01$, $\beta=0.5$, $\gamma=0.99$, $k=0.95$, and $\epsilon_{v}=0.1$.
\subsection{Self-Play and NFSP for Mini-RTS}
We train agents with raw self-play and NFSP, and evaluate them with the win rate against rule-based AIs. In Mini-RTS, there are two rule-based built-in AIs: AI-Simple and AI-Hit-and-Run. AI-Simple simply builds five tanks and then attacks the opponent base. AI-Hit-and-Run is more aggressive and often harasses the opponent with its tanks. A human player has a win rate of 90\% and 50\% against AI-Simple and AI-Hit-and-Run respectively~\cite{elf2017}.
Because the game is a symmetric two-player zero-sum game, if an agent follows a strategy of a Nash equilibrium strategy profile, the agent is never exploitable, and thus it wins at least 50 percent against any strategies.
If the game is sufficiently small, we can evaluate the exploitability of a strategy profile, which is the value that shows how close the strategy profile is to a Nash equilibrium~\cite{Exploit2011}. However, ELF Mini-RTS is too large to calculate it. There are scalable methods to calculate the approximated or bounded exploitability such as local best response teqnique~(LBR)~\cite{LBR2017}. Although LBR can calculate a lower bound of the given strategy profile, it cannot calculate an upper bound. In this work, we simply evaluate the agents with win rates against rule-based AIs, which is an estimator of a lower bound of the exploitability. Each evaluation consists of at least $1000$ games.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{\hsize}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=75mm]{vs_simple.png}
\caption{Win rate against AI-Simple.}
\label{fig:vs_simple}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{\hsize}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=75mm]{vs_har.png}
\caption{Win rate against AI-Hit-and-Run.}
\label{fig:vs_har}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Win rate in Mini-RTS with respect to the amount of experience in different methods. The horizontal axis is log-scale. NFSP is shown in the red line.}
\label{fig:nfsp}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:nfsp} shows the results of self-play methods, with the results of PPO agents. Evaluated against AI-Simple, the PPO agent trained against the same AI has the highest win rate. However, it fails to generalize its strategy against AI-Hit-and-Run and thus its strategy is far from Nash equilibria. The PPO agent trained against AI-Hit-and-Run also fails to exploit the AI-Simple.
The win rate of the agent trained with NFSP steadily increases as the number of experienced games increases. Although the rate is lower than the rate of the appropriate PPO agent, the NFSP agent does not fall into a specialized best response strategy but gradually acquires a less exploitable strategy.
The agent trained with raw self-play reaches the same result as the NFSP agent in the AI-Hit-and-Run evaluation, and even better result in the AI-Simple evaluation. Although there is no theoretical guarantee that a self-play algorithm converges, it can reach a Nash equilibrium if it converges~\cite{LearningWithOpponentAwareness2018}, and it is faster than NFSP because NFSP agent has to learn both the best response strategy to its opponent and the averaged strategy.
Note that \citet{RoboschoolBlog2017} show a counter example that a self-play method oscillates and thus does not converge. In this experiment such an oscillation is not observed.
Note that we do not conduct an experiment with the combined AI, namely, an AI that acts as AI-Simple in 50\% and acts as AI-Hit-and-Run in 50\%, unlike \citet{elf2017}, because we evaluate the strategies with these built-in AIs and we have to make at least one of them unknown to the trained agent to evaluate its performance against unseen opponents.
From Figure~\ref{fig:nfsp} we can see that even the highly specialized agent wins in at most 65\% of the games. This is because the Mini-RTS game has considerable randomness at the beginning of the game. When the game starts, resources, bases, and units are randomly placed in the game field. Because of the frame skip, if an agent has no tank and its opponent has some tanks at the beginning of the game, and the opponent decides to attack with them, the agent has no way to defend against the rush. Even the agent trained with PPO in $10^7$ games against a pure random agent loses in 29\% of the game against the same random agent.
\subsection{Analysis of the acquired agents}
We further analyze the acquired agents. To evaluate how exploitable the agent is, we train another PPO agent against the target agent. If the PPO algorithm converges to its optimal strategy, the win rate of the agent is equal to the exploitability of the target agent in imperfect recall settings.
The results are shown in Table~\ref{table:ppo_against_eachAI}. Compared with other agents, the self-play agents are less exploitable, and do not lose over 50 percent against the PPO algorithm. This result suggests that the obtained agents are not exploitable by strategies that do not use the past histories of observations.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|l||c|} \hline
Agent & Win rate \\ \hline \hline
Random & $0.71$ \\ \hline
AI-Simple & $0.62$ \\ \hline
AI-Hit-and-Run & $0.65$ \\ \hline
PPO against AI-Simple & $0.80^\dagger$ \\ \hline
PPO against AI-Hit-and-Run & $0.56$ \\ \hline
Raw self-play with PPO & $\bm{0.45}$ \\ \hline
NFSP with PPO & $\bm{0.44}$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Win rates of the trained PPO agent against each AI. All agents are trained with $10^7$ games except the results with $\dagger$, which means the number of training games is less than $10^7$. The self-play agents have the lowest win rate, and hence they are less exploitable.}
\label{table:ppo_against_eachAI}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.47\hsize}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=39mm]{game_1_1.png}
\caption{}
\label{fig:NFSP_game_1_1}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{0.02\hsize}
\begin{subfigure}{0.47\hsize}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=38mm]{game_1_2.png}
\caption{}
\label{fig:NFSP_game_1_2}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Screenshots of a game between the NFSP agent (red, bottom left) and the PPO agent trained against it (blue, top right). The blue tanks are melee attackers and the green tanks are range attackers. The NFSP agent (a) first builds a melee attacker, which is suited for defense, then (b) builds a range attacker, which is suited for attacking, and rushes to the opponent's base.}
\label{fig:NFSP_game_1}
\end{figure}
We observe the details of some games between the NFSP agent and the PPO agent trained against the NFSP agent. Figure~\ref{fig:NFSP_game_1} shows some screenshots of the game. The NFSP agent first builds two melee attackers, next builds a range attacker, and then rushes to the opponent's base. Because of the fog-of-war, agents cannot be aware of its opponent's attack until the opponent's tanks get closer, and thus melee attackers are suited for defense while range attackers are suited for attacking. Hence, the behavior of the NFSP agent is very rational for humans: first build some defense units to prepare for its opponent's attacking, secondly build an attacking unit with keeping the previously built defense units, and finally attack the opponent's base with all tanks.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.47\hsize}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=39mm]{game_2_2.png}
\caption{}
\label{fig:NFSP_game_2_1}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{0.02\hsize}
\begin{subfigure}{0.47\hsize}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=39mm]{game_2_3.png}
\caption{}
\label{fig:NFSP_game_2_2}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Screenshots of a game between the NFSP agent (red, top right) and the PPO agent trained against it (blue, bottom left). (a) The NFSP agent's base is now very fragile because of its opponent's attack. (b) It builds a range attacker (to attack) and not a melee attacker (to defend), because in this settings agents cannot attack with a part of its tanks but must attack with all tanks, and thus its opponent must have now no tanks.}
\label{fig:NFSP_game_2}
\end{figure}
We show another example. In the game shown in Figure~\ref{fig:NFSP_game_2}, at the initial state the NFSP agent has a large disadvantage due to the randomness of ELF games: it does not have a barrack while its opponent does, and it does not know the disadvantage because of the fog-of-war. Having the disadvantage, the NFSP agent is attacked by the opponent's tanks, but it builds a range attacker (suited for attacking) unit, and successfully counterattacks with it. Because in this game an agent must attack with all tanks it has, the NFSP agent knows that the opponent has now no tanks. Although an agent does not know or memorize the state of the opponent, the NFSP agent successfully exploits the rule and estimates the unknown state without any prior knowledge or even any built-in rule-base AIs.
\subsection{Pretraining NFSP with Raw Self-Play}
In the previous experiments, we observe that the NFSP agent successfully acquires a less exploitable strategy profile, but the learning process is slower than other methods. In contrast, the raw self-play algorithm is fast but lacks the guarantee of convergence. If the NFSP agent can be pretrained with the raw self-play algorithm, we can take the advantages of both algorithms.
This insight is also seen in CounterFactual Regret Minimization+ (CFR+)~\cite{CFR+2014}. In a regret matching algorithm, which is a basis of CFR+, the average strategy of the regret-based strategies converges to a Nash equilibrium. This schema is similar to the fictitious play: in a fictitious play algorithm, we compute a best response strategy instead of the regret-based strategy, and average them. In CFR+, \citet{CFR+2014} uses delayed averaging, namely, accumulates the strategies from the middle of them. It significantly improves the result. The pretraining of NFSP is regarded as a kind of delayed averaging, because in PPO we do not accumulate the strategies and then switch to NFSP and begin to averaging them.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{\hsize}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=75mm]{pretrain_vs_simple.png}
\caption{Win rate against AI-Simple.}
\label{fig:pretrain_vs_simple}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{\hsize}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=75mm]{pretrain_vs_har.png}
\caption{Win rate against AI-Hit-and-Run.}
\label{fig:pretrain_vs_har}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Win rate of the pretrained agents with respect to the amount of experience. The horizontal axis is log-scale. The blue line shows the base self-play results, the light-blue line is the NFSP whose RL component is pretrained, the purple line is the NFSP whose both RL and SL components are pretrained, and the red line is the non-pretrained NFSP. The vertical black lines show the beginning of the pretraining.}
\label{fig:nfsp_pretrain}
\end{figure}
First we pretrain the RL model in NFSP with raw self-play. The light-blue lines in Figure~\ref{fig:nfsp_pretrain} show the result. Although the learning is slightly faster than the NFSP agent, it does not improve the performance as we expected. This result can be explained as follows: in NFSP, the SL component averages the RL strategy and the RL component computes the best response strategy to the SL strategy. When we pretrain the RL strategy, the SL component can accumulate the pretrained strategies, and thus its learning process is accelerated. However, because the RL component computes the best response to the non-pretrained SL component, training in the RL component is not accelerated at all, making it fail to improve the performance.
To solve this problem, we also pretrain the SL model with the same parameters used in the RL model. We use the $\pi_{RL}$ head of the PPO agent to pretrain the $\pi_{SL}$ head of the NFSP agent, and simply discard the $V_{RL}$ head of the PPO agent.
The purple lines in Figure~\ref{fig:nfsp_pretrain} show the result. Although the result is worse than the raw self-play, it successfully maintains the result of its base strategy, and is even slightly fine-tuned from the strategy in the AI-Simple evaluation. This result suggests that we can extend the results from a faster but more unstable self-play algorithm as pretraining for NFSP.
\section{Conclusion and Future Work}
In this paper, we regard the Mini-RTS game as a two-player zero-sum extensive-form game, and apply self-play methods. The obtained agent is less exploitable for the PPO algorithm than other best response-based agents. We also observe that the obtained agent performs rationally to humans.
The contribution of this paper is that we show that NFSP can be combined with policy gradient reinforcement learning and be applied to Mini-RTS, which can be a first step toward solving more realistic and complex RTS games.
We also show that we can improve the scalability of NFSP by pretraining the models with simple self-play using policy gradients, which is faster but lacks the theoretical guarantee of convergence. It significantly reduces the computational time and could be applied even when the self-play algorithm oscillates.
However, the experimental results show that the learning process of NFSP is much slower than raw self-play with PPO, and actually raw self-play successfully acquires reasonable strategies despite its lack of convergence guarantees. We will further analyze the results and the differences between NFSP and raw self-play methods.
In this paper we do not have the agents memorize past histories. This makes the game essentially imperfect recall, which breaks the assumption of the FSP. To solve this, we could use a recurrent neural networks as a controller of the RL component as in~\citet{DRQN2015}. However, to ensure that the game is a perfect recall game, we need to use the same memorizing architecture for the SL reservoir replay buffer, which significantly reduces the size of the buffer. We will also further investigate to solve this problem as future work.
|
\section{Introduction}
Terrestrial total water storage (TWS) is a key element of the global
hydrological cycle, affecting both water and energy budgets \citep{Rodell2001}.
Tracking the TWS on a periodic basis was historically difficult because
of the lack of reliable in situ observations \citep{seneviratne2004inferring},
a situation that is still true in most countries. The gravity recovery
and climate experiment (GRACE) satellite mission provided unprecedented
tracking of the global TWS dynamics during its 15-year mission (2002-2017).
GRACE enabled remote sensing of TWS anomalies (TWSA) (i.e., variations
from a long-term mean) at regional to continental scales (> 100,000
km\textsuperscript{2}). The availability of such information has
had a profound impact on the development and validation of regional
and global hydrological models, which are increasingly being used
to assess changes in the hydrological cycle under current and future
climate conditions. These physically-based, semi-distributed hydrological
models are built on mathematical abstractions of physical processes
that govern the movement and storage of water, as well as land surface
energy partitioning in certain models, in space and time. Despite
its coarse resolution, GRACE provides a \textquotedblleft big picture\textquotedblright{}
check of model simulated TWS variations and thus represents a valuable
independent source of information for diagnosing and improving the
model performance. So far, GRACE data has been used in model calibration
and parameter estimation \citep{werth2010calibration,lo2010,Milzow2011,Sun2012}
and data assimilation \citep{Houborg2012,Li2012,Dijk2014,Girotto2016,schumacher2016systematic,Khaki2017}.
While results of these studies all indicate that the assimilation
of GRACE data generally improves model skills, the improvements may
be limited by uncertainties in model parameters and structures (e.g.,
missing deep groundwater storage and agricultural irrigation), as
well as assumptions underlying data assimilation schemes (e.g., a
priori specified spatial and temporal error covariance structures)
\citep{Girotto2016}. Calibration against an imperfect model structure
using inaccurate error models may lead to information loss and greater
propensity for forecast error \citep{gupta2014debates}. A recent
study compared TWSA trends obtained from seven global hydrological
models with those derived from GRACE over 186 global river basins
\citep{Scanlon2018}. Their results indicate a large spread in model
results and poor correlation between models and GRACE, which were
attributed by the authors to the lack of surface water and groundwater
storage components in most land surface models (LSMs), low storage
capacity in all models, uncertainties in climate forcing, and lack
of representation of human intervention in most LSMs.
Unlike physically-based models, pure data-driven methods (black box
models) seek to establish a regression model between climate forcing
(e.g., precipitation and temperature) and GRACE TWS \citep{Long2014,Humphrey2017,Seyoum2017},
or between TWS and its various components \citep{Sun2013,zhang2016grace,Miro2018}.
Data-driven models are suitable for applications where there are plenty
of observations but a complete understanding of the underlying physical
processes is lacking. A common criticism of black box models, however,
is related to their lack of interpretability and generalizability\textemdash a
regression model trained on the premise of a strong correlation between
predictors and the predictand may give unreliable results whenever
and wherever such correlation is weak. In addition, pure data-driven
models often do not integrate the full stack of information (e.g.,
soil property, topography, and vegetation types) that is normally
represented in physically-based models and therefore are only limited
to simulating certain aspects (e.g., interannual variations) of a
physical process. It is thus desirable to apply knowledge gained from
decades of physical-based modeling to inform the development of data-driven
models. These hybrid physical science and data science methods will
help to bridge and thus benefit hypothesis-driven and data-driven
discoveries \citep{karpatne2017theory}.
In this work we apply a hybrid approach that combines the strengths
of physically-based modeling and deep learning. Specifically, we use
deep convolutional neural networks (CNN), which are a special class
of artificial neural networks, to learn the spatiotemporal patterns
of \textquotedblleft mismatch\textquotedblright{} between the TWSA
simulated by an LSM and that observed by GRACE. Here the term mismatch
broadly refers to the difference either between two datasets or between
model simulations and observations. The learned mismatch patterns
are then fed back to the LSM to compensate for deficiencies in the
LSM. That means once trained and validated, the CNN model may be used
to predict the observed TWSA without requiring GRACE TWSA as inputs,
thus potentially filling the data gap between GRACE and its follow-on
mission (GRACE-FO). In the same fashion, the trained CNN model may
also be used to reconstruct TWSA for the pre-GRACE era. The basic
principle underlying our hybrid modeling approach is similar to that
behind data assimilation methods, both exploiting mismatch patterns
between predicted and observed variables. However, the assimilation
part of our hybrid method is driven by deep learning models that set
the current state-of-the-art in computer vision, and not limited by
the Gaussian-like unimodal error distribution commonly assumed in
many data assimilation schemes. On the other hand, the spatiotemporal
propagation part of our method is driven by a physically based LSM,
mitigating the lack of spatial continuity and physical interpretation
in purely data-driven statistical models.
As a case study, we demonstrate our hybrid approach over India, where
irrigation-induced groundwater depletion has been confirmed by GRACE
and in situ studies \citep{Rodell2004,Chen2014,Long2016,macdonald2016groundwater},
but is not well resolved in many contemporary LSMs. We evaluate the
performance of three different types of CNN models, driven under different
predictor combinations. Compared to the original LSM, we show that
all CNN models considered here significantly improve the performance
of the corrected LSM model, both at the country and grid scales. In
the following, Section 2 describes the study area and data used, Section
3 provides details on the technical approach, and results and discussions
are given in Section 4.
\section{Data and Data Processing}
\subsection{Description of the study area, India}
A large part of the annual rainfall budget over the Indian subcontinent
can be attributed to the Indian Summer monsoon (ISM), which results
from interactions of several complex atmospheric processes evolving
over many different spatiotemporal scales and is modulated by the
steep topography of the Himalayas \citep{Bookhagen2010}. The entire
Indian region (except for the southern part) receives maximum precipitation
during the monsoon season, which typically lasts from June to September.
At the country level, the average rainfall received during the monsoon
season is 85 cm, amounting to about 78\% of the annual rainfall \citep{mooley1984fluctuations}.
In the southern part of the country, the monsoon season extends to
October, sometimes even to November \citep{Bhanja2016}.
India depends heavily on groundwater resources. Groundwater storage
is a function of climatic variables such as precipitation and evaporation,
particularly in areas with shallow groundwater tables \citep{Bhanja2016}.
The Indus\textendash Ganges\textendash Brahmaputra systems, which
together drain the northern Indian plains, form a regional alluvial
aquifer system that is regarded as one of the most productive aquifers
of the world; on the other hand, groundwater is available in a limited
extent within the weathered zone and underlying fractured aquifers
within the remaining two-thirds of the country \citep{mukherjee2015groundwater}.
Irrigation withdrawal accounts for over 90\% of the total groundwater
uses \citep{IndiaBoard2014}. Overuse of groundwater beyond its potential
has caused pronounced groundwater depletion in northwest India, including
the states of Punjab, Haryana and Delhi, and Rajasthan (Figure \ref{fig:1}).
The country has established a dense in situ groundwater monitoring
network. Groundwater level measurements are taken on a seasonal basis
in January, April/May, August, and November, from a network of piezometers
(4,939) and non-pumping observation wells (10,714) that are typically
screened in the first available aquifer below ground surface \citep{Bhanja2016}.
\begin{center}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering{}\includegraphics[width=4in]{figure1}\caption{Map of study area (latitude: 7.75\textendash 47.75$\text{\textdegree}$, longitude:
60\textendash 100$\text{\textdegree}$), where India is bounded by the dark
solid line. During training, data corresponding to the entire square
area is used to reduce potential boundary effects and increase information
content for training. \label{fig:1}}
\end{figure}
\par\end{center}
The extensive in situ groundwater monitoring coverage shall provide
additional information for cross-validating patterns learned by the
deep CNN models. This study uses the in situ groundwater dataset published
recently by \citet{Bhanja2016}, which consists of 3,989 wells that
were selected to have temporal continuity (i.e., at least 3 out of
4 seasonal data should be available in all years). The authors derived
groundwater storage anomalies from water level measurements by using
specific yield values corresponding to 12 major river basins in the
country. The temporal coverage of the dataset is from January 2005
to November 2014. More details on the data processing and quality
control can be found in \citet{Bhanja2016}.
Besides groundwater, the impact of surface water is relatively high
along Indus River and Ganges River, but is generally small in the
area of severe groundwater depletion in northwest India \citep{getirana2017rivers}.
\subsection{GRACE-derived TWSA}
This study uses the monthly mascon TWSA product (RL-05) released by
Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) (\url{https://grace.jpl.nasa.gov}),
which has a 0.5$\text{\textdegree}$\texttimes 0.5$\text{\textdegree}$ grid resolution,
but inherently represents 3$\text{\textdegree}$\texttimes 3$\text{\textdegree}$ equal-area
caps \citep{Watkins2015}. The period of study covers from April 2002
to December 2016. Uncertainty in GRACE data is related to both measurement
and leakage errors, leading to potential signal loss \citep{Wiese2016}.
Measurement errors are related to, for example, system-noise error
in the inter-satellite range-rate and accelerometer error \citep{swenson2003estimated}.
Leakage errors arise because boundaries of hydrological basins generally
do not conform to the boundaries of the mascon elements and because
leakage across land/ocean boundaries (i.e., from mascons that cover
both land and ocean). For this work, we applied the gain factor (scaling
factor) distributed with the JPL mascon to compensate for the signal
loss. The gain factor, when combined with coastal line resolution
improvement, was shown to reduce leakage errors associated with mass
balance of large river basins (>160,000 km\textsuperscript{2}) by
an amount of 0.6\textendash 1.5 mm equivalent water height averaged
globally \citep{Wiese2016}. We obtained the total uncertainty bound
of monthly TWSA for the study region by combining the measurement
error released by JPL with the estimated leakage error. The leakage
error was estimated using the method of \citet{Wiese2016}.
\subsection{NOAH land surface model}
The NOAH LSM from NASA\textquoteright s global land data assimilation
system (GLDAS) \citep{Rodell2004} has been extensively used in previous
GRACE studies. Like many other LSMs, NOAH maintains surface energy
and water balances and simulates the exchange of water and energy
fluxes at soil-atmosphere interface \citep{ek2003implementation}.
NOAH does not simulate surface water storage (SWS) (e.g., in rivers,
lakes, and wetlands) and surface runoff routing, nor does it account
for deep groundwater storage and human intervention. The roles of
SWS and GWS can be significant in various parts of the study area,
as mentioned previously. For this study, the monthly forcing (total
precipitation and average air temperature at 2m) and outputs of NOAH
V2.1 (0.25$\text{\textdegree}$\texttimes 0.25$\text{\textdegree}$) were downloaded from
NASA's EarthData site (\url{http://earthdata.nasa.gov}). The NOAH-simulated
TWS was calculated by summing soil moisture in all four soil layers
(spanning from 0\textendash 200 cm depth), accumulative snow water,
and total canopy water storage (the contribution of canopy water is
typically negligible but is included for completeness). To be consistent
with the GRACE TWSA processing, the long-term mean from January 2004
to December 2009 was subtracted from NOAH TWS to obtain the simulated
TWSA.
\section{Methodology}
\subsection{Model and GRACE TWSA mismatch}
TWS is the sum of the following components \citep{Scanlon2018}:
\begin{equation}
\text{TWS}=\text{SnWS}+\text{CWS}+\text{SWS}+\text{SMS}+\text{GWS},
\end{equation}
where SnWS represents snow water storage, CWS is canopy water storage,
SWS is surface water storage, SMS is soil moisture storage, and GWS
is groundwater storage. We define the difference or mismatch between
NOAH-simulated TWSA and GRACE TWSA at time $t$ as
\begin{equation}
S(t)=\text{TWSA}{}_{\text{NOAH}}(t)-\text{TWSA}{}_{\text{GRACE}}(t),\label{eq:2}
\end{equation}
where the mismatch $S(t)$, which varies in both space and time, may
be related to two types of errors, (a) systematic error or bias caused
by either missing processes or uncertain conceptualization in NOAH
(e.g., omission of GWS), and (b) random error related to uncertain
data and model parameters. For the purpose of this work, we use CNN
models to learn a functional relationship between $S(t)$ and its
predictors $X$ by solving a regression problem
\begin{equation}
f:\:X\rightarrow S,
\end{equation}
where $f=f(X,{\bf w})$ is a CNN model; ${\bf w}$ denotes the network
parameters to be solved by using $\{X_{i},S_{i}\}_{i=1}^{N}$ as training
data, where $i=1\dots N$ is the index of training samples, $X_{i}=\{x^{j}\}_{j=1}^{M}$
is a set of input samples from $M$ different predictors $x_{j}\:(j=1,\dots M)$,
and $S_{i}$ are samples of $S(t)$ obtained by using Eq. \ref{eq:2}.
After training and validation, the CNN model can be used to predict
and, thus, give corrected TWSA without requiring GRACE data.
Figure \ref{fig:2} further illustrates the relations among NOAH,
GRACE, and the deep learning model, and the proposed workflow. The
deep learning workflow (solid line) is similar to that used in the
traditional data assimilation (dashed line), both exploiting the residual
between model and observations. The main difference is that in deep
learning the GRACE TWSA data is not used to correct the model states
but to train a regression model for predicting the mismatch, circumventing
challenges related to calibrating a conceptually uncertain physical
model. Details on the design and architecture of the CNN models are
provided in the subsection below.
\begin{figure}
\noindent \centering{}\includegraphics[height=5in]{figure2}\caption{Illustration of the flow of information from GLDAS-NOAH and GRACE
to the deep learning model. Here the observed mismatch $S(t)$ (blue
solid line) is only used to train the CNN deep learning model and
is no longer required after the model is trained. NOAH TWSA is the
base predictor (red solid line). Other predictors may include precipitation
and temperature. The dashed arrow line indicates that the same $S(t)$
is also used for GRACE data assimilation studies. \label{fig:2}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Design and architectures of CNN deep learning models}
CNN, originally introduced by LeCun \citep{LeCun1989,LeCun1995},
is symbolic of the modern deep learning era that began around 2006
\citep{schmidhuber2015deep}. CNNs and their variants have been extensively
used in image classification and are behind several high-profile deep
learning model architectures that have won the ImageNet Large Scale
Visual Recognition Challenge (ILSVRC) in recent years \citep{Simonyan2014,LeCun2015,szegedy2015,he2016deep}.
The design of CNN was inspired by the human visual cortex, aiming
to extract subtle features embedded in the inputs. As its name suggests,
CNN applies discrete convolution operations to project an input image
(or a stack of images) onto a hierarchy of feature maps, which may
be thought of as nonlinear transformations of the input. In practice,
a CNN deep learning model architecture includes the input, output,
and a series of hidden convolution layers in between to extract spatial
features (e.g., edges and corners) from each layer's input. Thus,
by design CNN models are highly suitable for learning multiscale spatial
patterns from multisource gridded data, which is a challenging problem
to solve using the traditional multilayer perception neural network
models that do not scale well on images.
In a convolution operation, a moving window, commonly referred to
as a filter or kernel, is used to scan along each dimension of the
input image, with possible strides between the moves (a stride defines
the number of rows/columns to skip). For each move, a dot product
is taken between the filter parameters and the underlying input image
patch, leading to a feature map at the end of scanning. The dimensions
(width $W$ and height $H$) of a feature map are related to its input
as
\begin{equation}
W=(W_{in}-D_{F}+2D_{P})/D_{S}+1,\quad H=(H_{in}-D_{F}+2D_{P})/D_{S}+1,\label{eq:4}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $W_{in}$ and $H_{in}$ are dimensions of the input
image, $W$ and $H$ are dimensions of the feature map, $D_{F}$ is
the filter dimension, $D_{S}$ is the stride size, and $D_{P}$ is
padding size. Filter dimensions and stride sizes are commonly kept
the same for both dimensions. Eq. \ref{eq:4} suggests that the dimensions
of a feature map become progressively smaller after each convolution
operation. Zero-padding may be used to add zeros around the edges
of the output feature map (i.e., $D_{P}$ in Eq. \ref{eq:4}) to preserve
the input dimensions.
CNN naturally achieves sparsity because each pixel in a feature map
only connects to a small region in its input layer. Also, by applying
the same filter to scan the entire input image, the filter parameters
are shared and the resulting feature map is equivariant to shifts
in inputs. Specifically, the units of a convolutional layer $l$,
$A_{j}^{(l)}$, is related to feature maps of its preceding layer
$l-1$, $A_{i}^{(l-1)}\:(i=1,\dots,M^{(l-1)})$, by \citep{goodfellow2016deep}
\begin{equation}
A_{j}^{(l)}=g\left(\sum_{i=1}^{M^{(l-1)}}A_{i}^{(l-1)}\oplus k_{ij}^{(l)}+b_{j}^{(l)}\right),\label{eq:5}
\end{equation}
where $M^{(l-1)}$ is the number of feature maps in layer $l-1$,
$\oplus$ denotes the convolution operator, $k_{ij}^{(l)}$ are the
filter parameters, $b_{j}^{(i)}$ are the bias parameters, and $g(\cdot)$
is the activation function. Eq. (\ref{eq:5}) shows that CNN involves
a hierarchy of feature maps, with each layer learning from its preceding
layer. When $l=1$ (i.e., the first hidden layer), its input layer
simply becomes the actual input image(s). The Rectified Linear Unit
(ReLU) function
\begin{equation}
g(x)=\max(0,x)
\end{equation}
\noindent is commonly used as the activation function for hidden CNN
layers, which is less costly to compute than other nonlinear functions
(e.g., sigmoid) and is shown to improve the CNN training speed significantly
\citep{goodfellow2016deep}. In regression problems, the linear function
or hyperbolic tangent function (\text{tanh}) are often used as the
activation functions for the output layer to generate solution in
the real domain. The total number of CNN parameters (weights and biases)
is determined by the number of filters, filter dimensions, and stride
dimensions, which are considered hyperparameters of the CNN model
design and may be tuned during training.
In addition to convolution operation, other commonly used CNN layer
operations include pooling, dropout, and batch normalization. Pooling
aggregates information in each moving window to further reduce the
size of feature maps. For example, max pooling selects the maximum
element in a pooling window. Dropout operation randomly leaves out
certain number of hidden neurons during training so that the net effect
is to prevent the network from overfitting; thus, it is regarded as
a regularization technique. Batch normalization performs normalization
on hidden layers to improve network training speed and stability \citep{goodfellow2016deep}.
Figure \ref{fig:3} shows a high-level, architectural diagram of CNN
deep learning models considered in this work. Because the number of
training samples (labeled data) is limited for many geoscience problems
including the one at hand, we tested several techniques to improve
the performance of CNN models, including (a) augmenting the NOAH TWSA
training samples with additional predictors, such as precipitation
(P) and temperature (T), (b) including regions outside the study area
(i.e., spanning 60\textendash 100$\text{\textdegree}$ longitude, 7.75\textendash 47.75$\text{\textdegree}$
latitude, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:1}) in training to reduce potential
boundary effects and increase training information, and (c) transfer
learning, which \textquotedblleft borrows\textquotedblright{} the
weights from a CNN model trained using many other images. Precipitation
and temperature are already part of the NOAH forcing. The logic behind
including them as additional predictors is that not all the information
in the forcing is fully utilized by the LSM. For example, precipitation
contributes to surface water and groundwater recharge that are not
simulated by NOAH. Similarly, temperature is a proxy of evapotranspiration,
which may not be simulated accurately by the model. \citet{Humphrey2017}
suggested that at least 40\% of the total variance of GRACE anomalies
can be reconstructed from precipitation and temperature variability
alone. Thus, in this study precipitation and temperature are explored
as additional predictors to help improve the model prediction.
\begin{center}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering{}\includegraphics[width=4in]{figure3}\caption{General CNN model architecture used in this study. The input layer
consists of the NOAH TWSA as the base input stack. Auxiliary predictors
include precipitation and temperature. Each stack of input images
include data from multiple time steps, $t,t-1,\dots,t-n$. The operations
include two stages for shallow and deep learning. The output is the
predicted $S(t)$ having the same dimensions as the input.\label{fig:3}}
\end{figure}
\par\end{center}
As part of data preparation, all input data are formatted or resampled
into 2D images of equal dimensions. Specifically, the 40$\text{\textdegree}$\texttimes 40$\text{\textdegree}$
square region used in this study is represented by 128\texttimes 128
pixel images (0.3125$\text{\textdegree}$ per pixel). The input and target images
are normalized before training. Hydroclimatic variables typically
exhibit certain temporal correlation. To enable the CNN to explore
temporal correlation between each input variable and its antecedent
conditions, we stack the input image at time $t$ on top of its antecedent
conditions to form a 3D volume (see Figure \ref{fig:3}). We set the
number of lags to 2 (i.e., $t-1,\:t-2$) after preliminary experiments;
thus each input volume has dimensions 128\texttimes 128\texttimes 3.
Figure \ref{fig:3} shows that our model design includes two learning
stages. In Stage I, each input volume goes through a separate stack
of convolutional layers. In Stage II, feature maps resulting from
Stage I are merged and the results are fed to a deep learning model
to arrive at the final outputs. The first stage aims to extract unique
features from each input, while the second stage aims to perform deep
learning of the spatial and temporal patterns within each input, as
well as co-variation patterns across the inputs. Putting in a different
way, the role of Stage I is to prepare inputs for use with the problem-independent,
established CNN model architectures employed in Stage II.
In this work, we consider three CNN-based model architectures, VGG16,
Unet, and Segnet, commonly used in image semantic segmentation problems
(i.e., associating each pixel of an image with a class label). VGG16
is a CNN-based model architecture consisting of 16 layers of 3\texttimes 3
convolutional layers, 2\texttimes 2 max pooling layers, and then a
fully connected layer at the end (Appendix A1). The number of filters
used in each VGG16 convolutional layers monotonically increases. A
VGG16 model pre-trained using 1.3 million images from the ILSVRC-2012
dataset \citep{Simonyan2014} is adopted in this work to implement
transfer learning. In $\mathtt{Keras}$, this is equivalent to freezing
all the hidden layers in VGG16, except for the last fully connected
layer, during training. This way, the CNN model will be able to adjust
itself to the user-specific inputs while transferring most of the
weights learned from the ILSVRC-2012, which includes labeled images
of 1000 object classes \citep{Russakovsky2015}. Previously, \citet{Jean2016}
used transfer learning models to predict poverty based on satellite
imagery. They showed that transfer learning \textquotedblleft can
be productively employed even when data on key outcomes of interest
are scarce.\textquotedblright{} Questions remain about the general
applicability of transfer learning to satellite images, which are
very different from the images used in the ILSVRC dataset.
Unet has demonstrated superb performance on semantic segmentation
problems, especially on relatively small training datasets \citep{Ronneberger}.
Unet belongs to a class of encoder-decoder model architectures. It
consists of an encoding path (downsampling steps) to capture image
context, followed by a symmetric decoding path (upsampling steps)
to enable precise localization (Appendix A2). The Unet model architecture
used in this study is shown in Appendix A2. It consists of repeated
applications of two 3\texttimes 3 convolution operations, each followed
by a 2\texttimes 2 max pooling layer. The number of filters used is
doubled after each downsampling step and then halved after each upsampling
step. In the final step, a $1\times1$ convolutional layer is used
to generate the output. Unet models are characterized by the copy
and concatenation operations that combine the higher resolution features
from the downsampling path with the upsampled features at the same
level to better localize and learn representations (dashed line with
arrow in Figure \ref{fig:a2}). This is also the part of Unet that
enables multiscale learning.
Segnet is also a class of encoder-decoder architecture that was originally
introduced to solve image segmentation problems \citep{badrinarayanan2015segnet}.
Similar to the Unet architecture, it includes an encoding path and
a decoding path. The main difference between the design of the original
Segnet and Unet is that the decoder in Segnet uses pooling indices
computed in the max-pooling step of the corresponding encoder to perform
non-linear upsampling, while in Unet the concatenation step is done
before the pooling step. Thus, the number of parameters of Segnet
is smaller than that in the Unet. In this work, we use a variant of
the Segnet architecture, in which the pooling layers are removed and
the upsampling layers in the decoder are replaced by transpose convolution
layers, which may be regarded as performing the reverse of convolutional
operations \citep{zeiler2010deconvolutional}. Different from upsampling,
transpose convolution layers have trainable parameters. The model
design is shown in Appendix A3, which we shall refer to as the SegnetLite
in the rest of this discussion. Similar to Unet, SegnetLite also uses
concatenation steps to combine feature maps from encoding and decoding
steps. The SegnetLite model has a significantly smaller number of
trainable parameters (\textasciitilde 700 thousand) than Unet (7.8
million) and VGG16 (\textasciitilde 134 million ), and can be trained
more efficiently.
\textcolor{black}{For Unet and SegnetLite models, Stage I shallow
learning (Figure \ref{fig:3}) includes a single convolutional layer
with 16 filters for each type of predictors, the outputs of which
are then merged and provided as inputs to the respective deep learning
model. In the case of VGG16, the maximum number of filters that can
be used in Stage I is 3. This is because the trained VGG16 is designed
to process images, which only allow 3 color channels (RGB).}
\subsection{Training and testing of CNN models}
The open-source Python package \texttt{Keras} with the \texttt{Tensorflow}
backend \citep{chollet2015} is used to develop all CNN models presented
in this work. Unless otherwise specified, the stochastic gradient
descent optimizer is used to train the CNN models with a learning
rate of 0.01, decay rate of $1\times10^{-6}$, and momentum of 0.9.
Out of a total of 177 monthly data available for the study period,
125 months or 70\% is used for training and the rest for testing.
The loss or objective function used for network training is the weighted
sum of two fitting criteria
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{cc}
\textrm{Criterion 1:} & \frac{1}{N_{g}N}\sum_{i=1}^{N}\sum_{j=1}^{N_{g}}(f_{i,j}-S_{i,j})^{2},\\
\\
\textrm{Criterion 2:} & \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{N}\sum_{j=1}^{N_{g}}\left|f_{i,j}-S_{i,j}\right|}{\sum_{i=1}^{N}\sum_{j=1}^{N_{g}}\left|S_{i,j}-\bar{S}_{j}\right|},
\end{array}\label{eq:7}
\end{equation}
\noindent in which $f_{i,j}$ and $S_{i,j}$ are the predicted and
observed mismatch at grid cell $j$ and month $i$, $\bar{S_{j}}$
denotes temporal average at cell $j$, $N_{g}$ is the number of grid
cells in the study area, $N$ is the number of training samples in
the training period, and the summation is taken both spatially and
temporally. Criterion 1 is the commonly used mean square error (MSE)
and Criterion 2 is a modified form of the Nash-Sutcliff efficiency
(NSE) that is more sensitive to over- or underprediction than the
L2 forms used in NSE \citep{krause2005comparison,sun2015model}. The
weight between two criteria is a hyperparameter and is set to 0.5
in this work.
The performance of trained models is evaluated against the observed
GRACE TWSA using correlation coefficient and NSE. For spatially averaged
time series, the NSE is defined as
\begin{equation}
\text{NSE}=1-\frac{{\displaystyle \sum_{i}^{N_{v}}\left(\text{TWSA}_{\text{GRACE},i}^{\circ}-\left(\text{TWSA}_{\text{NOAH},i}^{\circ}-f_{i}^{\circ}\right)\right)^{2}}}{{\displaystyle \sum_{i}^{N_{v}}\left(\text{TWSA}_{\text{GRACE},i}^{\circ}-\langle\text{TWSA}_{\text{GRACE},i}^{\circ}\rangle\right)^{2}}},
\end{equation}
in which ($\text{\textdegree}$) denotes spatially-averaged quantities and $\langle\rangle$
denotes the temporal mean of observed values, and $N_{v}$ is the
number of samples used for evaluation. The range of NSE is $(-\infty,$1{]}.
All experiments are carried out on a Linux machine (Dell PowerEdge
R730 server) running with GPU (NVIDIA Tesla K80 GPU, 24Gb RAM total).
Training typically takes 4s, 3s, and <1s per epoch for VGG16, Unet,
and SegnetLite, respectively. Epoch is a deep learning term that refers
to a full pass through a given training dataset and each epoch may
include several iterations as determined by the batch size (i.e.,
the number of samples passed to the neural network during each training
iteration).
\section{Results }
Figure \ref{fig:4} shows the seasonal patterns of $S(t)$, obtained
by averaging the grid values over seasons Dec-Jan-Feb (DJF), Mar-Apr-May
(MAM), Jun-Jul-Aug (JJA), and Sep-Oct-Nov (SON). Recall that $S(t)$
represents the mismatch between NOAH and GRACE TWSA which, according
to its definition in Eq. \ref{eq:2}, tends to be negative in wet
seasons and positive in dry seasons because of the missing SWS and
GWS components in NOAH. Significant spatial and temporal variability
can be observed in Figure \ref{fig:4}. In particular, the histograms
plotted on the right panel of Figure \ref{fig:4} suggest that in
MAM (pre-monsoon dry season) and JJA (first part of monsoon season)
$S(t)$ is dominated by positive values with a mean value of 5.1 cm
and 6.3 cm, respectively. The distribution in MAM is positively skewed,
while it is negatively skewed in JJA, suggesting a transition from
dry to wet season. In SON (late in monsoon season) and DJF (post-monsoon
wet season), the pattern of $S(t)$ is dominated by negative values
with a mean of -6.0 cm and -2.3 cm. The negative values cover most
of the regions in central and southern India. The distribution of
$S(t)$ in SON is also distinctively bimodal.
\begin{center}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[width=5in]{figure4}
\par\end{centering}
\caption{Spatial distribution (left panel) and histogram (right panel) of NOAH
and GRACE TWSA mismatch, $S(t),$ averaged over 4 seasons: (a), (b)
DJF; (c), (d) MAM; (e), (f) JJA; and (g), (h) SON. Solid lines on
histograms correspond to fitted PDFs. Map colors are scaled between
(-25cm, 25cm) for visualization.\label{fig:4}}
\end{figure}
\par\end{center}
In the base case, we test the performance of VGG16, Unet, and SegnetLite
models using only NOAH TWSA as the predictor (Table \ref{tab:1}).
The CNN-corrected TWSA is obtained by subtracting the predicted $S(t)$
time series from the NOAH-simulated TWSA using Eq. \ref{eq:2}. For
comparison purposes, all models are trained over 60 epochs with a
batch size of 5. Increasing the number of epochs further did not improve
the results in our experiments. For each of the three CNN models,
the correlation coefficient and NSE between the predicted and GRACE
TWSA at both the country level and grid level are compared. This is
because the GRACE research community is mostly interested on large-scale
averaged results. Note that the actual training is done at the grid
or pixel level, while the country-level statistics are calculated
using grid-averaged TWSA time series. The country-level results are
summarized in Table \ref{tab:1}. For comparison, the metrics between
the original NOAH TWSA and GRACE TWSA are reported in the first row.
At the country level, all CNN models achieved high correlation (>0.98)
during training, which are all significantly higher than the correlation
between the original NOAH TWSA and GRACE TWSA (0.78). For the testing
period, the correlation values decrease slightly to about 0.94 on
average, but are still higher than the correlation between the original
NOAH and GRACE (0.83), or a 14\% improvement on average. Because NOAH
TWSA, GRACE TWSA, and $S(t)$ are correlated, we applied Williams
significance test \citep{williams1959regression} to test the improvement
in correlation due to deep learning. The p-value of the Williams test
is <0.002 for all three models (see Supporting Information (SI) S1),
suggesting statistically significant improvement. It is worth noting
that the correlation results obtained in this study are comparable
to that obtained by \citet{Girotto2017}, who reported that data assimilation
increased the correlation between their model-simulated TWSA and GRACE
to a country average of 0.96. Correlation coefficient measures the
degree to which model and observations are related in phase, while
NSE, a measure of predictive power, is sensitive to matches (or mismatches)
of both magnitude and phase between the predicted and observed time
series. In this case, the NSE value of the original NOAH TWSA is relatively
low (0.6) for the training period. Figure \ref{fig:5}a plots the
base case results (solid lines in color), the GRACE TWSA (dark solid
line with filled circles) and its error bound (shaded area), and the
uncorrected NOAH TWSA (gray dashed line). For the training period,
the plot suggests that the uncorrected NOAH TWSA underestimates most
of the wet and dry events. In contrast, both Unet (orange line) and
SegnetLite (green line) fit the wet and dry events well and are within
the extent of the GRACE data uncertainty. The VGG16 model (dark blue
solid line) underestimates the magnitudes of some wet events in 2002,
2003, and 2007.
During the testing period, we see several dry events, for example,
the severe droughts in 2013 and 2016. In the literature, the dry events
in 2014 and 2015 were attributed to monsoon rainfall deficits \citep{mishra2016frequency}.
Again, the uncorrected NOAH underestimates the dry and wet events,
especially the dry events. The SegnetLite model captures all dry events
in 2013\textendash 2016 well, but slightly underestimates the 2014
and 2015 wet peaks. On the other hand, the VGG16 model captures most
of the wet events, but underestimates dry events. The performance
of Unet is in between. The average NSE improvement in the testing
period is 0.87, or 52\% improvement over the uncorrected NOAH TWSA.
Figure \ref{fig:5}a also suggests that even though the CNN models
are trained at the grid level, they conserve mass at the country level.
This is encouraging and may be attributed to the strong ability of
CNN to learn multiscale spatial features and, therefore, preserve
spatial continuity inherent in the input.
Figures \ref{fig:5}b and \ref{fig:5}c show the cumulative distribution
function (CDF) of the pixel-wise, or grid-scale correlation coefficient
and NSE between modeled TWSA and GRACE TWSA. The CDFs of all CNN-corrected
results (solid lines in color) show a clear improvement over the original
NOAH model (dashed line). Both Unet and SegnetLite give better performance
than VGG16 and, in particular, the performance of SegnetLite is slightly
better in the upper range of the correlation coefficient and NSE CDFs.
The results thus far suggest that the mismatch pattern learned using
NOAH TWSA as the base predictor can already help to correct the NOAH
results significantly, both in magnitude and phase. On the basis of
Table \ref{tab:1} and Figure \ref{fig:5}, the SegnetLite model shows
the best performance for the base case. The VGG16 model gives slightly
worse results than the other two, probably because of the limited
number of input feature maps it allows.
\begin{center}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering{}\includegraphics[width=5in]{figure5}\caption{Comparison of (a) GRACE (dark solid line with filled circles), NOAH
(gray dashed line), and CNN-corrected TWSA time series by VGG16 (blue),
Unet (orange), and SegnetLite (green) for training and testing periods
(separated by the thin vertical bar) at the country level; (b) and
(c) CDFs of correlation coefficient and NSE between modeled TWSA (including
both NOAH and CNN-corrected results) and GRACE at the grid level.
Shaded area in (a) represents the total error bound estimated for
GRACE TWSA (see Section 2). \label{fig:5}}
\end{figure}
\par\end{center}
To help interpret the learned spatial patterns further, in Figure
\ref{fig:6} we plot correlation and NSE maps corresponding to the
uncorrected NOAH TWSA (\ref{fig:6}a, \ref{fig:6}d), the SegnetLite
model (\ref{fig:6}b, \ref{fig:6}e), and improvements due to CNN
correction, for the period 2002/04\textendash 2016/12 (\ref{fig:6}c,
\ref{fig:6}f). In general, higher correlation and NSE values are
observed in southcentral and central India. The correlation improvement
is the greatest in northwest and south India. The drier northwest
India has been significantly affected by anthropogenic activities
related to irrigation, whereas the wetter southmost part of the country
is subject to bimodal precipitation pattern \citep{Girotto2017},
both are not resolved well in the current NOAH model. On the other
hand, regional groundwater impact related to water withdrawal in northwest
India has been confirmed by a number of previous GRACE studies \citep[e.g., ][]{Rodell2009,Chen2014}.
Thus, the TWSA correction benefits the most in those areas. Nevertheless,
isolated weak spots, especially on NSE maps, are found near the India-Nepal
border (part of Ganges River Basin) and also in the Brahmaputra River
Basin, where NOAH already gives good performance and the improvements
by CNN are either insignificant or even deteriorated. The Himalayas
region outside India's north border may have negative impact on the
learning because of sharp discontinuity in patterns. Similarly, the
isolated weak spots along the Indian coast may also be related to
the lack of continuity in patterns. Additional data may be necessary
to constrain the CNN learning in those isolated spots. To give a sense
of fitting quality, we show grid-level time series of NOAH TWSA, GRACE
TWSA, and SegnetLite corrected TWSA at four selected pixel locations
in SI S2. Two examples correspond to locations of significant NSE
improvement (northwest India and southcentral India) and the other
two examples show locations of performance deterioration (India-Nepal
border and southern coastal area). SI S2 suggests that at the northwest
India location, deep learning helps to improve the match of a downward
trend observed by GRACE. SI S3 plots the same maps as shown in Figure
\ref{fig:6} but for the testing period 2012/09\textendash 2016/12.
In general, the same improvement patterns (i.e., $\Delta\rho$ and
$\Delta\mathrm{NSE}$) are observed over most of the region, except
for north India where the effect due to correlation correction is
little or none. The absolute NSE over northwest India is lower than
that in Figure \ref{fig:6}, although the NSE correction is still
significant over most of the study region.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering{}\includegraphics[width=5in]{Figure6}\caption{Grid-scale correlation coefficient maps between (a) NOAH-simulated
TWSA and GRACE, (b) SegnetLite corrected TWSA and GRACE, and (c) the
difference between (a) and (c); (d)\textendash (f) the same maps but
for NSE. For plotting purposes, all maps are scaled to {[}-1,1{]}.
\label{fig:6}}
\end{figure}
We performed additional tests for each type of CNN models by adding
precipitation (P) and temperature (T) as predictors (Table \ref{tab:1}).
Results show that the additional predictors have little improvement
over the base case (SI S4). Although P and T may include additional
information (e.g., on SWS) not already included in the model, their
effect may be limited by the resolutions of CNN models and GRACE observations,
and by the strong seasonality of the study area. Nevertheless, P and
T forcing may still be useful for reconstructing the TWS for other
parts of the world.
To further corroborate the learned patterns, we now compare $S(t)$
to in situ groundwater storage anomalies (GWSA). As mentioned before,
NOAH does not include SWS and GWS, while GRACE observes the total
water column in space. Thus, the mismatch pattern should reflect the
missing components, and is expected to correlate well with in situ
GWSA wherever the TWSA is dominated by GWS. We assign groundwater
wells to the nearest CNN model grid cells and then calculate the correlation
coefficient between $S(t)$ estimated by SegnetLite and in situ GWSA.
Results are shown in Figure \ref{fig:7}. Spatially, positive correlations
are observed for most parts of India. The 50th percentile of correlation
is about 0.4 (inset of Figure \ref{fig:7}). The correlation is weaker
in northwest India, the India-Nepal border, and along the southern
coastal areas. The weaker correlation in northwest India is intriguing,
given the dominance of groundwater in that region and strong correlation
between the corrected NOAH and GRACE TWSA obtained for the same area,
as shown in Figure \ref{fig:6}b. One possible explanation is given
by \citet{Girotto2017}, who pointed out that groundwater used for
irrigation in northwest India is \textquotedblleft extracted primarily
from deep aquifers, which are observed by GRACE, but not by the shallow
in situ groundwater measurements.'' Thus, the limitation of the in
situ dataset needs to be kept in mind when interpreting the comparison
results in Figure \ref{fig:7}. For areas along the Indus River and
Ganges River, the impact of surface water is relatively high \citep{getirana2017rivers},
which limits the proportion of GWSA in $S(t)$ and weakens the correlation
between $S(t)$ and in-situ GWSA. Note in this comparison with the
in situ GWSA, we mainly focus on analyzing the phase agreement because
of the uncertainty of in situ GWSA magnitudes related to the uncertain
specific yield.
\begin{center}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering{}\includegraphics[height=5in]{figure7}\caption{Correlation map between in situ GWSA and $S(t)$ learned by SegnetLite
model. Inset shows the CDF of correlation coefficient. The map coordinates
are grid cell indices (from 0 to 127). \label{fig:7}}
\end{figure}
\par\end{center}
Finally, we apply the trained SegnetLite model to predict TWSA. Figure
\ref{fig:8} shows the country-averaged TWSA for the period 2016\textendash 2017.
The GRACE data (green filled circles) becomes unavailable after June
2017. Also, the GRACE data from 2017 is not part of the model training
and testing. The 95\% prediction interval is estimated using 1.96
RMSE, where the RMSE (\textasciitilde{} 2.20 cm) is calculated by
using the misfit of SegnetLite model on the training data. The plot
suggests that the SegnetLite model captures the GRACE data well during
the 2017 months that are not part of Figure \ref{fig:5}a, demonstrating
the potential use of this method for filling data gaps between GRACE
and GRACE-FO.
\begin{center}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering{}\includegraphics[width=4in]{figure8}\caption{Country averaged TWSA (blue solid line) predicted for 2016\textendash 2017
by using the trained base SegnetLite model. Dashed line (orange) is
the NOAH TWSA output, and also the input to the SegnetLite model.
Filled circles (green) represent GRACE monthly data, and shaded area
corresponds to 95\% prediction intervals. The vertical line marks
the beginning of ``unseen'' data during previous training and testing.
\label{fig:8}}
\end{figure}
\par\end{center}
\section{Conclusion}
In this study, we present a hybrid approach that combines physically-based
modeling and deep learning to predict the spatial and temporal variations
of TWS anomaly (TWSA). This is done by training CNN-based deep learning
models (VGG16, Unet, and SegnetLite) to learn the spatial and temporal
mismatch pattern between the TWSA simulated by a land surface model,
NOAH, and that observed by GRACE, using which the NOAH-simulated TWSA
is then corrected. The hybrid modeling approach is systematically
demonstrated over India by using various performance metrics. In general,
all deep learning models considered in this study are able to improve
the NOAH TWSA significantly at both the country- and grid level, which
is encouraging because we deal with a much smaller training sample
size than those typically used in image classification problems. A
correlation analysis between the learned patterns and the in situ
groundwater storage anomaly (GWSA) shows good correlation between
the two, suggesting the learned patterns effectively compensate for
the missing groundwater storage in NOAH for many parts of the study
area.
Our method presents an alternative for extrapolating TWSA time series
outside the GRACE period. Our results also indicate the feasibility
of using deep learning to perform spatial and temporal interpolation,
which has long been a challenging problem in the geoscience literature.
Compared to the conventional 4D variational or ensemble-based data
assimilation techniques for fusing hydroclimatic data, major strengths
of our hybrid approach include (1) the relatively few assumptions
involved, especially with regard to parameterization of the spatial
and temporal error distributions; (2) the capability to extract useful
features at multiple scales, and (3) the capability to handle multiple
data types with relative ease.
Deep learning algorithms evolve rapidly. In this study, we mainly
considered three variants of CNN. In the literature, long short-term
memory (LSTM) and recurrent neural networks (RNN) have been combined
with CNN for spatiotemporal prediction problems \citep{shi2015convolutional,Fang2017}.
In addition, the grid resolution of our networks is relatively coarse.
Finer resolution grids may be tested in the future to improve model
fits.
\section*{Appendix}
\setcounter{figure}{0} \renewcommand{\thefigure}{A.\arabic{figure}}
\subsection*{A.1 VGG-16}
The pre-trained VGG16 model (i.e., weights) is obtained from the \texttt{Keras}
package \citep{chollet2015}. The VGG16 model design consists of a
series of downsampling convolutional layers (3\texttimes 3 filter,
ReLU activation function), interlaced with max pooling layers (2\texttimes 2)
(Figure \ref{fig:a1}). The number of filters increases gradually
from 64 to 512, while the size of the feature map decreases from 128
to 8 (in pixels). At the end, the convolutional layers are flattened
and connected to a fully connected layer before reshaped to the dimensions
of the output layer (i.e., 128\texttimes 128). Linear activation function
is used for the output layer.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering{}\includegraphics[width=5in]{FigureA1}\caption{VGG16 model architecture. \label{fig:a1}}
\end{figure}
\subsection*{A.2 Unet model}
The Unet model used in this work is adapted from the original design
of \citet{Ronneberger}, with modifications in the number of filters
used. The model design belongs to a class of encoder-decoder architectures.
The encoder part includes 5 consecutive downsampling steps, and the
decoder part includes an equal number of upsampling steps. Each downsampling
step involves 2 convolutional layers (using 3\texttimes 3 filter and
ReLU activation function), followed by a max pooling layer (2\texttimes 2).
For the encoder part, the number of filters in the convolutional layers
increases from 32 to 512, while the dimensions of the feature maps
decrease from 128\texttimes 128 to 8\texttimes 8. Each upsampling
step involves (a) an upsampling step (2\texttimes 2), (b) a concatenation
step in which the feature maps from the same level of downsampling
and upsampling paths are combined (dashed line in Figure \ref{fig:a2}),
and (c) two convolutional layers (using 3\texttimes 3 filter and ReLU
activation function). In its simplest form, upsampling repeats rows
and columns to create a larger image (no trainable parameters). The
inputs to the model include image stacks corresponding to one or more
predictors, and the output of the model is the predicted mismatch,
$S(t)$. A $1\times1$ convolutional layer with linear activation
function is used to generate the output.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering{}\includegraphics[width=5in]{FigureA2}\caption{Unet model architecture. \label{fig:a2}}
\end{figure}
\subsection*{A.3 SegnetLite model}
Segnet is a deep CNN architecture introduced to perform semantic segmentation
\citep{badrinarayanan2015segnet}. SegnetLite used in this work is
a variant of the original Segnet, which uses a smaller number of encoding
and decoding steps. In addition, no max-pooling is used and the upsampling
layers in the original design are replaced by transpose convolution
layers, which can be regarded as the reverse of convolutional operations
and which increase the input dimensions like the upsampling does.
However, transpose convolution layers introduce trainable parameters
to learn the optimal upsampling parameters. The encoder part of SegnetLite
consists of six convolution layers, with the number of filters increasing
from 16 to 128, while the decoding part is symmetric and includes
alternating concatenation and transpose convolution layers (Figure
\ref{fig:a3}). Similar to Unet, SegnetLite uses concatenation steps
to combine feature maps from encoding and decoding steps at the same
level. To generate the output layer, an upsampling layer is used to
increase the decoder outputs to the output dimensions ($128\times128)$
and is then passed through a $1\times1$ convolutional layer as in
the other two models.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering{}\includegraphics[width=5in]{FigureA3}\caption{SegnetLite model architecture.\label{fig:a3}}
\end{figure}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The GRACE mascon product used in this study was downloaded from JPL
(\url{www.grace.jpl.nasa.gov}). NOAH data were downloaded from NASA
Earthdata site (\url{http://earthdata.nasa.gov}). Processing and
numerical experiments were carried out on the Chameleon Cloud hosted
by Texas Advanced Computing Center. A. Y. Sun and B. R. Scanlon were
partially supported by funding from Jackson School of Geosciences,
UT Austin. The authors are grateful to the Associate Editor and four
anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments.
\bibliographystyle{agufull08}
|
\section{Introduction}
Deep Neural Networks (DNN) generate robust modeling results across diverse domains such as image classification, natural language processing, speech recognition, and recommendation systems ~\cite{liu17dnn}. However, DNN training is resource intensive and time-consuming. Model developers often utilize cloud GPU resources to train large-scale models. A major concern is the privacy of the sensitive data and the trained models that may be stolen, traded, or possibly used to explore the private training data.
One possible approach to addressing the privacy issue in outsourcing DNN is by training the models over encrypted data. However, due to the large training data and expensive training process, cryptographic approaches are too expensive to be practical as shown in a recent study on training small scale neural networks ~\cite{mohassel17}. As a result, cryptographic approaches are practically limited to testing DNNs as in CryptoNets \cite{xie14}, which is much more simpler and less expensive than training a DNN model.
Differential Privacy (DP) has been applied for deep learning in a different setting ~\cite{reza15,abadi16}, where sharing, not hiding, the training data and model is the goal. Abadi et al. ~\cite{abadi16} consider the problem of building DNN models that do not leak to the model consumers the private information specific to any individual training examples. Shokri et al. ~\cite{reza15} study a similar problem where data contributors are distributed. These methods cannot be adapted to the outsourced training scenario where privacy of both data and model is of concern. Furthermore, DP mechanisms result in a significant tradeoff between utility and privacy. For example, with a practical privacy setting, such as $\epsilon=2$, Abadi et al. ~\cite{abadi16} report over $15 - 20 \%$ accuracy reduction in classifying the MNIST dataset.
A few recent studies try to address the confidentiality problem with the training data. Fan et al. ~\cite{fan18} apply differential privacy in hiding pixel-level details in the sensitive images. However, it does not protect sensitive contents that involve the entire images. In a different work, Li et al.~\cite{li17} propose hiding private data by submitting locally learned shallower neural networks to the cloud for further learning. However, the results show that the content of the intermediate representations is visually identifiable. These studies generally fail in protecting from the simplest attack --- manual visual content inspection by an attacker.
In summary, existing privacy-preserving techniques for deep learning are either too expensive, not designed for the outsourced setting, or vulnerable to the simple visual attacks.
\textbf{Scope and contributions.}
In this work, we thoroughly study the problems with existing candidate approaches for privacy-preserving outsourced deep learning and propose two novel attacks that a viable solution should address. Our work is focused on image training data and classification tasks. (1) The first attack is the \emph{visual re-identification attack}, where an attacker can visually identify the major content of a protected image. Due to the recent studies ~\cite{krizhevsky17} that shows DNN models have outperformed human experts in image recognition tasks, the attack can be further carried out automatically with a trained ``DNN examiner" model that tries to recognize the contents from protected images. (2) The second attack is the \emph{class-membership attack}. In this attack, an adversary is able to use the model and access the model output, however, does not know the secret parameter settings of the data protection mechanism. The attack goal is to determine whether a class of images was included in the training data. Specifically, for classification tasks, this attack can be carried out by observing the distribution characteristics of the predicted labels for a set of images from the same class, e.g., different face images of the same person in face recognition. For a reasonably performing image classifier, the test images if similar to a class in the training data will have distinct output distributions, i.e., most labels will be of the same class, which is untrue if the test images are dissimilar from any of the training data classes. Most methods that expose the learned models or their outputs are vulnerable to this attack.
To address these two attacks in the outsourced setting, we present a novel image disguising mechanism that protects both the training data and the learned models. The intuition is that \emph{with appropriately transformed images, the powerful deep learning techniques can still pick up the unique topological/geometric features preserved in the transformed spaces to effectively distinguish the classes of the transformed images}. Our image disguising mechanism combines block-wise permutation and multidimensional transformation to achieve excellent levels of \emph{visual privacy}, an empirical measure designed to evaluate the effectiveness of visual re-identification attack, and strong resilience to the model-based class-membership attack. We summarize our contributions as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item We identify two attacks that a viable privacy-preserving solution should consider in outsourced deep learning: the visual re-identification attack and the class-membership attack. We also propose empirical methods for evaluating the effectiveness of such attacks.
\item We design a suite of image disguising mechanisms for image-based DNN learning in the outsourced setting that thwarts both the visual re-identification and the class-membership attacks while preserving information in the transformed space for deriving high-quality models.
\item We conduct extensive experimental evaluations on several public datasets to show the trade-offs of related parameter settings for the image disguising mechanisms and their resilience to the identified attacks.
\end{enumerate}
Next, we briefly outline this paper. Section ~\ref{sec:framework} describes DNN outsourcing, the potential privacy threats, and shortcomings of some existing techniques that target the privacy issue. Then, it introduces the visual re-identification and class-membership attacks and describes the security assumptions for our work. In Section ~\ref{sec:core}, we introduce a suite of image disguising mechanisms that enable privacy-preserving deep learning in the outsourced setting. Section ~\ref{sec:security_analysis} analyzes the security of the proposed mechanisms. Section ~\ref{sec:experim} presents the results for the experimental evaluations of our privacy mechanisms in terms of model quality, resiliency against the two attacks, and related trade-offs. We refer to the most relevant related works in Section ~\ref{sec:related_work} and finally conclude the paper in Section ~\ref{sec:conclusion}.
\vspace{-0.35cm}
\section{ Attacks on Outsourced Deep Learning}\label{sec:framework}
In this section, we describe the setting of outsourced deep learning and define two types of attacks that a viable privacy-preserving solution has to address.
\textbf{General Framework.} DNN learning is resource and time intensive for massive data and larger and intricate architectures such as ResNet ~\cite{kaiming15}. Resource-constrained data owners outsource their data to public cloud providers such as AWS's elastic GPUs to benefit from their high-performance GPU computation resources. Figure ~\ref{fig:framework_generic} shows the general framework for outsourced deep learning: the data owner offloads her training data to the cloud provider and deploys the cloud provider's GPU resources in training complex DNN models. After training, the data owner can either download the learned model for local use or just upload newer testing data to the cloud for prediction.
\begin{figure} [h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width= 0.45\linewidth]{./figures/framework1}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{A data owner outsources her images to a cloud provider for storage and DNN modeling using GPU clusters.}
\label{fig:framework_generic}
\vspace{-0.55cm}
\end{figure}
Outsourcing DNN learning to the cloud provider introduces privacy risks when the training images may include sensitive images, as cloud providers are not fully trustable. An adversarial party may investigate the uploaded images manually with human visual inspection to identify and analyze characteristics of sensitive objects. Furthermore, the adversary may exploit the learned models for its own use or launching model-based attacks as we will describe. Therefore, the data owner must either completely trust the cloud provider or deploy some data and model privacy protection mechanisms.
\textbf{Problems with Existing Privacy-Preserving Approaches.} Due to the inherent cost of crypto approaches, they are not ideal candidates in hiding images from adversaries in outsourced deep learning as shown by ~\cite{mohassel17,xie14}. A few efficient data protection methods have been proposed recently to address the cost issue. Fan et al. ~\cite{fan18} rely on a differentially private (DP) mechanism to hide certain sensitive pixels (e.g., a person's face or a license plate number) in the larger-context images. However, it depends on the predefined size of the sensitive objects in the images to determine the noise and $\epsilon$ privacy levels. This is difficult to apply in practice because of numerous possible variations of shapes, sizes, distances, and angles a sensitive object may be projected in different images. Often, many training data contains large size objects, such as human faces, that can be sensitive. Even for images containing many objects, as shown in Figure ~\ref{fig:existing_app} (a), it is difficult to identify which sizes of an object are appropriate to protect. Furthermore, it is unclear whether blurring the targets is sufficient - the overall context may also reveal private information.
In a different work, Li et al. ~\cite{li17} propose learning the first few layers of the target DNN model locally and outsourcing the intermediate representation to the cloud provider for further learning. Unfortunately, the intermediate representation when reconstructed at the cloud provider's sites is visually recognizable despite high Peak Signal-to-Noise Ratio (PSNR) (a metric used to quantify visual privacy in the paper) as seen in Figure ~\ref{fig:existing_app} (b).
\begin{figure}
\vspace{-0.55cm}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c @{\quad} c }
\includegraphics[width=.30\linewidth]{./figures/fan_pixel} &
\includegraphics[width=.30\linewidth]{./figures/privy_net} \\
\small (a) & \small (b)
\end{tabular}
\vspace{-0.35cm}
\caption{(a) DP-based pixellation of images ~\cite{fan18} reveals the global properties of the images making them distinguishable. (b) The reconstructed images in PrivyNet ~\cite{li17} resemble the original images despite high PSNR values.}
\label{fig:existing_app}
\vspace{-0.45cm}
\end{figure}
In summary, there is no practical method for protecting the confidentiality of training data yet in outsourced deep learning. The cryptographic methods are still too expensive, and the two recent methods that avoid encryption \cite{li17,fan18} do not protect the images from visual inspection.
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\subsection{Adversarial Model and Attacks}\label{sec:threat_model}
In the general framework we described earlier, we consider the adversaries can compromise the cloud infrastructure thus see the training data and the learned model if no protection mechanism is applied. In addition, we assume that adversaries can use the model as a black box - feeding the model with testing images and getting the prediction labels - even if the training data and the model is protected with some mechanism while the output labels are revealed. We will present two attacks specific to outsourced image-based deep learning: 1) Visual re-identification attack aimed at compromising the visual privacy of protected images, and 2) the class-membership attack aimed at exploiting a trained model in determining if a certain class of images was included in the training dataset. Then, we will elaborate on the security assumptions we will base our work on.
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\subsubsection{Visual Re-identification Attack.}
We have shown that the existing work \cite{li17,fan18} are not effective at all in hiding sensitive images. An attacker can simply browse the blurred images to find out sensitive information. Before we propose our own mechanism for image-based deep learning (Section \ref{sec:core}), we explore the basic requirement for protecting the privacy of image data: no adversary should be able to visually identify sensitive objects from the protected image data. We name this characteristic \emph{visual privacy}. We found that none of the existing metrics can precisely capture or define visual privacy. Use of pixel-level mean square error by Fan et al. ~\cite{fan18} and peak signal-noise ratio by Li et al. ~\cite{li17} do not capture the semantic understanding level that humans' visual perception can.
We propose a DNN-based visual re-identification ``examiner" to serve as the agent of a human attacker. The recent advances in high-accuracy DNN models ~\cite{krizhevsky17} have shown that DNN models have exceeded human experts in image classification. Inspired by this, we propose to use a DNN models to impersonate the visual attackers to scan the protected images. We call such DNN models the ``DNN examiners''. Specifically, we can train a DNN examiner on the original training data and deploy it to distinguish the protected images. A high-accuracy result of the re-identification attack suggests the protection mechanism under scrutiny fails to maintain visual privacy. We define then \emph{visual privacy} as (1-Accuracy of DNN examiner in classifying the protected images).
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\subsubsection{Class-membership Attack.}
Given a protection mechanism that thwarts the visual re-identification attack successfully, we need to eliminate any potential abuse of the exposed model trained on the protected images in exploring the training images. After carefully examining the outsourced deep learning scenarios, we identify a new class-membership attack that has not been defined or explored by the related work \cite{fan18,li17} yet.
In the following, we design an attack that enables adversaries to learn whether a certain class of images was used as training examples by observing the target model's outputs. Figure \ref{fig:class_attack} shows the basic setting that adversaries can use (and thus explore) to try the model with any testing data in their hand and observe the model's outputs. The intuition is that a well-trained model should work nicely on records similar to the ones belonging to the training data classes whereas poorly on images from unrelated categories. For example, a face recognition DNN trained on 10 persons' face images must work much better on test images belonging to the same 10 individuals on test images belonging to others. Let us denote the two categories of image classes as ``in-training" and ``out-training" classes respectively.
We can define this attack formally. Given a fully trained DNN model and known output labels $\{c_i| c_i \in C\}$, the adversary prepares a set of images, $\{t_i, i=1..m\}$, belonging to some class $c$ (a target class) that may or may not be one of the output labels. The adversary launches the class-membership attack to determine if $c\in C$, i.e. if the training dataset included images belonging to the target class $c$. The attacker's strategy is to characterize the output distribution $Pr(c'|\{t_i\})$ that will aid in inferring class memberships, where $c'$ represents the models prediction outputs. Test images belonging to an in-training class are consistently classified by the model to the same class with high probability for a reasonably good model; whereas test images belonging to an out-training class may see more uncertain outputs. Figure ~\ref{fig:class_attack} illustrates the idea of class-membership attack. A pointy histogram infers the target class (or a closely related class) was likely included in the training set whereas a flatter histogram suggests the target class was not likely included in the training set. Such distribution differences can be captured with entropy or Fano factor. Fano factor, similar to the variance-to-mean ratio (VMR), measures the index of dispersion and can be used in determining how two sets of observed occurrences are clustered or dispersed. Correspondingly, in-training examples of the same class will show smaller entropy or higher Fano factor than out-training examples. In experiments, we have shown that unprotected models are extremely vulnerable to class-membershup attack.
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width= 0.65\linewidth]{./figures/class_attack}
\vspace{-0.15cm}
\caption{Class-membership Attack. Given a DNN model, an attacker analyzes the prediction outcomes of a series of testing images to determine if a certain class of images were included in the training set.}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\label{fig:class_attack}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
Expanding on the class-membership attack, an attacker may determine if a certain dataset was likely the training data, partially or fully.
Any deep learning framework that exposes the model for sharing are subject to this attack. For example, the differentially private models trained with the techniques of Abadi et al. ~\cite{abadi16} and Shokri et al. ~\cite{reza15} are subject to the class-membership attack unless the model quality is low enough (due to the privacy setting), in which case the output distribution of in-training examples cannot be statistically distinguished from that of out-training examples. This, however, would fall short of the goal of developing useful models.
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\subsubsection{Security Assumptions.}
Here, we will make some relevant security assumptions we will base our disguising mechanisms for image-based deep learning on: 1) We consider ciphertext-only attacks, i.e., any disguised image and its original image pair is unknown to the adversary; 2) The adversary possesses no prior knowledge of the images being outsourced, but they can use any images to explore the trained model; 3) All infrastructures and communication channels must be secure. We consider an honest-but-curious adversary, who may be interested in the contents and categorization (classes/labels) of the training images. The adversary might also want to misuse the models to distinguish or identify the domain of the training data with class-membership attacks.
\vspace{-0.35cm}
\section{Image Disguising for Deep Learning}\label{sec:core}
Our goal is to design a method to protect outsourced image-based deep learning from the two types of attacks described earlier. The current work will only address the challenges with whole-image based classification tasks.
Figure ~\ref{fig:framework} depicts the Disguised-Nets framework. A data owner disguises her private images before outsourcing them to the cloud for storage and DNN learning. She transforms all of her images using one secure transformation key, $K$, which is comprised of the transformation types and the involved parameters. It is computationally difficult to guess the security key $K$ with brute-force and the transformed images do not leave sufficient information for adversaries to guess $K$ or launch the visual re-identification attack. She uses the cloud resources to train the DNN models from the transformed images with acceptable model quality.
\vspace{-0.15cm}
\begin{figure} [h]
\centering
\vspace{-0.35cm}
\includegraphics[width= 0.48\linewidth]{./figures/framework}
\caption{Disguised-Nets: Image disguising framework for DNN learning.}
\label{fig:framework}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
Specifically, assume the data owner owns a set of images for training, notated as pairs $\{(X_i, y_i)\}$, where $X_i$ is the image pixel matrix and $y_i$ the corresponding label. We formally define the disguising process as follows. Let the disguising mechanism be a transformation $T_K$, where $K$ is the secret key which depends on the selected perturbation techniques. By applying image disguising, the training data is transformed to $\{(T(X_i), y_i)\}$, which is used to train a DNN, denoted as a function $\mathbf{D}_T$, that takes disguised images $T(X)$ and outputs a predicted label $\hat{y}$. The models trained on images transformed with the image disguising mechanisms only work on transformed images and thus cannot be exploited with other image data as long as the transformation keys are secured. For any new data $X_{new}$, the model application is defined as $\mathbf{D}_T(T(X_{new}))$, the new data transformed with the same key $K$.
A remarkable characteristic of Disguised-Nets is that there is no need for one to alter or tailor the existing DNN architectures to make them compatible with the privacy mechanisms. One can simply import successful architectures such as ResNet and VGG to train the desired privacy-preserving models on the transformed data. In our opinion, this simplification is a great advantage over using traditional encryption or garbled circuit schemes which requires transforming the target DNN algorithms to their privacy-preserving versions, often a complex task, which results in expensive and impractical solutions.
The success of this approach depends on the transformation $T_K$ that preserves certain properties of the transformed data allowing DNN to learn the classification task. We consider a suite of image disguising mechanisms that can be combined with one another to achieve the desired level of privacy and utility. Candidate mechanisms must hide the \emph{visually identifiable} features of the images, i.e., attain good visual privacy and provide a sufficiently large key space to be resilient to ciphertext-only attacks. As a result, these mechanisms inevitably affect the quality of the learned DNNs. Therefore, finding the settings that provide both high security and model quality is crucial. While we have not theoretically justified the utility preserving mechanisms of these transformations yet, the empirical evaluation shows surprisingly good modeling results.
\vspace{-0.35cm}
\subsection{Image Encoding and Partitioning}
An image $X_{l \times m}$ with $lm$ pixels may have three RGB channels or just a single grayscale channel. We encode grayscale images as matrices of size ${l\times m}$ whereas the color images as three channel matrices of size ${3\times l \times m}$. The matrices might be partitioned into smaller \emph{blocks} for block-wise transformations to improve the visual privacy. In classification modeling, the image labels $c_i$ are mapped to $0, 1, \dots$ without revealing their mapping to the actual classes.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\vspace{-0.35cm}
\begin{tabular}{c @{\quad} c @{\quad} c}
\includegraphics[width=.32\linewidth]{./figures/cifar_viz_perm_2} &
\includegraphics[width=.32\linewidth]{./figures/mp_cifar_example} &
\includegraphics[width=.32\linewidth]{./figures/mp_perm_example} \\
\small (a) Block-wise Permutation. & \small (b) Block-wise RMT. & \small (b) Block-wise RMT+Noise.
\end{tabular}
\caption{Different disguising mechanisms on MNIST and CIFAR-10 images. }
\vspace{-0.55cm}
\label{fig:disguises}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-0.45cm}
\subsection{Block-wise Permutation}\label{subsec:perm}
The block-wise permutation simply partitions an image and re-arranges the image blocks randomly. An image $X_{l \times m}$ is partitioned into $t$ blocks of uniform size $ r\times s$. If we label the blocks sequentially as $v= <1,2,3,4, . . . t>$. A pseudorandom permutation of the image, $T_{\pi}(X)$, shuffles the blocks and reassemble the corresponding image accordingly. The permutation may break the global patterns of the images and achieve good visual privacy already. However, the block-wise characteristics such as boundaries, color, content shape, and texture of the original neighboring blocks may provide clues for adversaries to recover the original image - imagine the jigsaw puzzle! Figure ~\ref{fig:disguises} (a) shows an example. For large $t$, it might be difficult to apply such a jigsaw attack due to the vague similarity between block boundaries. In practice, however, the image size might be small, which leads to smaller settings of $t$ insufficient to protect from the jigsaw attack. Thus, we will need another layer of transformation to address the jigsaw attack.
\vspace{-0.35cm}
\subsection{Randomized Multidimensional Transformations (RMT)}\label{subsubsec:tech_gdp}
\vspace{-0.1cm}
To address the block-wise jigsaw attack, we proceed with establishing a more resilient transformation mechanism that hides the visual attributes that aid in distinguishing the images from their transformed counterparts. For an image represented as a pixel matrix $X$, a general linear transformation can be defined as $G(X) = RX$, where $R_{ m \times m}$ is a random orthogonal matrix generated following the Haar distribution \cite{gallier00}, or a random projection matrix ~\cite{vempala05}. When an image is partitioned into $t$ blocks for random permutation, we will need a list of random matrices $\{R_i, i=1..t\}$, one for each image-block. The list of matrices $\{R_i\}$ acts as a secret key across the dataset and apply to the corresponding image-blocks.
Such transformation is known to preserve (or approximately preserve by random projection) the Euclidean distance between columns of the matrix $X$. For non-image datasets, it is not possible to recover the original data from the perturbed data without certain prior knowledge of the data \cite{liu06tkde}, due to the large parameter space (we will discuss in Section \ref{sec:security_analysis}). However, for images, we found that without block-wise application, i.e., with one RMT for the entire image, RMT leaks information about sparse contents in images such as in MNIST dataset, as the zero-valued columns do not change after the transformation as shown in Figure \ref{fig:disguises} (b). Thus, it is often beneficial to combine block-wise permutation and RMT. Interestingly, when combining permutation and RMT, smaller block sizes preserve better model quality, while the block size may not matter much in protecting from visual re-identification attack, as shown by our experiments.
To tackle the challenges presented by sparse images, we can also add noises into the transformation as $(X + \Delta)R$, where $\Delta$ is a random noise matrix, re-generated for each image (or image block) $X$, and drawn uniformly at random from $[0,N]$ where $N$ is the tunable noise level. Incorporation of additive noise before applying rotation perturbation converts the zero-pixel areas to noisy non-zero areas. Figure ~\ref{fig:disguises} (c) shows the effects of RMT on MNIST and CIFAR-10 datasets with and without the additional $\Delta$ noise. Note that the dense images, or even some sparse images, may have been well protected by block-wise permutation and RMT, and thus noise addition may not be needed as we will show in our experiments later.
\vspace{-0.45cm}
\section{Security Analysis}\label{sec:security_analysis}
In this section, we first present a proposition around the mathematical irreversibility of the proposed disguising mechanism under the assumption of ciphertext-only attacks. Next, we design the methods for the empirical assessment of the visual re-identification and class-membership attacks.
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\subsection{Theoretical Analysis of Parameter Space Complexity}
With $X' = (X+\Delta)R$, we consider the ciphertext-only attacks scenario, i.e., the adversary has accesses to the ciphertexts, $X'$, without knowing any mapping pairs $X \rightarrow X'$. We present a proposition to show that enumerating the RMT matrices $R$ is computationally intractable. Assuming the $\Delta$ noise levels are relatively small and attackers can ignore it, a brute-force attack needs to enumerate all possible $R$ matrices to identify a valid one (e.g., by applying the visual re-identification attack). However, we show that the number of possible $R$ can be exponentially large for given parameters.
\begin{prop} For values encoded in $h$-bit finite field, there are $O(2^{hm})$ candidate orthogonal matrices $R_{m\times m}$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} With $h$-bit encoding, there are $p=2^h$ distinct values. The theory of orthogonal matrix group on finite fields states that there are $O(p^m)$ orthogonal matrices in $\mathbb{Z}_p^{m \times m}$ for a $p$-element field ~\cite{curtis84}. Hence, there are $O(2^{hm})$ orthogonal matrices.
\end{proof}
With the current setting we used in the experiments, e.g., $h = 32$ and $m=4$, enumerating the orthogonal matrices $R$ is computationally intractable. For random projection, as each element of the matrix is randomly drawn from a normal distribution, the number of possible matrices is even larger.
We can extend the analysis to the case that block-wise RMT and permutation are combined. For simplicity, let each dimension of the matrix is partitioned into $r$ shares. Thus, there are $r^2$ matrix blocks, each of which has the size of $(m/r) \times (m/r)$. For one permutation of the blocks, there are $O(2^{hmr})$ combinations of matrices. Correspondingly, there are $O((r^2)!2^{hmr})$ combinations for all possible permutations. Therefore, block-wise partitioning further increases the complexity of the parameter space.
In summary, the parameter space of the image disguising methods is large enough to address the brute-force ciphertext-only attack.
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\subsection{Empirical Assessments of Visual Re-identification and Class-membership Attacks}\label{subsec:empirical}
We design a set of tools for empirically assessing the effect of both the visual re-identification and class-membership attacks. For the visual re-identification attacks, we train a DNN examiner with the original training data and apply it to distinguish the disguised images from one another. We measure the overall accuracy of these applications. The result (1 - accuracy of DNN examiner) is used for empirical visual privacy.
For the class-membership attacks, attackers will apply the DNN models learned from the disguised data to original image data, possibly from other domains or the same domain. Note, without the secret keys, the adversary cannot transform the attack images. We mimic this attack by applying the disguised DNN to both in-training and out-training classes of images in their original form. We measure the class-wise Fano factors for both the in-training and out-training classes of images and see if the classes of the images are statistically distinguishable. Specifically, for a series of images $\{X_i, i=1..n\}$, the output label distribution over the classes forms a histogram. Let $n_{c_j}$ be the number of labels for $c_j$, $j=1..k$. The estimated mean of the distribution is $\mu = (\sum_{j=1}^k n_{c_j})/k$ and the estimated variance $\sigma^2$ is $(\sum_{j=1}^k(n_{c_j}-\mu)^2)/k$. The Fano factor is $\sigma^2/\mu$. We expect all in-training classes to have significantly higher Fano factor values than the out-training classes. In Section ~\ref{sec:experim}, we will empirically analyze the resilience of our image disguising mechanisms against both attacks.
\vspace{-0.35cm}
\section{Experiments}\label{sec:experim}
\vspace{-0.15cm}
This experimental evaluation\footnote{Source code and scripts uploaded to https://github.com/datascale/DisguisedNets} has two specific goals. First, we will show that how effective the image disguising methods in preserving the model quality, with different parameter settings. Second, we show whether our methods are also resilient to the two attacks, with the empirical attack evaluation methods described in Section \ref{sec:security_analysis}.
\textbf{Datasets.} We test our disguising mechanisms with three prevalent DNN benchmarking datasets: MNIST and CIFAR-10 and a subset of face recognition dataset LFW faces. We use an additional dataset known as FASHION dataset in the class-membership attack evaluations on models trained with MNIST. MNIST (handwritten digits) and FASHION (fashion items) image-sets both consists of 60,000 training and 10,000 testing gray-scale $28 \times 28$ pixel-images with 10 classes. CIFAR-10 image-set consists of 50,000 training and 10,000 testing color-images of size $32 \times 32$ belonging to 10 classes. The subset of LFW faces dataset we use consists of a relatively smaller number (1,400 training and 150 testing) of color-images belonging to 12 classes. As LFW has images of a size larger than the images in CIFAR-10, we resize down the LFW images to 32x32 for assessing the class-membership attack.
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\subsection{Model Quality and Setup Cost}
Table ~\ref{tab:parameter_setting} details the mechanisms, block size, and additive noise level used for the datasets. We used a simple DNN architecture for MNIST implemented with TensorFlow, and the more powerful ResNet ~\cite{kaiming15} architecture implemented on PyTorch for CIFAR-10 and LFW datasets. For MNIST, we set the learning rate to 0.001 and train the network for 1,000 iterations. For CIFAR-10 and LFW, we adaptably adjust the learning rate from 0.1 to 0.001 as the models are trained for 350 iterations. We use an 8-GPU cluster to train the models and each experiment was carried out 5 times to capture the variances of results. Table ~\ref{tab:results} shows that the models trained on disguised images perform closely to the optimum models trained on the undisguised images.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\scriptsize
\caption{Parameter settings and CNN Architectures.} \label{tab:parameter_setting}
\vspace{-.19cm}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Datasets &$Mechanisms$ & Block size & Noise Level& Architecture\\
\hline
MNIST & block-wise RMT + Permutation &\{$7 \times 7\}$ &100 & Simple\\
CIFAR-10 & block-wise RMT & \{$2 \times 2\}$ & 25 &ResNet\\
LFW & block-wise RMT& \{$2 \times 2\}$&50&ResNet\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\scriptsize
\caption{Results of applying image disguising mechanisms.} \label{tab:results}
\vspace{-.19cm}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
& \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Model Accuracy}\\
Datasets &With Disguise & Without Disguise\\
\hline
MNIST &96.6 +/- 0.4\% & 96.7 +/-0.2\% \\
CIFAR-10 & 89.3\%+/-0.1\% & 93.4 +/-0.2\% \\
LFW &90.6 +/- 1.3\%&94.3 +/-2.0\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\end{table}
The cost of the image disguising transformations are generally very cheap, (per image cost is less than 10ms) and can be comfortably done by any PC.
For the experiments in following subsections, we keep all the parameters in Table ~\ref{tab:parameter_setting} constant and vary the parameter under discussion unless noted otherwise.
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\subsection{Effect of Parameter Settings on Model Quality}
\vspace{-0.15cm}
Our objective here is to understand the effect of different parameter settings on model quality. From Figure ~\ref{fig:proj_vs_orth} (left), it is clear that the DNN models were significantly more effective when applying RMT with the orthogonal matrices as compared to applying RMT with projection matrices for MNIST. However, we observe the variation results in comparable model quality for CIFAR-10 and LFW. On the other hand, permutation of RMT blocks, which intuitively reduces the model quality, deteriorates the model quality negligibly for MNIST, moderately for LFW, and a bit alarmingly for CIFAR-10 as seen in Figure ~\ref{fig:proj_vs_orth} (right). We prefer orthogonal matrices for the optimum setting.
Figure ~\ref{fig:model_block_sizes} (left) shows that the model quality for LFW and CIFAR-10 datasets increases with smaller block sizes i.e. with the increasing number of blocks. However, we do not observe much effect on MNIST. Intuitively, larger noise levels should degrade model quality. Figure ~\ref{fig:model_block_sizes} (right) shows the expected effect is prominent for the CIFAR-10 and LFW with significant degradation of model quality with increasing noise levels. Again, the effect is absent on the MNIST dataset, the model quality remaining steady with an increase in noise level.
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\begin{figure}[h]
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.48]
\begin{axis}[
ybar=-2pt, bar shift = 7pt,enlarge x limits=0.2,
bar width=12pt,
log basis y={10},
ymin=50, ymax=100,
axis x line*=bottom, ylabel near ticks, yticklabel pos=left, yticklabel style={font=\Large},
y axis line style={opacity=50},
legend columns=2,legend style={at={(0.5,0.99)},draw=none,anchor=south,
font=\Large},
ylabel={Avg. Model Quality},
ylabel style={font=\Large},
symbolic x coords={MNIST Orth, MNIST Proj, blank, CIFAR Orth, CIFAR Proj,blank2, LFW Orth, LFW Proj},
xticklabels={, MNIST, ,CIFAR-10,LFW},
yticklabel=\pgfmathprintnumber\tick\%,yticklabel={\pgfmathparse{\tick}\pgfmathprintnumber{\pgfmathresult}\%}]
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=blue,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=north east lines}] coordinates {
(MNIST Orth,97.97)+-(0.3,0.3)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(MNIST Proj,59.39)+-(25.0,25.0)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(blank,0)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=blue,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=north east lines}] coordinates {
(CIFAR Orth,89.12)+-(0.02,0.02)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(CIFAR Proj,87.73)+-(0.56,0.56)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(blank2,0)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=blue,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=north east lines}] coordinates {
(LFW Orth,89.80)+-(1.30,1.30)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(LFW Proj,91.80)+-(0.01,0.01)};
\legend{Orthogonal, Projection}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.48]
\begin{axis}[
ybar=-7pt, bar shift = 6pt,enlarge x limits=0.2,
bar width=12pt,
ymin=50, ymax=100,
axis x line*=bottom, ylabel near ticks, yticklabel pos=left, yticklabel style={font=\Large},
y axis line style={opacity=50},
legend columns=2,legend style={at={(0.5,0.99)},draw=none,anchor=south,
font=\Large},
ylabel={Avg. Model Quality},
ylabel style={font=\Large},
symbolic x coords={MNIST Perm, MNIST NoPerm, blank, CIFAR Perm, CIFAR NoPerm, blank2,LFW Perm, LFW NoPerm},
xticklabels={,MNIST, ,CIFAR-10, LFW},
yticklabel=\pgfmathprintnumber\tick\%,yticklabel={\pgfmathparse{\tick}\pgfmathprintnumber{\pgfmathresult}\%}]
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=blue,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=north east lines}] coordinates {
(MNIST Perm,97.97)+-(0.35,0.35)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(MNIST NoPerm,97.08)+-(0.92,0.92)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(blank,0)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=blue,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=north east lines}] coordinates {
(CIFAR Perm,60.07)+-(0.7,0.7)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(CIFAR NoPerm,89.12)+-(0.02,0.02)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(blank2,0)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=blue,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=north east lines}] coordinates {
(LFW Perm,73.0)+-(0.71,0.71)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(LFW NoPerm,90.60)+-(1.34,1.34)};
\legend{Permutation,No permutation}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\caption{Effect on Model Quality: Orthogonal vs. Projection (left). Permutation (right)}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\label{fig:proj_vs_orth}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\begin{figure}[h]
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.48]
\pgfplotsset{every axis legend/.append style={font=\small},every node near coord/.append style={font=\Large}}
\begin{axis}
[ymin=50,ymax=100.0,
xlabel={Block Counts},xlabel style = {font = \Large},
point meta ={y*100},
ylabel={Avg. Model Quality}, ylabel style = {font=\Large},
symbolic x coords={1,4,16,49,64,196,256},
yticklabel=\pgfmathprintnumber\tick\%,yticklabel={\pgfmathparse{\tick}\pgfmathprintnumber{\pgfmathresult}\%},
legend columns=2,legend style={at={(0.5,1.0)},draw=none,anchor=south,
font=\Large},
y tick label style = {font = \Large},
x tick label style = {font = \Large}
]
\addplot+[mark=*,error bars/.cd,
x dir=both
,y dir=both,y explicit]
table[x=block_count,y=accuracy, y error = std,col sep=comma]
{./data/block_variation_mnist.csv};
\addlegendentry{MNIST}
\addplot+[mark=square,color=red,draw opacity=0.6,error bars/.cd,
x dir=both,
y dir=both,y explicit]
table[x=block_count,y=accuracy,y error=std, col sep=comma]
{./data/block_variation_cifar.csv};
\addlegendentry{CIFAR}
\addplot+[mark=square,color=black,draw opacity=0.6,error bars/.cd,
x dir=both,
y dir=both,y explicit]
table[x=block_count,y=accuracy,y error=std, col sep=comma]
{./data/block_variation_faces.csv};
\addlegendentry{LFW}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.48]
\pgfplotsset{every axis legend/.append style={font=\small},every node near coord/.append style={font=\Large}}
\begin{axis}
[ymin=50,ymax=100.0,
xlabel={Noise Levels},xlabel style = {font = \Large},
point meta ={y*100},
ylabel={Avg. Model Quality}, ylabel style = {font=\Large},
xtick=data,
yticklabel=\pgfmathprintnumber\tick\%,yticklabel={\pgfmathparse{\tick}\pgfmathprintnumber{\pgfmathresult}\%},
legend columns=2,legend style={at={(0.5,1.0)},draw=none,anchor=south,
font=\Large},
y tick label style = {font = \Large},
x tick label style = {font = \Large}
]
\addplot+[mark=*,error bars/.cd,
x dir=both
,y dir=both,y explicit]
table[x=noise_lvl,y=accuracy, y error = std,col sep=comma]
{./data/noise_variation_mnist.csv};
\addlegendentry{MNIST}
\addplot+[mark=square,color=red,draw opacity=0.6,error bars/.cd,
x dir=both,
y dir=both,y explicit]
table[x=noise_lvl,y=accuracy,y error=std, col sep=comma]
{./data/noise_variation_cifar.csv};
\addlegendentry{CIFAR-10}
\addplot+[mark=square,color=black,draw opacity=0.6,error bars/.cd,
x dir=both,
y dir=both,y explicit]
table[x=noise_lvl,y=accuracy,y error=std, col sep=comma]
{./data/noise_variation_faces.csv};
\addlegendentry{LFW}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\vspace{-0.20cm}
\caption{Effect on Model Quality: Varying block counts (left). Varying noise levels (right)}
\label{fig:model_block_sizes}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-0.35cm}
\subsection{Attack Evaluation}
\vspace{-0.15cm}
\subsubsection{Resilience to Visual Re-identification Attacks.} We observe that both the orthogonal and projection matrix based RMT successfully thwart the visual re-identification attacks (i.e. preserve high visual privacy) for all datasets as seen in Figure ~\ref{fig:perm} (left). Further permutation of the RMT blocks prominently increases the visual privacy for the sparse MNIST dataset whereas not so much for the denser CIFAR-10 and LFW datasets as seen in Figure ~\ref{fig:perm} (right).
Figure ~\ref{fig:noise} (left) shows that the variation of the block sizes or the block counts does not affect visual privacy much for the denser datasets of CIFAR-10 and LFW. However, we observe a detectable drop in visual privacy for MNIST when using a single RMT for the entire image. On the other hand, the introduction of the additive noise does not seem to reduce the effectiveness of the DNN-examiners in compromising visual privacy as seen in Figure ~\ref{fig:noise} (right). As we observe high visual privacy across the parameter settings mostly, we can be flexible in choosing the parameters that maximize the model quality. As Figure \ref{fig:model_block_sizes} shows, in general, we can choose smaller block sizes (larger block counts) and smaller noise levels to achieve better model quality.
\begin{figure}[h]
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.48]
\begin{axis}[
ybar=-2pt, bar shift = 7pt,enlarge x limits=0.2,
bar width=12pt,
log basis y={10},
ymin=50, ymax=100,
axis x line*=bottom, ylabel near ticks, yticklabel pos=left, yticklabel style={font=\Large},
y axis line style={opacity=50},
legend columns=2,legend style={at={(0.5,0.99)},draw=none,anchor=south,
font=\Large},
ylabel={Avg. Visual Privacy},
ylabel style={font=\Large},
symbolic x coords={MNIST Orth, MNIST Proj, blank, CIFAR Orth, CIFAR Proj, blank2,LFW Orth, LFW Proj},
xticklabels={,MNIST, ,CIFAR-10, LFW},
yticklabel=\pgfmathprintnumber\tick\%,yticklabel={\pgfmathparse{\tick}\pgfmathprintnumber{\pgfmathresult}\%}]
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=blue,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=north east lines}] coordinates {
(MNIST Orth,90.27)+-(3.33,3.33)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(MNIST Proj,91.03)+-(2.69,2.69)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(blank,0)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=blue,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=north east lines}] coordinates {
(CIFAR Orth,89.44)+-(0,0)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(CIFAR Proj,87.71)+-(0.57,0.57)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(blank2,0)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=blue,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=north east lines}] coordinates {
(LFW Orth,98.0)+-(1.30,1.30)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(LFW Proj,86.0)+-(0.74,0.74)};
\legend{Orthogonal, Projection}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.48]
\begin{axis}[
ybar=-2pt, bar shift = 7pt,enlarge x limits=0.2,
bar width=12pt,
log basis y={10},
ymin=50, ymax=100,
axis x line*=bottom, ylabel near ticks, yticklabel pos=left, yticklabel style={font=\Large},
y axis line style={opacity=50},
legend columns=2,legend style={at={(0.5,0.99)},draw=none,anchor=south,
font=\Large},
ylabel={Avg. Visual Privacy},
ylabel style={font=\Large},
symbolic x coords={MNIST Perm, MNIST NoPerm, blank, CIFAR Perm, CIFAR NoPerm, blank2,LFW Perm, LFW NoPerm},
xticklabels={,MNIST, ,CIFAR-10, LFW},
yticklabel=\pgfmathprintnumber\tick\%,yticklabel={\pgfmathparse{\tick}\pgfmathprintnumber{\pgfmathresult}\%}]
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=blue,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=north east lines}] coordinates {
(MNIST Perm,90.27)+-(3.33,3.33)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(MNIST NoPerm,77.43)+-(5.20,5.20)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(blank,0)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=blue,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=north east lines}] coordinates {
(CIFAR Perm,89.63)+-(0.0,0.0)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(CIFAR NoPerm,89.64)+-(3.18,3.18)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(blank2,-5)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=blue,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=north east lines}] coordinates {
(LFW Perm,98.00)+-(1.31,1.31)};
\addplot[error bars/.cd, y dir=both,y explicit][draw=black, fill=yellow,fill opacity=0.85,postaction={pattern=grid}] coordinates {
(LFW NoPerm,98.00)+-(0.61,0.61)};
\legend{Permutation, No permutation}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\caption{Effect on Visual Privacy: Orthogonal vs. Projection (left). Permutation (right)}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\label{fig:perm}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-0.65cm}
\begin{figure}[h]
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.48]
\pgfplotsset{every axis legend/.append style={font=\small},every node near coord/.append style={font=\Large}}
\begin{axis}
[ymin=80.0,ymax=100.0,
xlabel={Block Counts},xlabel style = {font = \Large},
point meta ={y*100},
ylabel={Avg. Visual Privacy}, ylabel style = {font=\Large},
symbolic x coords={1,4,16,49,64,196,256},
yticklabel=\pgfmathprintnumber\tick\%,yticklabel={\pgfmathparse{\tick}\pgfmathprintnumber{\pgfmathresult}\%},
legend columns=2,legend style={at={(0.5,1.0)},draw=none,anchor=south,
font=\Large},
y tick label style = {font = \Large},
x tick label style = {font = \Large}
]
\addplot+[mark=*,blue,error bars/.cd,
x dir=both,y dir=both,y explicit]
table[x=block_count,y=accuracy,y error=std,col sep=comma]
{./data/block_variation_mnist_viz_priv.csv};
\addlegendentry{MNIST}
\addplot+[mark=x,red,draw opacity=0.6,error bars/.cd,
x dir=both,
y dir=both,y explicit]
table[x=block_count,y=accuracy,y error=std, col sep=comma]
{./data/block_variation_cifar_viz_priv.csv};
\addlegendentry{CIFAR-10}
\addplot+[mark=square,color=black,draw opacity=0.6,error bars/.cd,
x dir=both,
y dir=both,y explicit]
table[x=block_count,y=accuracy,y error=std, col sep=comma]
{./data/block_variation_faces_viz_priv.csv};
\addlegendentry{LFW}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.48]
\pgfplotsset{every axis legend/.append style={font=\small},every node near coord/.append style={font=\Large}}
\begin{axis}
[ymin=80.0,ymax=100,
xlabel={Noise Levels},xlabel style = {font = \Large},
point meta ={y*100},
ylabel={Avg. Visual Privacy}, ylabel style = {font=\Large},
xtick=data,
yticklabel=\pgfmathprintnumber\tick\%,yticklabel={\pgfmathparse{\tick}\pgfmathprintnumber{\pgfmathresult}\%},
legend columns=2,legend style={at={(0.5,1.0)},draw=none,anchor=south,
font=\Large},
y tick label style = {font = \Large},
x tick label style = {font = \Large}
]
\addplot+[mark=*,blue,error bars/.cd,
x dir=both
,y dir=both,y explicit]
table[x=noise_lvl,y=accuracy,y error=std,col sep=comma]
{./data/noise_variation_mnist_viz_priv.csv};
\addlegendentry{MNIST}
\addplot+[mark=x,red,draw opacity=0.6,error bars/.cd,
x dir=both,
y dir=both,y explicit]
table[x=noise_lvl,y=accuracy,y error=std,col sep=comma]
{./data/noise_variation_cifar_viz_priv.csv};
\addlegendentry{CIFAR-10.}
\addplot+[mark=square,color=black,draw opacity=0.6,error bars/.cd,
x dir=both,
y dir=both,y explicit]
table[x=noise_lvl,y=accuracy,y error=std, col sep=comma]
{./data/noise_variation_faces_viz_priv.csv};
\addlegendentry{LFW}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Effect on Visual Privacy:Varying block counts (left). Varying noise levels (right)}
\label{fig:noise}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\subsubsection{Resilience to Class-membership Attacks}
Next, we examine the resilience of our method to the class-membership attack. Following the empirical method described in Section ~\ref{subsec:empirical}, we measure the class-wise Fano factors for the prediction output probabilities for both the in-training and out-training datasets. We use different datasets to test how class-membership attacks perform on the DNN models. Specifically, we partition the datasets by class and then feed the images in the same class into the model, one class at a time. We then summarize the output distribution with the Fano factor. Without applying image disguising, we observe in Figure ~\ref{fig:fano_org}, the Fano factor values for the in-training classes are clearly distinguishable from those of the out-training classes, with statistically significant margins (p-value $\leq 0.001$). In contrast, for the transformed models, we observe in Figure ~\ref{fig:fano_pert} the in-training classes and out-training classes are not distinguishable from each another - a small difference between average values with p-value $>0.5$.
\vspace{-0.25cm}
\begin{figure} [h]
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width= 0.33\linewidth]{./figures/fano_mnist_org.pdf}
\includegraphics[width= 0.33\linewidth]{./figures/fano_cifar_org.pdf}
\vspace{-0.35cm}
\caption{Effective class-membership attack on the unprotected models. In-training class-wise Fano factor is significantly higher. }
\label{fig:fano_org}
\vspace{-0.45cm}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-0.53cm}
\begin{figure} [h]
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.33\linewidth]{./figures/fano_mnist_pert.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\linewidth]{./figures/fano_cifar_pert.pdf}
\vspace{-0.35cm}
\caption{Ineffective class-membership attack on the protected models. In-training class-wise Fano factor is indistinguishable from that of Out-training. }
\label{fig:fano_pert}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-0.35cm}
\textbf{Discussion.}
At its current state, Disguised-Nets only considers learning DNN models that classify images to individual labels. It will be important to assess if these results carry over to other learning objectives such as multi-label classification and regression. Furthermore, adapting our disguising mechanism in transfer learning, which has proven extremely useful in building powerful models, is a challenging yet interesting task.
Lastly, we would like to explore in an expansion of this work, how closely a malicious adversary can estimate the $R_i$ matrices in RMT given some leaked pairs of original and disguised images.
\vspace{-0.35cm}
\section{Related Work}\label{sec:related_work}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
Fan et al. ~\cite{fan18} applied a differentially private mechanism to hide certain pixels in images for image pixelation, however, the obfuscated images are visually identifiable from the global perspective. Li et al. ~\cite{li17} propose learning shallower neural networks locally by the data owner and sharing the intermediate representation to the cloud for further learning. Mao et al. ~\cite{mao18} propose a similar strategy for face detection problem. They let the data owner evaluate the first layer of the DNN and apply a differentially private noise to the output. However, both approaches reveal the visually identifiable features of the images.
The most related crypto approach for training DNNs is Mohassel et al. ~\cite{mohassel17} for SGD-based logistic regression and neural networks. It is based on randomized secret sharing, additively homomorphic encryption, and garbled circuits. However, the framework is very expensive even for small-scale neural networks.
Abadi et al. ~\cite{abadi16} and Shokri et al. \cite{reza15} propose training differentially private DNN models that hides inclusion or exclusion of individual images in the training data from the model consumers with noisy SGD update algorithms. These techniques are unsuitable in the outsourced setting for DNN learning as they do not directly protect the content of the images or the learned models. Similarly, they present a significant trade-off between model quality.
A set of research focuses on the privacy-preserving evaluation of DNN models, which is easier to build and less costly than privacy-preserving DNN learning frameworks. Nathan et al. ~\cite{xie14} present the homomorphic encryption based CryptoNets framework for evaluating a DNN with encrypted input data. Similarly, Rouhani et al. ~\cite{rouhani18} propose a garbled circuit based DNN evaluation protocol.
Our idea of class-membership attack is slightly related to the membership inference addressed by ~\cite{shokri16}, however completely a different concept. Membership inference attack aims to determine inclusion or exclusion of exact data points in the training set whereas class-membership attack determines inclusion or exclusion of a certain kind or category of images in the training dataset. Shokri et al. ~\cite{shokri19} assess the attack specifically on DNN models. With Disguised-Nets, this attack becomes irrelevant as it is impossible for an adversary to design and launch the attack without knowing the exact transformation keys we deploy.
Fredrikson et al. \cite{fredrikson14} show that it is possible to reverse engineer a machine learning model to explore the private training data the model was trained with a model inversion attack (MIA). The success of the MIA attack depends on unrestrained access to the target machine learning models. With a high level of visual privacy and the link between the transformed and original images broken by the RMT parameters, Disguised-Nets need not worry about this attack as the generated images are also in the transformed space.
\vspace{-0.45cm}
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:conclusion}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
While using cloud resources for deep learning has been an economical option, only a few studies address the related privacy concerns. In this paper, we identify two types of attacks on outsourced deep learning: the visual re-identification attack and the class-membership attack, which none of the existing candidate solutions can satisfactorily address. We propose our image disguising mechanisms: Disguised-Nets for privacy-preserving deep learning in the outsourced setting. It employs a combination of block-wise secret permutation and multidimensional transformations on each image while preserving a certain utility that the deep learning algorithms can pick up. Experimental results show that the Disguised-Nets approach preserves the model quality surprisingly well. It is also resilient to the visual re-identification and the class-membership attacks.
\vspace{-0.45cm}
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
|
\section{Introduction}
A connected and paracompact $2n$-dimensional symplectic manifold $(M,\omega)$ is called a \emph{flat affine symplectic manifold} if the bundle of symplectic frames $\textsf{Sp}(n,\mathbb{R})\hookrightarrow L(M)^\omega\stackrel{\pi}{\hbox to 18pt{\rightarrowfill}} M$ induced by $\omega$ admits a linear connection $\Gamma_\omega$ whose curvature and torsion 2-forms are identically null. To have a linear connection $\Gamma_\omega$ on $L(M)^\omega$ with the letter characteristics is equivalent to having a flat affine symplectic covariant derivative $\nabla$ on $(M,\omega)$, i.e. the curvature and torsion tensors of $\nabla$ vanishing and $\nabla \omega=0$. Moreover, the existence of a symplectic form $\omega$ and a flat affine symplectic covariant derivative $\nabla$ on $M$ is equivalent to have a maximal atlas for $M$ whose change of coordinates are restrictions of affine symplectic transformation of $\mathbb{R}^{2n}$ (see \cite{Fr}).\\
On one hand, the study of symplectic manifolds equipped with symplectic connections can be motivated by their role in deformation quantization and geometric quantization (see \cite{FLD,Fe} and \cite{Hs,L}, respectively). A famous result of Fedosov gives a canonical deformation quantization which is defined by the data $(M,\omega,\nabla)$ where $\omega$ is a symplectic form and $\nabla$ is a torsion free symplectic connection on $M$. Such result motivated the definition and study of \emph{Fedosov manifolds} (see \cite{GRS}). On the other hand, some knowledge of the category of flat affine manifolds are necessary for understanding the category of Lagrangian submanifolds (see \cite[Thm 7.8]{W} and \cite{V,V2}). In fact, flat affine manifolds with holonomy reduced to $\textsf{GL}(m,\mathbb{Z})$ appear naturally in integrable
systems and Mirror Symmetry (see \cite{KS}).
Further applications of flat affine manifolds appear in the study of Hessian structures and Information geometry (see \cite[c.\thinspace 6]{Sh}).\\
The main purpose of this paper is to study symplectic manifolds endowed with flat affine symplectic structures. More precisely, we want to study the structure of connected symplectic Lie groups which admit left invariant flat affine symplectic connections. The study of such structures is motivated by the open problem proposed by J. Milnor in \cite{Mi} which asks to determine flat affine Lie groups (i.e., Lie groups which carry a left invariant
flat affine structure) and study their properties.\\
The paper is divided as follows. In Section 2 we give a new characterization of flat affine manifolds (see Theorem \ref{F1}) which can be naturally used to characterize flat affine symplectic connections on the bundle of symplectic frames (see Proposition \ref{CSC}). This characterization is given in terms of an action of the Lie algebra of classical infinitesimal affine transformations on the bundle of linear frames of such a manifold. We show that such an infinitesimal action can be integrated (in the Lie-Palais' Theorem sense) in the case of compact parallelizable flat Riemannian manifolds (see Proposition \ref{F2}).\\
In Section 3 we introduce \emph{flat affine symplectic Lie groups}, which will be connected symplectic Lie groups endowed with left invariant flat affine symplectic connections. We show that these kind of connections are geodesically complete if and only if the Lie group is unimodular (see Theorem \ref{completeness}). Furthermore, we give a characterization of flat affine symplectic Lie groups in terms of ``symplectic'' \'etale affine representations (see Theorem \ref{CharacterizationLeft}). As consequence, every simply connected flat affine symplectic Lie group with bi-invariant symplectic connection can be identified with a Lie subgroup of affine symplectic transformations of its Lie algebra containing a nontrivial one parameter subgroup formed by central translations (see Proposition \ref{F16}). Our results put into evidence some properties of \emph{flat affine symplectic Lie algebras} (see Definition \ref{FASLA}). Further, other properties appear in \cite{MR2}, \cite{An}, and \cite{NB}.\\
In section 4, we give a method of construction of simply connected flat affine symplectic Lie groups using Nijenhuis' cohomology for left symmetric algebras (see \cite{N}). The construction will be called \emph{a double extension of a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra}. This is an iterative method which allows us to get flat affine symplectic Lie algebras of dimension $2n+2$ from a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra of dimension $2n$ (see Proposition \ref{F14} and Theorem \ref{F15}). We show that every simply connected flat affine symplectic Lie group whose Lie algebra is obtained as double extension of a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra with $\lambda=\mu$ (see Definition \ref{doubleextensionFAS}) can be identified with a subgroup of symplectic affine transformations of its Lie algebra containing a nontrivial one parameter subgroup formed by central translations (see Corollary \ref{F17}). Furthermore, the Lie algebra of a symplectic Lie group equipped with a bi-invariant flat affine symplectic connection is obtained as a double extension of flat affine symplectic Lie algebras starting from $\lbrace 0 \rbrace$ (see Proposition \ref{F18}). Moreover, we observe that the Lie algebra of any flat affine symplectic Lie group of dimension $2$ can be obtained as a double extension starting from $\lbrace 0 \rbrace$. Flat affine symplectic Lie groups in dimension $2$ were found by A. Andrada in \cite{An} (see also \cite{MSG}). We also explain how to use this method to construct nontrivial simply connected flat affine symplectic Lie groups in every even dimension.\\
In section 5, we get flat affine symplectic Lie groups of dimension $2n$ from a connected flat affine Lie group of dimension $n$. We consider the classical cotangent symplectic Lie group of a connected flat affine Lie group defined in \cite{MR}, and show that there always exists a left invariant flat affine symplectic connection which parallelizes its two natural left invariant transverse Lagrangian foliations (see Proposition \ref{F19}). The corresponding Hess connection (compare \cite{Hs}) will be given explicitly. Again, using Nijenhuis' cohomology for left symmetric algebras, we construct the \emph{twisted cotangent symplectic Lie group} of a connected flat affine Lie group together with left invariant flat affine symplectic connections (see Proposition \ref{F20}). The reciprocal of the result obtained in Proposition \ref{F20} was proved by X. Ni and C. Bai in \cite{NB}. We give a short and different approach to get it which allows us to show more consequences of our construction. It is important to note that this construction will be parametrized by a commutative product over the corresponding left symmetric algebra and a 2-cocycle of this left symmetric algebra with values in its dual vector space. We observe that when the commutative product and the 2-cocycle are both null we obtain the classical cotangent symplectic Lie group defined in \cite{MR}. Moreover, in this case the flat affine symplectic connection is the Hess connection (see Corollary \ref{F21}). We prove that on a simply connected Lie group there exists the structure of flat affine symplectic Lie group which admits a normal Abelian Lagrangian Lie subgroup if and only if, the group is isomorphic to the twisted cotangent symplectic Lie group of a connected flat affine Lie group (see Theorem \ref{F22}). Finally, we give necessary and sufficient conditions to say when the left invariant flat affine symplectic connections on the twisted cotangent symplectic Lie group are geodesically complete (see Proposition \ref{F23}).
\section*{Acknowledgements}
I wish to express my sincere gratitude to Omar Saldarriaga and Elizabeth Gasparim for their collaboration and valuable comments. I would also like to thank Alberto Medina for his accompaniment in the Differential Geometry seminar of the Universidad de Antioquia. His paper \cite{AuM} with Anne Aubert was a source of inspiration for the present work. Finally, I want to thank my great friend Sebasti\'an Herrera for all the academic discussions that we have had in recent years.\\
I am grateful for the support given by the Universidad de Antioquia and the Network NT8 from the Office External Activities of Adbus Salam International Center for Theoretical Physics, between years 2017 and 2018.
\section{New characterization of flat affine manifolds}
In this short section we give a new characterization of flat affine manifolds in terms of an action of the Lie algebra of classical infinitesimal affine transformations on the bundle of linear frames. As an immediate consequence of such result we characterize flat Riemannian metrics, flat affine connection leaving parallel a volume form, and flat affine symplectic connections. We show that such an infinitesimal action can be integrated (in the Lie-Palais' Theorem sense) in the case of compact parallelizable flat Riemannian manifolds.\\
In what follows $M$ denotes a connected and paracompact $n$-dimensional smooth manifold without boundary, $P=L(M)$ its bundle of linear frames, $\theta$ the canonical 1-form, $\Gamma$ a linear connection on $P$ of connection 1-form $\mathcal{A}$, and $\nabla$ the covariant derivative on $M$ associated to $\Gamma$. Consider the right action of $\textsf{GL}(n,\mathbb{R})$ on $P$. Denote by $H^\ast$ the fundamental vector field associated to an element $H\in\mathfrak{gl}(n,\mathbb{R})$ and $B(\xi)$ the standard horizontal vector field associated to $\xi\in\mathbb{R}^n$. This vector field is determined by the relation $\theta(B(\xi))=\xi$. Recall that the connection 1-form $\mathcal{A}$ associated to $\Gamma$ is a $\mathfrak{gl}(n,\mathbb{R})$-valued $1$-form over $P$ satisfying
$$\mathcal{A}(H^\ast)=H,\qquad H\in\mathfrak{gl}(n,\mathbb{R})\quad \text{and}$$
$$R_a^*\mathcal{A}=\text{Ad}_{a^{-1}}\circ \mathcal{A},\qquad a\in\textsf{GL}(n,\mathbb{R}),$$
where $R_a$ is the action of $a\in\textsf{GL}(n,\mathbb{R})$ on $P$. Furthermore, the canonical 1-form $\theta$ is an $\mathbb{R}^n$-valued tensorial 1-form over $P$ of type $(\textsf{GL}(n,\mathbb{R}),\mathbb{R}^n)$.
Also, we have
$$(R_a)_\ast B(\xi)=B(a^{-1}\xi),\qquad a\in\textsf{GL}(n,\mathbb{R}),\quad \xi\in\mathbb{R}^n.$$
It is well known that the curvature 2-form $\Omega_\mathcal{A}\in\Omega^2(P,\mathfrak{gl}(n,\mathbb{R}))$ and the torsion 2-form $\Theta\in\Omega^2(P,\mathbb{R}^n)$ associated to the connection 1-form $\mathcal{A}$ satisfy the Cartan's structure equations
$$\text{d}\mathcal{A}(X,Y)=-\dfrac{1}{2}[\mathcal{A}(X),\mathcal{A}(Y)]+\Omega_\mathcal{A}(X,Y)\quad\text{and}$$
$$
\text{d}\theta(X,Y)=-\dfrac{1}{2}(\mathcal{A}(X)\cdot \theta(Y)-\mathcal{A}(Y)\cdot\theta(X))+
\Theta(X,Y),$$
for all $X,Y\in T_u P$ with $u\in P$. When $\Omega_\mathcal{A}=0$ and $\Theta=0$ we say that $\Gamma$ is a \emph{flat affine connection}.\\
It is easy to see that a connection $\Gamma$ on $P$ is flat affine, if and only if, the curvature and torsion tensors of the corresponding covariant derivative are both null. The pair $(M,\nabla)$ is called a \emph{flat affine manifold} if $\nabla$ is a flat affine connection on $M$. That $(M,\nabla)$ is a flat affine manifold is equivalent to the existence of a maximal atlas of $M$ whose change of coordinates are restriction of affine transformations of $\mathbb{R}^n$. The set of affine transformation of $\mathbb{R}^n$, denoted by $\text{Aff}(\mathbb{R}^n)$, is a Lie group isomorphic to $\mathbb{R}^n\rtimes_{Id}\textsf{GL}(n,\mathbb{R})$. The Lie algebra of $\textsf{Aff}(\mathbb{R}^n)$ is the product vector space $\mathfrak{aff}(\mathbb{R}^n)= \mathbb{R}^n\rtimes_{id} \mathfrak{gl}(n,\mathbb{R})$ with Lie bracket
$$[(\xi,H),(\xi',H')]=(H\xi'-H'\xi,[H,H'])\quad H,H'\in\mathfrak{gl}(n,\mathbb{R}),\quad\xi,\xi'\in\mathbb{R}^n.$$
In these terms, we have the following characterization of flat affine manifolds.
\begin{theorem}\label{F1}
A connection $\Gamma$ on $P$ is flat affine, if and only if
\begin{align*}
\widetilde{\eta}: \mathfrak{aff}(\mathbb{R}^n) &\longrightarrow \mathfrak{X}(P)\\
(\xi,H) &\longmapsto B(\xi)+H^\ast,
\end{align*}
is an infinitesimal action of $\mathfrak{aff}(\mathbb{R}^n)$ over $P$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Recall that the map $\mathfrak{gl}(n,\mathbb{R})\to \mathfrak{X}(P)$ defined by $H\mapsto H^\ast$, is a Lie algebra homomorphism. Hence
$$
\widetilde{\eta}([(\xi,H),(\xi',H')])=B(H\xi')-B(H'\xi)+[H^\ast,H'^\ast].
$$
for all $(\xi,H)$ and $(\xi',H')$ in $\mathfrak{aff}(\mathbb{R}^n)$. Recall also that, for all $H\in \mathfrak{gl}(n,\mathbb{R})$ and $\xi\in\mathbb{R}^n$, we have $[H^\ast,B(\xi)]=B(H\xi)$. Thus
$$[\widetilde{\eta}(\xi,H),\widetilde{\eta}(\xi',H')]=[B(\xi),B(\xi')]+B(H\xi')-B(H'\xi)+[H^\ast,H'^\ast].$$
Therefore, the map $\widetilde{\eta}$ defines an infinitesimal action of $\mathfrak{aff}(\mathbb{R}^n)$ over $P$, if and only if, $[B(\xi),B(\xi')]=0$ for all $\xi,\xi'\in\mathbb{R}^n$.\\
If $\Gamma$ is a flat affine connection, then $[B(\xi),B(\xi')]$ is a vertical (respectively $[B(\xi),B(\xi')]$ is a horizontal) vector field (see \cite[p. 136]{KN}). Thus, $[B(\xi),B(\xi')]=0$ for all $\xi,\xi'\in\mathbb{R}^n$. Conversely, it is well known that if $X$ is a vertical vector at $u\in P$ there exists an element $H\in\mathfrak{gl}(n,\mathbb{R})$ such that $X=H^\ast_u$. On the other hand, if $Y$ is a horizontal vector at $u\in P$ there exists $\xi\in\mathbb{R}^n$ so that $Y=B(\xi)_u$. Therefore, making use of the Cartan's structure equations for $\Gamma$, a simple computation allows us to show that considering the cases when: $X$ and $Y$ are vertical or horizontal or one is vertical and the another is horizontal, then the condition $[B(\xi),B(\xi')]=0$ for all $\xi,\xi'\in\mathbb{R}^n$ implies directly that $\Gamma$ is a flat affine connection on $P$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Under the assumptions of Theorem \ref{F1} it is easy to verify that the infinitesimal action $\widetilde{\eta}$ is effective.
\end{remark}
\begin{corollary}\label{CorollaryCharacterization}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Let $(M,g)$ be a Riemannian manifold and $\textsf{O}(n,\mathbb{R})\hookrightarrow L(M)^g\stackrel{\pi}{\hbox to 18pt{\rightarrowfill}} M$ the bundle of orthonormal frames over $M$ induced by $g$. The Levi-Civita connection $\Gamma^g$ on $L(M)^g$ is flat if and only if the restriction of $\widetilde{\eta}$ to $\mathbb{R}^n\rtimes_{id} \mathfrak{o}(n,\mathbb{R})$ is an infinitesimal action of $\mathbb{R}^n\rtimes_{id} \mathfrak{o}(n,\mathbb{R})$ over $L(M)^g$.
\item If $\eta$ is a volume form on $M$ and $\textsf{SL}(n,\mathbb{R})\hookrightarrow L(M)^\eta\stackrel{\pi}{\hbox to 18pt{\rightarrowfill}} M$ is the bundle of special frames over $M$ determined by $\eta$, then a linear connection $\Gamma^\eta$ on $L(M)^\eta$ is flat affine if and only if the restriction of $\widetilde{\eta}$ to $\mathbb{R}^n\rtimes_{id} \mathfrak{sl}(n,\mathbb{R})$ is an infinitesimal action of $\mathbb{R}^n\rtimes_{id} \mathfrak{sl}(n,\mathbb{R})$ over $L(M)^\eta$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
Recall that linear connections on $L(M)^\eta$ are in bijective correspondence with covariant derivatives $\nabla$ on $(M,\eta)$ such that $\nabla \eta=0$.
\begin{proposition}\label{F2}
Let $(M,g)$ be a compact and parallelizable flat Riemannian manifold. Then, the infinitesimal action $\widetilde{\eta}_g: \mathbb{R}^n\rtimes_{id} \mathfrak{o}(n,\mathbb{R}) \to \mathfrak{X}(L(M)^g)$ of Corollary \ref{CorollaryCharacterization} is integrable.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
If $\lbrace X_1,\cdots, X_n \rbrace$ is a parallelism of $M$, by the Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization process, we can construct an orthonormal parallelism $\lbrace \widetilde{X_1},\cdots,\widetilde{X_n}\rbrace$ of $M$. Therefore, $\textsf{O}(n,\mathbb{R})\hookrightarrow L(M)^g\stackrel{\pi}{\hbox to 18pt{\rightarrowfill}} M$ is isomorphic to the trivial $\textsf{O}(n,\mathbb{R})$-principal bundle $\textsf{O}(n,\mathbb{R})\times M$. Hence, as $\textsf{O}(n,\mathbb{R})\times M$ is a compact smooth manifold, if
$G$ is a simply connected Lie group with Lie algebra $\mathbb{R}^n\rtimes_{id} \mathfrak{o}(n,\mathbb{R})$, by the Lie-Palais' Theorem, there exists a unique smooth right action of $G$ over $L(M)^g$ such that the fundamental vector field associated to $(\xi,H)\in\mathbb{R}^n\rtimes_{id} \mathfrak{o}(n,\mathbb{R})$ is $\widetilde{\eta}_g(\xi,H)$.
\end{proof}
As every Lie group is parallelizable, then circle $S^1$ and $n$-torus $\mathbb{T}^n$ are examples of compact parallelizable flat Riemannian manifolds, hence both satisfy the Proposition \ref{F2}.
\section{Flat affine symplectic Lie groups}
To determine flat affine Lie groups (i.e., Lie groups which carry a left invariant flat affine structure) is an open problem proposed by J. Milnor in \cite{Mi}. From now on, our purpose is to study this problem in the case of connected symplectic Lie groups endowed with left invariant flat affine symplectic connections. In this section, we treat some properties of these kind of Lie groups which will be useful throughout the work. We give necessary and sufficient conditions to say when a left invariant flat affine symplectic connection is geodesically complete. We also remember, for the bi-invariant case, an old ``conjecture'' made by L. Auslander in \cite{Aus}.
\subsection{Flat affine symplectic manifolds}
Let $(M,\omega)$ be a symplectic manifold of dimension $2n$. A symplectic frame at $p\in M$ is a symplectic ordered basis of $(T_pM,\omega_p)$. Denote by $L(M)^\omega$ the set of all symplectic frames at all points of $M$ and by $\pi$ the natural projection of $L(M)^\omega$ onto $M$. From Darboux's Theorem, it is possible to determinate a differentiable structure over $L(M)^\omega$ so that the map $\pi$ is smooth and $L(M)^\omega$ has a natural structure of $\textsf{Sp}(n,\mathbb{R})$-principal bundle. Consider the inclusion map $\iota:L(M)^\omega \hookrightarrow P$, the inclusion group homomorphism $\varphi: \textsf{Sp}(n,\mathbb{R})\hookrightarrow\textsf{GL}(2n,\mathbb{R})$, and the identity map $\text{Id}_M$ of $M$. It is simple to check that $(\iota,\varphi,\text{Id}_M)$ determines a homomorphism of principal bundles between $L(M)^\omega$ and $P$. Thus, every connection $\Gamma_\omega$ on $L(M)^\omega$ determines a unique linear connection $\Gamma$ on $P$ (see \cite[p. 79]{KN}). A connection $\Gamma_\omega$ on $P^\omega$ is called a \emph{linear symplectic connection}. If we denote by $(e_1,\cdots,e_{2n})$ the canonical symplectic basis of $(\mathbb{R}^{2n},\omega_0)$, and take $u=(X_1,\cdots,X_n,\widetilde{X_1},\cdots,\widetilde{X_n})$ as a symplectic frame at $p\in M$, the map $u:(\mathbb{R}^{2n},\omega_0)\to (T_pM,\omega_p)$ defined by $u(e_j)=X_j$ and $u(e_{j+n})=\widetilde{X_j}$ for all $j=1,2,\cdots,n$, is an isomorphism of symplectic vector spaces. We define the $\mathbb{R}^{2n}$-valued 1-form $\theta_\omega$ on $P^\omega$ by
$$\theta_\omega(X):=u^{-1}(\pi_{\ast,u}(X)),\qquad X\in T_u P^\omega.$$
If $\Gamma_\omega$ is a connection on $L(M)^\omega$, the torsion 2-form $\Theta_\omega$ associated to the canonical 1-form $\theta_\omega$ is defined as the exterior covariant differential of $\theta_\omega$ with respect to $\Gamma_\omega$ and it is also completely determined by the second Cartan's structure equation. When the curvature 2-form $\Omega_{\mathcal{A}_\omega}$\footnote{Here $\mathcal{A}_\omega$ denotes the connection 1-form associated to $\Gamma_\omega$.} and the torsion 2-form $\Theta_\omega$ are both null, we say that $\Gamma_\omega$ is a \emph{flat affine symplectic connection}. As a consequence of Theorem \ref{F1} we have
\begin{proposition}\label{CSC}
Let $(M,\omega)$ be a $2n$-dimensional symplectic manifold and $\textsf{Sp}(n,\mathbb{R})\hookrightarrow L(M)^\omega\stackrel{\pi}{\hbox to 18pt{\rightarrowfill}} M$ the bundle of symplectic frames over $M$ induced by $\omega$. A symplectic linear connection $\Gamma^\omega$ on $L(M)^\omega$ is flat affine if and only if the restriction of $\widetilde{\eta}$ to $\mathbb{R}^n\rtimes_{id} \mathfrak{sp}(n,\mathbb{R})$ is an infinitesimal action of $\mathbb{R}^n\rtimes_{id} \mathfrak{sp}(n,\mathbb{R})$ over $L(M)^\omega$.
\end{proposition}
A covariant derivative $\nabla$ on a symplectic manifold $(M,\omega)$ is called \emph{symplectic} is $\nabla \omega =0$, that is
$$X\cdot \omega(Y,Z)=\omega(\nabla_XY,Z)+\omega(Y,\nabla_XZ),\qquad X,Y,Z\in \mathfrak{X}(M).$$
\begin{remark}
\begin{enumerate}
\item There exists a bijective correspondence between linear symplectic connections $\Gamma_\omega$ on $L(M)^\omega$ and symplectic covariant derivatives on $(M,\omega)$.
\item Given a paracompact symplectic manifold $(M,\omega)$, it is always possible to ensure that there exists a torsion free symplectic connection on $M$ but unlike the Riemannian case it is not unique (see \cite{V}).
\item The holonomy group of a symplectic connection on a connected symplectic manifold is identified with a subgroup of $\textsf{Sp}(n,\mathbb{R})$ defined up to conjugation. Moreover, there is always a natural surjective group homomorphism between the fundamental group $\Pi_1(M)$ and $\text{Sp}(n,\mathbb{R})/G$ where $G$ is a normal Lie subgroup of $\text{Sp}(n,\mathbb{R})$ defined up to conjugation.
\item If $(M,\omega)$ is a compact symplectic manifold endowed with a flat affine symplectic connection $\nabla$, then the Euler characteristic of $M$ vanishes. This follows from the fact that the volume form induced on $M$ by $\omega$ is parallel with respect to $\nabla$. This result is a particular case of Chern's conjecture for compact flat affine manifolds and it is a direct consequence of the case proved by B. Klingler when the compact flat affine manifold admits a parallel volume form (see \cite{K}).
\end{enumerate}
\end{remark}
\begin{definition}
A triple $(M,\omega,\nabla)$ where $(M,\omega)$ is a symplectic manifold and $\nabla$ is a flat affine connection symplectic on $M$ is called a \emph{flat affine symplectic manifold}.
\end{definition}
To have a flat affine symplectic structure on a $2n$-dimensional manifold $M$ is equivalent to having a maximal atlas of $M$ whose change of coordinates are restriction of elements of $\mathbb{R}^{2n}\rtimes_{Id}\textsf{Sp}(n,\mathbb{R})$ (see \cite{Fr}). Two interesting examples of flat affine symplectic manifolds are the 2-torus $\mathbb{T}^2$ (see \cite{Ku} or \cite[p. 211]{KN}) and the ordinary cylinder $S^1\times \mathbb{R}$ (compare \cite[p. 223]{KN}).
\subsection{Flat affine symplectic Lie groups}
In what follows $G$ denotes a connected real Lie group and $\mathfrak{g}:=T_\epsilon G$ its Lie algebra. A symplectic form $\omega^+$ (respectively a linear connection $\nabla$) on $G$ is called \emph{left invariant} if $L_\sigma:G\to G$, defined by $\tau\mapsto \sigma\tau$, is a symplectomorphism of $(G,\omega^+)$ (respectively an affine transformation of $(G,\nabla)$) for all $\sigma\in G$.
\begin{definition}
\begin{enumerate}
\item A pair $(G,\omega^+)$ where $\omega^+$ is a left invariant symplectic form on $G$ is called a \emph{symplectic Lie group}.
\item A pair $(G,\nabla)$ where $\nabla$ is a left invariant flat affine connection on $G$ is called a \emph{flat affine Lie group}.
\item A triple $(G,\omega^+,\nabla)$ where $(G,\omega^+)$ is a symplectic Lie group and $\nabla$ is a left invariant flat affine connection on $G$ which is symplectic with respect to $\omega^+$ is called a \emph{flat affine symplectic Lie group}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
If $(G,\omega^+)$ is a symplectic Lie group and $\nabla$ is a left invariant symplectic connection on $G$, then
$$ \omega^+(\nabla_{x^+}y^+,z^+)+\omega^+(y^+,\nabla_{x^+}z^+)=0,\qquad x,y,z\in\mathfrak{g}.
$$
Here $x^+$ denoted the left invariant vector field associated to $x\in\mathfrak{g}$.
\begin{remark}
Every symplectic Lie group $(G,\omega^+)$ is also flat affine. More precisely, the left invariant symplectic form $\omega^+$ defines on $G$ a unique natural left invariant flat affine connection $\nabla$ determined by
$$\omega^+(\nabla_{x^+}y^+,z^+)=-\omega^+(y^+,[x^+,z^+]),\qquad x,y,z\in\mathfrak{g}.$$
This result was proved by A. Bon-Yau Chu in \cite{B}. It is easy to show that $\nabla$ is symplectic with respect to $\omega^+$ if and only if $G$ is commutative.
\end{remark}
Next we give the following characterization of flat affine symplectic Lie groups using étale affine representations\footnote{Let $V$ be an $n$-dimensional vector space. A Lie group homomorphism $\rho:G\to\textsf{Aff}(V)$ is called an \emph{\'etale affine representation} if the left action of $G$ over $V$ determined by $\rho$ admits a point with open orbit and discrete isotropy.}. Affirmation (1) if and only if (2) is well known (see for instance \cite{MR2} and \cite{NB}).
\begin{theorem}\label{CharacterizationLeft}
Let $G$ be a connected Lie group of dimension $2n$, $\mathfrak{g}$ its Lie algebra, and $\widetilde{G}$ its universal covering Lie group. The following are equivalent
\begin{enumerate}
\item There exist both $\omega^+$ and $\nabla$ on $G$ such that $(G,\omega^+,\nabla)$ is a flat affine symplectic Lie group.
\item There exist both a nondegenerate scalar 2-cocycle\footnote{$\omega\in \bigwedge^2\mathfrak{g}^*$ is a scalar 2-cocycle over $\mathfrak{g}$ if $\omega([x,y],z)+\omega([y,z],x)+\omega([z,x],y)=0$ for all $x,y,z\in\mathfrak{g}.$} $\omega\in \bigwedge^2\mathfrak{g}^*$ and a bilinear map $\cdot:\mathfrak{g}\times\mathfrak{g}\to \mathfrak{g}$ over $\mathfrak{g}$ satisfying
\begin{eqnarray}
& & \omega(L_x(y),z)+\omega(y,L_x(z))=0, \nonumber\\
& & L_{[x,y]}=[L_x,L_y]_{\mathfrak{gl}(\mathfrak{g})},\quad\text{and}\label{left1}\\
& & [x,y]=L_x(y)-L_y(x),\qquad x,y,z\in\mathfrak{g},\label{left2}
\end{eqnarray}
where $L_x:\mathfrak{g}\to\mathfrak{g}$ is the linear map defined by $L_x(y):=x\cdot y$.
\item There exists a Lie group homomorphism $\rho: \widetilde{G}\to V\rtimes_{Id}\textsf{Sp}(V,\omega)$ where $(V,\omega)$ is a real $2n$-dimensional symplectic vector space, such that the natural left action of $\widetilde{G}$ over $V$ admits a point with open orbit and discrete isotropy.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
If $(G,\omega^+,\nabla)$ is a flat affine symplectic Lie group, it is easy to prove that $\omega:=\omega^+_\epsilon$ is a nondegenerate scalar 2-cocycle of $\mathfrak{g}$ and $\cdot:\mathfrak{g}\times \mathfrak{g}\to\mathfrak{g}$ defined by $x\cdot y=L_x(y):=(\nabla_{x^+}y^+)(\epsilon)$, is a bilinear product over $\mathfrak{g}$ which satisfies the three identities of item (2).\\
Now suppose (2), hence the map $\theta\colon \mathfrak{g}\to \mathfrak{g}\rtimes_{id}\mathfrak{sp}(\mathfrak{g},\omega)$
defined by $x\mapsto(x,L_x)$
is a well defined Lie algebra homomorphism. Passing to exponential, we get a Lie group homomorphism $\rho\colon \widetilde{G} \to \mathfrak{g}\rtimes_{Id}\textsf{Sp}(\mathfrak{g},\omega)$ sending $\sigma=\textsf{exp}_G(x)$ to $\rho(\sigma)=(Q(\sigma),F_\sigma)$ where
$$Q(\sigma)=\sum_{k=1}^\infty \dfrac{1}{k!}(L_x)^{k-1}(x)\quad\text{and}\quad F_\sigma=\textsf{Exp}(L_x)=\sum_{k=0}^\infty \dfrac{1}{k!}(L_x)^k.$$
Thus, as the map $\psi_0:\mathfrak{g}\to\mathfrak{g}$ defined by $x\mapsto \theta(x)(0)=x+L_x(0)$ is a linear isomorphism, we have that $0\in\mathfrak{g}$ is a point with open orbit and discrete isotropy for the left action of $\widetilde{G}$ over $\mathfrak{g}$ determined by $\rho$.\\
Finally, suppose that $\rho\colon \widetilde{G}\to V\rtimes_{Id}\textsf{Sp}(V,\omega)$
be a homomorphism of Lie groups such that the orbital map
$\pi\colon\widetilde{G}\to \text{Orb}(v)$ defined by
$\sigma\mapsto Q(\sigma)+F_\sigma(v)$ is a local diffeomorphism for some
$v\in V$. Differentiating on the identity of $\widetilde{G}$,
we obtain a Lie algebra homomorphism
$\theta\colon \mathfrak{g} \to \mathfrak{g}\rtimes_{id}\mathfrak{sp}(V,\omega)$ given by
$x \mapsto (q(x),f_x)$, where the linear map $\psi_v\colon \mathfrak{g} \to V$ defined by
$x \mapsto q(x)+f_x(v)$ is a linear isomorphism (see \cite{M}). Moreover, the map $f:\mathfrak{g}\to \mathfrak{sp}(V,\omega)$ defined by $x\to f_x$ is also a Lie algebra homomorphism and $q:\mathfrak{g}\to V$ given by $x\to q(x)$ is a linear map such that
\begin{equation}\label{1cocycle}
q([x,y])=f_x(q(y))-f_y(q(x)), \qquad x,y\in\mathfrak{g}.
\end{equation}
Now, define over $\mathfrak{g}$ the skew-symmetric bilinear form
$\widetilde{\omega}$ and the bilinear map $\cdot:\mathfrak{g}\times \mathfrak{g}\to \mathfrak{g}$ respectively by
$$\widetilde{\omega}(x,y)=\omega(\psi_v(x),\psi_v(y))$$
and
$$L_x=\psi_v^{-1}\circ f_x\circ \psi_v,\quad y\mapsto x\cdot y=L_x(y),$$
for all $x,y\in\mathfrak{g}$. Since $f:\mathfrak{g}\to \mathfrak{sp}(V,\omega)$ is a Lie algebra homomorphism,
we have $L_{[x,y]}=[L_x,L_y]_{\mathfrak{gl}(\mathfrak{g})}$. On the other hand, since
$q:\mathfrak{g}\to V$ satisfies \eqref{1cocycle}, we conclude
$[x,y]=L_x(y)-L_y(x)$. Moreover, the fact that $f_x\in \mathfrak{sp}(V,\omega)$ implies
\begin{equation}\label{2cocycletilde}
\widetilde{\omega}(L_x(y),z)+\widetilde{\omega}(y,L_x(z))=0,\qquad x,y,z\in\mathfrak{g}.
\end{equation}
It follows that the identity \eqref{2cocycletilde} implies that $\widetilde{\omega}$ is a scalar 2-cocycle of $\mathfrak{g}$. Hence, it is easy to verify that the left invariant symplectic form
$$\omega^+_\sigma(X_\sigma,Y_\sigma):=\widetilde{\omega}((L_{\sigma^{-1}})_{\ast,\sigma}X_\sigma,(L_{\sigma^{-1}})_{\ast,\sigma}Y_\sigma),\quad\sigma\in G,\quad X_\sigma,Y_\sigma\in T_\sigma G,$$
and the left invariant flat affine connection
$$\nabla_{x^+}y^+:=(x\cdot y)^+=(L_x(y))^+,\qquad x,y\in\mathfrak{g},$$
are such that $(G,\omega^+,\nabla)$ is a flat affine symplectic Lie group.
\end{proof}
It is easy to show that the identities \eqref{left1} and \eqref{left2} of item (2) in the previous theorem imply that
\begin{equation}\label{SGprodut}
x\cdot(y\cdot z)-(x\cdot y)\cdot z = y\cdot(x\cdot z)-(y\cdot x)\cdot z,\qquad x,y,z\in\mathfrak{g}.
\end{equation}
A bilinear map over a vector space satisfying the formula \eqref{SGprodut} is called a \emph{left symmetric product} and the corresponding vector space is called a \emph{left symmetric algebra}. To set up terminology we give the following definition.
\begin{definition}\label{FASLA}
A triple $(\mathfrak{g},\omega,\cdot)$ where $\mathfrak{g}$ is a real finite dimensional Lie algebra, $\omega$ is a nondegenerate scalar 2-cocycle of $\mathfrak{g}$, and $\cdot:\mathfrak{g}\times\mathfrak{g}\to \mathfrak{g}$ is a left symmetric product over $\mathfrak{g}$ whose commutator agrees with the Lie bracket of $\mathfrak{g}$ and verifies
$$ \omega(L_x(y),z)+\omega(y,L_x(z))=0,\qquad x,y,z\in\mathfrak{g},$$
is called a \emph{flat affine symplectic Lie algebra}.
\end{definition}
Suppose that $(G,\omega^+,\nabla)$ is a flat affine symplectic Lie group. We can show a weaker claim than item (3) of Theorem \ref{CharacterizationLeft} as follows. Let $(\mathfrak{g},\omega,\cdot)$ be the flat affine symplectic Lie algebra associated to $(G,\omega^+,\nabla)$ and denoted by $\mathfrak{g}^\ast$ the dual vector space of $\mathfrak{g}$. If $L^\ast:\mathfrak{g}\to \mathfrak{gl}(\mathfrak{g}^\ast)$ denotes the dual representation of $L$, then a direct computation allows to show that
$$\omega([x,y],\cdot)=L^*_x(\omega(y,\cdot))-L^*_y(\omega(x,\cdot)),\qquad x,y\in\mathfrak{g}.$$
Thus, the map $\theta: \mathfrak{g} \to \mathfrak{aff}(\mathfrak{g}^*)$ defined by $x \mapsto (\omega(x,\cdot),L^*_x)$, is a well defined Lie algebra homomorphism. Moreover, as $\omega$ is nondegenerate, the map $\psi_0:\mathfrak{g} \to \mathfrak{g}^*$ defined by $x\mapsto \psi_0(x):=\omega(x,\cdot)$ is a linear isomorphism. Therefore, there exists a Lie group homomorphism $\rho:\widetilde{G}\to\textsf{Aff}(\mathfrak{g}^\ast)$ such that $0\in\mathfrak{g}^\ast$ is a point with open orbit and discrete isotropy. Consequently, the orbital map $\pi:\widetilde{G}\to\text{Orb}(0)\subset \mathfrak{g}^\ast$ which is determined by
$$\pi(\textsf{exp}_G(x))=\sum_{k=1}^\infty \dfrac{1}{k!}(L^*_x)^{k-1}(\omega(x,\cdot)),$$
is a covering map.\\
The following two results are similar to those proved, in the case of pseudo-Riemannian Geometry, by A. Aubert and A. Medina in \cite{AuM}. Next we give sufficient and necessary conditions to say when a left invariant flat affine symplectic connection is geodesically complete.
\begin{theorem}\label{completeness}
Assume that $(G,\omega^+,\nabla)$ is a connected flat affine symplectic Lie group. The connection $\nabla$ is geodesically complete if and only if, $G$ is unimodular.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
It is well know that a left invariant flat affine connection $\nabla$ is geodesically complete if and only if $\text{tr}(R_x)=0$ for all $x\in\mathfrak{g}$, where $R_x: \mathfrak{g}\to\mathfrak{g}$ is the linear map defined by $R_x(y)=(\nabla_{y^+}x^+)(\epsilon)$ for all $x,y\in\mathfrak{g}$ (see \cite{H}). Let $(\mathfrak{g},\omega,\cdot)$ be the flat affine symplectic Lie algebra associated to $(G,\omega^+,\nabla)$ and denote by $L_x(y)=R_y(x)=x\cdot y=(\nabla_{x^+}y^+)(\epsilon)$ for all $x,y\in\mathfrak{g}$. Thus, we have
\begin{equation}\label{n12}
\omega(L_x(y),z)+\omega(y,L_x(z))=0,\qquad x,y\in\mathfrak{g}.
\end{equation}
This implies that $L_x\in\mathfrak{sp}(\mathfrak{g},\omega)$ for all $x\in\mathfrak{g}$. Hence, the adjoint map of $L_x$ with respect to $\omega$, which we denote by $L_x^+:\mathfrak{g}\to \mathfrak{g}$, verifies that $L_x^+=-L_x$. On the other hand, if $\mathfrak{g}^\ast$ denotes the dual vector space of $\mathfrak{g}$ and $^tL_x:\mathfrak{g}^\ast\to \mathfrak{g}^\ast$ is the transpose map associated to $L_x$, then the identity \eqref{n12} implies that the linear isomorphism $\omega^\flat:\mathfrak{g}\to\mathfrak{g}^\ast$, defined by $\omega^\flat(x)=\omega(x,\cdot)$, makes the following diagram commutative for all $x\in \mathfrak{g}$
$$\xymatrix{
\mathfrak{g} \ar[d]_{\omega^\flat}\ar[r]^{L_x^+} & \mathfrak{g} \ar[d]^{\omega^\flat}\\
\mathfrak{g}^\ast \ar[r]_{^tL_x} & \mathfrak{g}^\ast
}.$$
Therefore, we have that
$$-\text{tr}(L_x)=\text{tr}(L_x^+)=\text{tr}((\omega^\flat)^{-1} \circ ^tL_x\circ \omega^\flat)=\text{tr}(^tL_x)=\text{tr}(L_x),\qquad x\in\mathfrak{g},$$
and hence $\text{tr}(L_x)=0$ for all $x\in \mathfrak{g}$.\\
Suppose that $\nabla$ is geodesically complete, then $\text{tr}(R_x)=0$ for all $x\in \mathfrak{g}$. As $\text{ad}_x=L_x-R_x$, we have that
$$\text{tr}(\text{ad}_x)=\text{tr}(L_x-R_x)=\text{tr}(L_x)-\text{tr}(R_x)=0,\qquad x\in\mathfrak{g},$$
that is, $G$ is an unimodular Lie group.\\
Conversely, if $G$ is an unimodular Lie group, the identities $\text{ad}_x=L_x-R_x$ and $\text{tr}(L_x)=0$ imply that $\text{tr}(R_x)=\text{tr}(L_x)-\text{tr}(\text{ad}_x)=0$ for all $x\in \mathfrak{g}$. Therefore, $\nabla$ geodesically complete.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
If $(G,\omega^+,\nabla)$ is a connected flat affine symplectic Lie group and $\nabla$ is geodesically complete, then $G$ is solvable.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Every unimodular Lie group admitting a left invariant symplectic form is solvable (see for instance \cite{B}).
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
If $(G,\omega^+,\nabla)$ is a connected flat affine symplectic Lie group, the \'etale affine representation $\rho:\widetilde{G}\to \mathfrak{g}\rtimes_{Id}\textsf{Sp}(\mathfrak{g},\omega^+_\epsilon
)$ obtained by means of the exponential map of $G$ and the Lie algebra homomorphism $\theta:\mathfrak{g} \to \mathfrak{g}\rtimes_{id}\mathfrak{sp}(\mathfrak{g},\omega^+_\epsilon
)$ defined by $x\mapsto(x,L_x)$, is injective. Thus, we can identify the Lie group $\widetilde{G}$ with the subgroup $\rho(\widetilde{G})$ of $\mathfrak{g}\rtimes_{id}\textsf{Sp}(\mathfrak{g},\omega^+_\epsilon
)$.
\end{remark}
Let $G$ be a simply connected Lie group. Having a left invariant flat affine connection $\nabla$ on $G$ is equivalent to have an étale affine representation $\rho:G\to\textsf{Aff}(V)$ (see \cite{Ko}). If $v\in V$ is a point with open orbit and discrete isotropy, the completeness of $\nabla$ is equivalent to have that such an action being simply transitive or equivalently that $\text{Orb}(v)=V$ and the orbital map $\pi:G\to \text{Orb}(v)$ is a global diffeomorphism (see \cite{FGH} or \cite{M} for more details). L. Auslander conjectured in \cite{Aus} that a simply transitive action contains nonzero translations if $G$ is nilpotent, that is, the restriction to $\rho(G)\subset \textsf{Aff}(V)$ of the natural homomorphism $\lambda:\textsf{Aff}(V)\to \textsf{GL}(V)$, is not injective. J. Scheuneman gave a presumed proof of this conjecture in \cite{Sc} but D. Fried observed in \cite{F} that his proof had an error and exhibited a counterexample showing that the Auslander's conjecture is not true in general. Later A. Medina and Yu. Khakimdjanov in \cite{MK} exhibited more general examples, more precisely on flat affine filiform Lie groups, for which Auslander's conjecture is true in odd dimension and false in even dimension.\\
With the aim to give a result related to this story, we consider bi-invariant flat affine symplectic connections. A linear connection $\nabla$ on $G$ in called \emph{bi-invariant} if $L_\sigma: G\to G$ and $R_\sigma: G\to G$ (defined by $\tau\mapsto \tau\sigma$) are affine transformations of $(G,\nabla)$ for all $\sigma\in G$. It is well known that a Lie group admits a bi-invariant flat affine connection, if and only if, the Lie bracket of $\mathfrak{g}$ is underlying of an associative product on $\mathfrak{g}$ (see for instance \cite{M}).
\begin{proposition}\label{F16}
Let $(G,\omega^+)$ be a simply connected symplectic Lie group. Assume that there is a bi-invariant flat affine symplectic connection on $G$. Then $G$ is a nilpotent Lie group and it can be identified with a subgroup of $\mathfrak{g}\rtimes_{Id}\textsf{Sp}(\mathfrak{g},\omega^+_\epsilon
)$ containing a nontrivial one parameter subgroup formed by central translations.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $\nabla$ be a bi-invariant flat affine symplectic connection on $(G,\omega^+)$. Then, the bilinear map $\cdot:\mathfrak{g}\times\mathfrak{g}\to\mathfrak{g}$ defined by $x\cdot y=L_x(y)=(\nabla_{x^+}y^+)(\epsilon)$ for all $x,y\in\mathfrak{g}$, determines an associative product over $\mathfrak{g}$ satisfying \eqref{left2} and \eqref{n12}. As $\cdot$ is associative, we have that $L_x\circ L_y=L_{x\cdot y}$ for all $x,y\in\mathfrak{g}$. This implies that $L_x\circ L_y\in \mathfrak{sp}(\mathfrak{g},\omega^+_\epsilon)$. If $(L_x\circ L_y)^+$ denotes adjoint map of $L_x\circ L_y$ with respect to $\omega$, then we have that $-(L_x\circ L_y)=(L_x\circ L_y)^+=L_y\circ L_x$, that is, $L_x\circ L_y+L_y\circ L_x=0$ for all $x,y\in\mathfrak{g}$. Therefore, $L_x\circ L_x=0$ for every $x\in\mathfrak{g}$. Note that if $\mathfrak{g}$ is a non-nilpotent associative algebra, there is a nonzero element $a\in\mathfrak{g}$ which is idempotent, that is, $a\cdot a=a$ with $a\neq 0$ (see for instance \cite[p. 23]{A}). Thus
$$0=(L_a\circ L_a)(a)=L_a(a\cdot a)=L_a(a)=a\cdot a=a\neq 0,$$
which is a contradiction. Therefore, $(\mathfrak{g},\cdot)$ is an associative nilpotent algebra. Consequently, there is an integer $m\geq 2$ such that
$$\mathfrak{g}^m=\lbrace x_1\cdot x_2\cdots x_m:\quad x_j\in \mathfrak{g},\quad \forall j=1,2,\cdots,m\rbrace=\lbrace 0\rbrace$$
with $\mathfrak{g}^{m-1}\neq\lbrace 0\rbrace$. This implies that there exists $b\neq 0$ such that $L_b=R_b=0$ where $R_b(x)=x\cdot b$. As $G$ is simply connected, by Theorem \ref{CharacterizationLeft} we have that there is a Lie group homomorphism $\rho$ between $G$ and the Lie group $\mathfrak{g}\rtimes_{Id}\text{Sp}(\mathfrak{g},\omega^+_\epsilon)$
defined by
\begin{align*}
\rho: G &\longrightarrow \mathfrak{g}\rtimes_{Id}\text{Sp}(\mathfrak{g},\omega^+_\epsilon)\\
\textsf{exp}_G(x) &\longmapsto \rho(\textsf{exp}_G(x))=\left(\sum_{k=1}^\infty \dfrac{1}{k!}(L_x)^{k-1}(x),\sum_{k=0}^\infty \dfrac{1}{k!}(L_x)^k\right),
\end{align*}
for all $x\in \mathfrak{g}$. As $\rho$ is an injective homomorphism, we can identify $G$ with the subgroup $\rho(G)$ of $\mathfrak{g}\rtimes_{Id}\text{Sp}(\mathfrak{g},\omega^+_\epsilon)$. Therefore, as $L_b=0$, $\rho$ determines a nontrivial central one parameter subgroup $H$ of $\rho(G)$ formed by translations which is induced by $t\mapsto \textsf{exp}_G(tb)$ and given by
$$H=\left\lbrace \rho(\textsf{exp}_G(tb))=(tb,\text{Id}_\mathfrak{g}):\ t\in\mathbb{R}\right\rbrace.$$
Hence, as $\mathfrak{g}$ is a nilpotent algebra, the existence of such a subgroup $H$ implies that $\mathfrak{g}$ is a nilpotent Lie algebra, and therefore, $G$ is a nilpotent Lie group (see \cite{H}).
\end{proof}
\section{A double extension of a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra}
By the previous section it is known that there exists a bijective correspondence between simply connected flat affine symplectic Lie groups and flat affine symplectic Lie algebras. The main objective of this section is give a method of construction of flat affine symplectic Lie algebras using Nijenhuis' cohomology for left symmetric algebras (see \cite{N}). This is an iterative method which allows us to get flat affine symplectic Lie algebras of dimension $2n+2$ from a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra of dimension $2n$. We will call to this construction \emph{a double extension of a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra}. We prove that it is possible to obtain all those flat affine symplectic Lie groups with bi-invariant symplectic connection by means of a double extension starting from $\{0\}$. Moreover, we get all flat affine symplectic Lie groups of dimension $2$ which were found in \cite{A} and give nontrivial examples in every even dimension.\\
Let $\mathfrak{g}$ be a left symmetric algebra and $V$ a vector space of finite dimension over $\mathbb{K}=\mathbb{R}$ or $\mathbb{C}$. We say that $V$ has a structure of $\mathfrak{g}$-\emph{bimodule} if there are two bilinear maps $\cdot:\mathfrak{g}\times V\to V$ and $\Box:V\times \mathfrak{g}\to V$ satisfying
\begin{eqnarray}
& & x\cdot(y\cdot v)-y\cdot(x\cdot v)=[x,y]\cdot v\quad\text{and}\label{bimo1}\\
& & x\cdot(v\Box y)-(x\cdot v)\Box y=v\Box (xy)-(v\Box x)\Box y, \qquad x,y\in\mathfrak{g},\quad v\in V.\label{bimo2}
\end{eqnarray}
If $C^0(\mathfrak{g},V):=V$ and $C^p(\mathfrak{g},V)$ denotes the set of $p$-linear maps $f:\mathfrak{g}\times\cdots\times\mathfrak{g}\to V$ for $p\in \mathbb{Z}^+$, the \emph{Nijenhuis' differential} $\delta_p:C^p(\mathfrak{g},V)\to C^{p+1}(\mathfrak{g},V)$ is defined by
$$(\delta_p f)(x_0,\cdots,x_p) = \sum_{i=0}^{p-1}(-1)^ix_i\cdot f(x_0,\cdots,\hat{x_i},\cdots,x_p)+\sum_{i=0}^{p-1}(-1)^if(x_0,\cdots,\hat{x_i},\cdots,x_{p-1},x_i)\Box x_p$$
$$-\sum_{i<j<p}(-1)^{i+j+1} f(x_ix_j-x_jx_i,\cdots,\hat{x_i},\cdots,\hat{x_j},\cdots,x_p)-\sum_{i=0}^{p-1}(-1)^if(x_0,\cdots,\hat{x_i},\cdots,x_{p-1},x_ix_p).$$
Using formulas \eqref{bimo1} and \eqref{bimo2} it is easy to show that $\delta_p\circ\delta_{p-1}=0$ (see \cite{N}). As is usual, the spaces of \emph{k-cocycles} (respectively \emph{k-coboundaries}) of the left symmetric algebra $\mathfrak{g}$ with values in $V$ is defined by $Z_{SG}^k(\mathfrak{g},V):=\text{Ker}(\delta_k)$ (respectively $B_{SG}^k(\mathfrak{g},V):=\text{Im}(\delta_{k-1})$ and $B_{SG}^0(\mathfrak{g},V):=\{ 0\}$). Therefore, the $k$-th space of cohomology of the left symmetric algebra $\mathfrak{g}$ with values in $V$ is defined by the quotient space
$$H_{SG}^k(\mathfrak{g},V):=Z_{SG}^k(\mathfrak{g},V)/B_{SG}^k(\mathfrak{g},V).$$
When $V=\mathbb{K}$ has structure of trivial $\mathfrak{g}$-bimodule (i.e. $x\cdot t=t\Box x=0$) we call to $H_{SG}^k(\mathfrak{g},\mathbb{K})$ the $k$-th \emph{space of scalar cohomology} of the left symmetric algebra $\mathfrak{g}$.\\
If $(\mathfrak{g},\omega,\cdot)$ is a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra and we denote by $L_x(y)=x\cdot y=xy$ for all $x,y\in\mathfrak{g}$, then the map $L:\mathfrak{g} \to \mathfrak{sp}(\mathfrak{g},\omega)$, defined by $x \mapsto L_x$, is a well defined linear representation of $\mathfrak{g}$ by $\mathfrak{g}$. That is, the map $L$ is a Lie algebra homomorphism satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{n12.1}
\omega(L_x(y),z)+\omega(y,L_x(z))=0,\qquad x,y,z\in\mathfrak{g}.
\end{equation}
We will denote by $H_L^1(\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{g})$ the first space of cohomology of the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}$ with values in $\mathfrak{g}$ with respect to the representation $L$.
\begin{lemma}\label{F12}
Let $(\mathfrak{g}, \omega, \cdot)$ be a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra. Then the formula
$$f(x,y)=\omega(u(x),y),\qquad x,y\in \mathfrak{g},$$
induces a lineal isomorphism between $H_{SG}^2(\mathfrak{g},\mathbb{K})$ and $H^1_L(\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{g})$, where $\mathbb{K}$ is seen as a trivial $\mathfrak{g}$-bimodule and $\mathfrak{g}$ has a structure of $\mathfrak{g}$-module determined by the linear representation $L$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It is enough to show that if $f$ is a scalar 2-cocycle (respectively scalar 2-coboundary) of left symmetric Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}$ if and only if, $u$ is a $1$-cocycle (respectively $1$-coboundary) of Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}$. Suppose that $f\in Z_{SG}^2(\mathfrak{g},\mathbb{K})$, then we have that $f(xy-yx,z)=f(x,yz)-f(y,xz)$ for all $x,y,z\in\mathfrak{g}$. Therefore
\begin{eqnarray*}
\omega(u([x,y]),z) & = & f([x,y],z)\\
& = & f(xy-yx,z)\\
& = & f(x,yz)-f(y,xz)\\
& = & \omega(u(x),L_y(z))-\omega(u(y),L_x(z))\\
& = & -\omega(L_y(u(x)),z)+\omega(L_x(u(y)),z)\\
& = & \omega(L_x(u(y))-L_y(u(x)),z).
\end{eqnarray*}
As $\omega$ is nondegenerate, we get that $u([x,y])=L_x(u(y))-L_y(u(x))$ for all $x,y\in\mathfrak{g}$. If $u\in Z^1_L(\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{g})$, the previous argument also shows that $f\in Z_{SG}^2(\mathfrak{g},\mathbb{K})$. On the other hand,
if $f\in B_{SG}^2(\mathfrak{g},\mathbb{K})$, there exists a linear map $\varphi:\mathfrak{g}\to \mathbb{K}$ such that $f(x,y)=\varphi(xy)$. As $\omega$ is nondegenerate, there is a unique $x_0\in\mathfrak{g}$ such that $\varphi=\omega(x_0,\cdot)$. Thus
$$\omega(u(x),y)=f(x,y)=\varphi(xy)=\omega(x_0,\cdot)(xy)=\omega(x_0,xy)=-\omega(L_x(x_0),y).$$
Therefore, $u(x)=L_x(-x_0)$ for all $x\in\mathfrak{g}$. Now, let $u\in B^1_L(\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{g})$ and choose $z_0\in\mathfrak{g}$ such that $u(x)=L_x(z_0)$. It follows that $-\omega(z_0,\cdot):\mathfrak{g}\to\mathbb{K}$ is a linear map such that $f(x,y)=-\omega(z_0,\cdot)(xy)$ for all $x,y\in\mathfrak{g}$, that is, $f\in B_{SG}^2(\mathfrak{g},\mathbb{K})$.
\end{proof}
If $(\mathfrak{g},\omega,\cdot)$ is a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra, by the Lemma \ref{F12}, it is easy to show that the map $\theta:H_{L}^1(\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{g})\to H^1_{ad^*}(\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{g}^*)$ defined by $[u]\mapsto [\theta(u)]$, where
$$(\theta(u)(x))(y)=\omega(u(x),y)-\omega(u(y),x)=\omega((u+u^*)(x),y),\qquad x,y\in\mathfrak{g},$$
is a well defined linear homomorphism. Here $u^*:\mathfrak{g}\to\mathfrak{g}$ denotes the adjoint map associated to $u$ with respect to $\omega$ and $\text{ad}^\ast:\mathfrak{g}\to\mathfrak{gl}(\mathfrak{g}^\ast)$ the coadjoint representation of $\mathfrak{g}$.\\
The following Lemma is similar to a result proved, in the case of pseudo-Riemannian Geometry, by A. Aubert and A. Medina in \cite{AuM}.
\begin{lemma}\label{F13}
Suppose that $(\mathfrak{g},\omega,\cdot)$ is a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra. Let $I$ be a bilateral ideal of $(\mathfrak{g},\cdot)$ of dimension $1$. Then
\begin{enumerate}
\item The product $\cdot$ in $I$ is null, $I\cdot I^{\perp_\omega}=0$, and $ I^{\perp_\omega}$ is a left ideal.
\item $ I^{\perp_\omega}$ is a right ideal if and only if, $ I^{\perp_\omega}\cdot I=0$.
\item If $ I^{\perp_\omega}$ is a bilateral ideal of $(\mathfrak{g},\cdot)$, then the canonical sequences
\begin{equation}\label{secu1}
0\longrightarrow I\hookrightarrow I^{\perp_\omega}\longrightarrow I^{\perp_\omega}/ I=B\longrightarrow 0
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{secu2}
0\longrightarrow I^{\perp_\omega}\hookrightarrow \mathfrak{g}\longrightarrow \mathfrak{g}/ I^{\perp_\omega}\longrightarrow 0
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{secu3}
0\longrightarrow I\hookrightarrow \mathfrak{g}\longrightarrow \mathfrak{g}/ I\longrightarrow 0
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{secu4}
0\longrightarrow I^{\perp_\omega}/I\hookrightarrow \mathfrak{g}/I\longrightarrow \mathfrak{g}/ I^{\perp_\omega}\longrightarrow 0,
\end{equation}
are sequences of left symmetric algebras. Moreover, the quotient Lie algebra $B=I^{\perp_\omega}/I$ admits a canonical structure of flat affine symplectic algebra, and \eqref{secu2}, \eqref{secu4} are split exact sequences of Lie algebras.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}
\item For $x\in I$, $y\in I^{\perp_\omega}$ and $z\in \mathfrak{g}$, the identity \eqref{n12.1} and the fact that $I$ is 1-dimensional (hence $I\subset I^{\perp_\omega}$) imply that
$$\omega(x\cdot y,z)=-\omega(y,x\cdot z)=0.$$
Thus $I\cdot I^{\perp_\omega}=0$. In particular, $I\cdot I=0$ and as
$$\omega(z\cdot y,x)=-\omega(y,z\cdot x)=0,$$
we have that $\mathfrak{g}\cdot I^{\perp_\omega}\subset I^{\perp_\omega}$.
\item For $x\in I$, $y\in I^{\perp_\omega}$ and $z\in \mathfrak{g}$, we get
$$\omega(y\cdot z,x)=0 \Leftrightarrow \omega(z,y\cdot x)=0, $$
this is, $I^{\perp_\omega}\cdot \mathfrak{g}\subset I^{\perp_\omega}$ if and only if $I^{\perp_\omega}\cdot I=0$.
\item Suppose that $I^{\perp_\omega}$ is a bilateral ideal of $(\mathfrak{g},\cdot)$. In this case, the quotient vector space $B=I^{\perp_\omega}/I$ has a structure of Lie algebra given by
$$[x+I,y+I]=[x,y]+I=(x\cdot y-y\cdot x)+I,\qquad x,y\in I^{\perp_\omega}.$$
As $\omega$ is a nondegenerate scalar 2-cocycle, it induces on $I^{\perp_\omega}$ a bilinear form of radical $I$. Hence, we have that $\left.\omega\right\vert_{I^{\perp_\omega}\times I^{\perp_\omega}}$ defines, passing to the quotient, a nondegenerate and skew-symmetric bilinear form $\omega'$ over $B=I^{\perp_\omega}/I$ which is also a scalar 2-cocycle of Lie algebra $B$. This symplectic form is given by $\omega'(x+I,y+I)=\omega(x,y)$ for all $x,y\in I^{\perp_\omega}$. If we denote the class of $x\in I^{\perp_\omega}$ module $I$ by $\overline{x}=x+I$, then the left symmetric product
$$\overline{x}\cdot\overline{y}=(x+I)\cdot (y+I)=x\cdot y+I=\overline{x\cdot y},$$
satisfies
$$\omega'(\overline{x}\cdot\overline{y},\overline{z})+\omega'(\overline{y},\overline{x}\cdot\overline{z})=\omega'(\overline{x\cdot y},\overline{z})+\omega'(\overline{y},\overline{x\cdot z})=\omega(x\cdot y,z)+\omega(y,x\cdot z)=0,$$
for all $x,y,z\in I^{\perp_\omega}$. Therefore, $(B,\omega',\overline{\cdot})$ is a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra. Finally, as $\mathfrak{g}/I^{\perp_\omega}$ has dimension $1$, we have that \eqref{secu2} and \eqref{secu4} are split exact sequences of Lie algebras.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
The Lie algebra $B$ of Lemma \ref{F13} will be called \emph{flat affine symplectic Lie algebra deduced from} $I^{\perp_\omega}$ \emph{by means of} $I$.\\
Let $(\mathfrak{g},\omega,\cdot)$ be a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra. In what follows we assume that $I$ is a bilateral ideal of $(\mathfrak{g},\cdot)$ of dimension $1$ and $I^{\perp_\omega}$ is also a bilateral ideal of $(\mathfrak{g},\cdot)$. If we put $I=\mathbb{K}e$, let $\mathbb{K}d$ a 1-dimensional subspace of $\mathfrak{g}$ such that $\omega(e,d)=1$.
We denote by $\overline{B}=(\text{Vect}_{\mathbb{K}}\lbrace e,d\rbrace)^{\perp_\omega}$. Then $\mathfrak{g}$ is identified with the vector space $\mathbb{K}e\oplus \overline{B}\oplus \mathbb{K}d$ and $I^{\perp_\omega}$ with $\mathbb{K}e\oplus \overline{B}$. The product on $I^{\perp_\omega}$ can be written as
\begin{equation*}
(\lambda e+x)(\mu e+y)=f(x,y)e+x\odot y,\qquad x,y\in \overline{B},\quad\lambda,\mu\in\mathbb{K},
\end{equation*}
where $x\odot y$ is the component of $x\cdot y$ over $\overline{B}$. A direct calculation allows us to verify that the product in $I^{\perp_\omega}$ is left symmetric if and only if the bilinear map $\odot:\overline{B}\times \overline{B}\to\overline{B}$ is a left symmetric product on $\overline{B}$ and $f$ is a scalar 2-cocycle for the left symmetric algebra $(B,\odot)$. On the other hand, it is easy to see that the canonical linear map $\theta:\overline{B}\to B=I^{\perp_\omega}/I$ defined by $x\mapsto \overline{x}=(x+I)$, is an isomorphism of left symmetric algebras (consider $\lambda=\mu=0$ in the previous equation). Therefore, we can identify $\mathfrak{g}$ with the vector space $\mathbb{K}e\oplus B\oplus \mathbb{K}d$ and $I^{\perp_\omega}$ with $\mathbb{K}e\oplus B$. Denote the left symmetric product of $B$ by $L_x(y)=xy$ for all $x,y\in B$.\\
According with the cohomology of left symmetric algebras due to A. Nijenhuis, the sequence \eqref{secu1} is described by the cohomology class of a scalar 2-cocycle $f\in Z_{SG}^2(B,\mathbb{K})$ of the left symmetric algebra $B$ (see \cite{N}). Thus, by Lemma \ref{F12}, this sequence is described by the cohomology class of a 1-cocycle $u\in Z_{L}^1(B,B)$ of Lie algebra $B$ with values in $B$ with respect to the linear representation $L:B\to\mathfrak{sp}(B,\omega')$ satisfying $f(x,y)=\omega'(u(x),y)$ for all $x,y\in B$. Thus, the product on $I^{\perp_\omega}$ can be written as
$$(\lambda e+x)(\mu e+y)=f(x,y)e+xy=\omega'(u(x),y)e+xy,\qquad x,y\in B,\quad\lambda,\mu\in\mathbb{K}.$$
As $I=\mathbb{K}e$ and $I^{\perp_\omega}=\mathbb{K}e\oplus B$ are both bilateral ideals of $(\mathfrak{g},\cdot)$, then they are also Lie algebra ideals of $\mathfrak{g}$. Therefore, the Lie bracket of $\mathfrak{g}$ is expressed as follows
\begin{eqnarray*}
& & [d,e]=\mu e\nonumber\\
& & [d,x]=\alpha(x)e+D(x)\\
& & [x,y]=\omega'((u+u^*)(x),y)e+[x,y]_B\nonumber,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $x,y\in B$, $\mu\in \mathbb{K}$, $D\in\mathfrak{gl}(B)$, and $\alpha\in B^*$. The product on $\mathfrak{g}=\mathbb{K}e\oplus B\oplus \mathbb{K}d$ satisfies the identity \eqref{n12.1} with $\omega(e,d)=1$ and $\text{Vect}_\mathbb{K}\lbrace e,d\rbrace\perp_\omega B$, if and only if
\begin{eqnarray}\label{productdoble1}
& & e\cdot x=x\cdot e=e\cdot e=0\nonumber\\
& & x\cdot y=\omega'(u(x),y)e+xy\nonumber\\
& & d\cdot x=\omega'(x_0,x)e+p(x)\nonumber\\
& & x\cdot d=\varphi(x)e+u(x)\\
& & d\cdot e=\lambda e\nonumber\\
& & e\cdot d=\gamma e\nonumber\\
& & d\cdot d=\beta e+x_0-\lambda d\nonumber,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\lambda,\gamma,\beta\in\mathbb{K}$, $x_0\in B$, $p\in\mathfrak{sp}(B,\omega')$, $\varphi\in B^*$ and $u\in Z_{L}^1(B,B)$. The commutator of the product \eqref{productdoble1} agrees with the Lie algebra structure of $\mathfrak{g}$ if and only if, $\gamma=\lambda-\mu$, $\varphi=\omega'(x_0,\cdot)-\alpha$ and $p=D+u$. As $\omega'$ is nondegenerate, there is a unique element $z_0\in B$ such that $\alpha=\omega'(z_0,\cdot)$. Therefore, the Lie bracket of $\mathfrak{g}$ is given by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{bracketdoble2}
& & [d,e]=\mu e\nonumber\\
& & [d,x]=\omega'(z_0,x)e+D(x)\\
& & [x,y]=\omega'((u+u^*)(x),y)e+[x,y]_B\nonumber,\qquad x,y\in B
\end{eqnarray}
and the product \eqref{productdoble1} by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{productdoble2}
& & e\cdot x=x\cdot e=e\cdot e=0\nonumber\\
& & x\cdot y=\omega'(u(x),y)e+xy\nonumber\\
& & d\cdot x=\omega'(x_0,x)e+(D+u)(x)\nonumber\\
& & x\cdot d=\omega'(x_0-z_0,x)e+u(x)\\
& & d\cdot e=\lambda e\nonumber\\
& & e\cdot d=(\lambda-\mu)e\nonumber\\
& & d\cdot d=\beta e+x_0-\lambda d\nonumber,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\lambda,\mu,\beta\in\mathbb{K}$, $x_0,z_0\in B$, $D\in\mathfrak{gl}(B)$ and $u\in Z_{L}^1(B,B)$ such that $D+u\in\mathfrak{sp}(B,\omega')$.\\
On the other hand, the product \eqref{productdoble2} is left symmetric if and only if for all $x,y\in B$ we have that
\begin{enumerate}
\item $(e\cdot d)\cdot e-(d\cdot e)\cdot e=e\cdot(d\cdot e)-d\cdot(e\cdot e)$. This equality holds if and only if
\begin{equation}\label{doble1}
\lambda=\mu\qquad\text{or}\qquad\lambda=\dfrac{\mu}{2}.
\end{equation}
\item $(d\cdot x)\cdot d-(x\cdot d)\cdot d=d\cdot(x\cdot d)-x\cdot(d\cdot d)$. This identity is true if and only if
\begin{align}\label{doble2}
&[u,D]_{\mathfrak{gl}(B)}=u^2+\lambda u-R_{x_0}\qquad \text{and}\\\label{doble3}
&D^\ast(x_0-z_0)-2u^\ast(x_0)-2\lambda(x_0-z_0)+(\lambda-\mu)z_0=0,
\end{align}
where $D^\ast:\mathfrak{g}\to\mathfrak{g}$ and $u^\ast:\mathfrak{g}\to\mathfrak{g}$ denote the adjoint maps with respect to $\omega'$ associated to $D$ and $u$, respectively.
\item $(d\cdot x)\cdot y-(x\cdot d)\cdot y=d\cdot(x\cdot y)-x\cdot(d\cdot y)$. This equality is satisfied if and only if
\begin{align}\label{doble4}
&\omega'(x_0,xy)=\omega'((u\circ D)(x)-(D\circ u)(x)-u^2(x)-\lambda u(x),y),\quad\text{and}\\\label{doble5}
&D(x)y+xD(y)-D(xy)=u(xy)-xu(y),\qquad x,y\in B,
\end{align}
As $\omega'$ is nondegenerate, it is clear that \eqref{doble4} holds if and only if $[u,D]_{\mathfrak{gl}(B)}=u^2+\lambda u-R_{x_0}$.
\item $(x\cdot y)\cdot d-(y\cdot x)\cdot d=x\cdot(y\cdot d)-y\cdot(x\cdot d)$. This identity is true if and only if
\begin{equation}\label{doble6}
(\lambda-\mu)(u+u^\ast)(x)-2(u\circ u^\ast)(x)=(L_x+R_x^\ast)(x_0-z_0),
\end{equation}
were $xy=L_x(y)$ for all $x,y\in B$ and $R_x^\ast:\mathfrak{g}\to\mathfrak{g}$ is the adjoint map with respect to $\omega'$ associated to the linear map $R_x:\mathfrak{g}\to\mathfrak{g}$ given by $y\mapsto R_x(y)=yx$.
\end{enumerate}
Consider the bilinear form $\omega_{u,p}:B\times B\to \mathbb{R}$ defined by
$$\omega_{u,p}:(x,y)\mapsto \omega'((u\circ D)(x)-(D\circ u)(x)-u^2(x)-\lambda u(x),y),\qquad x,y\in B.$$
If we take $\varphi=\omega'(x_0,\cdot)$, it is easy to see that the formula \eqref{doble4} means that $\omega_{u,p}$ is a scalar 2-coboundary for the left symmetric algebra $B$. On the other hand, the formula \eqref{doble5} tells us that the bilinear map $\beta_{u,x_0}:B\times B\to B$ defined by $\beta_{u,x_0}(x,y)=u(xy)-xu(y)$ for all $x,y\in\mathfrak{g}$, is the differential of $D$ in the Nijenhuis' cohomology of left symmetric algebra $B$ with values in the canonical $B$-bimodule $B$ (see \cite{N}). Moreover, using again the formula \eqref{doble5} and the fact that $u\in Z_{L}^1(B,B)$ we have $D:B\to B$ is a Lie algebra derivation. Indeed,
\begin{eqnarray*}
D([x,y]) & = & D(xy-yx)\\
& = & D(x)y+xD(y)-u(xy)+xu(y)-D(y)x-yD(x)+u(yx)-yu(x)\\
& = & [D(x),y]+[x,D(y)]-u([x,y])+L_x(u(y))-L_y(u(x))\\
& = & [D(x),y]+[x,D(y)],
\end{eqnarray*}
In summary, we have the following results.
\begin{proposition}\label{F14}
Let $(\mathfrak{g},\omega,\cdot)$ be a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra. Assume that $I$ is a bilateral ideal of $(\mathfrak{g},\cdot)$ of dimension $1$ and $I^{\perp_\omega}$ is also a bilateral ideal of $(\mathfrak{g},\cdot)$. If $B=I^{\perp_\omega}/I$ denotes the flat affine symplectic Lie algebra deduced from $I^{\perp_\omega}$ by means of $I$, then the left symmetric product of $\mathfrak{g}$ is given by \eqref{productdoble2} where $\lambda,\mu,\beta\in\mathbb{K}$,\ $x_0,z_0\in B$,\ $D\in\mathfrak{gl}(B)$ and $u\in Z_{L}^1(B,B)$ such that $D+u\in\mathfrak{sp}(B,\omega')$ satisfying the relations \eqref{doble1}, \eqref{doble3}, $\omega_{u,p}\in B_{SG}^2(B,\mathbb{K})$, \eqref{doble5}, and the identity \eqref{doble6}.
\end{proposition}
Reciprocally, we obtain a method to construct flat affine symplectic Lie algebras.
\begin{theorem}\label{F15}
Let $(B,\omega',\overline{\cdot})$ be a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra. Suppose that $\lambda,\mu\in\mathbb{K}$ verify
\eqref{doble1} and $u\in Z_{L}^1(B,B)$ with $D\in\mathfrak{gl}(B)$ are such that $D+u\in\mathfrak{sp}(B,\omega')$ and they satisfy \eqref{doble5}. If $x_0\in B$ verifies that $\omega_{u,p}\in B_{SG}^2(B,\mathbb{K})$ and there exists $z_0\in B$ such that the equalities \eqref{doble3} and \eqref{doble6} are satisfied, then the vector space $\mathfrak{g}=\mathbb{K}e\oplus B\oplus \mathbb{K}d$ endowed with the left symmetric product \eqref{productdoble2} and the symplectic form $\omega$ which extends $\omega'$ and verifies that $\text{Vect}_\mathbb{K}\lbrace e,d\rbrace$ is a hyperbolic plane orthogonal to $B$, is a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra.
\end{theorem}
To set up terminology we give the following definition.
\begin{definition}\label{doubleextensionFAS}
The Lie algebra $(\mathfrak{g},\omega,\cdot)$ obtained in Theorem \ref{F15} is called \emph{the double extension} of the flat affine symplectic Lie algebra $(B,\omega',\overline{\cdot})$ according to $(u,D,x_0,z_0,\beta,\lambda,\mu)$.
\end{definition}
Recall that by \eqref{doble1} we have that the parameters $\lambda$ and $\mu$ in the double extension of a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra are related to each other as $\lambda=\mu$ or $\lambda=\dfrac{\mu}{2}$. In the case that $\lambda=\mu$, we get the following special consequence of Theorem \ref{F15}.
\begin{corollary}\label{F17}
If $(G,\omega^+,\nabla)$ is a simply connected flat affine symplectic Lie group whose Lie algebra is obtained as a double extension of a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra according with $(u,D,x_0,z_0,\lambda,\beta,\lambda=\mu)$, then $G$ is identified with a subgroup of $\mathfrak{g}\rtimes_{id}\textsf{Sp}(\mathfrak{g},\omega^+_\epsilon)$ containing a nontrivial one parameter subgroup formed by central translations.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Let $(\mathfrak{g},\omega,\cdot)$ be the flat affine symplectic Lie algebra associated to $(G,\omega^+,\nabla)$. If $\mathfrak{g}$ is obtained as a double extension of a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra according with the parameters $(u,D,x_0,z_0,\lambda,\beta,\lambda,\mu)$ where $\lambda=\mu$, then it decomposes as $\mathfrak{g}=\mathbb{K}e\oplus B\oplus \mathbb{K}d$ and $\omega'=\omega|_B$ with $B\perp_\omega\text{Vect}_\mathbb{K}\lbrace e,d\rbrace$ and $\omega(e,d)=1$. Therefore, the left symmetric product deduced from $\nabla$ is given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
& & e\cdot x=x\cdot e=e\cdot e=0\\
& & x\cdot y=\omega'(u(x),y)e+xy\\
& & d\cdot x=\omega'(x_0,x)e+(D+u)(x)\\
& & x\cdot d=\omega'(x_0-z_0,x)e+u(x)\\
& & d\cdot e=\lambda e\\
& & e\cdot d=0\\
& & d\cdot d=\beta e+x_0-\lambda d,
\end{eqnarray*}
It is clear that $\text{Ker}(L)\neq \lbrace 0\rbrace$ since $L_e=0$. As $G$ is simply connected, using Theorem \ref{CharacterizationLeft} like in Proposition \ref{F16} it follows that $\rho$ determines a nontrivial one parameter subgroup $H$ of $\rho(G)\approx G$ formed by central translations which is induced by $t\mapsto \textsf{exp}_G(te)$ and given by
$$H=\left\lbrace \rho(\textsf{exp}_G(te))=(te,\text{Id}_\mathfrak{g}):\ t\in\mathbb{R}\right\rbrace.$$
\end{proof}
As a consequence of the proof of Proposition \ref{F16}, we have that every flat affine symplectic Lie algebra $(\mathfrak{g},\omega,\cdot)$ such that $\cdot:\mathfrak{g}\times\mathfrak{g}\to\mathfrak{g}$ is an associative product on $\mathfrak{g}$ is obtained as a double extension of flat affine symplectic Lie algebras from $\lbrace 0 \rbrace$. Indeed,
\begin{proposition}\label{F18}
Let $(G,\omega^+,\nabla)$ be a flat affine symplectic Lie group such that $\nabla$ is bi-invariant. Then the Lie algebra of $G$ is obtained as a double extension of flat affine symplectic Lie algebras from $\lbrace 0 \rbrace$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
If $(\mathfrak{g},\omega,\cdot)$ is the flat affine symplectic algebra associated to $(G,\omega^+,\nabla)$, then $x\cdot y=L_x(y)=R_y(x)=(\nabla_{x^+}y^+)(\epsilon)$ is an associative product on $\mathfrak{g}$ since $\nabla$ is bi-invariant. Under this assumptions, we know that $\mathfrak{g}$ is a nilpotent algebra and there exists an element $e\neq 0$ in $\mathfrak{g}$ such that $L_e=R_e=0$ (see proof of Proposition \ref{F16}). As consequence $e\in\mathfrak{z}(\mathfrak{g})$ (center of $\mathfrak{g}$) since $[e,x]=L_e(x)-R_e(x)=0$ for all $x\in\mathfrak{g}$. We define by $I=\mathbb{R}e$. It is clear that $I$ is a bilateral ideal of $(\mathfrak{g},\cdot)$ since $e\cdot x=x\cdot e=0$. On the other hand, we have that $I^{\perp_\omega}$ is also a bilateral ideal of $(\mathfrak{g},\cdot)$. Indeed, for all $y\in I^{\perp_\omega}$ and $x\in\mathfrak{g}$
$$\omega(x\cdot y,e)=-\omega(y,x\cdot e)=-\omega(y,0)=0\qquad\text{and}$$
$$\omega(y\cdot x,e)=-\omega(x,y\cdot e)=-\omega(x,0)=0.$$
Therefore, the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}$ is obtained as a double extension from $(B,\omega',\overline{\cdot})$ where $B=I^{\perp_\omega}/I$. On $\mathfrak{g}=\mathbb{K}e\oplus B\oplus \mathbb{K}d$, the product $\cdot$ is given by the
formulas \eqref{productdoble2} and we find that the associativity of this product implies the associativity of the product $\overline{\cdot}$ on $B$. Hence, $\mathfrak{g}$ is obtained by a series of double extensions of flat affine symplectic Lie algebras from $\lbrace 0\rbrace$.
\end{proof}
By means of the double extension of flat affine symplectic Lie algebras we obtain every flat affine symplectic Lie algebras in dimension two found by A. Andrada in \cite{An} (see also \cite{MSG}).
\begin{example}\label{Example1C3}
If in the double extension of flat affine symplectic Lie algebras we put $B=\lbrace 0 \rbrace$, then we have that $\mathfrak{g}=\text{Vect}_\mathbb{K}\lbrace e,d\rbrace$ with symplectic form $\omega(e,d)=1$ and Lie bracket $[d,e]=\mu e$. In this case, the product \eqref{productdoble2} is given by
$$\begin{tabular}{l | c r}
$\cdot$ & $d$ & $e$ \\
\hline
$d$ & $\beta e-\lambda d$ & $\lambda e$\\
$e$ & $(\lambda-\mu)e $ & $0$\\
\end{tabular}\quad\text{with}\quad \lambda,\mu,\beta\in\mathbb{K}.
$$
\begin{enumerate}
\item When $\mu=0$, we have that $\mathfrak{g}$ is isomorphic to $\mathbb{R}^2$. Also, as $\mu=0$ by \eqref{doble1} we get that $\lambda=0$. Moreover, taking $\beta\neq 0$ or $\beta=0$
$$\begin{tabular}{l | c r}
$\cdot$ & $d$ & $e$ \\
\hline
$d$ & $\beta e$ & $0$\\
$e$ & $0$ & $0$\\
\end{tabular}\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad \begin{tabular}{l | c r}
$\cdot$ & $d$ & $e$ \\
\hline
$d$ & $0$ & $0$\\
$e$ & $0 $ & $0$\\
\end{tabular}
$$
determined the only two non-isomorphic left invariant flat affine symplectic connections over $\mathbb{R}^2$. When $\beta\neq 0$ all these connections are isomorphic. Moreover, these connections induce on the 2-Torus $\mathbb{T}^2$ structures of flat affine symplectic Lie group. E. Remm and M. Goze found in \cite{RG} all the structures of flat affine Lie group on the abelian Lie group $\mathbb{R}^2$ and they showed that the only ones of such structures that induce left invariant flat affine structures on $\mathbb{T}^2$ are precisely the structures determined by the above left symmetric products.
\item On the other hand, when $\mu\neq 0$ we have that $\mathfrak{g}$ is isomorphic to $\mathfrak{aff}(\mathbb{R})$. By \eqref{doble1} we know that $\lambda=\mu$ or $\lambda=\dfrac{\mu}{2}$. So we get
$$\begin{tabular}{l | c r}
$\cdot$ & $d$ & $e$ \\
\hline
$d$ & $\beta e-\mu d$ & $\mu e$\\
$e$ & $0$ & $0$\\
\end{tabular}\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad \begin{tabular}{l | c r}
$\cdot$ & $d$ & $e$ \\
\hline
$d$ & $\beta e-\dfrac{\mu}{2} e$ & $\dfrac{\mu}{2} e$\\
$e$ & $-\dfrac{\mu}{2} e $ & $0$\\
\end{tabular}
$$
Each of these families determine a unique connection up to isomorphism.
\end{enumerate}
\end{example}
\subsection{Nontrivial examples in every even dimension}
We will explain how to obtain non-trivial flat affine symplectic Lie groups of dimension $2n$ from $((\mathbb{R}^{2n-2},+),\omega_0,\nabla^0)$ where $\omega_0$ is the usual symplectic form and $\nabla^0$ is the usual linear connection on $\mathbb{R}^{2n-2}$. Recall that $\nabla^0$ is a left invariant flat affine connection which is symplectic with respect to $\omega_0$. The abelian flat affine symplectic Lie algebra associated to $(\mathbb{R}^{2n-2},\omega_0,\nabla^0)$ is $(\mathbb{R}^{2n-2},\omega_0,\cdot^0)$ where $x\cdot^0y=0$ for all $x,y\in \mathbb{R}^{2n-2}$.\\
Suppose that $u=0$, $x_0=z_0$, and $D\in\mathfrak{sp}(\mathbb{R}^{2n-2},\omega_0)$. The double extension of flat affine symplectic Lie algebras under these conditions is $\mathfrak{g}=\mathbb{R}e\oplus \mathbb{R}^{2n-2}\oplus \mathbb{R}d\approx \mathbb{R}^{2n}$ with nonzero Lie brackets $[d,e]=\mu e$ and $[d,x]=\omega_0(x_0,x)e+D(x)$ for all $x\in \mathbb{R}^{2n-2}$.
It is easy to see that $\mathfrak{g}$ is isomorphic as Lie algebra to the Lie algebra $\mathbb{R}d\ltimes_{\theta}(\mathbb{R}e\times \mathbb{R}^{2n-2})$ where $\theta:\mathbb{R}d\to \mathfrak{gl}(\mathbb{R}e\times \mathbb{R}^{2n-2})$ is the Lie algebra homomorphism defined by $\theta(d)(e)=\mu e$ and $\theta(d)(x)=\omega_0(x_0,x)e+D(x)$. Therefore, the simply connected Lie group $G$ with Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}$ is given by $G=\mathbb{R}\ltimes_\rho(\mathbb{R}\times\mathbb{R}^{2n-2})$ where $\rho$ is the Lie group homomorphism
$$\rho: \mathbb{R} \to \textsf{GL}(\mathbb{R}\times \mathbb{R}^{2n-2}),\qquad t \mapsto \textsf{Exp}\left\lbrace t\begin{pmatrix}
\mu & [\omega^\flat(x_0)]_\beta\\
0_{n\times 1} & [D]_\beta
\end{pmatrix}\right\rbrace$$
where $[\omega^\flat(x_0)]_\gamma$ and $[D]_\gamma$ denote the matrix representation of the linear maps $\omega_0(x_0,\cdot):\mathbb{R}^{2n-2}\to\mathbb{R}$ and $D:\mathbb{R}^{2n-2}\to \mathbb{R}^{2n-2}$, respectively, with respect to a fixed ordered basis $\gamma$ of $\mathbb{R}^{2n-2}$. Let $\omega^+$ be the left invariant symplectic form on $G$ determined by $\omega$, where $\omega$ is the symplectic structure on $\mathfrak{g}$ with $\omega|_V=\omega_0$, $\text{Vect}_\mathbb{K}\lbrace e,d\rbrace\perp_\omega V$, and $\omega(e,d)=1$. Hence, for $\lambda=\mu$ or $\lambda=\dfrac{\mu}{2}$, and $(\lambda-\mu)x_0^+=0$, we have that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{dobleExample1}
& & \nabla_{e^+}x^+=\nabla_{x^+} e^+=\nabla_{e^+}e^+=\nabla_{x^+}y^+=\nabla_{x^+}d^+=0\nonumber\\
& & \nabla_{d^+} x^+=\omega_0(x_0,x)e^++D(x)^+\nonumber\\
& & \nabla_{d^+} e^+=\lambda e^+\nonumber\\
& & \nabla_{e^+} d^+=(\lambda-\mu)e^+\nonumber\\
& & \nabla_{d^+} d^+=\beta e^++x_0^+-\lambda d^+\nonumber,
\end{eqnarray}
is a left invariant flat affine symplectic connection on $(\mathbb{R}\ltimes_\rho(\mathbb{R}\times \mathbb{R}^{2n-2}),\omega^+)$.
\begin{remark}
If $\mu=\lambda$, then $x_0$ can take an arbitrary value. Moreover, if $\mu=0$ then $e\in\mathfrak{z}(\mathfrak{g})$. On the other hand, if $\lambda=\dfrac{\mu}{2}\neq 0$, one necessarily gets that $x_0=0$. The choice of $D\in\mathfrak{sp}(\mathbb{R}^{2n-2},\omega_0)$ is always arbitrary. Therefore, these statements allows us to conclude that the above construction produces different nontrivial flat affine symplectic structures on $(\mathbb{R}\ltimes_\rho(\mathbb{R}\times \mathbb{R}^{2n-2}),\omega^+)$. Everyone can convince itself by starting the construction with the canonical abelian flat affine symplectic Lie group $(\mathbb{R}^2,\omega_0,\nabla^0)$ where $\mathfrak{sp}(\mathbb{R}^2,\omega_0)=\mathfrak{sl}(2,\mathbb{R})$.
\end{remark}
\section{Twisted cotangent symplectic Lie group}
Our main purpose in this section is to give a method of construction of left invariant flat affine symplectic connections on the ``twisted'' cotangent symplectic Lie group of a connected flat affine Lie group. We will do it using again Nijenhuis' cohomology for left symmetric algebras. As a first step, we introduce the construction of the classical symplectic cotangent Lie group of a connected flat affine Lie group due to A. Medina and Ph. Revoy (see \cite{MR}). Let $(G,\nabla)$ be a connected flat affine Lie group, $\mathfrak{g}$ its Lie algebra, $\widetilde{G}$ its universal covering Lie group, and $\mathfrak{g}^\ast$ the dual space of $\mathfrak{g}$. We denote by $L:\mathfrak{g}\to \mathfrak{gl}(\mathfrak{g})$ the Lie algebra homomorphism induced by $\nabla$ through the formula $x\cdot y=L_x(y)=(\nabla_{x^+}y^+)(\epsilon)$ for all $x,y\in\mathfrak{g}$. The dual representation associated to $L$ is the Lie algebra homomorphism $L^\ast:\mathfrak{g}\to \mathfrak{gl}(\mathfrak{g}^*)$ defined by $L_x^\ast(\alpha)=-^tL_x(\alpha)=-\alpha\circ L_x$ for all $\alpha\in\mathfrak{g}^\ast$. Passing to exponential, we get a Lie group homomorphism $\Phi:\widetilde{G} \to \textsf{GL}(\mathfrak{g}^*)$ determined by $\displaystyle \textsf{exp}_G(x) \mapsto \sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\dfrac{1}{k!}(L_x^\ast)^k$.
Therefore, the product manifold $T^*\widetilde{G}:=\widetilde{G}\times \mathfrak{g}^*$ has a Lie group structure given by
$$(\sigma,\alpha)\cdot(\tau,\beta)=(\sigma\tau,\Phi(\sigma)(\beta)+\alpha),\qquad\sigma,\tau\in\widetilde{G},\quad\alpha,\beta\in\mathfrak{g}^\ast,$$
this is, the semidirect product of $\widetilde{G}$ with the abelian Lie group $\mathfrak{g}^\ast$ by means of $\Phi$. The Lie group $T^*\widetilde{G}=\widetilde{G}\ltimes_\Phi\mathfrak{g}^*$ is called \emph{classical symplectic cotangent Lie group} associated to the connected flat affine Lie group $(G,\nabla)$. The word ``symplectic" in the name of $T^*\widetilde{G}$ is motivated by the following result (see \cite{MR}).
\begin{proposition}[Medina-Revoy]\label{HessProposition1}
The Lie algebra of $T^*\widetilde{G}=\widetilde{G}\ltimes_\Phi\mathfrak{g}^*$ is the product vector space $\mathfrak{g}\oplus \mathfrak{g}^\ast$ with Lie bracket
\begin{equation}\label{Hess1}
[x+\alpha,y+\beta]=[x,y]+L^*_x(\beta)-L^*_y(\alpha),\qquad x,y\in\mathfrak{g},\quad\alpha,\beta\in\mathfrak{g}^\ast.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, $\mathfrak{g}\ltimes_L\mathfrak{g}^\ast$ is a symplectic Lie algebra with the nondegenerate scalar 2-cocycle $\widetilde{\omega}$ defined by
\begin{equation}\label{Hess2}
\widetilde{\omega}(x+\alpha,y+\beta)=\alpha(y)-\beta(x),\qquad x,y\in\mathfrak{g},\quad\alpha,\beta\in\mathfrak{g}^\ast.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
Let $\omega^+$ be the left invariant symplectic form on $T^\ast \widetilde{G}$ induced by $\widetilde{\omega}$. As a first result we get the left invariant flat affine connection on $T^\ast\widetilde{G}$ determined by $\omega^+$.
\begin{proposition}
The left invariant flat affine connection $\widetilde{\nabla}$ on $T^\ast\widetilde{G}$ determined by $\omega^+$ is
$$\widetilde{\nabla}_{(x+\alpha)^+}(y+\beta)^+=(xy+\text{ad}^*_x(\beta)+\alpha\circ R_y)^+,\qquad x+\alpha,\ y+\beta\in \mathfrak{g}\oplus\mathfrak{g}^\ast,$$
where $R_y:\mathfrak{g}\to \mathfrak{g}$ is the linear map defined by $x\mapsto R_y(x)=xy=(\nabla_{x^+}y^+)(\epsilon)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We denote $L_x(y)=R_y(x)=xy=(\nabla_{x^+}y^+)(\epsilon)$ for all $x,y\in \mathfrak{g}$. A. Medina and Ph. Revoy observed in \cite{MR} that the dual vector space $\mathfrak{g}^*$ has a structure of $\mathfrak{g}$-bimodule given by the bilinear maps $\cdot:\mathfrak{g}\times \mathfrak{g}^*\to\mathfrak{g}^*$ and $\Box:\mathfrak{g}^*\times\mathfrak{g} \to \mathfrak{g}^*$
which are defined by $(x,\beta) \mapsto x\cdot \beta=\text{ad}^*_x(\beta)$ and $(\alpha,y) \mapsto \alpha\Box y=\alpha\circ R_y$, respectively. Therefore, the product vector space $\mathfrak{g}\times\mathfrak{g}^\ast$
is a left symmetric algebra with product given by
\begin{equation}\label{F1P}
(x+\alpha)\odot(y+\beta)=xy+\text{ad}^*_x(\beta)+\alpha\circ R_y,\qquad x+\alpha,\ y+\beta\in \mathfrak{g}\times\mathfrak{g}^\ast.
\end{equation}
For the last claim see \cite{N}. As $\text{ad}_x=L_x-R_x$ for all $x\in\mathfrak{g}$, the commutator of left symmetric product given in \eqref{F1P} is
\begin{eqnarray*} (x+\alpha)\odot(y+\beta)-(y+\beta)\odot(x+\alpha) & = & (xy+\text{ad}^*_x(\beta)+\alpha\circ R_y)-(yx+\text{ad}^*_y(\alpha)+\beta\circ R_x)\\
& = & xy-yx+-\beta\circ \text{ad}_x+\alpha\circ R_y+\alpha\circ \text{ad}_y-\beta\circ R_x\\
& = & [x,y]-\beta\circ L_x+\alpha\circ L_y\\
& = & [x,y]+L^*_x(\beta)-L^*_y(\alpha).
\end{eqnarray*}
On the other hand,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\widetilde{\omega}((x+\alpha)\odot(y+\beta),z+\gamma) & = & \widetilde{\omega}(xy+\text{ad}^*_x(\beta)+\alpha\circ R_y,z+\gamma)\\
& = & -(\beta\circ \text{ad}^*_x)(z)+\alpha(zy)-\gamma(xy)\\
& = & -(\gamma\circ L_x)(y)+(\alpha\circ L_z)(y)-\beta([x,z])\\
& = & -\widetilde{\omega}(y+\beta,[x,z]+L^*_x(\gamma)-L^*_z(\alpha))\\
& = & -\widetilde{\omega}(y+\beta,[x+\alpha,z+\gamma]),
\end{eqnarray*}
for all $\alpha,\beta,\gamma\in \mathfrak{g}^*$ and $x,y,z\in \mathfrak{g}$. Therefore, the left invariant flat affine connection induced by the $\omega^+$ on $T^\ast\widetilde{G}$ is
$$\widetilde{\nabla}_{(x+\alpha)^+}(y+\beta)^+=(xy+\text{ad}^*_x(\beta)+\alpha\circ R_y)^+,\qquad x+\alpha,\ y+\beta\in \mathfrak{g}\oplus\mathfrak{g}^\ast.$$
\end{proof}
Recall that a foliation $\mathcal{F}$ of a symplectic manifold $(M,\omega)$ is called \emph{Lagrangian} if its leaves are Lagrangian submanifolds of $(M,\omega)$. On the other hand, two foliations $\mathcal{F}_1$ and $\mathcal{F}_2$ of $M$ are called \emph{transversal} if $TM=T\mathcal{F}_1\oplus \mathcal{F}_2$ where $T\mathcal{F}_j$ denotes the tangent distribution associated to $T\mathcal{F}_j$. If $(M,\omega)$ is a symplectic manifold and $\mathcal{F}_1$, $\mathcal{F}_2$ are Lagrangian transversal foliations of $M$, we say that $(M,\omega,\mathcal{F}_1,\mathcal{F}_2)$ is a \emph{bi-Lagrangian manifold}. The following important theorem is due to H. Hess in \cite{Hs}.
\begin{theorem}[Hess]\label{HessConnection}
If $(M,\omega,\mathcal{F}_1,\mathcal{F}_2)$ is a bi-Lagrangian manifold, there exists a unique torsion free symplectic linear connection $\nabla$ on $M$ that parallelizes both foliations\footnote{A linear connection $\nabla$ \emph{parallelizes} or \emph{preserves} a regular foliation $\mathcal{F}$ if $\nabla_XY\in \Gamma(T\mathcal{F})$ for all $Y\in \Gamma(T\mathcal{F})$ and $X\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$.
}. This linear connection satisfies the relation
$$\nabla_{(X_1+Y_1)}(X_2+Y_2)=(\nabla^\flat_{X_1}X_2+\text{pr}_{\mathcal{F}_1}[Y_1,X_2],\text{pr}_{\mathcal{F}_2}[X_1,Y_2]+\nabla^\flat_{Y_1}Y_2),$$
where $\nabla^\flat$ is the only symplectic linear connection determined by the identity
$$\omega(\nabla^\flat_XY,Z)=X\cdot \omega(Y,Z)-\omega(Y,[X,Z]),$$
for all $X,Y\in\Gamma(T\mathcal{F}_i)$ and $Z\in\mathfrak{X}(M)$, with $i=1,2$.
\end{theorem}
The torsion free symplectic linear connection given in the previous theorem is called the \emph{Hess connection} or the \emph{canonical connection associated to a bi-Lagrangian manifold}. We will denote this linear connection by $\nabla^H$.
\begin{remark}
If $(G,\omega^+)$ is a $2n$-dimensional symplectic Lie group and there exist two Lagrangian Lie subalgebras $\mathfrak{g}_1$ and $\mathfrak{g}_2$ of $(\mathfrak{g},\omega^+_\epsilon)$ such that $\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{g}_1\oplus \mathfrak{g}_2$, it is easy to show that there exists a symplectic basis $(e_1,\cdots,e_n,\widetilde{e_1},\cdots,\widetilde{e_n})$ of $(\mathfrak{g},\omega^+_\epsilon)$ such that $\mathfrak{g}_1=\text{Vect}_\mathbb{R}(e_1,\cdots,e_n)$ and $\mathfrak{g}_2=\text{Vect}_\mathbb{R}(\widetilde{e_1},\cdots,\widetilde{e_n})$. Moreover, from Frobenius' Theorem we have that there exist two left invariant transversal Lagrangian foliations $\mathcal{G}_1$ and $\mathcal{G}_2$ of $(G,\omega^+)$ such that $T\mathcal{G}_1$ is generated by $(e_1^+,\cdots,e_n^+)$ and $T\mathcal{G}_2$ by $(\widetilde{e_1}^+,\cdots,\widetilde{e_n}^+)$. A direct computation allows us to prove that the Hess connection on $G$ associated to the bi-Lagrangian Lie group $(G,\omega^+,\mathcal{G}_1,\mathcal{G}_2)$ is left invariant.
\end{remark}
For our case, it is easy to see that $\mathfrak{g}$ and $\mathfrak{g}^\ast$ are contained in $(\mathfrak{g}\oplus \mathfrak{g}^\ast,\widetilde{\omega})$ as Lagrangian Lie subalgebras. If $\mathcal{G}_1$ and $\mathcal{G}_2$ are the left invariant transversal Lagrangian foliations of $(T^\ast \widetilde{G},\omega^+)$ determined by $\mathfrak{g}$ and $\mathfrak{g}^\ast$, respectively, then
\begin{proposition}\label{F19}
There exists a unique left invariant flat affine symplectic connection $\nabla^H$ on $(T^\ast \widetilde{G},\omega^+)$ that parallelizes both foliations $\mathcal{G}_1$ and $\mathcal{G}_2$. The connection $\nabla^H$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\nabla^H_{(x+\alpha)^+}(y+\beta)^+=(xy+L_x^\ast(\beta))^+\qquad x,y\in\mathfrak{g},\quad \alpha,\beta \in\mathfrak{g}^\ast.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
It is clear that if $(e_1,\cdots,e_n)$ is a basis for $\mathfrak{g}$ and $(e_1^\ast,\cdots,e_n^\ast)$ is its dual basis, then $$(e_1,\cdots,e_n,e_1^\ast,\cdots,e_n^\ast)$$ is a symplectic basis for $(\mathfrak{g}\oplus \mathfrak{g}^\ast,\widetilde{\omega})$ such that
$T\mathcal{G}_1=\text{Vect}_\mathbb{K}\lbrace e_1^+,\cdots,e_n^+\rbrace$ and $T\mathcal{G}_2=\text{Vect}_\mathbb{K}\lbrace e_1^*,\cdots,e_n^*\rbrace$. Since $\mathfrak{g}^\ast$ is an abelian Lie algebra, then $e_i^*=(e_i^\ast)^+$ and recall that $e_i=(e_i^+)_\epsilon$ for all $i=1,\cdots,n$.
As $\omega^+$ is left invariant, we have $\omega^+(e_i^++e_j^\ast,e_k^++e_l^\ast)=\delta_{jk}-\delta_{li}$. It is clear that $\nabla^H$ is the Hess connection, hence satisfies that is the unique torsion free symplectic connection that that parallelizes both foliations $\mathcal{G}_1$ and $\mathcal{G}_2$. If $\displaystyle \nabla^H_{e_i^+}e_j^+=\sum_{\lambda=1}^nc_{ij}^\lambda e_\lambda^+\in \Gamma(T\mathcal{G}_1)$ where $c_{ij}^\lambda$ should be constants, then from Theorem \ref{HessConnection} we get
\begin{eqnarray*}
-c_{ij}^k & = & \omega^+\left(\sum_{\lambda=1}^nc_{ij}^\lambda e_\lambda^+,e_k^*\right)\\
& = & \omega^+(\nabla^H_{e_i^+}e_j^+,e_k^\ast)\\
& = & e_i^+\cdot \omega^+(e_j^+,e_k^*)-\omega^+(e_j^+,[e_i^+,e_k^*])\\
& = & -\omega^+(e_j^+,L_{e_i}^*(e_k^*))\\
& = & -e_k^*((e_i\cdot e_j)^+).
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus $\displaystyle \nabla^H_{e_i^+}e_j^+=\sum_{\lambda=1}^nc_{ij}^\lambda e_\lambda^+=\sum_{\lambda=1}^ne_\lambda^*((e_i\cdot e_j)^+)e_\lambda^+=(e_i\cdot e_j)^+$. As $\nabla^H_{e_i^*}e_j^*\in \Gamma(T\mathcal{G}_2)$, by the same way of above we get that $\nabla^H_{e_i^*}e_j^*=0$. On the other hand, $\nabla^H_{e_i^+}e_j^*\in \Gamma (T\mathcal{G}_2)$. Thus $$\nabla^H_{e_i^+}e_j^*=pr_{\mathcal{G}_2}[e_i^+,e_j^\ast]=pr_{\mathcal{G}_2} (L_{e_i}^\ast(e_j^\ast))=L_{e_i}^\ast(e_j^\ast).$$
Analogously, as $\nabla_{e_i^*}e_j^+\in \Gamma(T\mathcal{G}_1)$ then $\nabla^H_{e_i^\ast}e_j^+=pr_{\mathcal{G}_1}[e_i^\ast,e_j^+]=pr_{\mathcal{G}_1} (-L_{e_j}^\ast(e_i^\ast))=0$.\\
Therefore, extending bilinearly, we have that the Hess connection $\nabla^H$ is given by
$$\nabla^H_{(x+\alpha)^+}(y+\beta)^+=(xy+L_x^\ast(\beta))^+,\qquad x,y\in\mathfrak{g},\quad \alpha,\beta \in\mathfrak{g}^\ast.$$
Finally, as $\nabla$ is a left invariant flat affine connection on $G$ and $L^\ast:\mathfrak{g}\to\mathfrak{gl}(\mathfrak{g}^\ast)$ is a linear representation, it follows that $(x+\alpha)(y+\beta)=xy+L_x^\ast(\beta)$ is a left invariant product over $\mathfrak{g}\oplus \mathfrak{g}^\ast$ and hence $\nabla^H$ is also flat.
\end{proof}
Inspired in the construction due to A. Aubert and A. Medina on the twisted cotangent Lie group of a connected flat affine Lie group (in the case of pseudo-Riemannian Geometry, see \cite{AuM}), we get a more general construction than Proposition \ref{F19}.
Let $(G,\nabla,\omega^+)$ be a connected flat affine symplectic Lie group and $(\mathfrak{g}, \omega,\cdot)$ its flat affine symplectic Lie algebra. Assume that there exists a Lagrangian bilateral ideal $I$ of $(\mathfrak{g}, \omega, \cdot)$. By the formula \eqref{n12.1}, we have that
$$\omega(L_a(b),x)=-\omega(b,L_a(x))=0,\qquad a,b\in I,\quad x\in \mathfrak{g}.$$
As $\omega$ is nondegenerate, we get that $L_a(b)=0$ for all $a,b\in I$, this is, $I$ is a left symmetric algebra with null product. Therefore
$$0\longrightarrow I\hookrightarrow\mathfrak{g}\stackrel{\pi}{\hbox to 25pt{\rightarrowfill}}\mathfrak{g}/ I=B\longrightarrow0,$$
is an exact sequence of left symmetric algebras where $I$ has null product. If $s$ is a linear section of $\pi$, the vector space $\mathfrak{g}$ can be identified with $I\oplus s(B)$. In this case, the left symmetric product of $\mathfrak{g}$ can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{cotansym1}
(x+s(a))(y+s(b))=f(s(a),s(b))+xs(b)+s(a)y+s(a)\ast s(b),
\end{equation}
for all $x,y\in I$ and $a,b\in B$, where $f(s(a),s(b))$ and $s(a)\ast s(b)$ denote the components of product $s(a)s(b)$ over $I$ and $s(B)$, respectively. A direct calculation shows that \eqref{cotansym1} is a left symmetric product if and only if $\ast$ is a left symmetric product over $S(B)$, the Lagrangian bilateral ideal $I$ has a structure of $s(B)$-bimodule, and $f:s(B)\times s(B)\to I$ is a 2-cocycle of the left symmetric algebra $s(B)$ with values in $I$. Moreover, the linear isomorphism $\left.\pi\right\vert_{s(B)}:s(B)\to B$ defined by $s(a) \mapsto \pi(s(a))=a$, is also an isomorphism of left symmetric algebras. This follows from \eqref{cotansym1}, since this formula gives
$$\pi(s(a)\ast s(b))=\pi(s(a)s(b)-f(s(a),s(b)))=\pi(s(a))\pi(s(b))=ab,\quad a,b\in B.$$
\begin{comment}
We can consider $x=y=0$ in the equation \eqref{cotansym1} for obtain the formula of above.
\end{comment}
In what follows we identify the left symmetric algebras $s(B)$ with $B$. Therefore, the left symmetric product in $\mathfrak{g}$ is defined by a structure of $B$-bimodulo $I$
and a $2$-cocycle of left symmetric algebras $f: B\times B\longrightarrow I$. As $\omega$ is nondegenerate, the bilateral ideal $I$ is a Lagrangian in $(\mathfrak{g},\omega)$, and $\mathfrak{g}=I\oplus B$, we have that the ideal $I$ can be identified with $B^*$ by means of the linear isomorphism $\varphi: I \to B^*$ defined by $x\mapsto\omega(x,\cdot)$.\\
Now, we determine the structure of $B$-bimodule on $I=B^\ast$ as follows. If $b,b'\in B$ and $\beta\in B^\ast$, as $I$ is Lagrangian we get that
$$\omega(b \cdot \beta,b')+\omega(\beta,b\cdot b')=0 \Leftrightarrow \omega(b \cdot \beta,b')=-\omega(\beta,bb') \Leftrightarrow b\cdot \beta=-^tL_b(\beta)=L^\ast_b(\beta),$$
where $L_b:B\to B$ is defined by $b'\mapsto bb'$ (left symmetric product in $B$). Thus, the left action of $B$ over $B^\ast$ is given by the dual representation $L^\ast$ associated to the linear representation $L:B\to \mathfrak{gl}(B)$ defined by $b\to L_b$. The fact that $L^\ast$ be a Lie algebra homomorphism is equivalent to say that the bilinear map $\cdot:B\times B^\ast\to B^\ast$ defined by $b\cdot \beta= L_b^*(\beta)$, satisfies the identity \eqref{bimo1}. On the other hand, the map $\Phi_{a,b}: B^\ast\to\mathbb{K}$ defined by $\beta\mapsto \omega(\beta\Box a,b)$, allows us to define a product $\circ$ over $B$ by means of the formula
\begin{equation}\label{Important2}
\omega(\beta\Box a,b)=\omega(\beta,a\circ b)\qquad a,b\in B,\quad\beta\in B^\ast.
\end{equation}
As $\omega$ is nondegenerate and $I$ is Lagrangian, we have that both bilinear maps $\Box:B^\ast\times B\to B^\ast$ (defined by $(\beta,b)\to \beta\Box b$) and $\cdot:B\times B^\ast\to B^\ast$ satisfy the identity \eqref{bimo2} if and only if
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &\omega(a\cdot(\beta\Box b)-(a\cdot \beta)\Box b,c)=\omega(\beta \Box (ab)-(\beta\Box a)\Box b,c)\\
& \Leftrightarrow & -\omega(\beta\Box b,ac)-\omega(a\cdot \beta,b\circ c)=\omega(\beta,(ab)\circ c)-\omega(\beta\Box a,b\circ c)\\
& \Leftrightarrow & -\omega(\beta,b\circ (ac)-a(b\circ c))=\omega(\beta,(ab)\circ c-a\circ (b\circ c)),
\end{eqnarray*}
that is, the left symmetric product $B$ and the product $\circ$ must satisfy the relation
\begin{equation}\label{Importan1}
a\circ (b\circ c)+a(b\circ c)=(ab)\circ c+b\circ (ac),\qquad a,b,c\in B.
\end{equation}
Now, we claim that the following map $L':B \to \mathfrak{gl}(B)$ defined by $a\mapsto L'_a$ where $L'_a(b):=a\circ b$, is a Lie algebra homomorphism. To prove this, notice that by the identity \eqref{Important2}, we have that $\beta\Box a=\ ^tL'_a(\beta)$ for all $a\in B$ and $\beta\in B^*$. Therefore, the structure of $B$-bimodule over $I=B^\ast$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{Important0}
a\cdot\beta =L^*_a(\beta)\qquad\text{and}\qquad\alpha\Box b=\ ^tL'_b(\alpha).
\end{equation}
Hence, the left symmetric product over $\mathfrak{g}$ given in the formula \eqref{cotansym1} is expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{Important3}
(\alpha+a)(\beta+b)=(\alpha\Box b+a\cdot\beta +f(a,b))+ab=(^tL'_b(\alpha)+L^\ast_a(\beta) +f(a,b))+ab.
\end{equation}
The bracket over $\mathfrak{g}$ given by the commutator of product \eqref{Important3} is as follows
\begin{eqnarray*}
[(\alpha+a),(\beta+b)] & = & (\alpha+a)(\beta+b)-(\beta+b)(\alpha+a)\\
& = & (L^*_a(\beta) -\ ^tL'_a(\beta) -L^*_b(\alpha)+\ ^tL'_b(\alpha)+f(a,b)-f(b,a))\\
& +& ab-ba\\
& = & (\theta_a(\beta)-\theta_b(\alpha)+\hat{f}(a,b))+[a,b]_B,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\theta=L^*-\ ^tL'$ and $\hat{f}:B\times B\to I$ is defined by $\hat{f}(a,b)=f(a,b)-f(b,a)$ for all $a,b\in B$. As $f:B\times B\to I$ is a 2-cocycle of left symmetric algebra $B$ with values in $I$, it is easy to check that $\hat{f}$ is a 2-cocycle of the underlying Lie algebra $B^-$\footnote{The Lie algebra structure over $B^-$ is given by the commutator of the left symmetric product on $B$.} with values in $I$. That the previous bracket is a Lie bracket is equivalent to having that $\theta:B^-\to \mathfrak{gl}(B^*)$ defined by $a\mapsto \theta_a=L^*_a-\ ^tL'_a$, is a Lie algebra homomorphism. As
$$\omega(\theta_a(\beta),c)=\omega(a\cdot\beta-\beta\Box a,c)=\omega(a\cdot\beta,c)-\omega(\beta\Box a,c)=-\omega(\beta,a\circ c+ac)\quad c\in B,$$
the dual representation associated to $\theta$ is given by
\begin{align*}
\theta^*:B &\longrightarrow \mathfrak{gl}((B^*)^*)\cong \mathfrak{gl}(B)\\
a &\longmapsto \theta^*_a=-\ ^t\theta_a=-\ ^t(L^*_a-\ ^tL'_a)=L_a+L'_a.
\end{align*}
that is, $\theta^*=L+L'$ is a linear representation of $B$ by $B$. Therefore, $L'$ is also a linear representation of $B$ by $B$, since this is the difference between the linear representations $\theta^*$ and $L$.\\
Finally, as $I$ is Lagrangian, the left symmetric product on $\mathfrak{g}$ given in the formula \eqref{Important3} is symplectic with respect to $\omega$ if and only if
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &\omega((\alpha+a)(\beta+b),\gamma+c)+\omega(\beta+b,(\alpha+a)(\gamma+c))=0\\
& \Leftrightarrow & \omega((^tL'_b(\alpha)-\ ^tL_a(\beta) +f(a,b))+ab,\gamma+c)\\
& + &\omega(\beta+b,(^tL'_c(\alpha)-\ ^tL_a(\gamma) +f(a,c))+ac)=0\\
& \Leftrightarrow & \omega(^tL'_b(\alpha)-\ ^tL_a(\beta) +f(a,b),\gamma)+\omega(^tL'_b(\alpha)-\ ^tL_a(\beta) +f(a,b),c)\\
& + &\omega(ab,\gamma)+\omega(ab,c)+\omega(\beta,^tL'_c(\alpha)-\ ^tL_a(\gamma) +f(a,c))+\omega(\beta,ac)\\
& + &\omega(b,^tL'_c(\alpha)-\ ^tL_a(\gamma) +f(a,c))+\omega(b,ac)=0\\
& \Leftrightarrow & (^tL'_b(\alpha)-\ ^tL_a(\beta) +f(a,b))(c)-\gamma(ab)+\beta(ac)\\
& - &(^tL'_c(\alpha)-\ ^tL_a(\gamma) +f(a,c))(b)+\omega(ab,c)+\omega(b,ac)=0\\
& \Leftrightarrow & \alpha(b\circ c)-\beta(ac)+f(a,b)(c)-\gamma(ab)+\beta(ac)-\alpha(c\circ b)\\
& + &\gamma(ab)-f(a,c)(b)=0\\
& \Leftrightarrow & \alpha(b\circ c-c\circ b)+f(a,b)(c)-f(a,c)(b)=0.
\end{eqnarray*}
for all $a,b,c\in B$ and $\alpha,\beta,\gamma\in B^*$. This is equivalent to having
\begin{equation}\label{Important4}
\alpha(b\circ c-c\circ b)=0\qquad\text{and}\quad f(a,b)(c)-f(a,c)(b)=0,
\end{equation}
for all $a,b,c\in B$ and $\alpha \in B^*$. Therefore, the left symmetric product \eqref{Important3} is symplectic with respect to $\omega$ if and only if the product $\circ$ is commutative and $f$ is a 2-cocycle of the left symmetric algebra $B$ with values in $I$ verifying the formula \eqref{Important4}.\\
The previous construction shows a short and different way of obtaining the next result whose reciprocal was proved by X. Ni and C. Bai in \cite{NB}.
\begin{proposition}\label{F20}
Let $(\mathfrak{g},\omega,\cdot)$ be a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra which admits a Lagrangian bilateral ideal $I$. Then the canonical exact sequence of left symmetric algebras
$$0\longrightarrow I\hookrightarrow\mathfrak{g}\stackrel{\pi}{\hbox to 25pt{\rightarrowfill}}\mathfrak{g}/ I=B\longrightarrow0, $$
determines over the Lie algebra $B=\mathfrak{g}/ I$ a commutative product $\circ$ that verifies \eqref{Importan1} and endow to $B^*$ with a structure of $B$-bimodule of left symmetric algebra given by \eqref{Important0}. Furthermore, the left symmetric algebra $\mathfrak{g}$ is the extension of $B$ by $B^\ast$ according with the 2-cocycle of left symmetric algebra $f\in Z_{SG}^2(B,B^*)$ which satisfies \eqref{Important4}.\\
Reciprocally, let $(B,\cdot)$ be a left symmetric algebra endowed with a commutative product $\circ$ that satisfies the formula \eqref{Importan1}. Then $B^\ast$ has a structure of $B$-bimodule of left symmetric algebra given by \eqref{Important0}. Moreover, if $f\in Z_{SG}^2(B,B^*)$ is a 2-cocycle of left symmetric algebra that satisfies \eqref{Important4}, then the vector space $\mathfrak{g}=B^\ast\oplus B$ endowed with the left symmetric product \eqref{Important3} and the symplectic structure given by
$$\widetilde{\omega}(\alpha+a,\beta+b)=\alpha(b)-\beta(a)\quad a,b\in B,\quad \alpha,\beta\in B^*,$$
is a flat affine symplectic Lie algebra.
\end{proposition}
To set up terminology we give the following definition.
\begin{definition}
The flat affine symplectic Lie algebra of Proposition \ref{F20} is called \emph{twisted cotangent flat affine symplectic Lie algebra} associated to the left symmetric algebra $B$ according with the commutative product $\circ$ over $B$ and the 2-cocycle of left symmetric algebra $f\in Z_{SG}^2(B,B^\ast)$.
\end{definition}
It is easy to see that $B^\ast$ is contained on twisted cotangent flat affine symplectic Lie algebra $(B\oplus B^\ast,\widetilde{\omega})$ as an abelian Lagrangian Lie subalgebra. On the other hand, $B$ is contained as Lagrangian Lie subalgebra in $(B\oplus B^\ast,\widetilde{\omega})$ if and only if $f\in Z_{SG}^2(B,B^\ast)$ is symmetric.
\begin{corollary}\label{F21}
If $(G,\nabla)$ is a connected flat affine Lie group, then the Hess connection on the classic cotangent symplectic Lie group $(T^\ast \widetilde{G},\omega^+)$ given in the Proposition \ref{F19} is obtained by the previous construction with $f=0$ and null product $\circ$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
If $f=0$ and $\circ$ is the null product on $\mathfrak{g}$, then the left invariant flat affine symplectic connection $\nabla$ over $(T^\ast \widetilde{G},\omega^+)$ determined by \eqref{Important3} is given by
$$\nabla_{(x+\alpha)^+}(y+\beta)^+=(xy+L_x^\ast(\beta))^+\quad x,y\in\mathfrak{g},\quad \alpha,\beta \in\mathfrak{g}^\ast.$$
This is precisely the Hess connection of Proposition \ref{F19}, that is, $\nabla=\nabla^H$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Suppose that $(G,\nabla)$ is a simply connected flat affine Lie group. In this case the product manifolds $T^\ast \widetilde{G}=\widetilde{G}\times \mathfrak{g}^\ast$ is a vector bundle which is isomorphic to the cotangent bundle $T^\ast G$ of $G$. When $f=0$ and the product $\circ$ over $\mathfrak{g}$ is null, $T^\ast G$ is the classic cotangent Lie group of $(G,\nabla)$. Otherwise, when $f$ and $\circ$ are not both null, the simply connected Lie group $H$ with Lie algebra isomorphic to the vector space $\mathfrak{g}\oplus \mathfrak{g}^\ast$ with Lie bracket determined by the commutator of product \eqref{Important3}, that is
$$[x+\alpha,y+\beta]=[x,y]+\theta_x(\beta)-\theta_y(\beta)+\hat{f}(x,y)$$
where $\theta=L^*-\ ^tL'$ and $\hat{f}:\mathfrak{g}\times \mathfrak{g}\to \mathfrak{g}^\ast$ is defined by $\hat{f}(x,y)=f(x,y)-f(y,x)$ for all $x,y\in \mathfrak{g}$, will be called the \emph{twisted cotangent symplectic Lie group} of $(G,\nabla)$ according with the commutative product $\circ$ and $f\in Z_{SG}^2(\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{g}^*)$. By Proposition \ref{F20} and Theorem \ref{CharacterizationLeft} we have that $H$ has a structure of flat affine symplectic Lie group induced by $\widetilde{\omega}$ and the left symmetric product \eqref{Important3}.
\end{remark}
As an immediate consequence of Proposition \ref{F20} we obtain
\begin{theorem}\label{F22}
Let $G$ be a simply connected Lie group. Then there exists a structure of flat affine symplectic Lie group on $G$ that admits a normal abelian Lagrangian Lie subgroup if and only if, $G$ is isomorphic to the twisted cotangent symplectic Lie group of a connected flat affine Lie group.
\end{theorem}
Let $(G,\nabla)$ be a connected flat affine Lie group and $H$ the twisted cotangent symplectic Lie group of $(G,\nabla)$ according with a commutative product $\circ$ and a 2-cocycle $f\in Z_{SG}^2(\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{g}^\ast)$ where $ab=(\nabla_{a^+}b^+)(\epsilon)$ for all $a,b\in \mathfrak{g}$. To end the section, we study the completeness of the left invariant flat affine symplectic connection on $(H,\omega^+)$ induced by the left symmetric product \eqref{Important3}. Here $\omega^+$ denotes the left invariant symplectic form on $H$ determined by $\widetilde{\omega}$. Helmstetter showed in \cite{H} that a left invariant flat affine connection $\nabla$ on $G$ is geodesically complete if and only if the ``right multiplication" $R_a:\mathfrak{g}\to\mathfrak{g}$ defined by $R_a(b)=(\nabla_{b^+}a^+)(\epsilon)$, is nilpotent for all $a\in\mathfrak{g}$. Therefore, it is enough to see under what conditions the right product $\widetilde{R}_{a+\alpha}$ is nilpotent for all $a\in\mathfrak{g}$ and $\beta\in\mathfrak{g}^\ast$. The right multiplications on $\mathfrak{g}\times \mathfrak{g}^\ast$ induced by \eqref{Important3} are given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &\widetilde{R}_a(b)=f(b,a)+ba,\\
& & \widetilde{R}_a(\beta)=\ ^tL'_a(\beta),\\
& & \widetilde{R}_\beta(a)=L^*_a(\beta),\quad \text{and}\\
& & \widetilde{R}_\alpha(\beta)=0,\quad a,b\in ,\mathfrak{g},\quad \alpha,\beta\in \mathfrak{g}^\ast,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $L'_a:\mathfrak{g}\to\mathfrak{g}$ is defined by $L_a(b)=a\circ b$. Hence, as $\widetilde{R}_\alpha(\beta)=0$ we obtain that $\widetilde{R}_\alpha^2=0$ since $\widetilde{R}_\alpha^2(a)=\widetilde{R}_\alpha(L^*_a(\beta))=0$. On the other hand, if we put $R_a(b)=ab$, then
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &\widetilde{R}_a^k(b)=\sum_{j=1}^{k}\ ^t((L'_a)^{j-1})(f(R_a^{k-j}(b),a))+R_a^k(b),\quad\text{and}\\
& & \widetilde{R}_a^k(\beta)=\ ^t(L'_a)^{k}(\beta),\quad k\in \mathbb{N},\quad a,b\in B,\quad \beta\in B^\ast.
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus, we have the following result.
\begin{proposition}\label{F23}
Let $(G,\nabla)$ be a connected flat affine Lie group. The right product $\widetilde{R}_{a+\alpha}$ associated to the left symmetric product on $\mathfrak{g}\times \mathfrak{g}^\ast$ given by \eqref{Important3} according with the commutative product $\circ$ and the 2-cocycle $f\in Z_{SG}^2(\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{g}^\ast)$ is nilpotent for all $a\in\mathfrak{g}$ and $\alpha\in \mathfrak{g}^\ast$ if and only if the linear maps $R_a$ and $L'_a$ are nilpotent for all $a\in\mathfrak{g}$. In particular, the Hess connection $\nabla^H$ given in Proposition \ref{F19} is geodesically complete if and only if $\nabla$ is geodesically complete.
\end{proposition}
|
\subsection*{Acknowledgments}
All graphs were created with the help of Jaxodraw.
This work was supported by grant of National Science Center, Poland, No.\ 2015/17/B/ST2/01838.
\providecommand{\href}[2]{#2}\begingroup\raggedright |
\section{Introduction}
Extensive research encompassing spin-orbit interaction (SOI)~\cite{Liberman1992,Bliokh2015} of light has been conducted to date owing to the fundamental importance and emerging nanophotonics applications~\cite{Bliokh2010, Aiello2015_11, Cardano2015} in a variety of fields, e.g. nanoparticle manipulation~\cite{Padgett2011}, directional coupling to spin-momentum-locked waveguide modes~\cite{Bliokh2011, Lee2012, Paco2013, Neugebauer2014, Petersen2014}, spin-controlled beam shaping~\cite{Yu2014}, spin-based photonics~\cite{Shitrit2013} and chiral quantum optics~\cite{Lodahl2017}, to name a few.
SOI can be also observed in cylindrical symmetry, including, but not limited to, focusing of a beam by an aplanatic objective~\cite{Bomzon2006,Zhao2007,Nieminen2008}, scattering by a small particle~\cite{Schwartz2006,Haefner2009, Brasselet2009, Bliokh2011}, excitation and scattering of surface plasmon-polaritons~\cite{Gorodetski2008, Gorodetski2010, OConnor2014, Garoli2016} and transmission through a nanoaperture~\cite{Tischler2014, Zambrana2014, Garoli2016_07}. In cylindrical symmetry, the projection $J_z$ of the total angular momentum $\mathbf{J}$ of a beam on the axis of rotational symmetry $\mathbf{\hat{z}}$ is conserved~\cite{Bliokh2014}. Therefore, SOI in these systems typically manifests itself as a conversion of an incident spin angular momentum (SAM) to orbital angular momentum (OAM), that is, a generation of a spin-dependent optical vortex.
Further insight into the physical origins of SOI can be obtained by considering an additional characteristic of an electromagnetic beam, i.e. the helicity $\sigma = \frac{\mathbf{J\cdot P}}{|\mathbf{P}|}$, which is defined as the projection of the total angular momentum $\mathbf{J}$ onto the direction of the linear momentum $\mathbf{P}$~\cite{Ivan2012, Bliokh2013, Ivan2013}. Importantly, $\sigma$ is the generator of the duality transformation~\cite{Ivan2013} and, hence, is preserved in systems and processes that posses duality symmetry, irrespective of the underlying geometry. Typical examples of dual-symmetric processes include scattering by dual scatterers~\cite{Zambrana2013, Nieto2015, Nieto2017}, propagation in piecewise-homogeneous impedance matched media~\cite{Li2009, Bliokh2010, Ivan2013} or focusing by an aplanatic objective designed to have equal Fresnel coefficients for $s$- and $p$-polarized incident beams \cite{Bliokh2010, Bliokh2011, Ivan2012}. Helicity is very intuitive in the far-field, where its density $K$ reduces to the proportion of circular polarization in each individual plane-wave component. Therefore, $\sigma$ in the far-field is the expression of the average SAM per plane-wave component~\cite{Ivan2012, Ivan2013, Bliokh2013, Nieto2015,helicity_note}. On the other hand, in real space, e.g. in the near field of a nanostructure or in the focal plane of a tightly focused beam, $K$ is more subtle because it originates from complex spatial distributions of three-dimensional fields $\mathbf{E,H}$~\cite{Tang2010, Bliokh2011_02, Bliokh2013, Bliokh2014_07}. Focused beams with zero far-field $K$ can show complex spatial distributions of $K$ in the focal plane. These peculiar far-field to near-field transformation properties of $K$ pave the way for performing \textit{local} operations on it to \textit{globally} affect $\sigma$ and SAM of the beam~\cite{manupulations_note,helicity_note}, similarly to operations on the $k$-space of a beam in the Fourier plane of a 4$f$ system to affect its spatial distribution.
In this manuscript we employ local operations on $K$ to convert OAM of a linearly polarized beam to SAM. Firstly, we show that a focused linearly polarized Laguerre-Gaussian beam of first order $\left(\ell = \pm 1 \right)$ (from this point onwards referred to as $\text{LG}_{\pm 1}$)~\cite{Allen1992} exhibits $\ell$-dependent values of $K$ in the focal plane. Secondly, we utilize a dipolar Mie-scatterer~\cite{bohren1983} positioned on the optical axis in the focal volume to manipulate $K$ of such a beam locally. As a consequence, we obtain two distinct regimes of OAM to SAM conversion. For the first regime we consider a scatterer, which is dual-symmetric at a particular wavelength $\lambda_d$~\cite{Zambrana2013}.
Because a dipolar scatterer responds only to the local helicity density $K$ of the beam, and not to its integrated zero value, we can show that the dipole moment excited in the nanoparticle at $\lambda_d$ emits purely circularly polarized light with a handedness defined by $K$ and, eventually, by the OAM of the incident beam. Even though this results in SAM in the far-field, since the scatterer is dual-symmetric at $\lambda_d$, we observe no total generation of helicity~\cite{Ivan2013, Nieto2015, helicity_note}. Nevertheless, this is different for the second regime at a wavelength $\lambda\neq\lambda_d$, with the scatterer breaking the duality symmetry. In this case the nanostructure locally extincts helicity from an initially linearly polarized beam~\cite{Nieto2017, Nieto2017_05}, resulting in a total generation of far-field helicity~\cite{helicity_note}. We treat the aforementioned cases theoretically, and demonstrate experimentally the conversion of OAM to SAM by a dual-symmetric dipole scatterer~\cite{Zambrana2013_07}.
\section{Theory}
\subsection{Reflected and transmitted far-fields}
We start by briefly introducing the investigated scheme shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:focusing}. We use two confocally aligned microscope objectives (MO) with focal length $f_i$, described as aplanatic systems, where the focal plane of our system separates the left half-space ($z<0$, $i=1$) and the right half-space ($z>0$, $i=2$). Both half spaces are non-absorbing non-magnetic dielectrics characterized by their refractive index $n_i=\sqrt{\varepsilon_i \mu_i}$ ($\varepsilon_i$ and $\mu_i=1$ are the relative permittivity and permeability, respectively) and the numerical aperture NA$_i$ of their aplanatic system. Each of the two MO's is index-matched to the refractive index of its corresponding half-space. In this system, the first MO focuses the incoming beam and collects the reflected light from the optical boundary at the focal plane, whereas the transmitted light is collected by the second MO.
We consider a paraxial $x$-polarized $\text{LG}_{\pm 1}$ beam $\mathbf{E}_{\text{in}}=E_{\text{in}} \left(x,y\right)\hat{\mathbf{x}}=E_0\frac{\rho}{w_0}\exp\left(- \frac{\rho^2}{w_0^2}+\imath \ell \varphi\right) \hat{\mathbf{x}}$, illuminating the back focal plane (BFP) of the first MO, where $\rho=\sqrt{x^2+y^2}$ and $\varphi=\arctan\left(y/x\right)$ are the radial and axial cylindrical coordinates. Furthermore, $w_0$ is the beam waist and $\ell = \pm 1$ is the topological charge of the incoming beam. Following the approach described in ref.~\cite{novotny2006}, the field distribution at the entrance aperture of the MO can be linked to $k$-space via the transverse Cartesian coordinates: $x=-f_1\frac{k_x}{k_1}, y=-f_1\frac{k_y}{k_1}$, where $k_i=k_0 n_i$ is the wavenumber of the corresponding half-space and $k_0$ is the free-space wavenumber.
The highest transverse $k$-vector, which can be focused or collected by our aplanatic systems, is defined by the corresponding numerical aperture NA$_i \geq k_\bot/k_0$ and given by $k_\bot=\sqrt{k_x^2+k_y^2}$. The transmitted fields in the BFP of the second MO $\left(\mathbf{E}^{\infty}_t\right)$ and the field distributions of the reflected fields in the BFP of the first MO $\left(\mathbf{E}^{\infty}_r\right)$ can be written as:
\begin{align} \begin{split}
\left[\begin{matrix} E^{\infty}_{t,p}\\ E^{\infty}_{t,s} \end{matrix}\right]
(k_{x},k_{y})&=\frac{O_1}{O_2}
\left[\begin{matrix} ~~k_x t_p/k_\bot\\ -k_y t_s/k_\bot\\ \end{matrix}\right]
E_{\text{in}}(k_{x},k_{y}), \\
\left[\begin{matrix} E^{\infty}_{r,p}\\ E^{\infty}_{r,s} \end{matrix}\right]
(k_{x},k_{y})&=
\left[\begin{matrix} k_x r_p/k_\bot\\ k_y r_s/k_\bot\\ \end{matrix}\right]
E_{\text{in}}(k_{x},k_{y}),
\end{split} \label{eq:ff} \end{align}
respectively. Here, $\mathrm{E}^{\infty}_{p}$ and $\mathrm{E}^{\infty}_{s}$ are the radial and azimuthal field components in a cylindrical reference frame and $t_p,~t_s,~r_p,~r_s$ are the corresponding Fresnel transmission and reflection coefficients \cite{novotny2006}, respectively. Last, the factors
\begin{equation}
O_i=\frac{\imath f_i \exp\left( - \imath k_i f_i \right) }{2 \pi \sqrt{k_{z_i}k_i }}, \nonumber
\label{eq:stationary_phase}
\end{equation}
link the far-field on the reference sphere with the $k$-spectrum of the electric field via the method of stationary phase, which is described in a detailed manner in chap.~3.3 in~\cite{mandel_wolf}. Additionally, $k_{z_i}=\sqrt{k_i^2-k_\perp^2}$ is the longitudinal component of $k_i$ with $\Im(k_{z_i})>0$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{OTS_2.pdf}
\caption{Simplified sketch of the investigated system for parameters $n_1<n_2$ and $\text{NA}_1<\text{NA}_2$. An aplanatic high numerical aperture (NA) system is used to tightly focus an incoming beam impinging from left to right. The incoming electromagnetic field $\mathbf{E}_{\text{inc}}$ at the back focal plane (BFP) of the first microscope objective (MO) is projected onto a reference sphere with radius $f_1$. A second confocally aligned aplanatic system is used to collect the transmitted light in the second half-space.}
\label{fig:focusing}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Focal fields and helicity decomposition}
\label{chap:focal_fields_and_helicity_decomposition}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{OTS_9.pdf}
\caption{ Calculated properties of an $x$-polarized $\mathrm{LG}_{\pm1}$ beam at a wavelength of $\lambda=715$\,nm, tightly focused in free-space ($n_1=n_2=1$) with a numerical aperture of 0.9.
(a) Electric and magnetic focal-field distributions for $\ell=+1$ with their corresponding phases shown as insets in the top right corners. The polarization distribution of the electric and magnetic field in the paraxial regime is shown on the left.
(b) Energy densities for the same beam as in (a). $\mathcal{W}_{\text{em}}$ shows the total electromagnetic energy density, whereas $|\mathbf{E}_{\text{foc}}^+|^2$ and $|\mathbf{E}_{\text{foc}}^-|^2$ present the electric energy density for only LCP and RCP components of the angular spectrum, respectively. On the optical axis only RCP components contribute to $\mathcal{W}_{\text{em}}$.
(c) Spatial distributions of the normalized helicity density $\widetilde{K}= k_0K/\mathcal{W}_{\text{em}}$ in the focal plane for an incident beam with $\ell=+1$ and $\ell=-1$. }
\label{fig:focal_fields}
\end{figure*}
Utilizing the plane wave decomposition explained in the previous chapter, it is also possible to calculate the focal field distributions of an arbitrary input beam~\cite{novotny2006}. For the case of focusing in freespace ($n_1=n_2=1$, no reflection), we show the calculated focal fields of a $x$-polarized $\mathrm{LG}_{+1}$ beam in Fig.~\ref{fig:focal_fields} (a). Adapted to our experimental situation described later, we use a focusing objective with a numerical aperture of NA$_1$=0.9 and an aperture filling factor of $\frac{w_0}{f_1\text{NA}_1}=0.71$ at a wavelength of $\lambda= 715\,$nm for calculations.
As we see from the focal field distributions, only the longitudinal field components are present on the optical axis in the focal plane, which satisfy $H_z=\imath \ell / \eta_1^{-1} E_z$, where $\eta_1=\sqrt{\mu_1\mu_0/\varepsilon_1 \varepsilon_0}$ is the impedance of the medium. The phase difference $\Delta \phi$ between $H_z$ and $E_z$ gives rise to a helicity density $K=- \left( \varepsilon_1 \varepsilon_0 \eta_1 / 2k_0 \right) \Im \left( \mathbf{E}^\ast\cdot\mathbf{H}\right)$~\cite{Tang2010, Bliokh2013, Bliokh2011_02, Bliokh2014_07}. Even though $K$ in the focal volume depends on both $\mathbf{E}$ and $\mathbf{H}$, it can be derived from the electric field components only taking advantage of the so-called helicity basis representation~\cite{Berry2009, Bliokh2011_02,Bekshaev2011_03, Ivan2012, Aiello2015, Nieto2017}. This decomposition allows for separate discussion on the contributions of LCP and RCP polarized components of electric and magnetic fields as follows. To proceed we first decompose the incident paraxial beam into its circularly polarized components:
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{E}_{\text{in}}=
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}E_{\text{in}} \left[ \frac{\left(\hat{\mathbf{x}} + \imath \hat{\mathbf{y}} \right)}{\sqrt{2}} +\frac{\left(\hat{\mathbf{x}} - \imath \hat{\mathbf{y}} \right)}{\sqrt{2}} \right]
\equiv \mathbf{E}_{\text{in}}^+ +\mathbf{E}_{\text{in}}^-,
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{E}_{\text{in}}^+,\, \mathbf{E}_{\text{in}}^-$ are the LCP and RCP polarized components, respectively. Next, the focal fields for each of the components $\mathbf{E}_{\text{foc}}^+,\, \mathbf{E}_{\text{foc}}^-$ are calculated independently. It can be shown~\cite{Berry2009, Bliokh2011_02,Bekshaev2011_03, Ivan2012, Aiello2015, Nieto2017} that the total electric and magnetic focal fields are given by $\mathbf{E}_{\text{foc}}=\mathbf{E}_{\text{foc}}^+ + \mathbf{E}_{\text{foc}}^-$ and $\mathbf{H}_{\text{foc}}=-\imath \eta_1^{-1} \left[\mathbf{E}_{\text{foc}}^+-\mathbf{E}_{\text{foc}}^-\right]$. As a consequence, the total electric \textit{and} magnetic energy density can be expressed as a sum of the contributions originating form LCP and RCP electric field components $\mathcal{W}_{\text{em}} =\left( \varepsilon_1\varepsilon_0 /2 \right)\left[| \mathbf{E}^+ |^2 +|\mathbf{E}^- |^2 \right]$. Furthermore, because $\mathbf{E}^+,\, \mathbf{E}^-$ only include contributions of LCP and RCP plane-waves, respectively, the helicity density $K$ in the focal volume and in the far-field is proportional to a difference between these contributions $K= \left( \varepsilon_1 \varepsilon_0 / 2k_0 \right) \left[ | \mathbf{E}^+ |^2 -|\mathbf{E}^- |^2 \right]$.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:focal_fields} (b) we plot the total energy density $\mathcal{W}_{\text{em}}$ in the focal plane as well as the components $\mathbf{E}_{\text{foc}}^+$ and $\mathbf{E}_{\text{foc}}^-$.
We can see that $\mathbf{E}_{\text{foc}}^+$ is zero on the optical axis, whereas $\mathbf{E}_{\text{foc}}^-$ shows a significant energy density at this point~\cite{Zambrana2014}. The reason for the qualitatively different spatial distributions of $\mathbf{E}_{\text{foc}}^+$ and $\mathbf{E}_{\text{foc}}^-$ is the spin-to-orbit angular momentum conversion upon focusing and the different total angular momenta in $\mathbf{E}_{\text{in}}^+$ and $\mathbf{E}_{\text{in}}^-$~\cite{Allen1992, Bliokh2010, Bliokh2011, Bliokh2014}. Additionally, in Fig.~\ref{fig:focal_fields} (c) we show that the values of the normalized helicity density $\widetilde{K}= k_0K/\mathcal{W}_{\text{em}} \in [-1,1]$, for an incident beam with $\ell = \pm 1$ exhibit maximum absolute values on the optical axis ($\widetilde{K} = -\ell$)~\cite{Bliokh2011_02, Bliokh2014_07}. These values are equal to those obtained for an RCP or LCP plane-wave, respectively. This is consistent with Fig.~\ref{fig:focal_fields} (b), showing that in the focal plane on the optical axis only RCP ($\ell = +1$) plane-waves contribute to the focal fields.
\subsection{Far-field scattered light and orbit-to-spin coupling}
\label{chap:scatterer}
As a next step, we now assume that the 3D focal fields excite a dipolar high refractive-index dielectric scatterer, positioned on the optical axis at $\mathbf{r}_0=(0,0,-d)$ with $d>0$. The scatterer is characterized by its first order electric and magnetic Mie coefficients $a_1(\lambda)$ and $b_1(\lambda)$, which are complex functions of the wavelength $\lambda$~\cite{bohren1983, Hightower1988}. The induced electric and magnetic dipole moments can then be calculated by $\mathbf{p}=6 \pi \imath \varepsilon_0 n_1^2 / k_1^3 a_1 \mathbf{E}_{\text{foc}}(\mathbf{r}_0)$ and $\mathbf{m}= 6 \pi \imath / k_1^3 b_1 \mathbf{H}_{\text{foc}}(\mathbf{r}_0)$, where $\varepsilon_0$ is the vacuum permittivity. Consequently, when the scatterer is placed on-axis, only longitudinal electric and magnetic dipole moments $p_z$ and $m_z$ can be excited, owing to the focal field distributions of the chosen beam [see Fig.~\ref{fig:focal_fields} (a)]. Therefore, the far-field scattered light in the BFP of the MOs acquires a simple form in cylindrical coordinates:
\begin{align} \begin{split}
\left[ \begin{matrix} E^{d}_{t,p}\\ E^{d}_{t,s} \end{matrix}\right]
(k_{x},k_{y})&=\frac{C}{O_2} D
\left[ \begin{matrix} \frac{ -k_\bot p_z}{k_1} t_p \\ \frac{k_\bot m_z}{c_1 k_1} t_s \\ \end{matrix} \right], \\
\left[ \begin{matrix} E^{d}_{r,p}\\ E^{d}_{r,s} \end{matrix}\right]
(k_{x},k_{y})&=\frac{C}{O_1}
\left[ \begin{matrix} \frac{ -k_\bot p_z}{k_1} \left( \frac{1}{D} +Dr_p \right) \\ \frac{k_\bot m_z}{c_1 k_1} \left(\frac{1}{D} + Dr_s\right) \\ \end{matrix}\right].
\end{split} \label{eq:ff_dipoles} \end{align}
Here, $\mathbf{E}^{d}_t$ contains the forward scattered and transmitted light, while $\mathbf{E}^{d}_r$ describes the backward scattered as well as the forward scattered but reflected parts. In addition, $C=\frac{\imath k_0^2}{8 \pi^2 \varepsilon_0 k_{z_1}}$, $D=\exp \left( \imath k_{z_1}d \right)$ and $c_i$ is the speed of light in medium $i$. The total electric field in the BFP of the second MO ($\mathbf{E}_t$) and the first MO ($\mathbf{E}_r$) can be obtained by summing Eq.~\eqref{eq:ff} and \eqref{eq:ff_dipoles}:
\begin{align} \begin{split}
\mathbf{E}_t\left(k_{x},k_{y}\right)=&
\left[\begin{matrix} E^{\infty}_{t,p}\\ E^{\infty}_{t,s} \end{matrix}\right] +
\left[ \begin{matrix} E^{d}_{t,p}\\ E^{d}_{t,s} \end{matrix}\right], \\
\mathbf{E}_r\left(k_{x},k_{y}\right)=&
\left[\begin{matrix} E^{\infty}_{r,p}\\ E^{\infty}_{r,s} \end{matrix}\right] +
\left[ \begin{matrix} E^{d}_{r,p}\\ E^{d}_{r,s} \end{matrix}\right].
\end{split} \label{eq:ff_total} \end{align}
Inspired by the scattering particle utilized later in the experiment, from this point onwards the scatterer will be a spherical concentric core-shell nanosphere at the position $\mathbf{r}_0=(0,0,-87\text{\,nm})$. The core of the nanoparticle features a radius of $r_{\text{Si}} = 83$\,nm and consists of crystalline silicon~\cite{Palik1985}, whereas the shell material is SiO$_2$~\cite{Palik1985} with an estimated thickness of $\delta= 4$\,nm~\cite{shell,Decker2016}. In Fig.~\ref{fig:mie} (a) and (b) we plot the first and second order Mie coefficients~\cite{bohren1983, Hightower1988} and their corresponding phases. There we can see that for a wavelength $\lambda \geq 600$\,nm, the first order Mie coefficients $a_1$, $b_1$ are sufficient to characterize the scatterer. Moreover, at the wavelength $\lambda_{\text{d}} \approx 715$\,nm the first Kerker condition~\cite{Kerker1983, Geffrin2012, Zambrana2013, Zambrana2013_07} is approximately satisfied, i.e.~$a_1=b_1$, as marked by a dotted black line in Fig.~\ref{fig:mie} (a) and (b). Additionally, for a homogeneous medium ($n_1=n_2$), the condition for electric and magnetic fields exciting the particle at the focal point $H_z=\imath \ell \eta_1^{-1}E_z$, is also fulfilled on the optical axis outside of the focal plane (as a result also $\widetilde{K} = -\ell$ is fulfilled there).
Thus, the excited dipole moments $p_z$ and $m_z$ fulfill $m_z =\imath \ell c_1 p_z$. This combination of parallel electric and magnetic dipoles phase shifted by $\pm \pi/2$ has been termed $\sigma$-dipole~\cite{Zambrana2016, Eismann2018} since in free-space it emits light with a well-defined helicity $\sigma$ of $\pm1$ in all directions. In order to prove the pure circular polarization in the far-field, we insert the relation between the excited electric and magnetic $z$-dipoles into Eq.~\eqref{eq:ff_dipoles} and obtain $E^{d}_p = \imath \ell E^{d}_s$, for all $(k_x,k_y)$ in forward as well as in backward direction. This relation between the $p$- and $s$-polarized electric field components confirms that the scattered far-field is circularly polarized, with a handedness depending on the sign of the OAM of the incoming LG beam. In particular, the emitted light is purely RCP polarized for the case of $\ell=+1 $ and LCP polarized for $\ell=-1$~[cf.~Fig.~\ref{fig:focal_fields} (b) and (c)]. It is also worth mentioning that in some directions, e.g. backwards, the scattered light does not interfere with the incident beam for a particle in free-space, which keeps the far-field purely circularly polarized for those angular regions~\cite{helicity_note}.
So far, we have presented theoretically a way to employ the helicity density $K$ to convert OAM of the incident linearly polarized light to SAM of the scattered light (orbit-to-spin coupling).
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{OTS_5.pdf}
\caption{(a) Absolute values of the first and second order Mie coefficients of a core-shell nanoparticle with Si core of radius $r_{\text{Si}} = 83$\,nm and a SiO$_2$ shell of thickness $\delta = 4$\,nm. (b) Corresponding phases of the first order Mie coefficients. The dotted black lines show the wavelength $\lambda_d= 715$\,nm where the particle is approximately dual-symmetric, i.e. $a_1\approx b_1$.}
\label{fig:mie}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Helicity conservation}
The circularly polarized light emission from the excited dipole moment discussed in the previous section provides a very deep insight into global and local properties of recently derived theorems of conservation of helicity~\cite{Ivan2012, Ivan2013, Nieto2015} and the role of duality symmetry in optics. At the chosen wavelength $\lambda_d=715\,\mathrm{nm}$ the scatterer is approximately dual-symmetric, hence featuring interesting properties.
At first, a dual-symmetric scatterer has to preserve the local helicity. Therefore, the scattered light helicity is defined by the local helicity-density of the excitation field at the position $\mathbf{r}_0$ of the particle. Consequently, to show the response to the local helicity density upon scattering by a dual-symmetric dipolar particle, we integrate the resulting far-field Stokes parameter $S_3$ in backward direction in regions of no interference with the excitation field, and normalize it by the integrated far-field total Stokes parameter $S_0$ in the same angular region. In Fig.~\ref{fig:helicity} (a), we plot the resulting spectrum of $S_3/S_0$ calculated with Eqns.~\eqref{eq:ff_total} for our scatterer (Fig.~\ref{fig:mie}) and excitation beam in free-space [Fig.~\ref{fig:focal_fields}(a)]. The results are shown for the backward scattered light ($z<0$, blue line), the light propagating in forward direction ($z>0$, black line) and in full solid angle (red line). A close look at the blue curve confirms the response to the local helicity density, because at $\lambda_d$ the light scattered in backwards direction is purely RCP polarized. This is consistent with our calculations presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:focal_fields} (c), where we saw $\widetilde{K}=-1$ for $\ell=+1$ on the optical axis.
Owing to helicity conservation theorems for dual non-absorbing scatterers~\cite{Ivan2012, Ivan2013, Nieto2015}, also the global helicity of the interference between incident and scattered light must be equal to that of the incident field featuring zero helicity. At $\lambda_d$, $S_3/S_0$ integrated over full solid angle must be approximately zero (see Fig.~\ref{fig:helicity} (a) and (b)). In Fig.~\ref{fig:helicity} (b), we see a value close to zero, red-shifted with respect to $\lambda_d$, since for the scatterer, even if it was lossless, $a_1\approx b_1$, but $a_1\neq b_1$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{OTS_6.pdf}
\caption{
Scattering of a tightly focused $\mathrm{LG}_{+1}$ beam by the nanoparticle shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:mie}.
We show the average helicity ($S_3/S_0$) of the emitted light by plotting the integrated Stokes $S_3$ parameter normalized by the integrated $S_0$ parameter. The wavelength $\lambda_d$ where the particle is approximately dual-symmetric is indicated by dotted black lines. For free-space ($n_1=n_2=1$), (a) and (b) present the left half-space (blue), the right half-space (black) and the total value (red), where (b) shows an enlarged view onto the total value around $\lambda_d$. (c) and (d) show the case of the same scatterer positioned on a dielectric substrate ($n_1=1,\,n_2=1.52$), where we integrate over the light emitted in forward direction over different angular regions. The blue, black and red curve show $S_3/S_0$ for $0.9<\text{NA}_2 \leq 1.52$, $\text{NA}_2 \leq0.9$ and $\text{NA}_2 \leq 1.52$, respectively. (d) shows the area around $\lambda_d$ in more detail.
} \label{fig:helicity}
\end{figure}
In Addition to the conservation of the total helicity at $\lambda_d$ and the generation of SAM along the propagation direction $\mathbf{\hat{z}}$, the red curve in Fig.~\ref{fig:helicity} (a) also reveals that when using an excitation wavelength that causes our scatterer to break the dual symmetry, it is also possible to globally convert OAM into helicity. In this manner a dipolar spherical (and achiral) scatterer performs an operation on $K$ in a cylindrically symmetric system in a way that locally extincts helicity~\cite{Nieto2017, Nieto2017_05} in the focal plane of the initially linearly polarized beam, resulting in a total generation of helicity in the far-field. Hence, this regime corresponds to the average conversion of OAM to helicity for non dual-symmetric conditions~\cite{helicity_note}.
To experimentally confirm orbit-to-spin conversion, the backward scattered light has to be collected and analyzed for a homogeneously embedded particle. Alternatively, we can place the scatterer on a higher-index dielectric substrate, which facilitates the demonstration of orbit-to-spin conversion in two ways. Firstly, the backward scattering is strongly suppressed~\cite{novotny2006} and most of the light emitted by the nanoparticle is coupled to forward direction. Secondly, in the supercritical angular region (above the critical angle, $k_{\bot}>k_1$), only scattered light is observable creating an angular region without interference with the incident beam. We therefore expect the light emitted to the supercritical region to be almost purely RCP polarized at wavelengths close to $\lambda_d$. We calculate and integrate $S_3$ and $S_0$ by using Eq.~\eqref{eq:ff_total} for the particle presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:mie} positioned in air on a glass substrate ($n_1=1, n_2=1.52$). In our calculations the scatterer is excited by the focused incident and reflected field, while the excitation by the reflected scattered light is neglected. In Fig.~\ref{fig:helicity} (c), we show $S_3/S_0$ for different angular regions in forward direction --- $k_\bot/k_0 \leq 0.9 = \text{NA}_1$ (black), $0.9 < k_\bot/k_0 \leq 1.52$ (blue) and $k_\bot/k_0 \leq 1.52 = \text{NA}_2$ (red). Since in the region above the NA of the focusing objective only scattered light is present, the blue curve in Fig.~\ref{fig:helicity} (c) resembles the blue one in (a). However, the minimum is blue shifted by approximately 15\,nm, since the substrate influences the effective polarizability of the nanoparticle. Moreover, the minimum does not reach the value of minus one, owing to the complex nature of the Fresnel coefficients in the supercritical angular region. In Fig.~\ref{fig:helicity} (d), which shows a magnified area from (c), we observe that the average helicity in forward direction crosses zero at a wavelength of $\lambda_{d,s}=685$\,nm. This is the wavelength that we will use for an experimental demonstration later on. Although $\lambda_{d,s}$ does not correspond to the minimum of the blue curve in Fig.~\ref{fig:helicity} (c), the scattered light will still be strongly circularly polarized. In addition, since the dipole moments excited in the nanoparticle are oscillating along the substrate normal, most of the scattered light will be emitted to a narrow angular region around the critical angle~\cite{novotny2006}, facilitating the experimental observation.
\section{Experimental realization}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{OTS_1.pdf}
\caption{Sketch of the experimental setup.
A quarter wave plate, a q-plate of charge $-1/2$ and a linear polarizer transform the incoming linearly polarized Gaussian beam into an $\text{LG}_{\pm 1}$ mode. The paraxial beam is tightly focused onto a silicon nanoparticle (radius=87\,nm, SEM-image shown as inset) by a microscope objective (MO). The light propagating in forward direction is collected by an immersion-type MO. A rotatable quarter-wave plate and a linear polarizer are utilized for polarization analysis before a lens images the back focal plane of the second MO onto a CCD-camera.}
\label{fig:setup}
\end{figure}
The main part of the experimental setup, which is similar to that presented in previous works \cite{Banzer2010, Eismann2018}, is shown as a simplified sketch in Fig.~\ref{fig:setup}. An incoming linearly polarized Gaussian beam with a wavelength of 685\,nm is converted into an $\text{LG}_{\pm 1}$ beam by the use of a quarter-wave plate, a q-plate~\cite{Marrucci2006} of charge $-1/2$ and a linear polarizer. The sign of the charge $\ell$ of the generated LG beam can be set by aligning the axis of the quarter-wave plate with an angle of $\pm45^\circ$ relative to the incoming linear polarization. Afterwards, the beam is tightly focused by the first MO with NA$_1$=0.9 onto a silicon nanoparticle sitting on a glass substrate. An SEM-image of the particle with a radius of 87\,nm is shown as an inset in Fig.~\ref{fig:setup}. Precise positioning of the particle with respect to the beam is enabled by a 3D-piezo stage, attached to the substrate. Utilizing an index matched oil immersion MO (NA$_2=1.3$) in a confocal alignment with the first MO, the beam transmitted through the interface as well as the light scattered by the particle is collected and collimated. In order to measure in the far-field of our system, we image the BFP of the second MO onto a CCD camera. Prior to the imaging lens, a rotatable quarter-wave plate together with a linear polarizer are placed to project the light onto different polarization states, enabling us to reconstruct the far-field Stokes parameters \cite{Schaefer2007}.
\section{Results and discussion}
Due to technical limitations, in practice it is not possible to collect and collimate the complete far-field of the lower half-space. Nevertheless, analyzing only the light with $k_\bot/k_0 \leq 1.3$ gives us sufficient information, because the amount of light emitted to higher transverse $k$-vectors is negligibly small. In Fig.~\ref{fig:results} (a) and (b), we show the theoretically calculated BFP images of the third Stokes parameter normalized by the maximum of $S_0$ for an incoming $\text{LG}_{+1}$ and $\text{LG}_{-1}$ beam, respectively. Below those images, in Fig.~\ref{fig:results} (c) and (d), we also present our measured results, showing a clear overlap to the theoretical counterparts.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{OTS_7.pdf}
\caption{Theoretically calculated and experimentally measured back focal plane images of the second microscope objective. The colormap corresponds to the third Stokes parameter $S_3$, normalized by the maximum of $S_0$. (a) and (c) show the case of an azimuthal index $\ell=+1$ of the incoming LG mode, whereas (b) and (d) show results for $\ell=-1$.}
\label{fig:results}
\end{figure}
To investigate the conservation of helicity, similar as we did it in Fig.~\ref{fig:helicity}, we look at the average helicity in certain angular regions, only restricting the highest possible transverse $k$-vector to be within the the numerical aperture (NA$_2=1.3$) of the utilized immersion-type MO. In Table \ref{tab:results} we list the theoretical and experimental results of the average helicity in those regions. Again we see a good correspondence between our theoretical predictions and the experimental findings. Most importantly we notice that at $\lambda_{d,s}=685$\,nm the total helicity is very close to zero (see table entries for angular ranges within [0, 1.3]), proving the global conservation of helicity for a dual-symmetric scatterer. The reason for the small residual helicity origins in the discarded light emitted outside of the measured angular range. Also clearly visible from our results is the influence of the orbit-to-spin coupling upon scattering. Although the total helicity is unaffected, after the interaction of the linearly polarized LG beam with the nanoparticle, a significant amount of light is circularly polarized when looking at specific regions in the far-field.
\newcolumntype{C}[1]{>{\centering\arraybackslash}m{#1}}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Theoretical and experimental results of the average helicity for certain regions of transverse $k$-vectors and a wavelength of 685\,nm.}\label{tab:results}
\begin{tabular}{>{\centering}m{0.22\columnwidth} C{0.15\columnwidth} C{0.22\columnwidth} C{0.22\columnwidth}}
\hline
$k_\bot/k_0$ \hspace{3cm} region & $\ell$ & $S_3/S_0$ \hspace{3cm} theory & $S_3/S_0$ experiment \\
\hline
$[0, 1.3]$ & ~1 & ~0.005 & ~0.060 \\
$[0, 1.3]$ & -1 & -0.005 & -0.074 \\
$[0, 0.9]$ & ~1 & ~0.045 & ~0.124 \\
$[0, 0.9]$ & -1 & -0.045 & -0.149 \\
$[0.9, 1.3]$ & ~1 & -0.916 & -0.893 \\
$[0.9, 1.3]$ & -1 & ~0.916 & ~0.868 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion}
In conclusion, we have investigated orbit-to-spin angular momentum conversion upon scattering of a focused linearly polarized Laguerre-Gaussian beam by a spherical high-index dielectric nanoparticle. By tight focusing of a linearly polarized Laguerre-Gaussian beam, we create spatially varying distribution of helicity density in the focal plane. Placing a dipolar scatterer in the focal plane to locally manipulate the helicity density paves the way for manipulations on the total helicity properties of our system. These manipulations were shown to affect the spin angular momentum of the beam and the total helicity. Specifically, a dual-symmetric scatterer positioned on the optical axis resulted in the emission of purely circularly polarized light with a handedness depending on the orbital angular momentum of the incident beam, although the initial beam itself features zero helicity and zero spin angular momentum. For the case of a dual dipolar scatterer, we also demonstrated theoretically as well as experimentally the conservation of the total helicity of the interference between incident and scattered light. There, a higher index dielectric substrate allowed us to separate the transmitted far-field of the excitation beam from the purely circularly polarized scattered light, facilitating orbit-to-spin angular momentum conversion in specific angular regions. Our work provides an insight into local and global properties of helicity conservation theorems and emphasizes the role of duality symmetry in optics.\\
\begin{acknowledgments}
We gratefully acknowledge fruitful discussions with Martin Neugebauer.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}
New time-domain surveys, with their immense survey mapping speeds, are taking a leap by an order of magnitude in the sheer volume of their discovery streams. Ongoing optical time-domain surveys optimized for various cadences and depths include ASAS-SN \citep{asassn}, ATLAS \citep{atlas}, DLT40 \citep{dlt40}, Evryscope \citep{evryscope}, MASTER \citep{master}, PanSTARRS \citep{panstarrs} and the Zwicky Transient Facility (ZTF; Bellm et al. in prep, Graham et al. in prep). For example, ZTF is already generating alerts of the order of 10$^{5}$ events per night and soon, starting 2022, the Large Synoptic Survey Facility (LSST; \citealt{lsst}) will generate alerts of the order of 10$^{6}$ events per night. An alert is defined as any candidate astronomical source that has changed in flux density (or is at a new spatial position) relative to an archival reference image.
A major challenge that faces the astronomical community is how to efficiently work with such large datasets to identify well-defined samples of sources of interest and obtain the necessary follow-up data in a timely manner. Especially with worldwide collaborations involving multiple follow-up telescopes, organization, co-ordination and communication are key to an effective, productive scientific collaboration. Every system undertaking systematic follow-up of transients is putting together tools to facilitate this process, e.g. the PESSTO collaboration \citep{pessto} and Las Cumbres Observatory \citep{lco}.
Here, we present a dynamic web science portal that addresses this challenge dubbed the GROWTH Marshal. The word marshal signifies that this portal is designed to marshal transient candidates to follow-up telescopes (or vice versa). GROWTH (Global Relay of Observatories Watching Transients Happen) is a worldwide network of 16 institutions committed to time-domain astronomy and it is the name of the NSF PIRE (National Science Foundation Partnership in International Research and Education) project that developed this portal. The codebase is written by multiple students and postdocs and builds on the legacy of code developed for the Palomar Transient Factory (PTF; \citealt{ptf}) project. The codebase is written entirely in Python in modular form and version controlled. All data is stored in a postgreSQL database.
Currently, the GROWTH marshal is being used by 137 scientists with 38 science programs and 67 telescopes worldwide. Each science program has a well-defined sample-selection criterion to filter candidates from various discovery streams. Every night, members of a science program monitor which sources pass their filter. Based on the available information, users regularly marshal transient candidates to various follow-up telescopes and analyze the resulting follow-up data. A succinct summary of discovery stream data, follow-up data and analysis results is presented on the science program reports page. This summary is machine-readable to ease regular monitoring as well as ease generation of tables for journal publication. The key service of the GROWTH marshal is to assist a science collaboration with the steps between receiving a firehose of alerts from a discovery engine to publication of the science results. Figure~\ref{fig:schematic} shows a schematic summarizing the various components of the GROWTH marshal.
\begin{figure*}[!hbt]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textheight,angle=90]{MarshalDiagram.png}
\caption{\label{fig:schematic} Schematic representing the various components of the GROWTH Marshal Science Portal.}
\end{figure*}
The GROWTH Marshal's home page (Figure~\ref{fig:homepage}) acts as a unified, central hub allowing users to easily access various pages. The home page displays the most viewed sources of the week, letting users quickly navigate to the most exciting and interesting new sources. The home page features a newsfeed updating the user on the latest comments, classifications, and observation assignments for sources in their science programs. Each science program also has a calendar to organize candidate vetting and/or follow-up observing runs. The backend is a Google Calendar API such that users may subscribe to these calendars with other calendar applications to view them along with other calendars. This home page may also be limited to particular science programs, allowing users to quickly see what is happening in any of their science programs, not just those programs that happen to be the most active.
The home page provides easy access links for the various facets of a user's science program. It has links to ingestion streams (\S~\ref{sec:ingestion}), visual vetting of filtered candidates (\S~\ref{sec:vetting}), deep-drill analysis of selected sources (\S~\ref{sec:sources}), communicating with robotic telescopes (\S~\ref{sec:robotic}), planning tools for observing runs (\S~\ref{sec:observingrun}), visualizing follow-up data (\S~\ref{sec:followup}), viewing a summary as a science program report (\S~\ref{sec:report}) and triggering Target of Opportunity programs (\S~\ref{sec:too}).
\begin{figure*}[hbt!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{GROWTHmarshal_homepage.png}
\caption{\label{fig:homepage}The GROWTH Marshal Homepage.}
\end{figure*}
\section{Ingestion Streams}
\label{sec:ingestion}
There are three avenues by which new sources may be saved on the GROWTH Marshal: programmable real-time filtering, archival retrieval, and manual entry. Each of the current methods of saving sources to the GROWTH Marshal is intended to allow our users to pick out sources they find relevant to their science programs and to avoid missing any interesting sources among a vast number of irrelevant candidates.
First, throughout a night of observation, the GROWTH Marshal promptly receives a stream of Avro packets (Patterson et al. in prep) from the Zwicky Transient Facility describing properties of recently detected candidate sources, including a rolling 30-day history of detections and non-detections of that candidate.
Users of the GROWTH Marshal write programmable filters in a purpose-built domain-specific language to automatically accept or reject detected candidates in real-time as Avro packets are received by the Marshal. A user's programmable filter defines a function to be applied to each incoming candidate's Avro packet that returns a boolean value representing whether or not the source passes a science program's selection criterion. The programmable filter language is intentionally simplified to allow the GROWTH Marshal to safely attempt to execute any written filter and to ensure that all candidates can be filtered for every programmable filter in near real time. Any candidate that passes a user's programmable filter is presented to the user for manual candidate vetting prior to saving it as a source on the Marshal. The programmable filters do not perform any image-level operations.
Second, for users that may wish to perform more extensive offline calculations to select sources relevant to their science programs, we allow archival retrieval.
Each detected candidate's Avro packet is fully archived in an external database once the packet is broadcast.
The GROWTH Marshal is able to retrieve archived information about a candidate using the candidate's Avro packet id and thus save particular candidates as specified by the user. All candidates saved by their Avro packet ids are still presented to the user for manual candidate vetting before being saved as a source on the Marshal.
Third, we recognize that users may be interested in follow-up of sources discovered by surveys other than the Zwicky Transient Facility and using manual discovery streams such as announcements on Astronomer's Telegram or the Gamma-ray Circular Network. Thus, the GROWTH Marshal allows users to manually add sources to their science programs by providing the source's name and position. We assume that there is no uncertainty about the user's interest in a manually added source and that the user has already sufficiently vetted such a source. Therefore, manually added sources skip the candidate vetting step and are immediately saved as sources on the Marshal under a particular science program.
Finally, to further facilitate collaboration, the GROWTH Marshal includes a system that allows manual transfer, sharing and deletion of sources among science programs. This is needed if a source is interesting to several programs simultaneously, or if follow-up deems that a source no longer satisfies the criteria for the science program that saved it. For example, if a core-collapse science program finds that a candidate is a thermonuclear supernova after spectroscopic classification, any member of the core-collapse program may choose to either share or transfer the source from their program.
\section{Visual Vetting of Candidates}
\label{sec:vetting}
The GROWTH Marshal has a graphical user interface that presents all candidates saved either by passing a user's programmable filter or by packet id to the user for further manual vetting. Each candidate is presented with a triplet of image-cutouts centered on the candidate position in the reference image, science image and difference image. A user's candidates are listed alongside more detailed information for each candidate such as the candidate's photometric evolution. Users are able to manually save or reject candidates based on the provided information. Saved candidates are immediately saved as sources on the Marshal. Rejected candidates are noted along with the reason for rejection, which is then made available to the candidate stream's developers to improve the performance of machine-learning algorithms and other candidate detection apparatus. A candidate that is not selected by one science program is allowed to be selected by another science program. Candidates can be rank-sorted by their machine-learning score (Mahabal et al. in prep). Alternately, if users plan to follow-up candidates in real-time, they can sort the stream of candidates by observation time so that they look at the newest candidates first.
During development of a filter, we anticipate that science programs may have too large a number of candidates passing a users filter that are impractical to fully review. Thus, the GROWTH Marshal's programmable filters allow users to save and label values calculated during the application of the filter to incoming candidate Avro packets (Patterson et al. in prep). These saved values are presented alongside candidates as annotations for use in vetting. The GROWTH Marshal provides the ability to sort candidates by the value of annotations with a particular label, allowing users to prioritize vetting candidates that may be the most interesting for their purposes. This allows users to re-tune their filters so that a more manageable number passes their selection criterion.
As the ZTF discovery stream evolves, machine-learning improves and the GROWTH marshal filters are fine-tuned, we anticipate that this manual candidate vetting step will not be needed to separate real astrophysical sources from bogus sources. The key to automate the saving of candidates as sources is selection criterion that yield a sufficiently pure stream of astrophysically real sources that each satisfy a science program's selection criterion.
\section{Deep-drill Analysis on Selected Sources}
\label{sec:sources}
Once a candidate is saved to a science program, the members perform deep-drill analysis to a source to help prioritize follow-up observations and provide additional clues on the nature of the source (Figure~\ref{fig:viewsource}). All photometry is displayed in an interactive light curve where the user can add/remove filters and zoom in/out. All spectra are shown in an interactive display where the user can overplot line transitions of various elements, sky lines, telluric lines etc. Cross-matches to various archival, multi-wavelength catalogs is done to retrieve relevant information. Users can freely add comments about the nature of the source. Users can do a detailed examination by pulling up all detection image triplets of the source. Each science program has developed different analysis tools customized to their science goals. For example:
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{AT2018cow.png}
\caption{\label{fig:viewsource} An example candidate deep-drill page which collates the photometric and spectroscopic follow-up associated with the source, links the candidate to various databases, allows alerts to be sent, annotations to be freely added and follow-up assignments to be made.}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Light Curve Fitting Tool}
For some classes of transients, users can run a light curve fitter to predict future source brightness and thus plan out which resources, what cadence and what depth should be used for obtaining additional data. Specifically, when using type Ia supernovae as cosmological distance indicators, their peak magnitudes need to be standardized because supernovae that are fading slower are also intrinsically brighter. Similarly supernovae that are bluer at peak are also brighter. To determine this standardization, a SN~Ia template needs to be fit to the lightcurve. The GROWTH marshal has a simple tool that fits the SALT2 template \citep{2007A&A...466...11G, 2014A&A...568A..22B} using the Python package \texttt{sncosmo} \citep{kyle_barbary_2016_168220}. Since this fit requires exact knowledge of the filter transmission curves, the data is limited to photometry from ZTF and a few other telescopes. The lightcurve fit results yield useful information such as the predicted time of peak and magnitude at peak. Additionally comparing the absolute peak magnitude and the ``stretch'' and color parameters, $x_1$ and $c$, respectively, to the expected values for a type Ia supernova can be used to assess whether the transient may be a type Ia supernova or not. Since \texttt{sncosmo} offers easy access to more lightcurve templates, including many for supernova types other than Ia, we are implementing a feature that allows the user to select which template to fit. The quicklook fit results are very valuable for timely followup decisions, even if the transient that the template was fit to is not a type Ia supernova.
\subsection{Offset Plot}
In extragalactic astronomy, measurement of astrometry has proven to be an effective parameter to identify transient phenomena that are associated with nuclear black holes (e.g. tidal disruption events and AGN variability). Although the offset from the host galaxy centroid is available at the scanning phase, there are usually too few detections to tell whether the offsets are indeed clustered around the host centroid. In light of this, the offset plot is provided as a functionality for the saved candidates on the GROWTH Marshal. The backend Marshal database is designed to archive the parameters denoting the measured offset between the transient and the nearest source in the reference image for every detection. We created a script to display the scatter plot of $\Delta$RA and $\Delta$DEC for each detection by querying the photometry table. On the background, we also mark nearby objects ($<$ 10 arcsec) in the Pan-STARRS1 catalog to help visually associate transients with their host galaxies.
\subsection{Automated Annotations}
\paragraph*{} An automated annotation for a source on the GROWTH Marshal consists of a name, a datatype, and the annotation's content. The automated annotation's name is a description of the property described by the annotation, e.g. ``SDSS\_spec\_z''. Since the automated annotations are intended to act as extensions to the Marshal's database entries and since the Marshal has no ability to decide which automated annotation among many should be regarded as describing the ``true'' value for a particular property, the GROWTH Marshal allows at most one automated annotation with a given name to be present for a particular source. The automated annotation's datatype, e.g. ``BOOL'', ``FLOAT'', or ``STRING'', is used by the Marshal to determine how to interpret the annotation's content. The annotation's content consists of a single value consistent with the specified datatype followed by any other relevant information required by the user. When the GROWTH Marshal attempts to interpret an automated annotation, it takes everything in the annotation's content before the first space as the annotations's value to be interpreted in keeping with the annotation's datatype and ignores all of the annotation's content after the first space. This allows automated annotations to be used by the Marshal for sorting and searching, while also allowing automated annotations to contain further information, like error bars or external hyperlinks, needed for users to properly interpret the automated annotation's value.
\paragraph*{} Finally, the GROWTH Marshal allows users to retrieve saved source data from the Marshal and submit new automated annotations via HTTP Post requests. The Marshal's users are therefore able to determine relevant source properties and submit new automated annotations to the Marshal using scripts on their own machines. Thus, the submission of automated annotations to the Marshal may be automated by users and customized by each science program.
\subsection{Alerts on sources that require urgent follow-up}
With all the follow-up data and analysis tools at the user's fingertips, a member of a science program may realize that a source requires immediate follow-up (within minutes or hours). Thus, the GROWTH Marshal provides an alert message function to call the attention of all members of a given science program. There are two modes of the alert message: soft alert and hard alert. Soft alerts are sent in the form of emails to members of a science program. Hard alerts are sent as text messages to the mobile numbers of members of a science program. Accidental hard alerts are avoided with a pop-up window to confirm the sending of the alert. The users may also set their preferences to not be disturbed by hard alerts and will receive emails instead. This function improves the inefficiency in traditional email correspondence with a template message for each source. The message specifies the name and coordinates of a source with a link to the source deep-drill page.
\section{Interface tools to communicate with robotic, follow-up telescopes}
\label{sec:robotic}
The GROWTH Marshal provides an interface between the Marshal's users and the managers of robotic telescopes for automatically requesting follow-up observations of sources saved on the Marshal, e.g., the Palomar 60-inch telescope and the Liverpool telescope. Telescope managers are able to specify what information is required to perform a follow-up observation and grant permission to some science programs for automated follow-up. When requesting follow-up observation of a source, users who are members of approved science programs are able to complete a form generated from the telescope team's specifications which is then passed along to the telescope team.
When providing a specification of the information required for follow-up, a telescope team is required to also specify the URL to which the Marshal may send HTTP Post requests. When a user completes a follow-up request form, the form is then sent over to this specified URL. The GROWTH Marshal then uses the response from this Post request as an indication of whether the telescope team has accepted the request. In the event of a successful response, the followup request is saved on the Marshal as a pending observation. If the Post request times out or is sent to an invalid URL, the Marshal notifies the user that it was unable to communicate with the telescope team and does not save the failed follow-up request. If the Post request returns an error code, the error description is provided to the user and the request is not saved on the Marshal. This allows telescope teams to reject invalid or incomplete request forms and indicate the reason for rejection (e.g., if the user did not properly format some required parameter or if the telescope is completely down for maintenance).
Once a follow-up request is submitted, the scheduling and execution of the observation is left entirely to the discretion of the telescope team. The Marshal allows telescope teams to update the current status for submitted follow-up requests to inform the Marshal users of how close the observation is to completion. The Marshal also allows users to modify or cancel submitted follow-up requests, relaying the changed information back to the telescope team in the same manner as used to submit the original request. Upon the completion of a requested observation, the telescope team is able to submit the resulting photometric or spectroscopic information to the Marshal in a standardized format. This photometry or spectroscopy is then incorporated with the Marshal's existing saved photometric and spectroscopic data, allowing users to interact with the newly observed data with the Marshal's set of inbuilt analysis tools.
\section{Observing Run Planner for classical follow-up}
\label{sec:observingrun}
In addition to the integrated automatic follow-up of targets, the GROWTH Marshal also contains a toolset for classical follow-up. This toolset is organized as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item The scheduler keeps track of available follow-up resources (e.g, date of observing run, telescope, instrument, observer/contact).
\item On the overview page of each target, follow-up can be assigned, with a priority (1-5), and a comment giving details of the needed follow-up.
\item For each observing date, the Observing Planner will compile a sortable list of the targets that have been assigned, and generate a starlist with offset stars for each target, for use at the telescope.
\end{itemize}
The Observing Planner page can be used both to plan ahead and keep track in real-time of the observations that are done during the night. For each target, the Observing Planner displays the visibility plot, the lightcurve, cutouts from our reference and subtraction images, and any comments that were added when the follow-up assignments were made (see Fig.~\ref{fig:op}). Links to generate finder charts with an offset grid from three nearby, bright stars are also automatically generated.
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{op.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:op}The Observing Planner page. Green checkboxes allow the observer to mark the target as observed during the observing night. The pdf symbols in the first column generates finder charts with offset stars.}
\end{figure*}
The target list is by default sorted according to the visibility of the transient from the relevant telescope. This makes it very simple for the observer to optimize the observing schedule for the night. Sorting by RA, Dec, Name, type, age, priority, magpsf and redshift are also allowed. In case a high number of targets have been assigned to an observing run, the Observing Planner also allows for different filtering criteria, such as priority and/or candidate type (e.g, nuclear, variable star, transient) and/or classification (e.g., SN Ia, SN II, AGN) and/or science program(s). The essential information from the target list is also included in the automatically generated starlist, including the latest filtered magnitude, which allows exposure times to be estimated. Any comments added when the follow-up assignments were made are also appended to the starlist.
\section{Ingest and Visualize Follow-up Data}
\label{sec:followup}
After follow-up observations of sources in the GROWTH Marshal have been performed, the results need to be reported back to the collaboration by ingesting the observations into the Marshal database. Due to the number of follow-up facilities at the collaboration's disposal, it would be impossible to include automatic interfaces for all follow-up programs. Instead the follow-up data needs to be uploaded using two simple forms, one for photometry and another for spectroscopy.
The photometry upload form allows the user to either submit single points of data or a whole ASCII table of observation, provided that they were all obtained with the same telescope and instrument. Data can only be submitted for combinations of telescope and instrument that are known to the Marshal database. If a telescope or instrument is missing from the database it can be added through a linked form. When submitting an ASCII table of data the user must specify which type of information each column contains. Regardless of whether a single data point or a table, certain information is always required for the upload. This includes the Julian Date of the observation, filter, magnitude, magnitude error and the limiting magnitude. Optionally the user can also list the observers and reducers of the data to allow them to be credited for their contribution.
Manually uploaded photometry is added to the photometry table of the database which also collects all the observations and limiting magnitudes of the P48 observations that were ingested from the Avro alert packets. On a dedicated photometry page of a source this data can be as an interactive plot of the lightcurve, on which the user can zoom in for close inspection, as well as a simple table that can also be exported to a comma-separated-value (csv) file for further data analysis.
The spectroscopy upload form accepts spectroscopic data as either FITS or ASCII file. The upload is not limited to spectra of the object; observations of the host galaxy or the sky can also be submitted. As for photometric data, telescope and instrument first need to be entered into the data base. If the uploaded files contain important information as observation date and exposure time in the header, this will be entered into the database automatically. If the information is missing from the header, it can be provided in the form. Again the observer and reducer can be credited there as well. If further information was derived from the spectrum such as redshift or phase of the transient, this can be included as well and will be displayed to all users as comments on the spectrum.
The uploaded spectroscopic data can be viewed on a dedicated spectroscopy page for the source (Figure~\ref{fig:spectra}). There the spectra can be inspected in interactive plots of either multiple spectra or the individual ones. Like the photometric lightcurve plots, the user can can zoom in to relevant parts of the spectrum. The most relevant absorption lines (as well as common galactic and atmospheric lines) can be overlayed and shifted to the transient redshift and expansion velocity. Furthermore the individual spectra can be binned into larger bins to make the inspection of noisy data easier.
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{spectra.png}
\caption{\label{fig:spectra} Snapshot of the GROWTH marshal interactive spectra page. We allow users to enter line identifications, specify redshift and/or velocity, mark common sky/telluric/galaxy lines, select/unselect a subset of the spectroscopic sequence.}
\end{figure*}
\section{View Reports of Properties of Selected Data}
\label{sec:report}
Summary of all sources belonging to a user's science programs can be viewed on the ``Program Reports'' page, on which the user can either view all of their science programs or be filtered down to a single program (Figure~\ref{fig:reports}). This page contains a table of the basic data of the transient, including type, redshift, RA, Dec and the latest observed magnitude. Additionally small previews of the lightcurves and spectroscopic data (if available) are provided for each transient. Lastly there are columns for current follow-up assignments and their priority, autoannotations and ingestion date that have been added to the source. The table can be sorted by most columns and additionally by any autoannotation by clicking on the autoannotation name. The sorting by autoannotation allows each science program to define their own metric by which the candidates are to be sorted. Sources can also be filtered based on ingestion date range and/or follow-up instruments and/or classification. For further management of a science program, a pie-chart shows the classification of all the sources assigned to the program.
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{reports.png}
\caption{\label{fig:reports} Snapshot of the GROWTH Marshal reports page. The pie-chart shows spectroscopic classifications and allows filtering by type. The histogram shows follow-up assignments to various follow-up telescopes. The table summarizes various properties of the transients and can be exported into machine-readable format.}
\end{figure*}
\section{Triggering a Target of Opportunity for Multi-messenger Astrophysics}
\label{sec:too}
The Target of Opportunity (ToO) Marshal is designed to facilitate the multi-messenger detection of counterparts to short gamma-ray burst, high energy neutrino, and gravitational-wave candidate events. The workflow of the ToO Marshal begins with a trigger from an external source outside of the GROWTH marshal. An external instrument, such as the Fermi Gamma-Ray Burst Monitor (GBM), IceCube Neutrino Observatory, or Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo, releases a candidate event by Gamma-ray Coordinates Network (GCN). These GCN notices include information about the candidate, including sky localization information, either in the form of a Hierarchical Equal Area isoLatitude Pixelization (HEALPix) map or center of sky localization and error ellipse, and other identifying features, such as whether the gamma-ray burst is short or long, or the likelihood that the gravitational-wave transient has an object with a mass consistent with a neutron star. For any given transient, which are uniquely identified by their time, a series of ``tags'' are created, which give short, characteristic representations of the transients. For example, Fermi GBM transients have tags such as Fermi, short, long, and GRB, which are applied depending on the information in the notice.
For each of these notices, pages are created with five overall sections. The first, which applies in the Fermi GBM case, is to show a plot of the lightcurve. The second is to demonstrate the observability of the source. This includes the time windows that the source is available from Palomar and the time elapsed since the trigger time. The third are the GCN notices associated with the transient. For many of these transients, refined analyses lead to improvements in the sky localization. For example, in the gravitational-wave case, incorporation of detector calibration errors and full MCMC-based analyses can change the localization. For this reason, each notice is ingested and analyzed separately. The fourth is a section for observing plans, which are created for each of these notices. Finally, links to the GROWTH Marshal are created corresponding to the particular observing program.
There are a few components to each observing plan. The first is a queue name, which identifies the name given to the particular set of observations. The second is the start and end time of the set of observations. The third is the maximum exposure time for the observations. The fourth is the filter the observations will be taken in. A schedule with the fields encompassing the probability region are created based on these requested parameters. The scheduling is optimized using algorithms described in \citealt{Rana2017, Ghosh2017}. Subsequent sets of exposures of the same fields (potentially in different filters) are performed by making a separate request outside of the original window of time requested.
\section{Conclusion}
In summary, the GROWTH marshal provides an effective collaborative platform for time-domain astronomy. This portal continues to be developed based on feedback from the scientists using it with new features added every week. The GROWTH Marshal facilitates full automation of alert saving and alert follow-up. If a science program decides their alert stream is sufficiently pure that they would like to fully automate saving alerts and fully automate follow-up, this is technically straightforward. Indeed, two science programs are currently exploring full automation.
As we prepare for the LSST era, where the alert stream increases by yet another order of magnitude, science portals like the GROWTH Marshal will serve to assist collaborations focus on answering science questions and prioritize use of follow-up resources amidst the deluge of transient alerts.
\bigskip
\bigskip
This work was supported by the GROWTH (Global Relay of Observatories Watching Transients Happen) project funded by the National Science Foundation Partnership in International Research and Education program under Grant No 1545949. GROWTH is a collaborative project between California Institute of Technology (USA), Pomona College (USA), San Diego State University (USA), Los Alamos National Laboratory (USA), University of Maryland College Park (USA), University of Wisconsin Milwaukee (USA), Tokyo Institute of Technology (Japan), National Central University (Taiwan), Indian Institute of Astrophysics (India), Inter-University Center for Astronomy and Astrophysics (India), Weizmann Institute of Science (Israel), The Oskar Klein Centre at Stockholm University (Sweden), Humboldt University (Germany). Tested with observations obtained with the Samuel Oschin Telescope 48-inch and the 60-inch Telescope at the Palomar Observatory as part of the Zwicky Transient Facility project. Major funding has been provided by the U.S National Science Foundation under Grant No. AST-1440341 and by the ZTF partner institutions: the California Institute of Technology, the Oskar Klein Centre, the Weizmann Institute of Science, the University of Maryland, the University of Washington, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron, the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, and the TANGO Program of the University System of Taiwan. We thank I. Arcavi for valuable contributions to the predecessor of this system, the Palomar Transient Factory marshal system.
|
\section{}
Free neutrons with a lifetime of about 15 minutes are known to undergo $\beta$ decay via $n\rightarrow p + e^- + \bar{\nu}_e$ due to the weak force. There has been much experimental effort over the past decades for measuring the lifetime using two different techniques. The ``beam'' approach is to measure the neutron flux from a cold neutron beam after it going through a region where the emitted protons are detected \cite{nico2005,yue2013}. It measures directly the $\beta$ decay rate as far as other hidden neutron-disappearing processes are on the level of $10^{-3}$ or below. This approach typically gives a neutron lifetime of about 888 seconds. On the other hand, the ``bottle'' experiments store ultra-cold neutrons (UCN) confined by the gravitational force in a material or magnetic trap \cite{pattie2018,serebrov2018,arzumanov2015}. By measuring the neutron loss rate in the trap this method typically presents a neutron lifetime of about 880 seconds. Note that any other unknown loss processes in the trap will contribute to the measured lifetime and make it appear shorter. Another different approach using a magnetic storage ring \cite{paul1989} provides similar results as the ``bottle'' method. The 1\% difference between the results of the two approaches becomes more severe recently with the most precise measurements of $887.7\pm 1.2 (stat)\pm 1.9 (sys)$ s (``beam'') \cite{yue2013} and $877.7 \pm 0.7 (stat) +0.4/-0.2 (sys)$ s (``bottle'') \cite{pattie2018}.
Meanwhile, various theoretical studies on resolving the 1\% neutron lifetime discrepancy have been carried out. Searching physics beyond the standard model makes the idea of $n-\bar{n}$ oscillations intriguing. However, an early experiment set a very strict constraint on the oscillation time scale $\tau_{n\bar{n}} > 0.86 \times10^8$ s \cite{baldo-ceolin1994} making it unlikely to settle the issue. A recent attempt to consider neutrons that decay to particles in the dark sector showed an interesting decay channel of $n \rightarrow \chi + \gamma$ with constraints of $937.900$ MeV $< m_{\chi} < 938.783$ MeV for the dark particle mass and $0.782$ MeV $< E_{\gamma} < 1.664$ MeV for the photon energy \cite{fornal2018}. Unfortunately, such a possibility was dismissed shortly by an experiment \cite{tang2018} and a similar channel of $n \rightarrow \chi + e^+ + e^-$ was excluded as well \cite{ucnacollaboration2018}. By introducing a six-quark coupling in the mirror matter theory for the $n$ and $n'$ interaction of $\delta m \sim 10^{-15}$ eV with a large mass cutoff at $M \sim 10$ TeV, Berezhiani and Bento proposed a possible $n-n'$ oscillation mechanism with a time scale of $\tau \sim 1$ s \cite{berezhiani2006}. Later on, such oscillations were refuted experimentally with a much higher constraint of $\tau \geq 448$ s \cite{serebrov2009,ban2007,altarev2009,serebrov2008}. Despite all these efforts over the years the neutron lifetime puzzle still eludes explanation. More recent papers that have come to my awareness after the preparation of this work suggest other interesting ideas on either neutron dark decays or $n-n'$ oscillations \cite{karananas2018,bringmann2019,goldman2019,berezhiani2019a}. In particular, a $n-n'$ oscillation model was proposed using a six-quark coupling and a small $n-n'$ mass splitting of $10^{-7}$ eV \cite{berezhiani2019a} where, like many other studies, the ``bottle'' lifetime is favored.
In this paper, a new mechanism of $n-n'$ oscillations will be proposed. The new model can explain the observed difference of neutron lifetime measurements without harming other known physics with a $n-n'$ mixing strength of $2\times 10^{-5}$. Considering the thermal history of the early universe and big bang nucleosynthesis (BBN), we will show the mass difference of the $n-n'$ doublet to be about $2\times 10^{-6}$ eV/c$^2$ under the framework of the mirror matter theory with slightly broken mirror symmetry and no explicit cross-sector interaction. How the early universe evolved with both sectors forming the observed dark matter to baryon matter ratio $\Omega_{dark}/\Omega_B = 5.4$ will be demonstrated under this model. Possible experimental tests to confirm or refute this model will be discussed along the way and in the end.
The idea that there may exist mirror particles that compensate the parity violation of ordinary particles in the universe was first conceived by Lee and Young in their seminal paper on parity violation \cite{lee1956}. The idea has been developed into theories of a parallel world of mirror particles that is an exact mirrored copy of our ordinary world and the two worlds can only interact with each other gravitationally \cite{kobzarev1966,blinnikov1982,blinnikov1983,kolb1985,khlopov1991,foot2004,berezhiani2004,okun2007}.
Such a mirror matter theory has appealing theoretical features. For example, it can be embedded in the $E_8\otimes E_{8'}$ superstring theory \cite{green1984,gross1985,kolb1985} and it can also be a natural extension of recently developed twin Higgs models \cite{chacko2006,barbieri2005} that protect the Higgs mass from quadratic divergences and hence solve the hierarchy or fine-tuning problem. The mirror symmetry or twin Higgs mechanism is particularly intriguing as the Large Hadron Collider has found no evidence of supersymmetry so far and we may not need supersymmetry, at least not below energies of 10 TeV.
For simplicity, one can consider a gauge symmetry $G\otimes G'$ for both sectors of ordinary and mirror particles, where the standard model symmetry $G = SU(3)_c \otimes SU(2)_L \otimes U(1)_Y$ and the mirror counterpart $G'=SU(3)'_c \otimes SU(2)'_R \otimes U(1)'_Y$. The two parallel worlds share nothing but the same gravity. Very importantly, we assume that the mirror symmetry $\mathcal{M}(G \leftrightarrow G')$ is spontaneously broken by the Higgs vacuum, i.e., $<\phi> \neq <\phi'>$, although very slightly (e.g., on a relative breaking scale of $10^{-15} \text{--} 10^{-14}$ in this work). Mass of a fermion particle $\psi$ will be obtained via the Yukawa term of the Lagrangian coupled to the Higgs field $\phi$ owing to the broken symmetry,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{Yukawa} = -Y^{\alpha\beta}\bar{\psi}_{L\alpha} \psi_{R\beta} \phi_{\beta} + h.c.
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are the mirror indices of 1 and 2 of the two sectors. Note that this mirror mixing is similar to the family mixing for quarks and neutrinos in the standard model and the basis of mass eigenstates is not the same as that of mirror eigenstates. Therefore, like the CKM and PMNS matrices, a unitary mirror mixing operator is defined as follows,
\begin{equation}
U =
\begin{pmatrix}
\cos \theta_m & \sin \theta_m \\
-\sin \theta_m & \cos \theta_m
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
which transforms between the two bases with a mixing angle of $\theta_m$.
This broken mirror symmetry then naturally leads to the oscillations of neutral particles due to a mass difference. Similar to the ordinary neutrino oscillation, we can find the probability of non-relativistic $n-n'$ oscillations in free space,
\begin{equation}\label{eq_prob}
P_{nn'}(t) = \sin^2(2\theta) \sin^2(\frac{1}{2}\Delta_{nn'} t)
\end{equation}
where $\theta$ is the $n-n'$ mixing angle and $\sin^2(2\theta)$ denotes the mixing strength, $t$ is the propagation time, and $\Delta_{nn'} = m_{n} - m_{n'}$ is the small mass difference. Note that such oscillations do not affect the stability of nuclei with bound neutrons owing to energy conservation. From now on, natural units ($\hbar=c=1$) are used for simplicity and quantities of the mirror particles will be marked by $'$ to distinguish from those of the ordinary particles. For $t \ll \tau_{\beta} \approx 888$ s, the neutron $\beta$ decay factor of $\exp(-t/\tau_{\beta})$ is omitted in Eq. (\ref{eq_prob}).
If neutrons travel in a magnetic field $B$, Eq. (\ref{eq_prob}) will generally be modified by a medium effect due to the effective potential contributed to the Hamiltonian from the field \cite{berezhiani2019a,tan2019a,tan2019d}. However, such an effect is negligible \cite{tan2019a,tan2019d} if $\mu B \ll \Delta_{nn'}$ where $\mu=|\mu_n| \approx 6\times 10^{-8}$ eV/T is the absolute neutron magnetic moment. As shown below, the magnetic fields in the lifetime measurements are low enough in comparison with $\Delta_{nn'}$ and therefore Eq. (\ref{eq_prob}) still holds for the discussions below. Similar effect of $\mu' B'$ has to be considered as well if a mirror magnetic field exists at the same time.
The energy of a trapped UCN is typically less than $10^{-7}$ eV and its mean free flight time $\tau_f$ is on the order of $0.1$ s in a ``bottle'' experiment setup. Each scattering of UCN (e.g., from the trap walls) will collapse its wave function into a mirror eigenstate with a $n-n'$ transition probability $P_{nn'}(\tau_f)$ determined as in Eq. (\ref{eq_prob}). For a unit holding time in the trap, the number of such collisions will be $1/\tau_f$. Therefore, the transition rate of $n-n'$ for the trapped UCN is simply,
\begin{equation}\label{eq_prob2}
\lambda_{nn'} = \frac{1}{\tau_f}\sin^2(2\theta) \sin^2(\frac{1}{2}\Delta_{nn'} \tau_f).
\end{equation}
A more careful treatment of the $n$ and $n'$ wave function was carried out in Ref. \cite{kerbikov2008} as the trap walls do not exist for $n'$. Nonetheless, the result is the same as Eq. (\ref{eq_prob2}).
For the ``bottle'' experiments, the magnetic field of the UCN trap varied from as low as $B\approx2$ nT up to 10 mT (including ambient Earth's magnetic field of about $50\mu$T) \cite{ban2007,altarev2009,serebrov2008,serebrov2009,pattie2018} corresponding to an energy shift of $1.2\times 10^{-16} - 6\times 10^{-10}$ eV. If the $n-n'$ mass difference is large enough ($\gg 6\times 10^{-10}$ eV), the medium effect from the magnetic field will be negligible and meanwhile $\frac{1}{2}\Delta_{nn'} \tau_f \gg 1$, i.e., the propagation factor of Eq. (\ref{eq_prob2}) will simply be the mean value of 1/2. However, if the $n-n'$ mass difference is even greater than the energy (about $10^{-7}$ eV) of the trapped UCN, the propagation factor of Eq. (\ref{eq_prob2}) has to have its sine phase modified \cite{kerbikov2008} but its average is still 1/2. So under the assumption of $\Delta_{nn'} \gg 6\times 10^{-10}$ eV, we can obtain the transition rate of $n-n'$ for ``bottle'' experiments,
\begin{equation}\label{eq_prob3}
\lambda_{nn'}(\text{bottle}) = \frac{1}{2\tau_f}\sin^2(2\theta)
\end{equation}
which depends only on the mean free flight time $\tau_f$ and the mixing strength constant $\sin^2(2\theta)$ for $n-n'$ to be determined later.
There was actually strong evidence to support Eq. (\ref{eq_prob3}) from an early ``bottle'' experiment \cite{mampe1989}. They developed a novel technique with an adjustable Fomblin-coated UCN storage vessel \cite{bates1983,ageron1986} to determine the lifetime by extrapolating to the ideal condition of zero wall collisions. By varying the size of the vessel, they conducted a number of runs with effectively varied mean free flight time for UCN. Then they fit the data to an equation that is essentially the same as Eq. (\ref{eq_prob3}) and obtained the lifetime of $887.6 \pm 1.1$ s which is almost identical to the best ``beam'' measurement \cite{yue2013}. The remarkable fit in Fig. 2 of the paper \cite{mampe1989} essentially claims a hidden constant just like the $n-n'$ mixing strength $\sin^2(2\theta)$. Unfortunately, the dominating idea for the mythical loss from wall collisions was to blame the imperfect wall surface. And they were not confident of large corrections they had to apply so they changed the measured error bar from $\pm1.1$ to $\pm 3$ s. Nevertheless, the $n-n'$ mixing strength of about $2\times10^{-5}$ can be inferred from their work and the mean UCN loss per bounce on the Fomblin surface they measured essentially set an upper limit on the $n-n'$ mixing strength of $\sin^2(2\theta) \leq 4\times10^{-5}$.
As for the most recent ``bottle'' result by the UCN$\tau$ collaboration \cite{pattie2018} with a magnetic trap, neutrons are confined by magnetic fields and gravity and therefore it does not suffer the type of UCN losses from walls as in material trap experiments. However, its measured neutron lifetime is still about 1\% lower than the ``beam'' results. Taking into account the geometry of their trap, it is reasonable to estimate $\tau_f \sim 0.8$ s in their experiment. Together with the $n-n'$ mixing strength of $2\times10^{-5}$ as discussed above, the lifetime discrepancy is perfectly resolved using Eq. (\ref{eq_prob3}). Assuming that in the extreme case UCN is prepared at a much higher temperature than its kinetic energy in the trap, we can estimate a lower limit for the mixing strength $\sin^2(2\theta) \geq 8\times10^{-6}$. Under the new $n-n'$ oscillation model, magnetic traps with different sizes or effectively different mean free flight times will give different apparent lifetime values that can only be reconciled by Eq. (\ref{eq_prob3}). Future experiments with more of this type of traps will present a very strict test of this $n-n'$ oscillation model.
As a matter of fact, other ``bottle'' measurements with less precise magnetic traps have already indicated such discrepancies due to different trap sizes or mean free flight times \cite{dzhosyuk2005,leung2016,ezhov2018}. For example, a neutron storage lifetime of $874.6 \pm 1.7$ s was reported with a magnetic trap operated at the UCN facility of the Institut Laue–Langevin (ILL), France \cite{ezhov2018}. Assuming the discrepancy is all from $n-n'$ oscillations, we can obtain the mean neutron velocity of $29$ cm/s by using a mean free path of 17 cm according to the geometry of their setup. At the same facility (ILL), a very different magnetic trap (HOPE) was used to measure the neutron lifetime as well \cite{leung2016}. The HOPE trap was designed with a very thin cylindrical volume and a movable UCN remover rod at the top was used to measure the lifetime at two different heights of 65 and 80 cm, respectively. Due to the design, the neutron mean free path is essentially the same (i.e., the diameter of 9 cm) for both heights. The similar neutron energy distribution can be safely assumed for both Ref. \cite{ezhov2018} and Ref. \cite{leung2016} at the same facility. Therefore the mean neutron velocity in the HOPE experiment should be a little more than double that in Ref. \cite{ezhov2018} (i.e., 60 cm/s for height of 65 cm and 70 cm/s for 80 cm) as the maximum neutron energy in the HOPE setup is more than four to five times more. Considering $n-n'$ oscillations, the resulting lifetime within a few seconds agrees very well with the measured values of 835 s (at 65 cm) and 824 s (at 80 cm) although very large errors were applied in Ref. \cite{leung2016}. An earlier measurement at NIST \cite{dzhosyuk2005} used a magnetic trap that was very similar in geometry to the HOPE trap and a very similar lifetime of 833 s was obtained although quoted with large errors.
Now one can take a look at ``beam'' experiments in which neutrons don't bounce around until they hit the flux-monitoring detector in the end. Therefore one can consider it like traveling in free space as described in Eq. (\ref{eq_prob}). The flight time of $t \sim 10^{-3}$ s can be calculated for a flight path of 1 m and energy of 0.0034 eV \cite{nico2005}. ``Beam'' experiments typically apply high magnetic field of several Teslas (e.g. $B=4.6$ T \cite{nico2005}) to confine and extract emitted protons. Assuming that $\Delta_{nn'} \gg 3\times 10^{-7}$ eV, we can neglect the magnetic medium effect again for $B<5$ T and it makes the last factor of Eq. (\ref{eq_prob}) averaged to 1/2 as well. Therefore, the $n-n'$ transition probability is as follows,
\begin{equation}\label{eq_prob4}
P_{nn'}(\text{beam}) = \frac{1}{2}\sin^2(2\theta)
\end{equation}
which is on the order of $10^{-5}$, i.e., smaller than the best experimental precision by two orders of magnitude and basically not detectable in a ``beam'' experiment. Therefore, $n-n'$ oscillations do not affect the beta decay rate or $\tau_\beta$ measured in ``beam'' experiments. If $\Delta_{nn'} \sim 3\times 10^{-7}$ eV, i.e., $\mu B \sim \Delta_{nn'}$, the ``beam'' experiments could present a resonant $n-n'$ oscillation behavior \cite{berezhiani2019a}. As far as the mass splitting parameter is more than 10\% away from the resonant value, a ``beam'' experiment will not observe the effect on $\tau_\beta$. If $\mu B \gg \Delta_{nn'}$, the medium effect will greatly suppress the oscillation probability of Eq. (\ref{eq_prob4}) \cite{tan2019a,tan2019d} making the effect even smaller for ``beam'' experiments.
Here it is worth pointing out that we don't need the mirror-symmetry framework just to resolve the neutron lifetime discrepancy. The only assumptions for it to work are the mixing mechanism via some spontaneously broken symmetry and the mass difference should be $\gg 6\times 10^{-10}$ eV avoiding the resonant region of $\sim 3\times 10^{-7}$ eV for ``beam'' experiments . However, the mirror symmetry theory naturally presents a very elegant solution if not the best. In addition, to further constrain the $n-n'$ mass difference or better yet to nail it down, the mirror-symmetry theory need to be applied to the thermal evolution of the early universe which will be discussed below. As a motivation bonus, much richer physics can be studied under this model, for example, possible oscillations of other neutral particles and its impact on astrophysical environments.
In the first second of the Big Bang after protons and neutrons are formed from quarks, the age of the universe can be parameterized for temperatures between $10^{12}$ K ($\sim 100$ MeV) and $10^{10}$ K ($\sim 1$ MeV) as \cite{weinberg1972},
\begin{equation}\label{eq_age}
t=3.07/(\sqrt{g_*(T)} T_{10}^2) \text{[sec]} \sim \frac{1}{ T_{10}^2} \text{[sec]}
\end{equation}
where $T_{10}$ is the temperature in unit of $10^{10}$ K and $g_*(T)$ is the effective number of relativistic degrees of freedom at the given temperature $T$, which is about $10-17$ for this temperature range for one sector (the contribution from the other sector is negligible if its temperature is much lower as discussed below). As pions and muons are quickly annihilated in this temperature range, their contributions here and possible pion-neutron interactions that affect discussions below are omitted for simplicity. See Ref. \cite{bringmann2019} on the effect of pion-neutron interactions under a different neutron oscillation mechanism.
Once formed at temperature just above $10^{12}$ K, protons and neutrons are in thermal equilibrium with a 1:1 ratio by interacting with electrons, positrons, and neutrinos. They each consist of half of the baryon content because the Q-value or the mass difference between proton and neutron (1.293 MeV) is negligible at high temperatures. The same is true for the mirror sector except it may have a lower temperature $T' < T$ (e.g., $T'=1/3T$) at the same time as suggested by previous studies \cite{kolb1985,hodges1993,foot2004,berezhiani2004}. In fact, lower mirror temperature can occur naturally after inflation and subsequent reheating \cite{kolb1985,hodges1993,berezhiani2006} and it requires $T' < T/2$ to be consistent with BBN, in particular, the observed primordial helium abundance \cite{kolb1985,hodges1993}. Such a standard mirror temperature condition ($T'/T < 1/2$) is sufficient for the following discussions.
Oscillations of $n-n'$ then become the dominant source for matter exchange between the two parallel sectors as other neutral particles are either too short-lived (e.g., $\pi^0$) or too light (like neutrinos) to contribute, which will be discussed later. Therefore, the baryon contents of the two sectors will evolve via the interplay of $n-n'$ oscillations as follows,
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq_move}
\frac{d\chi(t)}{dt} &=& \frac{1}{2}P_{n'n}(\tau_f') \lambda_{np}'(t) \chi'(t) - \frac{1}{2}P_{nn'}(\tau_f) \lambda_{np}(t) \chi(t), \\
\label{eq_move2}
\frac{d\chi'(t)}{dt} &=& \frac{1}{2}P_{nn'}(\tau_f) \lambda_{np}(t) \chi(t) - \frac{1}{2}P_{n'n}(\tau_f') \lambda_{np}'(t) \chi'(t)
\end{eqnarray}
where $P_{nn'}$ ($P_{n'n}$) is the same as defined in Eq. (\ref{eq_prob}) with $t=\tau_f(\tau_f')$. The conversion rate $\lambda_{np}$ between protons and neutrons (smaller $n-\pi$ contributions are ignored here \cite{bringmann2019}) essentially defines the mean free flight time $\tau_f$ as \cite{weinberg1972},
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{1}{\tau_f} = \lambda_{np} &=& \frac{7\pi}{30}G_F^2 |V_{ud}|^2 (1+3\left( \frac{g_A}{g_V}\right)^2)(kT)^5 \nonumber \\
&\sim & 0.4 T_{10}^5 \text{[sec$^{-1}$]}
\end{eqnarray}
where $G_F$ is the Fermi constant, $V_{ud}$ is the CKM matrix element, and $g_A/g_V$ is the ratio of axial-vector/vector couplings.
Under the condition of the lower mirror temperature discussed above, the two equations (\ref{eq_move}-\ref{eq_move2}) will be decoupled and can be simplified by removing the first term. Therefore, the matter exchange will be in two separate steps. First, mirror neutrons, formed earlier than ordinary neutrons, will be converted to neutrons and hence mirror matter to ordinary matter due to $n-p$ equilibrium. The second step starts when the ordinary temperature gets low enough so that ordinary neutrons/matter will go back to the pool of mirror matter in the same way. The second step is much more significant due to a slower universe expansion rate at a later time as detailed below. In the end, a small amount of ordinary matter (neutrons and protons) is left while the mirror matter dominates the universe behaving exactly like the dark matter we have observed today.
First, one can examine the last yet dominant $n \rightarrow n'$ conversion process. The fraction of leftover ordinary matter can be worked out as follows,
\begin{equation} \label{eq_ratio}
\frac{\chi_r}{\chi_i} = \exp(-\frac{1}{2}\int P_{nn'}(\tau_f) \lambda_{np}(t)dt)
\end{equation}
where $\chi_r$ ($\chi_i$) is the remaining (initial) amount of ordinary matter. The integration over time in Eq. (\ref{eq_ratio}) can be simplified by replacing $t$ with temperature using Eq. (\ref{eq_age}),
\begin{eqnarray}
\int g(T)dT &\equiv& \int P_{nn'} \lambda_{np}dt \nonumber \\
\label{eq_int}
&=& \int 1.6\times10^{-5} \sin^2(\frac{\Delta_{nn'}/\text{[eV]} }{5.3\times10^{-16} (T_{10})^5}) (T_{10})^2 dT_{10}
\end{eqnarray}
where the conversion factor $g(T)$ is plotted in Fig. \ref{fig_1} assuming the $n-n'$ mass difference $\Delta_{nn'} = 2\times10^{-6}$ eV and the mixing strength of $2\times 10^{-5}$. As seen in Fig. \ref{fig_1}, the peak conversion occurs just under $10^{12}$ K (i.e., at $\sim 70$ MeV) and the distribution is narrow enough to decouple the evolution equations. Similar equations as above also apply to the first or $n' \rightarrow n$ conversion step although it is much shorter and the conversion factor is greatly suppressed by the small factor of $(T'/T)^2\sqrt{g_*(T')/g_*(T)}$. Therefore, the contribution from the $n' \rightarrow n$ conversion step is negligible.
For $\Delta_{nn'} \sim 2\times10^{-6}$ eV, after the conversion ($n \rightarrow n'$) process following Eqs. (\ref{eq_ratio}-\ref{eq_int}) over the temperature range between the QCD phase transition ($T_c=150-200$ MeV) and the weak interaction decoupling ($T=1$ MeV), most of the ordinary matter is converted to mirror matter resulting a mirror-to-ordinary matter ratio of about 5.4, which is the same as the ratio of dark matter to baryon matter. As it turns out, the obtained $\Delta_{nn'}$ value within $50\%$ is very insensitive to other parameters such as the phase transition or nucleon-forming temperature (e.g., between 150 and 200 MeV) and the initial mirror-to-ordinary baryon ratio (e.g., equal amounts or little initial net mirror baryon matter as suggested by a separate work \cite{tan2019c}). Remarkably, $\Delta_{nn'} \sim 2\times10^{-6}$ eV is consistent with constraints from the neutron lifetime experiments as discussed above. A high-precision laboratory measurement of this mass splitting parameter is proposed using a ``beam'' approach with very high magnetic fields \cite{tan2019d}.
Conversely, using the observed dark-to-baryon matter ratio as a constraint, one can obtain the following simple relationship between the $n-n'$ mass difference and its mixing strength,
\begin{equation}
\sin^2(2\theta) = \left( \frac{3\times 10^{-14} \text{eV}}{\Delta_{nn'}}\right)^{0.6}
\end{equation}
which could be used to determine a better mass difference once the UCN experiments have better measurements for the mixing strength.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{osc.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig_1} The temperature dependence of the $n \leftrightarrow n'$ conversion factor $g(T)$ due to $n-n'$ oscillation is shown. The peak conversion rate occurs right below $T=10^{12}$ K shortly after (mirror) baryons are formed in the early universe.}
\end{figure}
If the $n-n'$ mixing strength is on the order of $10^{-5}-10^{-6}$, the corresponding single quark mixing strength will be the cube root of that, i.e., about $10^{-2}$. The neutral mesons like $\pi^0$ and $K^0$, consequently, will have a mirror mixing strength of about $10^{-4}$. The mixing probabilities for neutral mesons are,
\begin{eqnarray}
P_{\pi^0\pi^{0'}}(t) & = & \sin^2(2\theta_{\pi^0}) \sin^2(\frac{1}{2}\Delta_{\pi^0\pi^{0'}} t), \nonumber \\
\label{eq_probmeson}
P_{K^0K^{0'}}(t) &=& \sin^2(2\theta_{K^0}) \sin^2(\frac{1}{2}\Delta_{K^0K^{0'}} t)
\end{eqnarray}
which hold true even for relativistic particles as far as $t$ is the proper time in the particle's rest frame. The mirror particles are not detectable in the ordinary world so that Eq. (\ref{eq_probmeson}) essentially defines the branching fractions of invisible decays of the mesons. Since the mass difference stems from the Higgs mixing, it is reasonable to assume that it is scaled to the particle's mass. Therefore, $\Delta_{\pi^0\pi^{0'}}$ and $\Delta_{K^0K^{0'}}$ should be similar to that of $n-n'$, i.e., about $10^{-6}$ eV. Considering the $\pi^0$'s very short lifetime of $8.52\times10^{-17}$ s, the $\pi^{0} - \pi^{0'}$ transition probability or the branching fraction of its invisible decays should be less than $10^{-18}$ which is not detectable with today's technology. On the other hand, $K^0$ has fairly long lifetime ($9\times10^{-11}$ s for $K^0_S$ and $5\times10^{-8}$ s for $K^0_L$) which makes the propagation factor in Eq. (\ref{eq_probmeson}) about $10^{-2}$ for $K^0_S$ and averaged to 1/2 for $K^0_L$. Therefore, the branching fraction of $K^0$ invisible decays is estimated to be about $10^{-6}$ for $K^0_S$ and $10^{-4}$ for $K^0_L$, which surprisingly is not constrained experimentally \cite{gninenko2015}. Such a large fraction should motivate people to start searching for $K^0 \rightarrow invisible$ decays at current kaon production facilities.
Similar estimate can be done for $D^0$ and $B^0$ mesons and their lifetimes permit an invisible branching fraction of about $10^{-9}-10^{-10}$ from the mirror oscillations. Other heavy neutral particles have even shorter lifetimes so that the effect of the oscillations is negligible. As for the light particles, photons have no rest mass and thus can not be mixed. The massive species of neutrinos should take part in the mirror mixing just like the 3-generation mixing in the ordinary sector. However, the effect is very small as $\Delta^2_{\nu\nu'} \sim 10^{-17} - 10^{-19}$ eV$^2$ assuming a neutrino mass of $0.1-0.01$ eV. To observe this oscillation effect for 1 MeV neutrinos, it has to come from stars at least thousands of light years away, possibly from a supernova explosion. Solar neutrinos have to have an energy below 1 eV to experience such oscillations on its way to Earth.
To conclude, the following analysis and experimental studies are highly recommended in order to test the proposed model.
Careful reanalysis of past ``bottle'' experiments should be carried out by taking into account the mean free flight time $\tau_f$ evaluated or simulated for its own specific setup. Under this model with Eq. (\ref{eq_prob3}) for the corrections from $n-n'$ oscillations, a consistent beta decay lifetime should be obtained and it will also help determine a more accurate $n-n'$ mixing strength. Magnetic traps with various sizes can provide a much stricter test of this model without worries of the interference from wall surface. Studies of $K^0\rightarrow invisible$ decays should be granted high priority at kaon production facilities. The measured invisible branching fraction will tell us about the $K^0-K^{0'}$ mixing strength and possibly verify the mechanism of the spontaneously broken mirror symmetry. If this mirror symmetry theory is confirmed, invisible mirror stars and galaxies should be searched. Such candidates may have already been observed in most of the black hole and neutron star merger events that were detected by gravitational-wave observatories but could not be identified with its electromagnetic counterpart except for the one neutron star merger \cite{ligoscientificcollaborationandvirgocollaboration2017}. Could most of the merger events actually come from the mirror sector of the universe? This is understandable since we are in a dark (mirror) matter dominated universe.
Many of the intriguing features conceived in previous studies of the mirror matter theory \cite{blinnikov1983,kolb1985,khlopov1991,foot2004,berezhiani2004} are kept and work even better under the new model. For example, the $\Omega_{dark}/\Omega_B$ ratio could be explained better as discussed above. Another example is the unexpected excess of ultrahigh-energy cosmic rays above the Greisen–Zatsepin–Kuzmin (GZK) limit and an explanation using the mirror matter theory was provided except for a caveat of unrealistic requirement on galactic and intergalactic magnetic fields \cite{berezhiani2006a}. Under the current model, better explanation without tarnishment for this and various other GZK related effects is presented in a separate work \cite{tan2019b}. To resolve the galactic dark matter issues, a requirement of strongly self-interacting dark matter \cite{spergel2000} was proposed and it can be naturally met with the mirror matter theory.
Based on this model, the Standard Model is extended with mirror matter and used for understanding dark energy and puzzles in particle physics \cite{tan2019e}. Application of this proposed $n-n'$ model to evolution and nucleosynthesis in stars is studied under a new stellar burning theory \cite{tan2019a}. Remarkable agreement between the observations and the predictions from the study provides strong evidence and support for this model \cite{tan2019a}. And furthermore, a natural extension of the new model applying kaon oscillations in the early universe shows a promising solution to the long-standing baryon asymmetry problem with new insights for the QCD phase transition and B-violation topological processes \cite{tan2019c}. Last but not least, extension of the CKM matrix and laboratory tests of the new model are proposed in a separate work \cite{tan2019d}.
The influence of this $n-n'$ mixing model can also be studied in various other scenarios like BBN where the $^7$Li problem could potentially be solved \cite{coc2013,coc2014a,tan2019c}, stellar burning processes (in particular, neutron capture processes) \cite{tan2019a}, neutron star mergers (including all three cases of ordinary-ordinary, mirror-mirror, and mirror-ordinary mergers). Probably the two mirrored yet separated worlds have been and are being connected by the active and fascinating messenger of the $n-n'$ doublet during the Big Bang and after the formation of stars.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
I would like to thank Ani Aprahamian and Michael Wiescher for supporting me in a great research environment at Notre Dame. Useful discussions on UCN with Adam Holley at the 42nd Symposium on Nuclear Physics in Mexico are appreciated. I also like to thank Jim Cline for informing about their work on the effect of pion-neutron interactions under a different neutron oscillation mechanism, Bo Feng and Jing Shu for pointing out the connection of this work to the twin Higgs models.
This work is supported in part by the National Science Foundation under
grant No. PHY-1713857 and the Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics (JINA-CEE, www.jinaweb.org), NSF-PFC under grant No. PHY-1430152.
\bibliographystyle{elsarticle-num}
|
\section{Introduction } \label{intro}
Higher derivative gravity theories play an important role in black hole physics, cosmology, holography, supergravity and string theory. Efforts to construct a UV complete theory of quantum gravity generically lead to theories that contain a series of terms in the action that are higher-order in curvature in addition to usual Einstein-Hilbert term. For example, this is the case in string theory where an infinite series of terms can be present~\cite{Gross:1986mw}. Higher derivative theories provide a framework for testing which features of gravitational theory are special, and therefore their studies provide a better understanding of Einstein gravity and what type of modifications one can expect due to quantum corrections.
Work in this direction has a long history, dating back to early days of general relativity. Originally, Weyl and Eddington proposed such theories for geometric unification of gravity and electromagnetism \cite{weyl1923allgemeine, carmichael1925eddington}. Somewhat later the search for higher curvature theories correcting the Einstein-Hilbert action became motivated by attempts to construct a quantized theory of gravity. For example, the addition of higher derivative terms to Einstein-Hilbert action can yield a power-counting renormalizable theory~\cite{Stelle:1977ry}.
Further work indicated that in the low energy effective action of string theory a Gauss-Bonnet term appears \cite{Zwiebach:1985uq}. Higher curvature gravities have been particularly useful in the context of the AdS/CFT correspondence \cite{Maldacena:1998}, where these terms generically arise when studying the dual theory beyond large $N$, but also have been successfully employed as holographic toy models. The presence of additional couplings in the action allow one to make contact with a larger class of CFTs than those defined by Einstein gravity~\cite{Camanho:2009vw,deBoer:2009pn,Buchel:2008vz,Hofman:2008ar,Hofman:2009ug,Nojiri:1999mh,Blau:1999vz,Buchel:2009sk,Myers:2010jv,mir:1307,Bueno:2018xqc}, which has been used with success to identify universal properties of CFTs, e.g.~\cite{Myers:2010tj,Myers:2010xs,Mezei:2014zla,Bueno1,Bueno2, Cano:2018aqi}. In the context of cosmology, higher curvature gravities have been extensively considered to explain the late-time expansion of the universe, dark matter and inflation \cite{sotiriou2010f, clifton2012modified}.
The most general higher-curvature theory yielding second order equations of motion in arbitrary dimensions is known as Lovelock gravity. It is perhaps the most natural generalization of Einstein gravity in higher dimensions~\cite{Lovelock:1971yv}. Indeed, Einstein gravity can be understood as a special case of Lovelock gravity in dimensions greater than four, with the Einstein-Hilbert term being one of several terms that constitute Lovelock theory in a given dimension. These theories are ghost-free~\cite{Zwiebach:1985uq} and so are candidates for generalizations of Einstein gravity in higher dimensions. However, Lovelock gravity that is $k$th order in curvature is only non-trivial for spacetime dimensions $d > 2k+1$. Thus, one must go beyond Lovelock gravity to obtain theories that have interesting implications for lower dimensional physics.
Under certain symmetry restrictions, many of the nice properties of Lovelock gravity can be extended to obtain a broader class of \textit{quasi-topological gravity} theories~\cite{Oliva:2010eb, Myers:2010ru}. Quasi-topological theories possess a number of interesting properties. First, in the context of spherically symmetric metrics, their field equations are second-order (though they would be fourth-order on a generic background). Second, in contrast to Lovelock theory, quasi-topological theories of cubic or higher-order in curvature appear to exist and are non-trivial for any dimension $d \ge 5$.\footnote{Though we note that, at present, explicit examples of five-dimensional quasi-topological theories are known only up to quintic order in curvature~\cite{Dehghani:2013ldu, Cisterna:2017umf}.} Third, the linearized equations of motion of quasi-topological gravity coincide (up to an overall prefactor) with those of Einstein gravity on maximally symmetric spacetime backgrounds
\cite{Myers:2010tj}. This property ensures that the theory does not propagate negative energy to asymptotic regions of constant curvature.
These applications have motivated more recent efforts to construct new theories of higher-curvature gravity that are both free of ghosts and interesting both holographically and phenomenologically. A success in this direction was the construction of \textit{Einsteinian Cubic Gravity} (ECG)~\cite{Bueno:2016xff, Bueno:2016ypa}. ECG was constructed as the unique cubic theory of gravity whose Lagrangian is of the same form in all dimensions and propagates only the usual massless and transverse graviton on maximally symmetric backgrounds. Unlike Lovelock and quasi-topological gravities, ECG is neither trivial nor topological in four dimensions, and admits four-dimensional black hole solutions that possess a number of remarkable properties~\cite{Hennigar:2016gkm, Bueno:2016lrh}: (i) there is a single independent field equation (in the most general case there would be two) that admits an integrating factor, reducing it to a second-order differential equation determining the metric function $f(r)$. (ii) The black hole solutions are ``non-hairy'' in the sense that they are characterized by mass alone. (iii) Despite the lack of an analytic solution to the equations of motion, the thermodynamic properties of black holes can be studied exactly. When evaluated at the horizon, the field equations reduce to two polynomial equations that determine the temperature and mass in terms of the horizon radius.
It has been realized that it is possible to construct more general theories of gravity in four and higher dimensions that incorporate many of the interesting properties observed for ECG~\cite{Hennigar:2017ego, Bueno:2017sui, Ahmed:2017jod}. These theories, named \textit{generalized quasi-topological gravities}, propagate only the usual massless tranverse graviton in vacuum, admit non-hairy black hole solutions characterized by a single metric function, and allow for non-perturbative studies of black hole thermodynamics.\footnote{It appears that all of these features follow from the requirement that black holes are characterized by single independent field equation, as argued in~\cite{Hennigar:2017ego, Bueno:2017sui}.} The relative simplicity of this class of theories make them ideal for phenomenological purposes (in four dimensions) and
as toy models (in all dimensions). It was shown that black branes in these theories possess a rich phase structure, contrary to what happens in Lovelock and quasi-topological theories~\cite{Hennigar:2017umz}. An initial study of holographic aspects of ECG was carried out in~\cite{Bueno:2018xqc}, determining a number of entries in the holographic dictionary for the theory and revealing, for example, that the Kovtun-Son-Starinets bound on the ratio of entropy density to shear viscosity always holds~\cite{Bueno:2018xqc}. In~\cite{Bueno:2018uoy} it was shown that the properties of black hole solutions in these theories extend also to Taub-NUT/Bolt solutions, providing the first examples of explicit solutions of this kind beyond Lovelock theory. Based on that work, a number of universal results were obtained for the free energy of odd-dimensional CFTs on squashed spheres~\cite{Bueno:2018yzo}. See, for example,~\cite{Li:2017ncu, Li:2017txk, Colleaux:2017ibe, Li:2018drw, Carballo-Rubio:2018bmu, Li:2019auk} for a number of other recent developments and applications of these --- and closely related --- theories.
As we mentioned, there are also reasons for considering these theories in the context of phenomenology. Concerning four-dimensional physics, small asymptotically flat black hole solutions become stable, a result with possible implications for dark matter and the information loss problem~\cite{Bueno:2017qce}. Recent work has revealed potentially interesting phenomenological signatures of black holes~\cite{Hennigar:2018hza,Poshteh:2018wqy}. Furthermore, it has been realized that the equations of motion of a subclass of the generalized quasi-topological theories are second-order for FLRW cosmologies (indicating a well-posed initial value problem), with late-time dynamics indistinguishable from $\Lambda$CDM while giving rise to an inflationary epoch~\cite{Arciniega:2018fxj}. It was subsequently realized that this is a generic property of the four-dimensional class of theories~\cite{Cisterna:2018tgx, GeometricInflation}.
In this paper we carry out an extensive study of the thermodynamic properties of charged black holes in cubic generalized quasi-topological gravity. Much of our work is framed in the language of black hole chemistry, in which the cosmological constant is promoted to a thermodynamic variable \cite{Henneaux:1985tv, Creighton:1995au} interpreted as pressure in the first law of black hole mechanics \cite{Kastor:2010gq, KastorEtal:2010}. This more general perspective revealed a deep analogy
between charged anti-de Sitter black holes and Van der Waals fluids \cite{Kubiznak:2012wp}.
A remarkably rich thermodynamic phase behaviour for black holes has since been discovered, including the examples of triple points \cite{Altamirano:2013uqa}, re-entrant phase transitions \cite{Altamirano:2013ane}, polymer-like behaviour \cite{Dolan:2014vba}, and even superfluid-like phase transitions \cite{Hennigar:2016xwd,EricksonRobie,Dykaar:2017mba}.
This framework has shown to be particularly fruitful in understanding black holes in higher curvature gravity~\cite{Wei:2012ui, Cai:2013qga, Xu:2013zea, Mo:2014qsa, Wei:2014hba, Mo:2014mba, Zou:2013owa, Belhaj:2014tga, Xu:2014kwa, Frassino:2014pha, Dolan:2014vba, Sherkatghanad:2014hda, Hendi:2015cka, Hendi:2015oqa, Hennigar:2015esa, Hendi:2015psa, Nie:2015zia, Hendi:2015pda, Hendi:2015soe, Zeng:2016aly, Hennigar:2016gkm, EricksonRobie, Hennigar:2016xwd, Cvetic:2010jb, Hennigar:2014cfa, Johnson:2014yja, Karch:2015rpa, Caceres:2015vsa, Dolan:2016jjc, Sinamuli:2017rhp, Li:2017wbi, Dehyadegari:2018pkb, Hendi:2018xuy}; we refer the reader to \cite{Kubiznak:2016qmn} for a detailed survey of this subject. A study of the thermodynamic behaviour of black holes in the quartic theory
\cite{Ahmed:2017jod} is forthcoming \cite{MirMann2019}.
Our paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{sec:bhsolution} we present charged static, spherically symmetric AdS black holes in cubic generalized quasi-topological gravity. In Section \ref{sec:thermo} we collect the thermodynamic properties of the charged black holes. In Section~\ref{sec:HawkingPage} we study the uncharged solutions, discussing their thermodynamics and the Hawking-Page transition in four and five dimensions. In Section~\ref{sec:thermofpe} we extend our considerations to include charge, working in the grand canonical (fixed potential) ensemble. In Section \ref{sec: thermoce} we discuss the phase structure of the charged black holes in the canonical (fixed charge) ensemble.
In Section~\ref{sec: holog} we begin a holographic study of the theory, focusing on holographic hydrodynamics. We conclude the paper with a general discussion, and collect some useful results in the appendices.
\section{Charged black hole solutions} \label{sec:bhsolution}
To set up for the thermodynamic analysis in Section~\ref{sec:thermo}, in this section we shall study charged static, spherically symmetric AdS black holes in generalized quasi-topological gravity. This includes a more thorough study of the results presented for asymptotically flat solutions and AdS black branes in recent work~\cite{Bueno:2017sui, Bueno:2017qce, Ahmed:2017jod, Hennigar:2017ego, Hennigar:2017umz}, but also includes a study of spherical and hyperbolic black holes for the first time in this context.
\subsection{Full theory and equations of motion}
The most general cubic theory satisfying the condition $g_{tt}g_{rr} = -1$ ensuring dependence on a single metric function includes the cubic Lovelock and quasi-topological terms, in addition to the generalized quasi-topological term. Since both Lovelock and quasi-topological terms have been previously studied (see, e.g.~\cite{Frassino:2014pha, Hennigar:2015esa}) here we take Einstein gravity accompanied only by the cubic generalized quasi-topological term and a Maxwell field. In $d$ spacetime dimensions, the action\footnote{Our choice of the coupling here is opposite to that of~\cite{Hennigar:2017ego}, i.e. we choose a positive sign convention for the cubic coupling.} is given by \cite{Hennigar:2017ego}
\begin{align}
\cI=\frac{1}{16\pi G}\int d^dx& \sqrt{-g} \bigg[ \frac{(d-1)(d-2)}{L^2}+R -\frac{1}{4}F_{a b}F^{a b}
\nonumber\\
&+\frac{12(2d-1)(d-2) \mu \cS_{3,d}}{(d-3)(4d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)} \bigg]
\label{action0}
\end{align}
where the cosmological constant is parameterized in the standard way
\begin{equation}
\Lambda = -\frac{(d-1)(d-2)}{2 L^2}
\end{equation}
and where
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Sd}
\mathcal{S}_{3, d} &=&
14 R_{a}{}^{e}{}_{c}{}^{f} R^{abcd} R_{bedf}+ 2 R^{ab} R_{a}{}^{cde} R_{bcde}- \frac{4 (66 - 35 d + 2 d^2) }{3 (d-2) (2 d-1)} R_{a}{}^{c} R^{ab} R_{bc}
\nonumber\\
&&- \frac{2 (-30 + 9 d + 4 d^2) }{(d-2) (2d-1)} R^{ab} R^{cd} R_{acbd}
- \frac{(38 - 29 d + 4 d^2)}{4 (d -2) (2 d - 1)} R R_{abcd} R^{abcd}
\nonumber\\
&&+ \frac{(34 - 21 d + 4 d^2) }{(d-2) ( 2 d - 1)} R_{ab} R^{ab} R - \frac{(30 - 13 d + 4 d^2)}{12 (d-2) (2 d - 1)} R^3 \, .
\end{eqnarray}
The ansatz for the metric is in the following form
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eqn:metricAnsatz}
ds^2&=& -N(r)^2f(r)dt^2+\frac{dr^2}{f(r)}+r^2d\Sigma^2_{(d-2),k}
\end{eqnarray}
and the field equations permit $N(r)=constant$ \cite{Hennigar:2017ego}; we set $N(r)=1$ for simplicity.\footnote{In general, one can choose $N=1/\sqrt{f_{\infty}}$, to normalize the speed of light on the boundary or in the dual CFT to be $c=1$ \cite{Myers:2010ru}. However we set $N=1$ by time reparametrization of the metric. } In the above, $d\Sigma^2_{(d-2),k}$ denotes the line element of the $(d-2)$-dimensional transverse space, which we take to be a surface of constant scalar curvature $k=+1,0,-1$, associated with spherical, flat, and hyperbolic topologies, respectively.\footnote{The case $k=0$ has been previously investigated \cite{Hennigar:2017umz} and so we only concentrate on non-planar black holes.}
A particular case of the metric~\eqref{eqn:metricAnsatz} is a maximally symmetric space, for which the metric function takes the form,
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{\rm AdS}(r) = k+f_{\infty} \frac{r^2}{ L^2} \, .
\end{eqnarray}
Here, $L$ is the length scale associated with the cosmological constant, while $f_\infty$ is a constant that solves the following polynomial equation:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{asympf}
h(f_\infty) := 1 - f_\infty +(d-6) \frac{\mu f_\infty^3}{L^4} = 0 \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
which is insensitive to the value of $k$. With $\mu \neq 0$, $f_\infty$ will differ from unity, indicating that the higher curvature terms contribute to the radius of curvature of the space. In general, the real solutions to this polynomial may be positive or negative --- we discard any negative solutions for $f_\infty$, since these would correspond to dS vacua. Restricting to only $f_\infty > 0$, the effective radius of the AdS space is then given by $L_{\rm eff} = L/\sqrt{f_\infty}$.
The negative of the derivative of Eq.~\eqref{asympf} with respect to $f_\infty$ coincides with the prefactor appearing in the linearized equations of motion~\cite{Hennigar:2017ego}, and therefore must be positive
\begin{eqnarray}\label{asympder}
-h'(f_\infty) = 1 - 3 (d-6) \frac{\mu}{L^4} f_\infty^2 > 0
\label{PF}
\end{eqnarray}
to ensure that the graviton is not a ghost in these backgrounds.
As our aim is to study charged black holes, we introduce a Maxwell field $F_{a b}=\partial_a A_b-\partial_b A_a$, with electromagnetic one form defined as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eqn:vecPot}
A &=& q E(r) dt
\end{eqnarray}
By substitution of above expression in the Maxwell equation, the unknown function is determined
\begin{eqnarray}
E(r) &=& \sqrt{\frac{2(d-2)}{(d-3)}}\frac{1}{r^{d-3}}
\end{eqnarray}
where the specific choice of the prefactor was chosen to simplify the thermodynamic expressions and we have set to zero a constant term in the potential.
The only independent field equation from \eqref{action0} becomes
\begin{equation}\label{Feqn}
\frac{d}{dr} F[f, f', f''] = 0
\end{equation}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
F&=&r^{d-3}\left(k-f(r)+\frac{r^2}{L^2}\right)+\mu F_{\cS_{3,d}}+r^{3-d}q^2 \, .
\end{eqnarray}
The term $F_{\cS_{3,d}}$ is the contribution from the cubic generalized quasi-topological term to the field equation and is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eqn:fullEFE}
F_{\cS_{3,d}}&=& \frac{12}{(4d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)} \Bigl[ (d^2+5d-15)\Bigl(
\frac{4}{3} r^{d-4} f'^3- 8 r^{d-5} f f'' \bigl(\frac{r f'}{2} + k - f \bigr) \nonumber\\
&& - 2 r^{d-5} ((d-4)f -2k) f'^2
+ 8(d-5) r^{d-6} ff'( f - k) \Bigr)
-\frac{1}{3} (d-4) r^{d-7}(k-f)^2 \nonumber\\
&&\times \Bigl( \bigl(-d^4 + \frac{57}{4} d^3 - \frac{261}{4} d^2 + 312 d - 489 \bigr)f + k\bigl( 129 - 192 d + \frac{357}{4} d^2 - \frac{57}{4} d^3 + d^4 \bigr) \Bigr) \Bigr]\,.\nonumber\\
\end{eqnarray}
Since the left-hand side of Eq. \eqref{Feqn} is a total derivative, direct integration yields
\begin{eqnarray}
F = m
\end{eqnarray}
where $m$ is an integration constant with dimensions of $[{\rm length}]^{d-3}$ and we shall see shortly that it is related to the mass of black hole.
Although exact solutions to these field equations are not possible (except in special cases~\cite{Feng:2017tev}), it is possible to study the asymptotic behaviour and near horizon behaviour of the metric perturbatively. From the near horizon expansion it will be possible to completely characterize the thermodynamics of the black holes.
\subsection{Asymptotic solution}
To begin our solution of the equations of motion, we first focus on the case of large-$r$. In this limit, the solution will consist of a homogeneous and particular part. For the particular solution, we take the following series ansatz:
\begin{equation}
f_{1/r}(r) = f_\infty \frac{r^2}{L^2} + \sum_{n=-1}^{\infty} \frac{b_n}{r^n} \, ,
\end{equation}
where we have included a possible linear dependence $b_{-1} r$. Plugging this expansion into Eq.~\eqref{eqn:fullEFE} and solving order-by-order yields the following result:
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{1/r}(r)&=&f_\infty \frac{r^2}{L^2} + k + \frac{m}{h'(f_{\infty}) r^{d-3}}
-\frac{q^2}{h'(f_{\infty}) r^{2d-6}} \nonumber\\
&&\left.+ \mu
\frac{(72 d^5-294 d^4+2358 d^3-11880 d^2+18888 d-6624)}{2(4d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)}\frac{h'(f_{\infty})+2}{h'(f_{\infty})^2}\frac{f_{\infty} m^2}{L^2 r^{2 d-4}}
\right.\nonumber\\
&&\left.-\mu \frac{(216 d^5-342 d^4-2442 d^3+5064 d^2-1992 d+2016)}{(4d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)} \frac{h'(f_{\infty})+2}{h'(f_{\infty})^2}
\frac{f_{\infty} m q^2}{L^2 r^{3 d-7}}
\right.\nonumber\\
&&\left.+24\mu \frac{(d-2) (d-1)^2 \left(d^2+5 d-15\right)}{(4d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)}
\frac{h'(f_{\infty})+2}{h'(f_{\infty})^2}\frac{k m^2}{ r^{2 d-2}}\right.\nonumber\\
&&\left.
+\cO\left(\frac{g_1(\mu,d,L)m^3}{h'(f_{\infty})^3 r^{3 d-5}},\frac{g_2(\mu,d,L)k q^2 m}{h'(f_{\infty})^2 r^{3 d-5}},\frac{g_3(\mu,d,L)q^4}{h'(f_{\infty})^2 r^{4 d-10}}\right)
\right.
\end{eqnarray}
where $h'(f_{\infty})$ is defined in \reef{asympder}. We have written the first five leading terms and have indicated the falloff behaviour of the next corrections to $f_{1/r}(r)$. It is easy to see that as $\mu \to 0$ $f_{1/r}(r)$ approaches the full solution in Einstein gravity,
\begin{eqnarray}
f^{\rm Ein}(r)=k+\frac{r^2}{L^2}-\frac{m}{r^{d-3}} +\frac{q^2}{r^{2d-6}} \, .
\end{eqnarray}
This is so because, in this limit, $f_\infty \to 1$ and $h'(f_\infty) \to -1$ putting the first four terms into the expected form, while $\mu \to 0$ removes the remaining terms.
To obtain the homogeneous solution, we substitute $f(r) = f_{1/r}(r) + \epsilon f_{\rm h}(r)$ into Eq.~\eqref{eqn:fullEFE}. Here we will work to linear order in $f_{\rm h}(r)$ (which is accomplished by working to linear order in $\epsilon$, then setting $\epsilon = 1$), and to leading order in the large-$r$ limit. In this case, the equation determining the homogeneous solution reads
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{\rm h}''-\frac{4}{r}f_{\rm h}'-\gamma^2 r^{d-3}f_{\rm h}=0 \, ,
\label{homog}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\gamma^2&=& -\frac{ 3 (4d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184) L^2 \left[h'(f_\infty) \right]^2}{144 (d-1) \left(d^2+5 d-15\right) f_{\infty} \mu \ m}
\, .
\label{gamma2}
\end{eqnarray}
Note that, at this order, the homogeneous equation does not care about the value of $k$.
Let us now understand the solutions to the homogeneous equation in the relevant cases. First, consider the case of $\gamma^2>0$. In this case the solution to~\eqref{homog} takes the form,\footnote{Note that the term involving $f_{\rm h}'$ is subleading compared to the other terms in the equation. This justifies neglecting that term in the large-$r$ limit. Doing so leads to identical conclusions concerning the sign of $\gamma^2$ as we obtain here.}
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{\rm h}^{(+)} = A r^{5/2} I_{\frac{5}{d-1}}\left(\frac{2 \gamma r^{\frac{d-1}{2}}}{d-1}\right)+B r^{5/2} K_{\frac{5}{d-1}}\left(\frac{2 \gamma r^{\frac{d-1}{2}}}{d-1}\right) \label{bessel}
\end{eqnarray}
where $I$ and $K$ denote the modified Bessel functions of the first and second kinds, respectively and $A$ and $B$ are constants. Schematically, in the limit of large $r$, the behaviour is
\begin{equation}
f_{\rm h}^{(+)} \sim A r^{5/2} \exp\left(\frac{2 \gamma r^{\frac{d-1}{2}}}{d-1}\right)+B r^{5/2}\exp \left(-\frac{2 \gamma r^{\frac{d-1}{2}}}{d-1}\right)\label{exp}
\end{equation}
which shows that by imposing $A = 0$, the homogenous solution falls off super-exponentially in the asymptotic region --- this can be viewed as a consequence of the fact that the theory does not propagate ghosts on AdS. The super-exponential falloff of the second term also justifies our dropping of the homogenous solution below.
Consider next $\gamma^2<0$; the homogenous solution at large $r$ becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{\rm h}^{(-)} = C_1 r^{5/2} J_{\frac{5}{d-1}}\left(\frac{2 |\gamma| r^{\frac{d}{2}-\frac{1}{2}}}{d-1}\right)+C_2 r^{5/2} Y_{\frac{5}{d-1}}\left(\frac{2 |\gamma| r^{\frac{d}{2}-\frac{1}{2}}}{d-1}\right) \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $J$ and $Y$ are the Bessel functions of the first and second kinds, respectively. Note that the radial dependence is such that, in any dimension, we get solutions that oscillate rapidly and grow faster than $r^2/L^2$, and thus do not approach AdS at infinity. The only consistent possibility would be to impose $C_1 = C_2 = 0$, eliminating the homogenous part of the solution and fixing all of the integration constants characterizing the solution. This appears to be too restrictive, as it seems to be impossible to construct solutions with $\gamma^2 < 0$ numerically while demanding a sensible black hole solution in the bulk. This, combined with the fact that for all other choices of the constants $C_1$ and $C_2$ the solution is not asymptotically AdS, leads us to disregard solutions with $\gamma^2 <0$ in the remainder of the paper --- they do not seem to exist. We henceforth will restrict ourselves to those solutions that have $\gamma^2 > 0$.
Let us note that in all cases of interest here (i.e. $d\ge 4$), the dimension-dependent pre-factors in~\eqref{gamma2} are always positive. Further, the requirement of having asymptotically AdS solutions constrains $f_\infty > 0$. Thus, ensuring the full positivity of $\gamma^2$ reduces to the inequality $m \mu < 0$. As we will see below, the parameter $m$ is related to the mass of the solution. In this work we will restrict ourselves to positive mass solutions, and hence demand that $\mu < 0$.\footnote{Note that negative mass solutions are not necessarily pathological in asymptotically AdS spaces~---~see~\cite{Mann:1997jb} for more details. In this case however, it is not simply the fact that the mass is negative that leads to the exclusion of the solutions, it is the absence of well-behaved asymptotics.}
\subsection{Near horizon solution}\label{nearsol}
Next, we look at the solution near the horizon, which is achieved by performing the following expansion for the metric function:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eqn:nh_ansatz}
f(r)=4\pi T (r-r_+)+\sum_{i=2}a_n (r-r_+)^n
\end{eqnarray}
where $T$ is Hawking temperature of the black hole:
\begin{eqnarray}
T=\frac{f'(r_+)}{4 \pi} \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
which follows from the regularity of the Euclideanized solution.
Inserting the near horizon expansion of the metric function into the field equation and demanding it satisfy the field equations at each order of $(r-r_+)$ leads to conditions on the series coefficients. The first two equations involve only the mass parameter and the temperature, and read:
\begin{align}
m &= \frac{\mu r_+^{d-7}}{(4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)} \bigg[ 256 \pi^2 (d^2 + 5 d - 15) (3k + 4 \pi r_+ T) r_+^2 T^2
\nonumber\\
&- (d-4)(4 d^4 - 57 d^3 + 357 d^2 - 768 d + 516) k^3 \bigg] + r_+^{d-3} \left(k + \frac{r_+^2}{L^2} \right) +\frac{q^2 }{ r_+^{d-3}} \, ,
\\
0 &= (d-3) k r_+^{d-4} + (d-1)\frac{r_+^{d-2}}{L^2} - 4 \pi r_+^{d-3} T - (d-3) r_+^{2-d} q^2
\nonumber\\
&+ \frac{\mu r_+^{d-8}}{(4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)} \bigg[12 \pi (d-4) (d-6) (4d^3 - 33 d^2 + 127 d - 166) k^2 r_+ T
\nonumber\\
&
- 512 \pi^3 (d-4)(d^2 + 5d - 15) r_+^3 T^3 - 768 \pi ^2 (d-5)(d^2 + 5d -15) k r_+^2 T^2
\nonumber\\
&
-(d-4)(d-7)(516 - 768 d + 357 d^2 - 57 d^3 + 4 d^4) k^3 \bigg]\, .
\label{MT0}
\end{align}
These two equations determine the mass parameter and temperature (non-perturbatively) as functions of the horizon radius and coupling.
These formulae are enough to determine the thermodynamic properties of the black hole. At higher orders in $(r-r_+)$, the equations are more complicated. However, the general pattern is simple: the next condition fixes $a_3$ in terms of $a_2$. Each successive order then fixes $a_n$ in terms of the previous coefficients. The only free parameter in the series is $a_2$ and, as we will see, the value of $a_2$ ends up being fixed by requiring the solution to be well-behaved asymptotically.
With near horizon and asymptotic solutions in hand, we use numerical methods to verify that these solutions are indeed joined in the intermediate region. In order to do this
we first rescale the metric function by a factor of $L^2/r^2$ so that when $r\rightarrow \infty$, $(L^2/r^2) f(r)\rightarrow f_\infty$. Recall that permissible solutions for $f_\infty$ will be real, positive numbers that solve Eq.~\eqref{asympf}. We then choose specific values for the coupling, electric charge and mass parameter, finding the corresponding values of $r_+$ and $T$ using \reef{MT0}. To solve the second order differential equation we need to have initial values for the field and its first derivative. We use the near horizon expansion, evaluated at $r = r_+(1+\epsilon)$, to obtain:
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:initial_data}
f\left(r_+(1+\epsilon) \right) &= 4 \pi T r_+ \epsilon + a_2 r_+^2 \epsilon^2 \, ,
\nonumber\\
f'\left(r_+(1+\epsilon) \right) &= 4 \pi T + 2 a_2 r_+ \epsilon
\end{align}
where $\epsilon$ is some small parameter. Since $a_2$ is not fixed by the field equations, its value must be determined via the shooting method: for given values of the charge, coupling, horizon radius, and $\epsilon$, a value of $a_2$ is selected and then the field equations are integrated using \eqref{eqn:initial_data} as initial data. The result is then compared to the asymptotic solution at some large value of $r$. This process is repeated until satisfactory agreement is obtained, which determines the value of $a_2$. Remarkably, we find a unique value of $a_2$ through this process. Also, owing to the fact that the differential equation is stiff, we are only able to obtain a solution to a certain precision. With our choice of $a_2$ the asymptotic solution up to $\cO(r^{-12})$ is precise to one part in 1,000 or better.
We show in Figure~\ref{fig:numerics} some sample numerical solutions in four (top row) and five dimensions (bottom row) for spherical and hyperbolic black holes with various values of electric charge. At fixed coupling, we observe that increasing the electric charge has the effect of decreasing the horizon radius. As in the uncharged case~\cite{Hennigar:2017ego}, the effect of holding the charge fixed and increasing the coupling is to increase the horizon radius. We have also produced numerical profiles for the metric function $f(r)$ in higher dimensions, but there are no qualitative differences compared to the results displayed in Figure~\ref{fig:numerics}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{d4_k1.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{d4_km1.pdf}
\\
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{d5_k1.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{d5_km1.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Numerical solutions}. Here we show numerical solutions for the metric function $f(r)$ outside the black hole horizon for the cases: $d = 4$ with $k=1$ (top left), $d=4$ with $k=-1$ (top right), $d=5$ with $k=1$ (bottom left), and $d=5$ with $k=-1$ (bottom right). In the case of four dimensions, we have chosen $\mu/L^4 = -1/50$ and $m/L = 1$, while in five dimensions we set $\mu/L^4 = -1/100$ and $m/L^2 = 1$. In all cases, the value of the electric charge is indicated on the plot. }
\label{fig:numerics}
\end{figure}
Another interesting property of the solutions is their behaviour near the origin $r = 0$, which is sensitive to the spacetime dimension. We consider an expansion near the origin of the form
\begin{equation}
f(r) = r^s \left(b_0 + b_1 r + b_2 r^2 + \cdots \right) \, .
\end{equation}
The most interesting feature is the leading order behaviour, which is governed by $r^s$. To determine the value of $s$ we substitute the above expansion into the field equations and extract the lowest-order in $r$ term in the limit $r \to 0$. In the uncharged case\footnote{A numerical analysis of the interior solutions with $q\neq 0$ is considerably more involved due to the presence of an inner horizon at which the numerical scheme breaks down.} with $k=1$, we find that the vanishing of this term requires that $s$ solve the following cubic equation:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:determineS}
4 s^3 + 3(d-10)s^2 - 12(d-6) s - \frac{(d-4)(4d^4 - 57 d^3 + 261 d^2 - 1248 d + 1956)}{8(d^2 + 5d - 15)} = 0 \, .
\end{equation}
To be physically admissible, the solution for $s$ must be real. Calculating the discriminant of the cubic reveals that it takes the form $\Delta = (d-6) \times ({\rm positive})$, and so in four and five dimensions there is a single real solution, while in $d \ge 6$ there are three real solutions.
To determine which value of $s$ controls the behaviour of the metric function near the origin we must again resort to numerics. The generalization to construct the interior solution is straightforward. We first construct the exterior solution in manner described above, which allows us to determine the value of $a_2$. With the appropriate value of $a_2$ selected, we then run the numerical scheme once again, this time setting $\epsilon$ to be a small, negative number. The numerical scheme encounters no difficulties inside the horizon. The value of $s$ can then be extracted by plotting $r f'(r)/f(r)$ in the limit $r \to 0$. In all cases that we have explored, we find that it is the smallest (real) root of the cubic~\eqref{eq:determineS} that governs the behaviour of the metric function near the origin; the value of $s$ is shown in table~\ref{tab:nearOrigin} for cases that we have verified numerically. It is interesting that, in six and higher dimensions, there appears to be three admissible solutions based on the small $r$ analysis but the black hole solution (which appears to be unique) selects only one of these possibilities. It would be interesting address what (if any) solutions the additional families of small $r$ solutions represent.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ll} \toprule
{Dimension} & $s$
\\\midrule
$d = 4$ & $0$
\\
$d=5$ & $-0.43962$
\\
$d = 6$ & $-1$
\\
$d=7$ & $-1.62444$
\\
$d = 8$ & $-2.26912$
\\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{{\bf Behaviour of metric function near origin}: Here we display several values of $s$ where $f(r) \sim b_0 r^s$ as $r\to 0$ and $f(r)$ represents a black hole solution. In the cases of five, seven, and eight dimensions we have displayed the result to 5 decimal places. In all cases, we have set $q=0$. }
\label{tab:nearOrigin}
\end{table}
\section{Thermodynamic considerations \label{sec:thermo}} \label{prop}
In this section we investigate the thermodynamic properties of charged black holes in cubic generalized quasi-topological gravity. Applying the black hole chemistry formalism \cite{Kubiznak:2016qmn}, we start by investigating the first law and Smarr relation, taking both
$\Lambda$ and $\mu$ to be thermodynamic variables.
We then look at the physical constraints between the cubic coupling and the charge and present the domain for parameters to get physical critical points. We also illustrate the critical behaviour for the black holes here.
\subsection{First law and Smarr relation}
The near horizon expansion of the metric function discussed in Section~\ref{nearsol} above allows for the mass and temperature of the black holes to be determined algebraically by \reef{MT0}, despite the lack of an exact solution. However except for $d=4$ an explicit solution for the temperature is complicated, so we shall use the second equation implicitly instead to show that the first law is satisfied.
To calculate the entropy, we use the Iyer-Wald formalism~\cite{Wald:1993nt, Iyer:1994ys},
\begin{eqnarray}
S = -2\pi \oint d^{d-2}x \sqrt{\gamma}P^{a b c d}\hat{\varepsilon}_{a b}\hat{\varepsilon}_{c d}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
P^{a b c d}=\frac{\partial \cL}{\partial R_{a b c d}}
\end{eqnarray}
and $\hat{\varepsilon}_{a b}$ is the binormal to the horizon, which is normalized as $\hat{\varepsilon}_{a b}\hat{\varepsilon}^{a b}=-2$. The integration is performed on the horizon with induced metric $\gamma_{a b}$ and $\gamma=\textrm{det} \gamma_{a b}$. Direct calculation yields the form of the entropy for the action \reef{action0},
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{sratio}
S&=&\frac{\Sigma_{(d-2),k}}{4} r_+^{d-2} \Big[1+\frac{48(d-2)\mu}{(4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184) r_+^4 }\Big(8 \pi \left(d^2+5 d-15\right) k r_+ T
\nonumber\\
&&\left. + 8 \pi^2 \left(d^2+5 d-15\right) r_+^2 T^2 -\frac{1}{16} (d-4)\left(4 d^3-33 d^2+127 d-166\right) k^2\Big)
\Big]\right. \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Sigma_{(d-2),k}$ is the volume of the submanifold with line element $d\Sigma_{(k)d-2}$. When $k=1$, this is just the volume of the $(d-2)$-dimensional sphere, while for $k=0$ and $k=-1$ the numeric answer depends on what type of identifications are performed. The pressure is defined in the standard way,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{press}
P=-\frac{\Lambda}{8\pi} = \frac{(d-1)(d-2)}{16 \pi L^2}
\end{eqnarray}
with other thermodynamic quantities given by
\begin{align}
V &=\frac{\Sigma_{(d-2),k} r_+^{d-1}}{(d-1)} \, , \quad Q=\Sigma_{(d-2),k} \frac{\sqrt{2(d-2)(d-3)}}{16\pi}q \, ,\quad
\Phi =\sqrt{\frac{2(d-2)}{d-3}}\frac{q}{r_+^{d-3}} ,
\nonumber\\
\Psi_{\mu} =& -\frac{32(d-2)(d^2 + 5d - 15) \Sigma_{(d-2),k}}{(4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)} \left(\pi^2 r_+^{d-4} T^3 + \frac{3}{2} \pi k T^2 r_+^{d-5} \right)
\nonumber\\
&+ \frac{(d-2)(d-4)\Sigma_{(d-2),k}}{4 (4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)} \bigg[3\left(4d^3 - 33 d^2 + 127 d - 166 \right) k^2 T r_+^{d-6}
\nonumber\\
&- \left( 129 - 192 d + \frac{357}{4} d^2 - \frac{57}{4} d^3 + d^4 \right) \frac{k^3 r_+^{d-7}}{\pi} \bigg]
\end{align}
and the mass is~\cite{Deser:2002jk}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eqn:adm_mass}
M =\frac{(d-2) \Sigma_{(d-2),k} m }{ 16 \pi } \,.
\end{eqnarray}
These quantities satisfy the (extended) first law of black hole thermodynamics
\begin{eqnarray}
d M =T dS+V dP+\Phi dQ+\Psi_{\mu}d\mu
\end{eqnarray}
with $V$ the thermodynamic volume conjugate to the pressure
and $\Psi_\mu$ the potential conjugate to the coupling $\mu$.
The quantities also satisfy the Smarr formula
\begin{eqnarray}
(d-3)M = (d-2)T S-2 P V+(d-3)\Phi Q+4 \mu \Psi_{\mu}
\end{eqnarray}
that follows by a scaling argument and the first law. In Appendix~\ref{sec:EucAct}, we show that the same thermodynamic potentials follow from the Euclidean action.
Our aim is to study the critical behaviour of these black holes, and so we must obtain the equation of state. This is constructed by replacing $L^2$ in the second equation in Eq. \reef{MT0} in terms of pressure, yielding
\begin{eqnarray}
P&=&\frac{T}{v}-\frac{(d-3)}{\pi (d-2)} \frac{k}{v^2}+\frac{e^2}{v^{2 d-4}}
+ \frac{2^8 (d-7)(d-4) (4 d^4-57 d^3+357 d^2-768 d+516 ) \mu k }{\pi (d-2)^5 (4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184) v^6}
\nonumber\\
&&-\frac{3\times 2^8 (d-4)(d-6) \left(4 d^3-33 d^2+127 d-166\right) k^2 \mu T}{(d-2)^4 (4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184) v^5} \nonumber\\
&&\
+\frac{3\times 2^{12} \pi (d-5) \left(d^2+5 d-15\right) k \mu T^2 }{(d-2)^3 (4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184) v^4}
\nonumber\\
&&+ \frac{2^{11} \pi^2 (d-4) \left(d^2+5 d-15\right) \mu T^3 }{(d-2)^2 (4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184) v^3}
\label{eos0}
\end{eqnarray}
where, to simplify the resulting expressions we have introduced
\begin{equation}
\label{rescaled}
v=\frac{4 r_+}{(d-2)}, \quad \quad
e^2=\frac{16^{d-3}}{\pi } (d-3) (d-2)^{5-2 d} q^2
\end{equation}
where we refer to $v$ as the specific volume and $e$ is a rescaled electric charge. The non-linear dependence of the equation of state on the temperature in \eqref{eos0} has been observed in previous studies of the generalized quasi-topological theories \cite{Hennigar:2016gkm, Hennigar:2017umz}.
In the bulk of the paper we will study how including cubic generalized quasi-topological terms modify the results for Einstein gravity in various dimensions. To facilitate the study of the thermodynamics, we present the explicit form of the Gibbs free energy valid for arbitrary $d$. In the canonical --- fixed charge --- ensemble the Gibbs free energy is given by $G = M - TS$ and reads
\begin{eqnarray}
\cG &=& \left[\frac{4}{d-2}\right]^{d-1} \frac{G}{\Sigma_{(d-2), k}} =
\frac{ v^{d-1}P}{d-1}+\frac{ v^{d-3}k}{\pi (d-2)}
+\frac{e^2 }{(d-3)v^{d-3}}
\nonumber\\
&&- \frac{2^8 (d-4) \left(4 d^4-57 d^3+357 d^2-768 d+516\right) \mu k v^{d-7} }{\pi (d-2)^5 (4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)} \nonumber\\
&& - \left( \frac{v^{d-2}}{d-2} - \frac{3\times 2^8 (d-4) \left(4 d^3-33 d^2+127 d-166\right) k^2 \mu v^{d-6} }{(d-2)^4 (4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)}\right)T
\nonumber\\
&&- \frac{3 \times 2^{12} \pi \left(d^2+5 d-15\right) v^{d-5} \mu k T^2 }{(d-2)^3 (4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)}
\nonumber\\
&&- \frac{2^{11} \pi ^2 \left(d^2+5 d-15\right) \mu v^{d-4}T^3}{(d-2)^2 (4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)} \label{Gibbsd0}
\end{eqnarray}
where the overall positive factor is suppressed in the new definition to simplify the expression and other parameters are defined in Eq. \reef{rescaled}. In the grand canonical ensemble this expression is supplemented by an additional $\Phi Q$ term, i.e. $G = M - TS - \Phi Q$.
In stable equilibrium, the preferred state of the system is that which minimizes the Gibbs free energy at constant temperature and pressure. In subsequent sections we will denote the free energy as $F$ when considering the cosmological constant as a fixed parameter and $G$ when working explicitly in the black hole chemistry framework. The expressions are identical in either case, only the interpretation differs.
\subsection{Physical constraints}\label{constraints}
Here we discuss the constraints on the cubic coupling that we impose to ensure the theory is physically reasonable. Recall first that, As discussed in Section~\ref{sec:bhsolution}, the asymptotic structure of the solutions is problematic when the parameter $\gamma^2$ --- defined in Eq.~\eqref{gamma2} --- is negative. Ensuring that $\gamma^2 > 0$, requires that $m \mu <0$. If we wish to study positive mass solutions, this then means that we must have $\mu < 0$. We leave consideration of the negative mass solutions for future work, and consider only positive mass solutions with $\mu < 0$ here.
There are constraints on the coupling/pressure that arise due to the existence of stable AdS vacuum solutions to the theory. As described earlier, the AdS vacua of the theory are determined by the roots of the embedding equation $h(f_\infty) = 0$. Naturally, we require that the solutions have $f_\infty > 0$ --- so that they are AdS --- and $h'(f_\infty) < 0$ --- so that they are stable, with positive effective Newton constant. Combining these requirements yields a bound on the coupling/pressure $|\mu| \le |\mu_c|$ where
\begin{equation}
\mu_c = \frac{4 L^4}{27 (d-6) } \, .
\end{equation}
This actually corresponds to the critical limit of the theory, where both $h(f_\infty)$ and $h'(f_\infty)$ are identically zero. This is a special point in the parameter space of the theory since the linearized equations of motion are identically satisfied. In fact, in the four dimensional version of the theory, it is possible to solve the full equations of motion exactly in this limit --- see~\cite{Feng:2017tev}. We see that the coupling at the critical limit is negative in four and five dimensions, there is no critical limit in six dimensions, and the coupling is positive at the critical limit in $d \ge 7$. When the coupling exceeds (in magnitude) the critical coupling, the theory does not admit AdS vacua. This means that the coupling/pressure is constrained only in four and five dimensions where the constraint reads $\mu > \mu_c$. The coupling is not constrained by this requirement in higher dimensions, since there $\mu_c > 0$ and the coupling must satisfy the stricter requirement of being negative. If we write the constraint in terms of the pressure, it reads:
\begin{equation}
P \le P_{\rm max} := \frac{\sqrt{3}}{72 \pi} \frac{(d-1)(d-2)}{\sqrt{(d-6) \mu } } \, ,
\end{equation}
where, of course, $P_{\rm max}$ exists only in four and five dimensions.
It turns out that in higher curvature theories black hole entropy for some regions in parameter space can be negative. In the context of Gauss-Bonnet gravity, it has been argued that some of these negative entropy black holes could be unstable~\cite{Cvetic:2001bk, Nojiri:2001pm}. While it is common to simply discard negative entropy solutions as unphysical, in general the situation requires more careful thought. This is partly because there exist ambiguities in the definition of the black hole entropy --- adding to the Lagrangian a total derivative or a term proportional to the induced metric on the black hole horizon will shift the entropy by an arbitrary constant without having an effect on the other properties of the solution. For example, in even dimensional spacetimes one can add the Euler densities to the action to accomplish such a shift --- we review this in Appendix~\ref{sec:GBent} for the case of Gauss-Bonnet gravity in four dimensions. However, adding an arbitrary constant will be in tension with the expectation that the entropy should vanish when the spacetime does not contain a horizon, and so a judicious choice must be made. It is beyond the scope of this work to completely solve the issue of negative entropy in gravitational thermodynamics, but we shall make a point to elaborate on some of the issues that arise in the sections that follow. The conditions that determine whether or not the entropy is positive will depend on the spacetime dimension and how the temperature behaves as a function of horizon radius.
\section{Hawking-Page transitions}
\label{sec:HawkingPage}
Let us begin a more thorough study of the thermodynamics of these black holes by revisiting the Hawking-Page transition. That is, we will consider the case of the uncharged black holes with spherical horizon topology. This is not only interesting in its own right, but will allow for some subtleties in the thermodynamic analysis to be discussed in a less complicated setting. We perform this analysis in four and five dimensions. In this section we regard the cosmological constant as fixed, and hence refer to the free energy (which is then interpreted as the Helmholtz free energy) as $F$. Additionally, we measure the cubic coupling relative to its value in the critical limit, which is $\mu_c/L^4 = -2/27$ in $d = 4$ and $\mu_c/L^4 = -4/27$ in $d = 5$.
\subsection{Four dimensions}
In four dimensions, our considerations become equivalent to those for Einsteinian Cubic Gravity, which were first carried out in~\cite{Bueno:2018xqc}. Here, for the sake of completeness, we review some of these considerations with additional commentary. In this simplest case, the near-horizon equations of motion reduce to
\begin{align}
8 \pi M &= r_+ \left(1 + \frac{r_+^2}{L^2} \right) + \frac{8 \pi^2 T^2 \mu }{r_+}(3 + 4 \pi T r_+ ) \, ,
\nonumber\\
0 &= 1 + 3\frac{r_+^2}{L^2} - 4 \pi T r_+ + \frac{24 \pi^2 T^2 \mu}{r_+^2} \, ,
\end{align}
which can be solved exactly.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ECG-TR.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ECG-TvM.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ECG-SvM.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Properties of four-dimensional uncharged black holes}. {\it Top Left}: A plot of temperature vs. horizon radius for the four-dimensional spherical black holes. The red curve represents the Einstein gravity case, while the blue curves correspond to different values of the coupling $\mu$, with curves of lower opacity corresponding to larger values of $\mu$. The dashed portions of the curves indicate that the Wald entropy of the black holes is negative. {\it Top Right}: A similar plot, this time showing the temperature against the mass. {\it Bottom Center}: Here we plot the Wald entropy against the black hole mass. The red curve corresponds to the Einstein gravity case, while the blue curves correspond to different, non-zero values of the coupling, with curves of lower opacity corresponding to larger values of $\mu$. We see that for any non-zero $\mu$, the Wald entropy is negative as $M \to 0$. }
\label{fig:ECG-TR}
\end{figure}
It is useful to understand the differences and similarities between these solutions and the usual Schwarzschild-AdS solution. To facilitate this comparison, we show in Figure~\ref{fig:ECG-TR} a number of plots. The top left plot shows the temperature against horizon radius for various values of the coupling. For large black holes, the behaviour is very similar to the Schwarzschild AdS solution (which is shown in red), but the behaviour of small black holes is markedly different.\footnote{ Through out this section we will refer to large and small black holes. While our use of this terminology should be clear from the plots displayed, roughly speaking by `small' we mean $r_+/L < 1$ and by large $r_+/L > 1$.} For a given, fixed temperature there can be up to three distinct black hole solutions in the cubic theory, while there are at most two in the Einstein theory. The top right plot, which shows the temperature plotted against the mass, shows very similar behaviour. This plot is particularly useful since we can extract from it the thermal stability of the black holes. Since $C = \partial M/\partial T$, the slope of this plot represents the reciprocal of the heat capacity. We conclude that in the higher-curvature theory the large black holes ($M/L \gtrsim 0.3$)
are thermally stable (as they are in Einstein gravity) and the small black holes ($M/L \lesssim 0.03$) are as well (whereas they are not in Einstein gravity). In the cubic theory, it is only the intermediate sized black holes that are thermodynamically unstable.
The plots also reveal initially puzzling behaviour: The Wald entropy computed for the black holes can become negative, as indicated by the dashed portions of the blue curves, and shown explicitly for a few examples in the bottom center plot of Figure~\ref{fig:ECG-TR}. In this simple setting we can compute the Wald entropy of the small black holes perturbatively in $r_+$ finding:
\begin{equation}
S = - 2 \pi \sqrt{- 6 \mu} + {\cal O}(r_+^2) \, .
\end{equation}
All of the small black holes, therefore, possess negative entropy. While negative entropy certainly makes no sense from a statistical mechanics perspectice, there do not appear to be any other pathologies associated with these classical solutions, and so there is no obvious reason to outright reject these negative entropy solutions\footnote{Let us note that the issue of negative gravitational entropy is not only a problem for higher-curvature theories of gravity. For example, AdS Taub-NUT and Taub-Bolt solutions in Einstein gravity can possess negative entropy for certain parameter
values~\cite{Mann:1999pc,Emparan:1999pm,Mann:1999bt}.}. Further, let us recall that ambiguities in the definitions of entropy can allow for the shift of the entropy by an arbitrary constant. Such a shift could be accomplished via a number of ways, e.g. by adding an explicit Gauss-Bonnet contribution to the action, as in~\cite{Castro:2013pqa, Bueno:2016lrh}, or by adding to the Lagrangian a term proportional to the volume form of the induced metric on the horizon, as in~\cite{Clunan:2004tb}. Note that these methods only shift the entropy when a horizon is present, leaving the entropy of the vacuum unchanged. Further, these techniques \textit{only} change the entropy --- the solutions themselves are left unaffected. The most natural way to adjust the entropy would be to ensure that $S \to 0$ as $M \to 0$, thereby avoiding any order of limits issues. In the present case this would amount to adding $2 \pi \sqrt{-6 \mu}$ to the Wald entropy, using either of the methods described above.
The numerical value of the entropy will not have any implications when we consider thermodynamics in the fixed charge ensemble, since there we will be comparing the free energy of different branches of the black hole solutions which would all be shifted by the same amount. However, whether or not one chooses to shift the entropy can have significant implications when comparing the free energy to the vacuum. This is the case both for the Hawking-Page transition, which we consider here, and the thermodynamics in the fixed potential ensemble, which we will consider below. To illustrate these differences, we plot the results one would obtain by taking the Wald entropy to be the ``correct'' thermodynamic entropy versus those obtained using the shifted entropy satisfying $S \to 0$ as $M \to 0$.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ECG-FNS.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ECG-F1.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Hawking-Page transitions in four dimensions}. {\it Left}: A plot of the free energy using the Wald entropy. Here we indicate negative entropy regions with a dashed curve. {\it Right}: A plot of the free energy using the shifted Wald entropy satisfying $S \to 0$ as $M \to 0$. In both cases, the red curve corresponds corresponds to the Einstein gravity case with $\mu = 0$, the light-blue curve corresponds to $\mu = -10^{-4} |\mu_c|$, and the dark-blue curve corresponds to $\mu = -10^{-5} |\mu_c|$. Note that in these plots we have plotted $F/T$, since the free energy itself has a steep slope that makes it difficult to showcase the results.
}
\label{fig:HP-4d}
\end{figure}
We show in Figure~\ref{fig:HP-4d} plots of the free energy in the two scenarios.
On the left, the plots are constructed using the Wald entropy, while on the right the plots are constructed using the shifted Wald entropy. Note in both cases the existence of a third branch of solutions that exist for any non-vanishing cubic coupling. These appear in the figure as near horizontal lines that extend all the way to $T = 0$. These correspond to the small, thermally stable black holes described above. The situation portrayed in the left plot is very similar to the Einstein gravity situation: At low temperatures, the dominant contribution to the partition function arises from thermal radiation, and at higher temperatures the dominant contribution is a large AdS black hole. Although it is hard to see in the diagram, the temperature at which the transition takes place $T_{\rm HP}$ is larger in the cubic theory. Performing a series expansion for small $\mu$ near the zero of the free energy makes this more apparent:
\begin{equation}
T_{\rm HP} = \sqrt{\frac{8 P}{3 \pi}}\left[1 - \frac{1280}{9} \pi^2 P^2 \mu + {\cal O}(\mu^2) \right] \, .
\end{equation}
The right plot tells a very different story. In this case, at low temperatures, the dominant contribution is a small, thermally stable black hole. As the temperature increases, there is a point at which a first order small/large black hole phase transition occurs. For small values of the coupling, the temperature at which this transition occurs is very close to the usual Hawking-Page temperature. As the magnitude of the coupling is increased, the swallow-tail structure shrinks --- see Figure~\ref{fig:HP-FT2} --- eventually disappearing at $\mu = -L^4/576$. This corresponds to a critical point, i.e. a second order small/large black hole phase transition. The critical exponents that characterize this point are given by the usual mean field theory values --- see, for example,~\cite{Kubiznak:2012wp}.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{ECG-F2.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Free energy in four-dimensions}. Here we use an additional plot of the free energy for larger values of the coupling, using the shifted entropy. The various curves correspond to increasing magnitudes of the coupling from top to bottom. The swallowtail present on the curves shrinks, eventually terminating at a cusp for $\mu = - L^4/576$, which corresponds to a second-order phase transition. For smaller larger magnitudes of the coupling, the curve is smooth with only a single branch. }
\label{fig:HP-FT2}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Five dimensions}
With the four-dimensional case illustrating some of the interesting --- and puzzling --- behaviour of these solutions, let us now move on to consider the five-dimensional case. This case is already quite a lot more complicated, with the near horizon equations being cubic polynomials in the temperature:
\begin{align}
M &= \frac{8 r_+^2}{3 \pi} \left(k + \frac{r_+^2}{L^2} \right) + \frac{\mu}{474 \pi r_+^2} \left[-976 k^3 + 8960 \pi^2 r_+^2 T^2 \left(3k + 4 \pi r_+ T \right) \right] \, ,
\nonumber\\
0 &= 2 r_+ \left(k + \frac{r_+^2}{L^2}\right) + r_+^2 \left( \frac{2 r_+}{L^2} - 4 \pi T \right)
\nonumber\\
&- \frac{\mu}{1264 r_+^3} \left[-1952 k^3 + 1728 k^2 \pi r_+ T + 17920 \pi^3 r_+^3 T^3 \right] \, .
\end{align}
Since the equation determining the temperature as a function of $r_+$ is cubic it can be solved exactly. Although the resulting expressions are too messy to be illuminating, we can gain some important information by considering the discriminant of this equation, $\Delta$. Again the full expression is not particularly illuminating, but in the limit of large $r_+$ it takes the following form:
\begin{equation}
\Delta = -(79 L^4 + 1890 \mu ) \frac{286 720 \pi^6 r_+^6 \mu}{6241 L^4} + {\cal O}(r_+^4) \, .
\end{equation}
This means that this discriminant changes sign from positive to negative when $\mu = - 79 L^4/1890$. Consequently for $ \mu \in (-79 L^4/1890,0)$ the temperature as a function of $r_+$ has three real solutions at large $r_+$, while for $\mu \in (\mu_c, -79 L^4/1890)$ there is only a single solution. Looking directly at the explicit solutions to the cubic equation (and discarding those for which $T < 0$), we find that for $ \mu \in (-79 L^4/1890,0)$, $T(r_+)$ is double-valued at large $r_+$, while for $\mu \in (\mu_c, -79 L^4/1890)$, large black holes with positive temperature do not exist. A similar analysis as that just described applied to small black holes reveals that the discriminant behaves like
\begin{equation}
\Delta = - \frac{6452490240 \pi^6 \mu^4}{493039 r_+^6} + {\cal O}\left( r_+^{-2} \right) \, .
\end{equation}
This means that, regardless of the value of $\mu$, $T(r_+)$ will always be single-valued at small $r_+$. By explicitly examining the solution, we find that $T(r_+)$ is positive for small $r_+$: small black holes exist over the full range $\mu \in (0, \mu_c)$.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{5D-TR.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{5D-TM.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Properties of five-dimensional uncharged black holes I}. {\it Left}: A plot of the temperature vs.~horizon radius for the five-dimensional black holes. The red curve represents the Einstein gravity result, while the blue curves correspond to $\mu/\mu_c = 10^{-3}, \, 10^{-2}, \, 10^{-1}/2$ in order of decreasing opacity. In each case, the dashed portion of the curve indicates negative Wald entropy, while the gray dot-dashed portions indicate that the mass is negative, and hence the solutions do not exist. {\it Right}: A plot of the temperature vs.~the mass; the curves are the same as in the left plot. For large values of the mass (or, equivalently, large values of the horizon radius) the solutions with the cubic correction hug closely the Einstein gravity curve, while significant differences begin to appear for small values of the mass/horizon radius. Though it is a bit hard to see in the figures, note that the curves that touch $T = 0$ (those on the bottom left of each figure) always have positive entropy.}
\label{fig:5d-HP-properties}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{5D-TR-Small.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{5D-TM-Small.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Properties of five-dimensional uncharged black holes II}. Here we show plots of the temperature vs.~horizon radius and temperature vs.~mass for $\mu = 0$ (red) and $\mu/\mu_c = 0.29, 0.6, 0.9, 0.99$ (blue curves). Each non-zero value of $\mu$ here is larger in magnitude than the special value of $\mu = - 79 L^4/1890$ which marks the point at which the large black holes no longer exist. The dashed blue curves indicate negative Wald entropy, while the dot-dashed grey curves indicate that the mass is negative --- these solutions do not exist. Note that for small temperatures the entropy is positive.
}
\label{fig:5d-HP-small}
\end{figure}
Let us now consider the temperature vs.~horizon radius profiles directly, taking into account various complications like the positivity of mass and entropy. We divide our study into two cases corresponding to $\mu > -79 L^4/1890$ and $\mu < -79 L^4/1890$, with the first case shown in Figure~\ref{fig:5d-HP-properties}. Here we see that two branches of black holes emerge, which ``hug'' the Einstein gravity temperature vs. horizon radius curve on opposite sides. In the limit $\mu \to 0$, it is the upper curve that converges to the Einstein gravity result, while the lower curve disappears. At any given value of the temperature, there can be up to three black hole solutions (opposed to the two present in the Einstein case), though for most values of the coupling at least one of these possible solutions will have negative mass (and hence the solutions does not exist) or negative entropy (and hence the solution needs more careful attention). Contrary to the four-dimensional case, the small black holes are not thermally stable, as can be deduced from the negative slope in the temperature vs.~mass plot. Similar to the Einstein case, the large black holes are thermally stable. Now, let us move on to consider what happens when we push $\mu$ beyond $-79 L^4/1890$. Plots for this situation are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:5d-HP-small}. Despite the absence of the large black holes, the profiles for the small black holes remain largely the same.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{5D-FvT.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{5D-FvT-Pos.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Hawking-Page transition in five dimensions}. {\it Left}: Here we show a plot of the free energy vs.~temperature for the five dimensional uncharged black holes. The red curve corresponds to the Einstein gravity case, the dark blue curve corresponds to $\mu = -10^{-3} |\mu_c|$, and the light blue curve corresponds to $\mu = -10^{-2} |\mu_c|$. In each case, solid curves indicate that both the mass and entropy are positive, while a dashed curve indicates that the Wald-Entropy is negative. The blue curves terminate when the mass becomes negative. {\it Right}: The same plot as on the left, but now using the shifted entropy as described in the text. }
\label{fig:5d-HP-FvT}
\end{figure}
Both plots in Figure~\ref{fig:5d-HP-properties} indicate regions of negative Wald entropy. At first glance, the situation here is actually more complicated than in four dimensions, since instead of one there are now two branches of black hole solutions. This means that we cannot simply add a universal constant to the entropy to ensure that $S \to 0$ as $M \to 0$. However, it turns out that in this case the effects are not relevant for the Hawking-Page transition. As shown in Figure~\ref{fig:5d-HP-FvT}, which is a plot of the free energy vs.~temperature in the five dimensional case, the free energy and mass are positive at $T \to 0$, indicating that it is thermal AdS that dominates the partition function at small temperatures. The regions with negative entropy and negative mass (the latter corresponding to solutions that do not exist) are actually excluded by the Hawking-Page transition, since they have positive free energy. This persists even when a constant is added to the entropy\footnote{Here we have shifted the entropy $S \to S_{\rm Wald} - S_{\rm min}$ with $S_{\rm min} = \min \left\{S^1_{M \to 0} , S^2_{M \to 0} \right\}$, where the superscripts denote the two branches of black holes.} to ensure that $S > 0$ for all $M \ge 0$. The precise temperature at which the Hawking-Page transition occurs is larger than in the equivalent set up for Einstein gravity, similar to the four-dimensional case. Let us close by noting that when $\mu < - 79 L^4/1890$ (and so large black holes no longer exist), then a Hawking-Page transition does not occur, and thermal AdS is thermodynamically preferred for all temperatures.
\subsection{Remarks on higher dimensions}
Before moving on to consider the charged solutions, let us pause here to present a few comments on the higher dimensional solutions. In many aspects, the higher dimensional solutions are similar to the five dimensional solutions. One feature that continues into higher dimensions is a limit on the coupling for the existence of large black holes. We saw above that in five dimensions there is a special coupling $\mu^* = -79 L^4/1890$ such that for $\mu < \mu^*$ there are no large black holes. In higher dimensions the value of $\mu^*$ can be determined in the same way by examining the large $r_+$ behaviour of the discriminant of equation~\eqref{MT0}. The result reads
\begin{equation}
\mu^* = -\frac{(4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)L^4}{54(d-4)(d-1)^2(d^2 + 5d - 15)} \, ,
\end{equation}
and we emphasize that no such bound exists in four dimensions. Noting this, the structure of the temperature vs.~horizon radius profiles are qualitatively similar to the discussion presented above for five dimensions.
\section{Charged black holes: Grand canonical ensemble} \label{sec:thermofpe}
Next we consider the thermodynamics of the cubic corrected black holes in the fixed potential --- or grand canonical --- ensemble. This means we consider the difference of electric potential between the horizon and infinity to be a fixed quantity. From the perspective of holography this setup amounts to a fixed chemical potential in the field theory. Once again we restrict ourselves to the spherical black holes and present the analysis in four and five dimensions. Further, we emphasize that the four-dimensional results would coincide with those for Einsteinian Cubic Gravity, though in this case there is no precedent for this study and the results here are novel. Recall that in the grand canonical ensemble the free energy is given by $F = M - TS - \Phi Q$.
\subsection{Four dimensions}
In four dimensions, a number of expressions are quadratic (rather than cubic) in the temperature, allowing for analytic results to be presented. Working in the fixed potential ensemble, we have the following expressions that determine the mass and temperature in terms of the coupling and $r_+$:
\begin{align}
2 M &= k r_+ + \frac{r_+ \Phi^2}{4} + \frac{ r_+^3}{L^2 } + \frac{8 \mu \pi^2 T^2 \left(4 \pi r_+ T + 3 k \right)}{ r_+} \, ,
\nonumber\\
0 &= k + \frac{ 3 r_+^2}{L^2} - 4 \pi r_+ T - \frac{\Phi^2}{4} + \frac{24 \mu k \pi^2 T^2}{ r_+^2} \, .
\label{eqn:GCE-4d-nheqs}
\end{align}
From the above, we can obtain the equation of state by solving the second expression for the pressure:
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:gce_eos_4d}
P = \frac{T}{v} - \frac{k}{2 \pi v^2} + \frac{\Phi^2}{8 \pi v^2} - 48 \mu \frac{ k \pi T^2}{ v^4} \, ,
\end{equation}
where we have identified $P = 3/(8\pi L^2)$ and $v = 2 r_+$ is the specific volume. In the following we will remark on the cases where both $P$ is constant and considered a thermodynamic variable. From now on we take $k = +1$ to focus on the spherical black holes.
Let us begin by discussing some of the properties of the black holes when the potential is fixed at the boundary. In this four dimensional case, we note that the terms that arise due to the higher-order curvature terms are all proportional to at least one power of the temperature. This means that the properties of the extremal black holes are in fact the same as in Einstein gravity. The black holes will be extremal when the following constraint is satisfied:
\begin{equation}
\left( L r_+^{\rm ext} \right)^2 = \frac{\Phi^2 - 4 }{32 \pi} \, .
\end{equation}
In the case of spherical black holes, this means that extremal black holes will exist in the fixed potential ensemble only if the potential satisfies $\Phi^2 > 4$, just as in the Einstein gravity case~\cite{ChamblinEtal:1999a}. As we will see, it turns out that this value of the electric potential also controls other aspects of the behaviour of the black holes and leads to a variety of interesting structures.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{GC-TrEin.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{GC-Tr1.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Ein-Phi-TM.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ECG-Phi-TM.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Four-dimensional black holes in the fixed potential ensemble}. {\it Top Row}: Here we display plots of the black hole temperature vs. horizon radius in Einstein gravity (left) and four dimensional generalized quasi-topological gravity (right). The various curves correspond to different values of the potential: $\Phi = 0, 1.2, 1.8, 2, 2.1, 2.5$ from top to bottom (greatest to least opacity). In the right plot, the dashed portion of the curve indicate negative Wald entropy, and the higher-curvature coupling has been set to $\mu/\mu_c = 10^{-3}$. {\it Bottom Row}: Here, for exactly the same parameters, we display the temperature plotted against the mass in Einstein gravity (left) and the cubic theory (right).}
\label{fig:4dPhi_TR}
\end{figure}
To gain a better understanding of the black hole solutions under consideration, it is again helpful to consider plots of the temperature against the horizon radius (and mass), as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:4dPhi_TR}. First, note that when the electric potential obeys $\Phi^2 < 4$, extremal black holes cannot exist and for both theories the behaviour is qualitatively similar to the uncharged solutions. This means that, for the cubic theory, so long as the potential satisfies this bound the small black holes are thermally stable, opposed to thermally unstable as is the case in Einstein gravity. Let us examine the behaviour of the small black holes in more quantitative detail for the cubic theory.
The temperature of small black holes is proportional to the horizon radius, rather than inversely proportional:
\begin{equation}
T = \sqrt{\frac{4 - \Phi^2}{-96 \pi^2 \mu}} r_+ + {\cal O}(r_+^3) \, .
\end{equation}
This feature leads to the thermal stability of small black holes with the specific heat taking the following form:
\begin{align}
C_P = \frac{\pi \Phi^2}{\sqrt{-96 \mu \left(4 - \Phi^2 \right)}} +& \frac{\pi r_+^2}{L^2 (4-\Phi^2)^2} \left[L^2(\Phi^6 - 12 \Phi^4 + 128) \right.
\nonumber\\
&\left.- 2 \sqrt{-96 \mu (4 - \Phi^2)}(\Phi^2 + 8) \right] + {\cal O}( r_+ ^3) \, .
\end{align}
The expression for the specific heat makes manifest the fact that small black holes will always have a positive heat capacity. Expanding the expression for the mass in the limit of small black holes we see that
\begin{equation}
M = \frac{\Phi^2 r_+}{2} + {\cal O}(r_+^3) \, ,
\end{equation}
indicating that the mass is positive for small black holes and vanishes in the limit that the spacetime does not contain a horizon. However, performing a similar analysis for the entropy we see that
\begin{equation}
S = - \pi \sqrt{-6 \mu (4 - \Phi^2)} + {\cal O}(r_+^2) \, .
\end{equation}
Once again we can add a constant to the entropy to ensure that it is positive as $M \to 0$, but the situation is a bit trickier than in the uncharged case. Here, the limiting value of the entropy cares not only about the coupling $\mu$, but also the value of the electric potential $\Phi$. This is troubling because the methods we introduced in the previous section for shifting the entropy essentially amount to adding a non-dynamical term to the Lagrangian. In this case, if we add precisely the contribution to ensure $S \to 0$ as $M \to 0$, this would require modifying the action in a way that depends on the particular solution. A compromise of sorts can be reached by adding the same constant as in the uncharged case. This would ensure that the entropy is always positive, but would mean that only when $\Phi = 0$ would $S \to 0$ as $M \to 0$, otherwise $S$ would limit to a (positive) constant. Here we will be somewhat agnostic, presenting the results obtained when using the Wald entropy directly, and those obtained when shifting the entropy as just described.
Next let us consider the behaviour of the black holes when $\Phi^2 > 4$, which marks the transition between the two types of behaviour evident in Figure~\ref{fig:4dPhi_TR}. Recall that, because all instances of $\mu$ in Eqs.~\eqref{eqn:GCE-4d-nheqs} multiply the temperature, the properties of extremal black holes are identical to those in Einstein gravity. In particular, this implies that when $\Phi^2 > 4$, the extremal (and near extremal) black holes will possess positive entropy. In this case, to see this explicitly, it is helpful to expand the quantities in a small temperature series. We find that the horizon radius goes like
\begin{equation}
r_+ = \frac{1}{4} \sqrt{\frac{\Phi^2 - 4}{2 \pi P}} + \frac{T}{4 P} + \sqrt{\frac{\pi}{2}} \left(\frac{-4 - 1536 P^2 \pi^2 \mu + \Phi^2}{4 P^{3/2} (\Phi^2 - 4)^{3/2}} \right) T^2 + {\cal O}(T^3) \, ,
\end{equation}
which in turn implies the entropy behaves in the following way:
\begin{equation}
S = \frac{\Phi^2 - 4}{32 P} + \sqrt{\frac{\pi P}{2 (\Phi^2 - 4)}} \left(\frac{-4 + 1536 P^2 \pi^2 \mu + \Phi^2}{8 P^2} \right) T + {\cal O}(T^2) \, .
\end{equation}
Thus we see that the Wald entropy for the near extremal solutions will be positive. We also know that the solutions have positive entropy in the high temperature limit since, in that case, the solutions also reduce to the Einstein gravity results. Thus, provided $\Phi^2 > 4$, only solutions at intermediate temperatures can possess negative entropy, if any do at all.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Ein-GC-FT3.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ECG-GC-FT3.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Ein-GC-FT2.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ECG-GC-FT2.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Ein-GC-FT1.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ECG-GC-FT1.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Free energy vs.~temperature for grand canonical ensemble in four dimensions}. {\it Top Row}: Here we plot examples of the free energy for $\Phi = 0, 1.5, 1.9$ (more to less opacity) for Einstein gravity (left) and the cubic theory with $\mu/\mu_c = 10^{-5}$. {\it Middle Row}: Here we plot the free energy for $\Phi = 2.01, 2.02, 2.04, 2.06$ (more to less opacity) for Einstein gravity (left) and the cubic theory with $\mu/\mu_c = 100 489/32157432$. {\it Bottom Row}: Here we plot the free energy for $\Phi = 2.05, 2.2, 2.26, 2.35, 2.45$ (more to less opacity) for Einstein gravity (left) and the cubic theory with $\mu/\mu_c = 1/2 489/32157432$. In all cases, the dashed portions of the curves indicate negative Wald entropy.}
\label{fig:4d-gce-freeEnergy}
\end{figure}
To understand better the phase structure of the solutions, we display a few relevant free energy curves in Figure~\ref{fig:4d-gce-freeEnergy} taking the entropy to be the Wald entropy. The top row shows a few relevant examples when the potential satisfies $\Phi^2 < 4$. In this case, the free energy is qualitatively similar to the uncharged results for both Einstein gravity and the cubic theory. In both cases, increasing the electric potential has the effect of decreasing the temperature at which the free energy crosses zero, i.e. the temperature at which the Hawking-Page transition occurs is reduced. In the case of the cubic theory, increasing the potential has the additional effect of shrinking the swallowtail, and so can push the system toward a critical point. The middle and bottom row show examples of what occurs when $\Phi^2 > 4$. In this circumstance, there is only a single branch of solutions in both the Einstein gravity case and the cubic case. In the Einstein gravity case, the free energy of the charged solutions is now always less than zero. This means that the charged black hole always makes the dominant contribution to the partition function provided $\Phi^2 > 4$.
However, in the cubic case the situation is more subtle. Using the Wald entropy, as done in Figure~\ref{fig:4d-gce-freeEnergy}, the interpretation would be the following: For $\Phi^2 < 4$, the situation would be qualitatively similar to that of Einstein gravity, with thermal AdS at fixed potential dominating the partition function at low temperatures, and a large AdS black hole at higher temperatures. The situation is also similar to Einstein gravity provided $\Phi^2$ is much larger than $4$: then there is a single branch of black holes, always with positive entropy, and with free energy always less than zero --- the dominant contribution to the partition function is a black hole for all values of temperature. The real differences emerge for $\Phi^2 > 4$, but close to $4$. Here, at low temperatures, the thermodynamically preferred phase is a black hole. As the temperature is increased a region of parameter space is entered where the entropy is negative; if these black holes are considered unphysical, at this point there would be a zeroth-order phase transition to thermal AdS space. As the temperature is further increased, there comes a point where the entropy is positive and the free energy dips below zero again --- at this point there will be a Hawking-Page transition between thermal AdS and the black hole. However, in this case, the Hawking-Page transition need not be first order, but can in fact be a second order transition, akin to those that occur at a critical point. The reason this can happen here is because of the fact that the free energy is ``peaked'' --- if the peak of the free energy occurs exactly when $F = 0$, then both $F$ and its first derivative vanish at that point and hence the transition will be of second order.
To summarize, from this perspective, the interpretation of the thermodynamics would be the following: there is a zeroth-order black hole/thermal AdS transition, followed up a first- or second-order thermal AdS/black hole phase transition as the temperature is monotonically increased. In other words, there is an intermediate regime of $\Phi$ for which we have a re-entrant Hawking-Page transition for the fixed potential ensemble.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Ein-GC-FTPos.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ECG-GC-FTPos.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Free energy vs. temperature in four dimensions using shifted entropy}. Here we plot the free energy vs. temperature for $\Phi = 0, 1.6, 1.957, 2.2, 3$ (more to less opacity) for Einstein gravity (left) and the cubic theory with $\mu/\mu_c = 10^{-4}$ (right). In this plot, the entropy has been shifted by the constant $S = S_{\rm Wald} + 2 \pi \sqrt{-6 \mu}$ which ensures that the entropy is always positive. The orange curve on the right corresponds to $\Phi = 1.957$, which results in a critical point. }
\label{fig:4d-gce-freeEnergyPos}
\end{figure}
For completeness, let us also discuss the interpretation of the thermodynamics using the shifted Wald entropy that is always positive. For this case, representative free energy diagrams are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:4d-gce-freeEnergyPos}. Here the interpretation is a bit different. In this case, regardless of the value of $\Phi$ the free energy of the black holes in the cubic theory is always negative and thermal AdS is never the thermodynamically favoured solution. For $\Phi^2 < 4$, the free energy possesses three branches, and there is a first-order small/large black hole phase transition. As the value of $\Phi$ is increased (or, equivalently, as the pressure is increased at constant $\Phi$), the swallowtail shrinks, eventually terminating at a critical point. In other words, the free energy displays standard van der Waals behaviour. When $\Phi^2$ is larger than the critical value (to be discussed explicitly below), there is only a single branch of black holes, and these are thermodynamically favoured at all temperatures.
Let us discuss the critical point in more detail. It is easy to check that \eqref{eqn:gce_eos_4d} admits a critical point with the values
\begin{align}
T_c &= \frac{\sqrt{2} }{12 \pi } \left(\frac{3 (4 - \Phi^2)^3}{-48 \mu } \right)^{1/4}
\, ,\quad
v_c = \frac{\sqrt{2}}{3} \left(3^3 (-48) \mu (4 -\Phi^2) \right)^{1/4}
\,, \nonumber\\
P_c &= \frac{1}{32 \pi} \sqrt{\frac{3 ( 4 - \Phi^2)}{ -48 \mu }} \, .
\label{eqn:critPoint}
\end{align}
Note that these expressions for the critical values are valid in the case where $P$ is constant as well as when $P$ is a thermodynamic variable. In the former case, the expression for the critical pressure can be solved to obtain the value of $\Phi$ that yields a critical point for a given fixed pressure. In the latter case, specifying a value of $\Phi$ then gives a critical pressure, as is the standard in black hole chemistry. The critical values satisfy the following universal relationship,
\begin{equation}
\frac{P_c v_c}{T_c} = \frac{3}{8} \, ,
\end{equation}
which is identical to the van der Waals ratio \cite{Kubiznak:2012wp}, and is the same in both the canonical and grand canonical ensembles (see below). It is worth noting that critical points only exist for a range of potentials: if $\Phi^2 > 4$, then there is no critical point.
To determine the critical exponents, we expand the equation of state near the critical point in terms of the dimensionless variables $\rho, \tau$ and $\phi$ defined by
\begin{equation}
P = P_c(\rho + 1) \, , \quad T = T_c(\tau + 1) \, , \quad v = v_c \left(\phi + 1 \right) \, .
\end{equation}
This yields
\begin{equation}
\rho = \frac{10}{3} \tau - \frac{16}{3} \phi \tau + \frac{1}{3}\tau^2 - \frac{4}{3} \phi^3 - \frac{4}{3} \tau^2 \phi + \frac{28}{3} \phi^2 \tau + \cdots \, .
\end{equation}
Using well-established techniques~\cite{GunasekaranEtal:2012} the critical exponents can be read off from this expansions and are given by the mean field theory values:
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:mft}
\alpha = 0 \, , \quad \beta = \frac{1}{2} \, , \quad \gamma = 1 \, , \quad \delta = 3 \, .
\end{equation}
\subsection{Five dimensions}
Let us now consider the differences that arise when considering the grand canonical ensemble in five dimensions. In five dimensions, the near-horizon equations take the following form:
\begin{align}
M &= \frac{8 r_+^2}{3 \pi} \left(k + \frac{r_+^2}{L^2} \right) + \frac{8 r_+^2 \Phi^2}{9 \pi} + \frac{\mu}{474 \pi r_+^2} \left[-976 k^3 + 8960 \pi^2 r_+^2 T^2 \left(3k + 4 \pi r_+ T \right) \right] \, ,
\nonumber\\
0 &= 2 r_+ \left(k + \frac{r_+^2}{L^2}\right) + r_+^2 \left( \frac{2 r_+}{L^2} - 4 \pi T \right) - \frac{2 r_+ \Phi^2}{3}
\nonumber\\
&- \frac{\mu}{1264 r_+^3} \left[-1952 k^3 + 1728 k^2 \pi r_+ T + 17920 \pi^3 r_+^3 T^3 \right]
\end{align}
In this case we would identify the pressure as $P = 3/(4 \pi L^2)$ and the specific volume as $v = 4 r_+/3$, leading to the equation of state
\begin{equation}
P = \frac{T}{v} - \frac{2 k}{3 \pi v^2} + \frac{2 \Phi^2}{9 \pi v^2} - \frac{31232 k^3 \mu }{19197 \pi v^6} + \frac{256 k^2 T \mu}{237 v^5} + \frac{4480 \pi^2 T^3 \mu }{711 v^3} \, .
\end{equation}
Once again, from this point we will set $k=1$ to focus on the spherical black holes.
In the four-dimensional case, we saw that all instances of the cubic coupling multiply powers of the temperature in the near horizon equation. This led to the interesting result that the extremal black holes in the cubic theory are the same as in Einstein gravity. This property is no longer true in five dimensions. It is easy to see that even in the uncharged case extremal solutions can exist --- see, for example, those branches of solutions that intersect $T=0$ at finite $r_+$ in Figure~\ref{fig:5d-HP-properties}. The condition for the existence of extremal solutions is a solution of the following equation:
\begin{equation}
0 = 2 r_+\left(1 - \frac{\Phi^2}{3} \right) + \frac{4r_+^3}{L^2} + \frac{981\mu}{632 r_+^3} \, .
\end{equation}
It is obvious that this has solutions for $\Phi = 0$ as well as for non-zero $\Phi$ (recall that $\mu < 0$ for the existence of positive mass solutions). In this four-dimensional case, the distinct types of thermodynamic behaviour corresponded to whether or not extremal black holes existed. While that is still true here for the Einstein case, it is no longer the case for the cubic theory where things now become more interesting.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{5D-GC-TR-Ein.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{5D-GC-TR.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{5D-GC-TM-Ein.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{5D-GC-TM.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Five-dimensional black hole properties in grand canonical ensemble I}. {\it Top Left}: A plot of the temperature vs.~horizon radius in Einstein gravity for $\Phi = 0, 0.6, 0.82, 1.2, 2.0$ in order of decreasing opacity (or top to bottom through a vertical slice of the plot). {\it Top Right}: Temperature vs.~horizon radius in the cubic theory with $\mu/\mu_c = 10^{-3}$ for the same values of the potential. In this case, the dashed blue lines indicate negative Wald entropy, while the dot-dashed grey lines indicate negative mass (and hence the full solution does not exist). {\it Bottom Left}: The same situation as the top left plot, but now we replace the horizon radius with the mass. {\it Bottom Right}: The same situation as the top right plot, but now we replace the horizon radius with the mass. }
\label{fig:TR-5d-GC}
\end{figure}
To gain a better understanding of the situation, we once again consider plots of the temperature against the horizon radius for fixed values of the potential and the AdS radius. As in the uncharged case, we divide our study into two parts: first for $\mu \in (0, -79 L^4/1890)$ and then for $\mu \in (-79 L^4/1890, \mu_c)$. For the five dimensional case, the first plots are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:TR-5d-GC}. The behaviour in the Einstein gravity case (shown on the left) is qualitatively similar to the four-dimensional analysis: For $\Phi^2 < 3$ the structure of the curves is qualitatively identical to the uncharged solutions with up to two black holes at a given temperature, while for $\Phi^2 > 3$ there is only ever a single black hole. In the cubic case (shown on the right) the situation is quite different. For small values of $\Phi$, the structure of the curves is again qualitatively similar to the uncharged case --- namely, there are two disconnected branches of the temperature. However, as the value of $\Phi$ is increased there is a point where there is a significant change in the structure of the curves. There are still two disconnected branches of the temperature, but one now consists of purely negative mass black holes (see the curves in the upper left of the plot), while the other somewhat resembles the profiles shown in Figure~\ref{fig:HP-4d} --- for a given temperature there can be up to three black holes. As the value of $\Phi$ is further increased, the hump on this curve flattens out, and the profile resembles that of Einstein gravity for $\Phi^2 > 3$. For large enough $\Phi$, the entropy and mass will be positive along the entire curve.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{5D-PhiSpecial.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Special values of potential in five dimensions}. Here we show a plot of the value of potential at which the structure of the $T-r_+$ profiles change from resembling the uncharged case to exhibiting a closed curve. The black curve represents the value at which this occurs in Einstein gravity $\Phi = \sqrt{3}$. Note that the limit between the two cases is discontinuous. The blue curve terminates at $\mu = 79 \mu_c /280 = -79 L^4/1890$, since after this point the theory does not admit large black hole solutions.
}
\label{fig:PhiSpecial}
\end{figure}
The value of $\Phi$ for which the dramatic change just described occurs depends on the value of cubic coupling. Its precise value can be determined in the following way. Note that when $\Phi$ is less than this value, the temperature vs.~horizon radius profiles have only a single extremum. However, just above this value, the profiles have three extrema (one corresponding to the negative mass branch, and two corresponding to the other branch). Determining when the number of extrema jumps provides a way to determine this value of $\Phi$. In practice, this means solving a complicated polynomial equation, and so here we simply provide a plot of the result in Figure~\ref{fig:PhiSpecial}. Note that the coupling only runs to $\mu = - 79 L^4/1890 = 79/280 \mu_c$, since beyond this point the branch of large black holes ceases to exist.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{5D-GC-TR-Small.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{5D-GC-TM-Small.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Five-dimensional black hole properties in the grand canonical ensemble II}. Here we show plots of temperature vs.~horizon radius (left) and temperature vs.~mass (right) for $\mu/\mu_c = 0.3$, corresponding to $\mu < -79 L^4/1890$, providing an example of the behaviour when large black holes do not exist. The curves correspond to $\Phi = 0, 1.5, 1.7, 2$ in order of decreasing opacity (or left to right through a horizontal slice). The dashed blue curves indicate that the Wald entropy is negative, while the dot-dashed grey curves in the left plot indicate negative mass. }
\label{fig:5D-GC-Small}
\end{figure}
The value $\mu = -79 L^4/1890$ continues to mark a transition between the existence/nonexistence of large black holes. However, in the fixed potential ensemble, the structure is slightly different. We show some representative curves in Figure~\ref{fig:5D-GC-Small}. For small values of $\Phi$, the behaviour is similar to that displayed in Figure~\ref{fig:5d-HP-small}. For larger values of $\Phi$, one can see the a protrusion begins to take shape in the profiles, pushing toward larger values of horizon radius. We can see that for much of the profiles the mass is negative, indicating that those parameters do not correspond to solutions with sensible asymptotics.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{5D-GC-FvT1-Ein.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{5D-GC-FvT1.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{5D-GC-FvT2-Ein.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{5D-GC-FvT2.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{5D-GC-FvT3-Ein.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{5D-GC-FvT3.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Free energy: grand canonical ensemble in five dimensions}. {\it Top Row}: Here we show plots of the free energy for $\Phi = 0, 0.7$ (more to less opacity) for Einstein gravity (left) and the cubic theory with $\mu/\mu_c = 10^{-3}$ (right). {\it Middle Row}: Here we show plots of the free energy for $\Phi = 0.81, 1.2, 1.6$ (more to less opacity) for Einstein gravity (left) and the cubic theory with $\mu/\mu_c = 10^{-3}$ (right). {\it Bottom Row}: Here we show plots of the free energy for $\Phi = 1.75, 1.9, 2.0$ (more to less opacity) for Einstein gravity (left) and the cubic theory with $\mu/\mu_c = 10^{-3}$ (right). In all cases the dashed portions of the blue curves indicate negative Wald entropy, and points where the blue curves simply terminate indicate that the mass has become negative.}
\label{fig:FvT-5d-GC}
\end{figure}
Finally, let us consider the free energy --- for the situation where $\mu < -79 L^4/1890$ we show representative plots in Figure~\ref{fig:FvT-5d-GC}. In the top row we show the results for small values of the potential. In both cases, when the potential is small the free energy has the same structure as in the uncharged case. For Einstein gravity this means that the free energy presents a cusp-like structure, with a Hawking-Page-like transition between thermal AdS and a large AdS black hole occurring at the point where the free energy vanishes. For the cubic theory (shown on the right), the situation is much the same, exhibiting a phase transition between thermal AdS and a large black hole. Different parts of the free energy curve can have either negative entropy or mass. However, as in the uncharged case, this does not seem to pose a problem in the five dimensional case, as these cases are excluded due to the fact that they are not thermodynamically favoured. Note that the blue curve terminates at the point where $M=0$, since the cases with $M < 0$ do not exist as full solutions of the equations of motion.
As the potential is further increased, we enter into the regime where three branches of solutions emerge for the cubic theory. The value of $\Phi$ where this occurs is plotted in Figure~\ref{fig:PhiSpecial}, and representative free energy curves are shown in the middle row of Figure~\ref{fig:FvT-5d-GC}. In the Einstein case nothing of note changes. For the cubic case, we see a swallowtail emerge when $\Phi^2$ equals the value given in Figure~\ref{fig:PhiSpecial}. As $\Phi^2$ is further increased, the swallowtail shrinks, eventually terminating at what would be a critical point if it minimized the free energy\footnote{The critical exponents of this would-be critical point turn out to be the usual mean field theory values --- see Eq.~\eqref{eqn:mft}.}. Of course, since the swallowtail occurs for positive values of the free energy, the usual first order phase transition it represents does not occur. Instead, what we observe is once again a Hawking-Page transition between thermal AdS and a large black hole at fixed potential.
As the value of $\Phi^2$ is further increased, we eventually reach a value for which there is only a single branch of solutions, which occurs for
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:5d-no-PT}
\Phi^2 > 3 + \frac{9}{2} \left(\frac{-122 \mu}{79 L^4} \right)^{1/3} \, .
\end{equation}
Plots of free energy for $\Phi^2$ larger than $3$ are shown in the bottom row of Figure~\ref{fig:FvT-5d-GC}. The upper-most curve in this these plots corresponds to $\Phi = 1.75$, for which we see that in Einstein gravity the black hole is thermodynamically preferred at all temperatures, while in the cubic theory a Hawking-Page transition continues to occur. The remaining curves correspond to values of $\Phi$ that satisfy the inequality given in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:5d-no-PT} --- the black hole is always thermodynamically preferred. Due to the appearance of $\mu$ in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:5d-no-PT}, Hawking-Page transitions persist to larger values of $\Phi$ in the cubic theory than in Einstein gravity.
Lastly, let us note that in similar fashion to the uncharged case, if we adjust the entropy of the solutions so that they are always positive, this does nothing to change the interpretation of the phase structure described here, though it does push around the temperatures at which the phase transitions occur.
To close this section, let us make a few comments about what our results reveal about the black hole chemistry of these solutions. In both the uncharged and fixed potential cases, nothing qualitatively different is observed if one chooses to vary the cosmological constant. This can be seen, for example, just by considering the expressions for the critical point given in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:critPoint}. Notice that the critical pressure could be completely removed from the equation by redefining $\mu = x \mu_c$. Then the pressure simply serves as a relative scaling between the critical temperature and critical volume. Since the electric potential is dimensionless, in the uncharged and fixed potential ensembles, changing the pressure can only scale the results. In other words, by varying the pressure we can scale the points at which phase transitions and critical points occur, but we will not uncover any additional physics. The situation is a bit different in the canonical ensemble, since there the electric charge (which is dimensionful) appears directly, and there is no natural analog of $\mu_c$ (i.e. a special value of the charge that relates it to the cosmological length scale) that occurs for the charge.
\section{Charged black holes: Canonical ensemble} \label{sec: thermoce}
We now move on to consider thermodynamics in the canonical (fixed charge) ensemble. In this case, our aim will be to explore the critical points and phase behaviour working in the black hole chemistry framework. A key difference between the thermodynamics in the canonical ensemble compared to the previous two sections is that here, due to conservation of charge, transitions to the vacuum are not possible. This means that, at fixed charge, we compare the free energy of all the black hole solutions, and that with the lowest free energy is the preferred phase.
Recall that the equation of state in general dimensions reads
\begin{eqnarray}
P&=&\frac{T}{v}-\frac{(d-3)}{\pi (d-2)} \frac{k}{v^2}+\frac{e^2}{v^{2 d-4}}
+ \frac{2^8 (d-7)(d-4) (4 d^4-57 d^3+357 d^2-768 d+516 ) \mu k }{\pi (d-2)^5 (4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184) v^6}
\nonumber\\
&&-\frac{3\times 2^8 (d-4)(d-6) \left(4 d^3-33 d^2+127 d-166\right) k^2 \mu T}{(d-2)^4 (4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184) v^5} \nonumber\\
&&\
+\frac{3\times 2^{12} \pi (d-5) \left(d^2+5 d-15\right) k \mu T^2 }{(d-2)^3 (4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184) v^4}
\nonumber\\
&&+ \frac{2^{11} \pi^2 (d-4) \left(d^2+5 d-15\right) \mu T^3 }{(d-2)^2 (4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184) v^3}
\end{eqnarray}
where we note that the charge appears as $e^2$, and so
the same results hold for both positive and negative charge. The general idea for observing phase transitions is to see whether the coefficients of different powers of $v$ in the equation of state have signs that allow for various
maxima and minima of $P$. The appearance/disappearance of distinct phases will generically be associated with \textit{critical points}. A necessary condition for a critical point to occur is that
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\partial P}{\partial v}=\frac{\partial^2 P}{\partial v^2}=0\label{dpd2p} \, .
\end{eqnarray}
which will generally have non-degenerate solutions. A free energy analysis is required to determine whether the critical point is physically realized in the system i.e., whether or not the critical point belongs to a minimizing branch of the free energy. Unfortunately it is difficult to make any very general statements about how many critical points occur and what their associated phase behaviour is. For this reason, we resort to a case-by-case analysis in four, five and six dimensions, presenting an essentially exhaustive analysis of the parameter space. We close the section with a few brief remarks on the situation in general dimensions.
In what follows, we concentrate on several specific dimensions and investigate the thermodynamic behaviour in some detail.
\subsection{Critical behaviour in four dimensions}\label{four4}
The existence of critical points for four dimensional charged black holes has been previously pointed out in Einstein gravity ($\mu=0$) \cite{Kubiznak:2012wp}. In four dimensions, the field equation for cubic generalized quasi-topological gravity reduces to that of Einsteinian cubic gravity;\footnote{In four-dimensions, the theory itself reduces to Einsteinian cubic gravity plus an additional term that does not contribute to the field equations of spherically symmetric black hole spacetimes~\cite{Hennigar:2017ego}.} the critical behaviour of black holes in Einsteinian cubic gravity have been previously studied~\cite{Hennigar:2016gkm} for the case of uncharged black holes (see also Section~\ref{sec:HawkingPage} above). Here we include an analysis of the charged case.
The equation of state~\eqref{eos0} takes the following relatively simple form:
\begin{eqnarray}
P=\frac{T}{v}-\frac{k}{2 \pi v^2}+\frac{e^2}{v^4}-\frac{48 \pi \mu k T^2}{ v^4}
\end{eqnarray}
Note that, at fixed temperature, the term arising from the electric charge and the term arising from the cubic correction both go like $v^{-4}$. These terms dominate for small black holes and, due to them having the same fall-off behaviour, suggests there will be similarities between the cubic black holes and ordinary charged black holes in Einstein gravity.
Solving equation \reef{dpd2p} we find for general values of $\mu$ and $e^2$
that the critical temperature, volume and pressure are
\begin{eqnarray}
T^2_{c \pm}=\frac{3 \pi e^2\pm \sqrt{9 \pi^2 e^4- 64 k^4\mu }}{288 \pi ^2 k\mu },\quad P_{c \pm}=\frac{3 \pi e^2\pm \sqrt{9 \pi ^2 e^4-64 k^4\mu }}{512 \pi k^2\mu }
,\quad
v_{c \pm}=\frac{2 k}{3 \pi T_{c \pm}}\nonumber\\ \label{Tpvc}
\end{eqnarray}
where the two choices result because the equation of state is quadratic in $T$.
Under the restriction of negative coupling (which is required for the existence of sensible positive mass solutions), we can see that the term under the square root in the above expressions is always positive. However, by the same token we see that for $k=+1$ only $T_{c-}, P_{c-}$ and $v_{c-}$ are physically sensible, i.e. have all three critical values positive, while for $k=-1$ there is no physical solution. The end result then is that there are no ``new'' critical points introduced by the cubic theory in four dimensions. Effectively, the cubic correction shifts the critical quantities away from their Einstein gravity values, reducing the critical temperature and pressure, while increasing the critical volume.
We also find that the ratio of critical quantities in \reef{Tpvc} is independent of the black hole parameters
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{P_c v_c}{T_c}=\frac{3}{8}\label{ratio}
\end{eqnarray}
and in this sense is universal.
Note that this ratio is independent of choice of spherical or hyperbolic geometry, though in the latter case we do not have critical points since $p_{c-}$ and $v_{c-}$ are negative. In~\cite{Hennigar:2017umz} it was found that the van der Waals ratio differs from this value of $3/8$ for black branes, and so the ratio can be sensitive to the horizon topology. Remarkably, the ratio~\eqref{ratio} is precisely the same as that first observed for charged black holes in four dimensional Einstein gravity~\cite{Kubiznak:2012wp}; higher curvature corrections have not affected this universal value for spherical black holes.
It can be straight-forwardly confirmed that the various physical constraints are satisfied by the black holes at the critical point. That is, these black holes possess positive mass and the critical pressure is always less than the maximum pressure $P_{\rm max}$. We can also confirm that the entropy --- regardless if it has been shifted or not --- is always positive at the critical point. For the entropy from Eq. \reef{sratio} at critical point we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
s_{c \pm}\propto\frac{16 \pi^2 k^4\mu +9 \pi ^4 e^4\pm 3 \pi ^3 e^2 \sqrt{9 \pi ^2 e^4-64 k^4\mu}}{48 \pi^2 k^4\mu}\label{ent4d} \, .
\end{eqnarray}
Noting that only the minus branch with $k=+1$ corresponds to a sensible critical point, some simple manipulations reveal that the Wald entropy is positive at the critical point.
The critical points are characterized by mean field theory critical exponents which, for generic values of parameters and $k=1$ in the physical domain, are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\alpha=0, \quad \beta=\frac{1}{2}, \quad \gamma=1 ,\quad \delta=3
\label{exponents}
\end{eqnarray}
and are obtained by expanding the equation of state near the critical point \cite{Gunasekaran:2012dq}
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{P}{P_{c \pm}}&=&1-\frac{1}{48 \pi^2 k^4{\mu}} \left(-160 \pi^2 k^4{\mu}+Y\right){\tau}
+\frac{4 }{48 \pi^2 k^4{\mu}} \left(-64 \pi^2 k^4{\mu}+Y\right){\phi} {\tau}-\frac{4}{3} {\phi}^3
\nonumber\\
&+&\cO(\tau \phi^2,\phi^4)\label{ppc}
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
Y =9 \pi ^4 {e^4}\pm 3 \pi ^2 {e^2}\sqrt{9 \pi ^4 e^4- 64 \pi^2 k^4{\mu}}
\end{eqnarray}
and where we replaced the following terms for volume and temperature
\begin{eqnarray}
v = v_c(\phi + 1) \, , \quad T = T_c (\tau + 1) \, .
\end{eqnarray}
Since the prefactors multiplying the $\phi \tau$ and $\phi ^3$ terms are non-vanishing the the physical portion of parameter space, the critical points given in \eqref{exponents} follow from this expansion.
Considering the $P-v$ graph in Figure \ref{PT4d}, we observe two distinguishable (stable) phases
for $T<T_c$. These merge at $T=T_c$ and then for $T>T_c$ they become indistinguishable,
the hallmark of a standard Van-der-Waals (VdW) phase transition. Note that for certain low temperature isotherms, portions of the $P-v$ curve can dip into negative pressure. A similar situation occurs already in Einstein gravity and, of course, negative pressure in this setup is unphysical. The solution to the problem is either that the negative pressure portion of the curve is excised via a Maxwell equal area prescription or, in some cases, it is just the case that these solutions are unphysical.
The critical points correspond to the end point of a line of first order phase transitions, as shown in Figure~\ref{PT4d}. This line of coexistence demarcates phases of large and small black holes.
\begin{figure*}[htp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[scale=.32]{P-V-4d-2.pdf}& \quad \quad
\includegraphics[scale=.32]{P-T-4d-v2.pdf}
\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{{\bf Critical behaviour in four dimensions}. \textit{Left}: the case for fixed charge, we show a $P-v$ graph that illustrates a first order phase transition with VdW behaviour in $d=4$ and with $k=1$. The various curves correspond to different isotherms: at the critical point $T=T_c$ (dashed blue line), $T=0.9 T_c, 0.71 T_c, 0.67 T_c$ (solid black lines), and $T=1.3 T_c, 1.8 T_c$ (solid blue lines). Here we choose $\mu/e^4 \approx -0.00152$ with $T_c e\approx 0.03455$. \textit{Right}: Phase diagram in $P-T$ plane. The phase diagram for four dimensional charged black holes with $k=1$ is constructed with $\mu/e^4 \approx -0.00152$, however the similar behaviour occurs for any other values. Note that here we are working in units of the electric charge.
}
\label{PT4d}
\end{figure*}
Furthermore, an analysis of the Gibbs free energy reveals typical van der Waals behaviour, shown in Figure~\ref{GTd4}.
\begin{figure*}[htp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[scale=.32]{G-T-4d-3.pdf}
&\quad\quad
\includegraphics[scale=.32]{G-T-4d-4-d01.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\caption{\textbf{Free energy in four dimensions}. {\it Left}: Plot of Gibbs free energy versus temperature for $d=4$ and $k=1$, for $P=1.2 P_c$ (dotted, blue curve), for $P=P_c$ (dotted, black curve), for $P=0.6 P_c$ and $P=0.2 P_c$ (solid black and red lines). {\it Right}: Plot for $P=0.01 P_c$.
In each plot, the red lines represent parts of the curves that the specific heat is negative. In all plots, $\mu/e^4 \approx -0.00152$ where physical conditions are satisfied with $P_c e^2\approx 0.00211$.
}
\label{GTd4}
\end{figure*}
For pressures larger than the critical value, there is only a single branch of black holes and no phase transition takes place. For $P=P_c$, the free energy has a kink shape, characteristic of the diverging specific heat at the critical point and it is always stable ($C_p>0$). For pressures a bit less than the critical pressure, the Gibbs free energy demonstrates the swallowtail behaviour as expected from van der Waals manner. There are up to two branches of black holes that have positive specific heat (though only one ever minimizes the free energy), while the concave patch of the Gibbs free energy indicates negative specific heat,
\begin{eqnarray}
C_p = - T \frac{\partial ^2 G}{\partial T^2} \, .
\end{eqnarray}
We specify the negative specific heat in Figure~\ref{GTd4} by red lines. Note that all curves approximately converge to the same small domain as $T\rightarrow 0$ for different choices of pressure. Further decreasing the pressure, we observe a swallowtail. For very small values of pressure the swallowtail `grows'.
\subsection{Critical behaviour in five dimensions} \label{five5}
In five dimensions we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
P=\frac{T}{v}-\frac{2 k}{3 \pi v^2}+\frac{ 4480 \pi^2 \mu T^3}{711 v^3}+\frac{256 \mu k^2 T}{237 v^5}-\frac{31232 \mu k}{19197 \pi v^6}+\frac{e^2}{v^6}
\end{eqnarray}
for the equation of state. Using \reef{dpd2p} and setting the first and second derivatives of $P$ with respect to $v$ to $0$,
the general form of the critical temperature for given $k$ in terms of critical volume and other parameters reads
\begin{equation}
T_c = \frac{19197 \pi e^2-31232 k \mu +1422 k v_c^4}{2133 \pi v_c^5-11520 \pi k^2 \mu v_c}
\end{equation}
where $v_c$ satisfies
\begin{align}
0&=3 v_c^3 \left(79 v_c \left(4266 k v_c^4-95985 \pi e^2+87040 k \mu \right)+40320 \pi ^3 \mu T_c^3 \left(1280 k^2 \mu -237 v_c^4\right)\right)
\nonumber\\
&+1280 k \mu \left(31232 \mu -19197 \pi e^2 k\right)
\end{align}
Although the equations~\eqref{dpd2p} are non-linear in both $T$ and $v$, it is still possible to obtain the above explicit expression for $T_c$ in terms of $v_c$ and the other parameters by manipulating the equations~\eqref{dpd2p} to remove non-linear dependencies on the temperature. Note that these manipulations are possible only in four, five and six dimensions, since it is only in these cases that a single non-linear power of temperature appears in the equation of state.
Although it appears possible for the expression of the critical temperature to have a singularity for a particular combination of the specific volume and the coupling, this does not manifest as it would require positive coupling --- this is forbidden by the requirement of having sensible positive mass solutions.
\begin{figure*}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{physdomain-5d-k=1-v8.pdf}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{physdomain-5d-k=-1}
\caption{\textbf{Phase space of constraints for $d=5$}.
The plot shows the different possibilities for
critical behaviour in $(\mu,e)$
parameter space for
$k=1$ (left) and $k=-1$ (right). Green regions denote single physical critical points with all physical constraints fulfilled. In grey regions there are no possible critical points. Blue regions depict single critical points with $\gamma^2<0$. The thin red line denotes two potential critical points. In the left plot, the critical points that lie below the dashed black curve possess negative Wald entropy. In the right plot, the black region indicates that the critical pressure exceeds the maximum pressure, while the orange region indicates that the potential critical point corresponds to a negative mass black hole.}
\label{domain5d}
\end{figure*}
We now turn to an examination of the coupling/charge parameter space, with the relevant plot shown in Figure~\ref{domain5d}. We first focus on black holes with spherical horizons. In this case, we first note that when $\mu = 0$ there is a single physical critical point provided that the electric charge is non-zero. We find that when the cubic coupling is negative, and provided it satisfies the bound $\mu \lessapprox -0.446179 e^2$ then there are no possible critical points. When $-0.446179 e^2 \lessapprox \mu < 0$ the equations \eqref{dpd2p} admit two possible solutions for critical points. To determine if the black holes corresponding to these possible solutions are physical, we have to ensure that the various physical constraints are satisfied --- these have been incorporated into Figure~\ref{domain5d} directly. We find that one of the two possible critical points always possesses negative Wald entropy, while the second has negative Wald entropy only when $\mu \lessapprox -0.358799 e^2$, and otherwise has positive entropy. However, as mentioned in the previous sections, due to ambiguities in the definition of the entropy, it is unclear whether this alone means that the black holes are unphysical. More important is that the mass is positive, since it seems that the negative mass solutions do not exist. We find that for coupling in the range $-0.445201 e^2 \lessapprox \mu < 0$ there is a single critical point with positive mass, while in the interval $-0.446179 e^2 \lessapprox \mu \lessapprox -0.445201 e^2$ both of the critical points correspond to black holes with positive mass.
Let us now describe the phase behaviour in the various regions of parameter space. In the regime where there is a single physical critical point we find (unsurprisingly) Van der Waals type behaviour with the critical exponents coinciding with the mean field theory values. The plots that arise in this case are qualitatively similar to the four dimensional case, and so we do not present them here. This single physical critical point limits to the one in Einstein gravity as $\mu \to 0$; the effect of the higher curvature correction is to increase both the critical pressure and temperature, while decreasing the critical volume. We can examine the ratio of critical values numerically based on the data from Figure~\ref{domain5d}, and we find that it exhibits weak dependence on the cubic coupling constant. This dependence can be confirmed by solving Eqs.~\eqref{dpd2p} perturbatively in the coupling constant, giving the following for the leading order correction:
\begin{equation}
\frac{P_c v_c}{T_c} = \frac{5}{12} \left[1 - \frac{527872}{2399625} \left( \frac{\mu}{e^2} \right) + {\cal O} \left(\frac{\mu^2}{e^4} \right) \right] \, .
\end{equation}
The first term in the expansion is, of course, the result for five-dimensional charged black holes in Einstein gravity~\cite{Gunasekaran:2012dq}. Recalling that $\mu <0$, we see that the cubic correction increases the value of the ratio.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{5d-k1-2crit-PV.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Pressure vs.~volume plot depicting two critical points in $d=5$ for $k=+1$}. This plot displays the situation for $\mu = -0.446 e^2$. There are two critical points with critical temperatures $T_{c_1} \approx 0.160234/e$ and $T_{c_2} \approx 0.163327/e $. The isotherms shown correspond to $T \approx 0.75 T_{c_1}, T_{c_1}, 1.22 T_{c_2}$, from bottom to top (more to less opacity). Solid blue lines indicate positive Wald entropy and mass, dashed blue lines indicate positive mass but negative Wald entropy, dot-dashed gray lines indicate negative mass and hence that the corresponding black holes do not exist.}
\label{fig:5d-k1-PV2}
\end{figure}
As mentioned just above, when $-0.446179 e^2 \lessapprox \mu \lessapprox -0.445201 e^2$ there is an additional critical point that occurs for positive mass black holes (though they have negative Wald entropy). To illustrate the physics in this case, we refer to Figure~\ref{fig:5d-k1-PV2}, where the behaviour in the pressure volume plane is displayed for three different temperatures. The plot depicts three isotherms, corresponding to $T \approx 0.75 T_{c_1}, T_{c_1}, 1.22 T_{c_2}$. The behaviour can be understood as follows. For $T < T_{c_1}$, the system exhibits usual van der Waals type behaviour that terminates at the critical point $T_{c_1}$. For temperatures between $T_{c_1}$ and $T_{c_2}$, there is no interesting phase behaviour. (Curves with $T_{c_1} < T < T_{c_2}$ are not shown in Figure~\ref{fig:5d-k1-PV2} since they are too close together to distinguish.) When $T > T_{c_2}$, the system again exhibits van der Waals type oscillations, but with the caveat that these oscillations \textit{begin} at the critical point and then exist for arbitrarily large temperatures. However, it turns out that for much of the parameter space one of the possible phases possesses negative mass, and so there is no first order phase transition present.
Finally, let us make a few comments about the hyperbolic $k=-1$ case. In this case we observe that the equations \eqref{dpd2p} admit a single solution provided that $ -1.93101 e^2 \lessapprox \mu < 0$. However, a further analysis reveals that the black holes corresponding to these critical points are unphysical. For the coupling in the range $-0.946037 e^2 \lessapprox \mu < 0$, the black hole mass is negative at the critical point, while for $ -1.93101 e^2 \lessapprox \mu \lessapprox -0.946037 e^2$ the mass is positive but the value of the critical pressure exceeds the maximum allowable pressure $P_{\rm max}$.
\subsection{Critical behaviour in six dimensions}
For six dimensional Einstein metrics, the contributions of any cubic term to the linearized field equations vanishes~\cite{Bueno:2016xff}. This results in some simplification in this case, and we have $f_{\infty}=1$ by definition. From \reef{gamma2}, we obtain $\gamma^2=-\frac{2 }{9 \pi \mu P f_{\infty} m} $, which is positive provided $\mu<0$ (see Figure \ref{domain6d}); for $\mu>0$ we obtain $\gamma^2<0$. Therefore, in six dimensions, the pressure can be arbitrarily large.
In six dimensions, the equation of state becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
P=\frac{T}{v}-\frac{3 k}{4 \pi v^2}+\frac{6 \pi^2 \mu T^3}{v^3}+\frac{9 \pi \mu k T^2}{2 v^4}-\frac{3 \mu k}{8 \pi v^6}+\frac{e^2}{v^8} \, .
\end{eqnarray}
According to the analysis at the beginning of this section, there can be up to two critical points for the six dimensional spherical $(k=+1)$ black holes and three critical points for the hyperbolic ($k=-1$) ones. Applying Eq. \reef{dpd2p}
the critical temperature is related to the critical volume as
\begin{equation}
T_c = -\frac{160 \pi e^2 v_c^4-162 k \mu ^2 v_c^2+81 k \mu v_c^6+6 k v_c^{10}+1152 \pi e^2 \mu }{1440 \pi ^2 e^2 k \mu v_c-243 \pi \mu ^2 v_c^3-54 \pi \mu v_c^7-8 \pi v_c^{11}}
\end{equation}
and $v_c$ satisfies the following relation
\begin{equation}
\pi ^2 v_c^2 \left(72 \pi ^2 k \mu T_c^2 v_c^2+6 k v_c^4-8 \pi T_c v_c^5-27 k \mu \right)+160 \pi ^3 e^2 = 0 \, .
\end{equation}
Once again, any apparent singularities of the above expression for the critical temperature actually do not occur within the physical parameter space.
A parameter space plot is shown in Figure~\ref{domain6d} for the case of $k=+1$. In this case we find that there are two solutions to Eqs.~\eqref{dpd2p} provided $-0.068658 e^{4/3} \lessapprox \mu < 0$, while there are no solutions for potential critical points when $\mu \lessapprox -0.068658 e^{4/3}$. To determine which (if any) of these potential critical points are physical, we must check the various physicality conditions. We find that when the coupling is in the range $0.049633 e^{4/3} \lessapprox \mu < 0$ one of the potential critical points corresponds to a negative mass solution, while for $-0.068658 e^{4/3} \mu \lessapprox 0.049633 e^{4/3}$ both potential critical points have positive mass. We also find that in the interval $\-0.064541 e^{4/3} \lessapprox \mu \lessapprox 0.049633 e^{4/3}$ one of the two critical points possesses negative Wald entropy.
\begin{figure*}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{physdomain-6d-k=1.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{Phase space of constraints in six dimensions}. Here we show the situation for spherical black holes in six dimensions. Green shaded areas represent a single physical critical point. Light green areas represent two physical critical points. In the gray regions, there are no solutions to the critical point equations~\eqref{dpd2p}. In the region between the dashed black lines, the Wald entropy is negative for one of the two critical points.}
\label{domain6d}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[htp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[scale=.32]{v-e.pdf}&\quad\quad
\includegraphics[scale=.32]{p-e.pdf}
\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{\textbf{Counting the number of critical points in six dimensions}. In six dimensions, The behaviour of critical volume (left) and critical pressure (right) versus electric charge. We set $\mu =-0.0675$ and $k=1$. The red curve shows in which region of electric charge two critical points exist.
}
\label{figPeVe6d}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[htp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{P-V-6d-3.pdf}
\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{\textbf{$p-v$ graph illustrating two first order phase transitions}. The behaviour of pressure versus volume for temperatures less than first critical point $T=T_c$ presented with dashed red line, ${\it i.e.,}\ $ $T=0.45 T_c, .48859 T_c, 0.8 T_c$ (red lines) and temperatures larger than second critical point $T=T_{\overline{c}}$ presented with dashed black line, ${\it i.e.,}\ $ $T=1.5 T_{\overline{c}},1.9 T_{\overline{c}}$ (black lines). Here, we set $\mu/e^{4/3}=-0.0655$ giving $T_c e^{1/3} =0.24730$ and $T_{\overline{c}}e^{1/3}\approx 0.31746$.
}
\label{figPV6d}
\end{figure*}
Let us discuss at greater length the situation in which there are two physical critical points since, as we will see, this leads to some interesting phase behaviour. The existence of these two solutions is dependent on the value of the electric charge and the coupling, as shown in Figure~\ref{figPeVe6d}. This plot shows the critical volume and pressure as a function of electric charge for particular choices of the coupling. In Figure~\ref{figPV6d} we depict two separate first order transitions for two different critical points. The figure exhibits `double VdW' behaviour, in which a standard VdW transition takes place for cold temperatures, disappearing at a critical temperature $T_{c}$, and then reappearing once $T$ becomes greater than an even larger critical temperature $T_{\overline{c}}$. The intermediate region $T_c < T < T_{\overline{c}}$ is where both phases are indistinguishable, and the associated isotherms are one-to-one functions $P(v)$. Note that, in Figure~\ref{figPV6d}, some of the isotherms dip below $P < 0$. Those portions of the curve are, of course, unphysical but are also naturally excluded via Maxwell's equal area law since the pressure at which the phase transition occurs is positive.
\begin{figure*}[htp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[scale=.32]{PT-1.pdf}&\quad\quad
\includegraphics[scale=.32]{PT-2.pdf}
\\
\includegraphics[scale=.32]{PT-3.pdf}&\quad\quad
\includegraphics[scale=.32]{PT-4.pdf}
\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{ \textbf{Phase diagrams depicting first and second order phase transitions in $d=6$}. \textit{Top left}:
Choosing $\mu/e^{4/3}\approx -0.065487$ the critical quantities are $T_c e^{1/3} \approx 0.24730$ and $P_c e^{2/3} \approx 0.05712$, $T_{\overline{c}}e^{1/3}\approx 0.31746$ and $P_{\overline{c}}e^{2/3}\approx 0.08175$. Green points denote critical points and black lines indicate a first-order phase transition. We
see that there is such a transition for $T < T_c$ and another for $T> T_{\overline{c}}$. Blue lines indicate negative entropy; green dotted lines indicate negative mass.
\textit{Top right }: A magnification of the region near the upper right critical point in the figure to the left, illustrating the existence of a small region with positive entropy (solid black line).
\textit{Bottom left}: For $\mu/e^{4/3}\approx-0.068658$ we obtain an isolated critical point (red point); the approximate values at the conjoined critical temperature and volume are $T_c e^{1/3} \approx
0.2766075924$ and $P_c e^{2/3} \approx 0.06725819565$. \textit{Bottom right}: A magnification of the bottom left plot close to the isolated critical point.
}
\label{PT6d}
\end{figure*}
For generic values of the coupling, each of the two critical points are described by mean field theory critical exponents. One marks the end point of a first order coexistence line, while the other marks the beginning of a first order coexistence line, shown in Figure \ref{PT6d}. The fact that the critical exponents are the mean field theory values can be deduced by examining the equation of state expanded near the critical point. Schematically, we obtain an expansion of the form
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{P}{P_{c \pm}}&=&1+A \tau-B \tau \phi-C \phi^3+\cO(\tau \phi^2,\phi^4)\label{expcoeff}
\end{eqnarray}
where the coefficients $(A,B,C)$ are numerically determined from choices of the parameters.
For finely tuned values of the coupling, these two critical points merge into a single object known as an \textit{isolated critical point}. Isolated critical points have been of interest since, in all known cases, they provide examples of critical exponents that deviate from the mean field theory values. The first examples using Lovelock and quasi-topological gravity were discussed in \cite{Frassino:2014pha, Dolan:2014vba,Hennigar:2015esa} where the isolated critical points happen for hyperbolic horizons and massless black holes, and coincided with a thermodynamic singularity. For Lovelock and quasi-topological black holes with conformal scalar hair \cite{EricksonRobie, Dykaar:2017mba} isolated critical points were discussed in five and higher dimensions, providing first examples of isolated critical points for black holes of any mass and away from the thermodynamic singularity. Here we observe these points for the first time in six dimensions, and also for spherical horizons in pure gravity. Note also that these examples of isolated critical points do not correspond to any thermodynamic singularity, as the slope of the $P-T$ coexistence curve is non-zero.
We have confirmed that this isolated critical point associated with the parameters given in Figure \ref{PT6d} has positive mass, and therefore the associated black holes have sensible asymptotic structure. Since the equation for finding the critical values of $T$ and $v$ \reef{dpd2p} is seventh order in $v$ and third order in $T$, it is only feasible to solve these equations numerically. From the numerics we can extract the form of the equation of state expanded near the critical point. We find that the coefficient $B$ in \reef{expcoeff} goes to zero as parameters approach those yielding an isolated critical point. The critical exponents corresponding to the isolated critical point are given according following prescription.
To get the critical exponents, we follow the prescription outlined in \cite{Gunasekaran:2012dq}. For the specific heat at constant volume
\begin{eqnarray}
C_v=T \frac{\partial s}{\partial T}\Big|_v = 0 \, .
\end{eqnarray}
we find that the critical exponent $\tilde{\alpha}=0$,
despite the fact that the entropy (naively) depends on temperature. Using \reef{expcoeff}, the fact that during the phase transition (between large/small black holes) the pressure remains constant, and Maxwell's area law written in differential form as
\begin{eqnarray}
dP=-P_c(2 D \tau \omega+3 C \omega^2)d\omega
\end{eqnarray}
we find $\omega_{l,s}\propto \tau$. Hence $\tilde{\beta}=1$. To evaluate the exponent $\tilde{\gamma}$ we compute the behaviour of the isothermal compressibility near criticality, finding
\begin{eqnarray}
\kappa_T=-\frac{1}{v}\frac{\partial v}{\partial P}\Big|_T=-\frac{1}{(1+\omega) P_c \left(-2 D \omega \tau-3 C \omega^2\right)}\propto \frac{1}{\tau^2}
\end{eqnarray}
where we used the relation $\omega\propto \tau$ as mentioned above. We thus obtain $\tilde{\gamma}=2$. These values for the exponents ($\beta,\gamma$) are different from the standard exponents in \reef{exponents} but match the non-standard critical exponents found in~\cite{Dolan:2014vba} for seven-dimensional Lovelock gravity.
Let us close this section by mentioning that there are no physical critical points in the hyperbolic case. We find that for any negative coupling the equations~\eqref{dpd2p} admit possible solutions, however these always correspond to negative mass black holes.
\subsection{Remarks on higher dimensions}
To close our considerations of the canonical ensemble, we present a few remarks on the situation in general dimensions. Rather than perform an exhaustive analysis --- which would require a case-by-case study --- here we limit the discussion to small values of the coupling and black holes with spherical horizons. This will allow us to understand how the cubic theory affects the critical behaviour already present in Einstein gravity.
Let us begin by recalling that in Einstein gravity charged black holes with spherical horizon present a single critical point in all dimensions with the critical values being given by~\cite{Gunasekaran:2012dq}
\begin{equation}
P_c^{(0)} = \frac{(d-3)^2}{(d-2)^2 \pi v_c^2} \, , \quad T_c^{(0)} = \frac{4 (d-3)^2}{(d-2)(2d-5)\pi v_c} \, , \quad v_c^{(0)} = \left[\frac{(d-2)^2(2d-5) \pi e^2}{d-3} \right]^{\frac{1}{2(d-3)}} \, .
\end{equation}
When the cubic coupling is turned on and is perturbatively small, the critical values given above become modified. The first order corrections are given by
\begin{align}
P_c^{(\mu)} &= P_c^{(0)} - \frac{256 (d-2)^{-(5d-9)/(d-3)} \pi^{-d/(d-3)} }{(2 d-5)^3 \left(4 d^4-49 d^3+291 d^2-514 d+184\right)} \left( \frac{d-3}{2d-5}\right)^{\frac{3}{d-3}}
\nonumber\\
&\times \bigg(416 d^9+4424 d^8-200812 d^7+2129198 d^6-11437255 d^5+35957054 d^4
\nonumber\\
&-68280093 d^3+75654408 d^2-43205940 d+8802960 \bigg) \left(\frac{\mu}{|e|^{6/(d-3)}} \right) + {\cal O}\left(\mu^2 \right) \, ,
\\
T_c^{(\mu)} &= T_c^{(0)} - \frac{1536 (2 d-5)^{-3} \pi^{(1-2d)/(2d-6)} }{(d-2)^5 \left(4 d^4-49 d^3+291 d^2-514 d+184\right)} \left(\frac{(d-2)^2(2d-5)}{d-3} \right)^{\frac{5}{2(3-d)}}
\nonumber\\
&\times \bigg( 128 d^9+304 d^8-39908 d^7+464048 d^6-2604697 d^5+8471996 d^4
\nonumber\\
&-16664635 d^3 +19319904 d^2-11851020 d+2803440 \bigg) \left(\frac{\mu}{|e|^{5/(d-3)}} \right) + {\cal O}\left(\mu^2 \right) \, ,
\\
v_c^{(\mu)} &= v_c^{(0)} + \frac{384 (d-2)^{-4} (2d-5)^{-3} \pi^{-3/(2d-6)} }{(d-3)^2\left(4 d^4-49 d^3+291 d^2-514 d+184\right)} \left(\frac{(d-2)^2(2d-5)}{d-3} \right)^{3/(6-2d)}
\nonumber\\
&\times \bigg(32 d^9+7848 d^8-171340 d^7+1533478 d^6-7507951 d^5+21947526 d^4
\nonumber\\
&-38744053 d^3+39179688 d^2-19237140 d+2564880 \bigg) \left(\frac{\mu}{|e|^{3/(d-3)}} \right) + {\cal O}\left(\mu^2 \right) \, .
\end{align}
Although it is not immediately obvious from these expressions, the effect of the higher-order coupling is different depending only on whether the spacetime dimension is four or higher. In four dimensions, the cubic coupling leads to an increase in the critical volume, while decreasing both the critical temperature and the critical pressure. In all higher dimensions, the effect is reversed: the critical volume is decreased, while the critical temperature and pressure are increased. One can readily check that for small values of the coupling, the critical points meet all physicality conditions. We can also compute the effect on the Van der Waals ratio:
\begin{align}
\frac{P_c v_c}{T_c} &= \frac{2d-5}{4d-8} \bigg[1 - \frac{256(d-4)(2d-5)^{-3} \pi^{-2/(d-3)} }{(d-3)^2(d-2)^4\left(4 d^4-49 d^3+291 d^2-514 d+184\right)}
\nonumber\\
&\times\left(\frac{d-3}{(d-2)^2(2d-5)} \right)^{\frac{2}{d-3}} \bigg(32 d^9+3720 d^8-84548 d^7+758186 d^6-3668673 d^5
\nonumber\\
&+10467583 d^4-17711283 d^3+16541067 d^2-6667680 d+106860 \bigg) \left(\frac{\mu}{|e|^{4/(d-3)}} \right)
\nonumber\\
&+ {\cal O}\left(\mu^2 \right) \bigg] \, .
\end{align}
In four dimensions the ratio is unaltered (as discussed above), while in all higher dimensions there is a correction dependent on the coupling and charge that serves to increase the ratio compared to its value in Einstein gravity. The conclusion, then, is that while the van der Waals ratio is a ``universal'' quantity in Einstein gravity, it is sensitive to the particular details of the solution in more general theories of gravity.
\section{Holographic hydrodynamics} \label{sec: holog}
\label{sec:holo_hydro}
\subsection{Review of black branes}
The thermodynamic properties of black branes in the cubic theory were studied in~\cite{Hennigar:2017umz}. Here we will review some of the properties of uncharged black branes in the cubic theory that will be useful in the following subsection.
When $k=0$, the near horizon equations of motion simplify dramatically:
\begin{align}
m &= r_+^{d-4} \bigg[ \frac{r_+^{3}}{L^2} + \frac{ 1024 \mu \pi^4 (d^2 + 5 d - 15) T^3}{ (4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)} \bigg]
\nonumber\\
0 &= (d-1)\frac{r_+^2}{L^2} - 4 \pi r_+ T
- \frac{512 (d-4)(d^2 + 5d - 15) \mu \pi^3 T^3}{(4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184) r_+} \, .
\end{align}
In four dimensions, these equations imply that the temperature as a function of horizon radius is exactly the same in the cubic theory as it is in Einstein gravity. In higher dimensions there are corrections to this profile, and in both four and higher dimensions the mass receives corrections. Taking the discriminant of the second equation above we find that it changes from positive to negative when the coupling takes the value
\begin{equation}
\mu^* = -\frac{(4 d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)L^4}{54(d-4)(d-1)^2(d^2 + 5d - 15)} \, .
\end{equation}
When taking $d =5$, this reduces to $\mu^* = - 79 L^4/1890$ which we encountered earlier in Sections~\ref{sec:HawkingPage} and~\ref{sec:thermofpe}. In those cases we were interested in black holes with spherical horizon topology and the bound implied that large black holes simply do not exist when the coupling is smaller than this value. In the present case, the bound applies \textit{for all values of the horizon radius} and we find that when the coupling exceeds this value there is no sensible solution for $T$ as a function of $r_+$.
The next important point we will note is that both of the near horizon equations are satisfied (with vanishing mass) for all values of the horizon radius when the temperature and coupling are given by
\begin{equation}
T_p = \frac{3(d-2) r_+}{8 \pi L^2} \, , \quad \mu_p = - \frac{L^4(4d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)}{54 (d-2)^3(d^2 + 5d - 15)} \, .
\end{equation}
Interestingly these conditions also imply that the entropy of the black brane vanishes. This is the reason for the labels ``$p$'' since as we will see, in this limit the ratio of shear viscosity to entropy density has a pole. Comparing the above results, we notice that $\mu_p < \mu^*$ indicating that we reach the point where $M = 0$ and $S = 0$ before the point where solutions fail to exist. Further exploration reveals that for all $|\mu| > |\mu_p|$ the mass of the black holes is negative, indicating that the full solutions do not exist. This means that the point $\mu = \mu_p$ actually serves as the limit of sensible coupling for black branes in the cubic theory and we must constrain $\mu \in [\mu_p, 0]$. In this interval, we find that the mass and entropy of the black branes is always positive. An interesting point is that in four-dimensions $\mu_p$ coincides with $\mu_c$ corresponding to the critical limit of the theory; however, in higher dimensions $\mu_p$ is always distinct from $\mu_c$.
While the equation determining the temperature as a function of horizon radius is a cubic, only a single branch of the solution is physical --- one gives negative temperature, while the other gives negative mass. In terms of $\mu_p$, the physical solution can be expressed quite simply as
\begin{equation}
T = \frac{3 r_+}{4 \pi L^2} \sqrt{\frac{(d-2)^3 \mu_p}{(d-4) \mu }} \cos \left(\frac{\theta + \pi}{3} \right)
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\cos\theta = \frac{(d-1) \sqrt{(d-4) \mu/\mu_p}}{(d-2)^{3/2}} \, .
\end{equation}
The temperature therefore exhibits a linear dependence on the horizon radius, with the slope of the line depending on the spacetime dimension and the value of the coupling. In the limit $\mu \to 0$, the expression limits to $T = (d-1) r_+/(4\pi L^2)$, while when $\mu \to \mu_p$ it limits to $T = 3(d-2) r_+/(8\pi L^2)$. These two lines bound all other curves.
We can also write an explicit expression for the entropy for the physical branch of black branes. This reads
\begin{align}
s &:= \frac{S}{L^{d-2} {\rm Vol} \left(\mathbb{R}^{d-2} \right)}
\nonumber\\
&= \frac{r_+^{d-2}}{4 L^{d-2}} \left[1 - \frac{4(d-2)}{d-4} \sin\left( \frac{1}{3} \arcsin \left( \frac{(d-1) \sqrt{(d-4) \mu/\mu_p}}{(d-2)^{3/2}} \right) \right) \right] \, .
\end{align}
This entropy is vanishes only when $r_+ \to 0$ or when $\mu \to \mu_p$. This behaviour is precisely in line with what we would expect for the entropy, and so there is no need to be concerned with shifting it for the black branes. Indeed, any shift in the entropy would result in a non-zero entropy assigned to the spacetime when it does not contain a horizon. Let us now study the ratio of shear viscosity to entropy density.
\subsection{Computation of $\eta/s$}
As a step toward a full understanding of the generalized quasi-topological class of theories in the context of the AdS/CFT correspondence, we compute here the ratio of shear viscosity to entropy density $\eta/s$.
For field theories possessing Einstein gravity duals, the shear viscosity to entropy density ratio has a universal form $\eta/s = 1/(4\pi)$. It was conjectured by Kovtun, Son, and Starinets that this represents a universal lower bound for all substances~\cite{Kovtun:2004de}, i.e. $\eta/s \ge 1/ (4\pi)$ (the KSS bound). However, it was later discovered that the inclusion of higher derivative corrections can actually lead to violations of this bound~\cite{Brigante:2007nu}. Here we will compute $\eta/s$ for field theories dual to the cubic generalized quasi-topological theory in all dimensions and show that the KSS bound always holds. In fact, we show that the ratio $\eta/s$ takes on all real values $\eta / s \in [(4\pi)^{-1}, \infty)$ as a function of the coupling $\mu$.
For this computation, we are interested in the planar class of metrics,
\begin{equation}
ds^2 = \frac{r^2}{L^2} \left(-g(r) dt^2 + \sum_i dx_i^2 \right) + \frac{L^2 dr^2}{r^2 g(r)} \, .
\end{equation}
We transform the metric by introducing $z = 1 - r_+^2/r^2$, which compactifies the space outside the horizon. The transformed metric reads,
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:zMetric}
ds^2 = \frac{r_+^2}{L^2 (1-z)} \left(-g(z) dt^2 + \sum_i dx_i^2 \right) + \frac{L^2}{4 g(z)} \frac{dz^2}{(1-z)^2}
\end{equation}
and $g(z)$ has a simple zero at $z=0$, and $g(1) = f_\infty$. Near the horizon, we can expand $g(z)$ as,
\begin{equation}
g(z) = g_0^{(1)} z + g_0^{(2)} z^2 + g_0^{(3)} z^3 + \cdots \, .
\end{equation}
The field equations fix $g_0^{(i)}$ for $i \neq 2$. As mentioned earlier, the second derivative of the metric function near the horizon is undetermined, but is fixed by demanding that the numerical solution converges to the asymptotic solution without growing mode. It is in this same way that $g_0^{(2)}$ must be determined. Of course, the parameters $g_0^{(i)}$ are straightforwardly related to the parameters $a_i$ used in the near horizon expansion in Eq.~\eqref{eqn:nh_ansatz}. The relevant ones for our purposes below are,
\begin{align}
g_0^{(1)} &= \frac{2 \pi T L^2}{r_+} \, , \quad g_0^{(2)} = - \frac{L^2}{4 r_+} \left(2 \pi T - r_+ a_2 \right)
\nonumber\\
g_0^{(3)} &= -\frac{L^2}{8 r_+} \left(2 \pi T - r_+ a_2 - r_+^2 a_3 \right) \, .
\end{align}
We will need the expression for $a_3$ as a function of $a_2$. This can be obtained from the following equation, which is the ${\cal O}\left((r-r_+)^3\right)$ component of the near horizon field equations:
\begin{align}
0 &= \frac{16 \mu }{3 \mu_p} \frac{(4 \pi T)^2 L^6 }{(d-2)^3} a_3 + \frac{32 \mu}{9 \mu_p} \frac{4 \pi T L^6}{(d-2)^3} {a_2}^2 + \left(\frac{8 \mu}{9\mu_p} \frac{(5d-28) (4 \pi T)^2 L^6}{(d-2)^3 r_+} - 2 r_+ L^2 \right)a_2
\nonumber\\
&+ \frac{16 \mu}{27 \mu_p} \frac{(d-5)(d-10) (4 \pi T)^3 L^6}{(d-2)^3 r_+^2} + (d-1)(d-2) r_+ - 2 (d-3)(4 \pi T) L^2
\end{align}
Next, following~\cite{Paulos:2009yk} we perturb the metric~\eqref{eqn:zMetric} by the shift
\begin{equation}
dx_i \to dx_i + \epsilon e^{-i\omega t} dx_j \, .
\end{equation}
The perturbed metric is substituted into the Lagrangian and a small $\epsilon$ expansion is performed. The result gives,
\begin{align}
&\sqrt{-g}{\cal L} = \frac{1}{16 \pi} \bigg[ \cdots - \frac{\omega^2 \epsilon^2 r_+^{d-3}}{L^{d-4} g_0^{(1)} z} \bigg\{1 + \frac{\mu}{L^4} \frac{48}{d-3} \bigg( \frac{(17 d^3 - 209 d^2 + 632 d - 566)}{(4d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)} (g_0^{(1)})^2
\nonumber\\
& -\frac{4(21d^3 - 289 d^2 + 740 d - 478)}{(4d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)} g_0^{(1)} g_0^{(2)}
- \frac{24 (21 d^2 - 62d + 38)}{(4d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)} g_0^{(1)}g_0^{(3)}
\nonumber\\
&- \frac{16(21 d^2 - 62 d + 38)}{(4d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)} (g_0^{(2)})^2 \bigg) \bigg\} + {\rm Regular} \bigg]
\end{align}
Now, using the `time' formula, the shear viscosity is given by
\begin{equation}
\eta = - 8 \pi T \lim_{\omega,\epsilon \to 0} \frac{{\rm Res}_{z=0} \sqrt{-g}{\cal L}}{\omega^2 \epsilon^2}
\end{equation}
which we can read off to be
\begin{align}
\eta &= \frac{ T r_+^{d-3}}{8L^{d-4} g_0^{(1)}} \bigg\{1 + \frac{48 \mu}{L^4 (d-3) (4d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)}
\nonumber\\
&\times \bigg( (17 d^3 - 209 d^2 + 632 d - 566) (g_0^{(1)})^2
\nonumber\\
& -4(21d^3 - 289 d^2 + 740 d - 478) g_0^{(1)} g_0^{(2)}
- 24 (21 d^2 - 62d + 38) g_0^{(1)}g_0^{(3)}
\nonumber\\
&- 16(21 d^2 - 62 d + 38) (g_0^{(2)})^2 \bigg) \bigg\} \, .
\end{align}
Recalling that the entropy density (for planar black holes) takes the form,
\begin{equation}
s = \frac{S}{L^{d-2} {\rm Vol}\left(\mathbb{R}^{d-2}\right)} = \frac{r_+^{d-2}}{4 L^{d-2}} \left[1 + \frac{384 \pi^2 (d-2)(d^2 + 5d - 15)}{4d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184} \frac{\mu T^2}{r_+^2} \right]
\end{equation}
it is straightforward (if messy) to write down the ratio $\eta/s$. Computing this ratio for arbitrary values of $\mu$ requires implementing a numerical scheme to determine the value of $a_2$ for a given black hole. However, insight can be easily gained by considering a small $\mu$ expansion of $\eta/s$. This can be performed analytically, and the result is
\begin{equation}
\frac{\eta}{s} = \frac{1}{4 \pi} \left[1 - \frac{12 \mu}{L^4} \frac{(d-1)^2(23 d^4 - 83 d^3 - 18 d^2 + 256 d - 136)}{(d-3)(4d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)} + {\cal O}(\mu^2) \right] \, .
\end{equation}
The dimension dependent factor in the above is always positive (at least for $d \ge 4$), and since $\mu$ must be negative for sensible AdS asymptotics, this means that the KSS bound $\eta/s \ge 1/(4\pi)$ holds in all dimensions in the cubic generalized quasi-topological theories, at least when the coupling is small.
An interesting property of the generalized quasi-topological theories is that the entropy density of black branes is non-trivial~\cite{Hennigar:2017umz}. It turns out that this actually leads to a pole in the ratio $\eta/s$ in all dimensions. Recall from above that for the special values
\begin{equation}
T_p = \frac{3(d-2) r_+}{8 \pi L^2} \, , \quad \mu_p = - \frac{L^4(4d^4 - 49 d^3 + 291 d^2 - 514 d + 184)}{54 (d-2)^3(d^2 + 5d - 15)} \, ,
\end{equation}
the near horizon equations are satisfied identically and the entropy vanishes linearly as $\mu \to \mu_p$.
Meanwhile, our numerical investigations (see below) indicate that the shear viscosity is always strictly positive on the interval for $\mu \in (\mu_p, 0)$. Thus, in all dimensions there is a pole in the ratio of shear viscosity to entropy density. This is quite an interesting result -- since the ratio smoothly connects between $\eta/s = 1/(4\pi)$ (for $\mu = 0$) and $\eta/s = \infty$ (for $\mu = \mu_p$), a particular coupling can always be chosen to match $\eta/s$ for any fluid in nature.
The pole in $\eta/s$ is also universal in the following sense. If we were to include cubic quasi-topological or Lovelock terms into the action, these terms would not disturb our result. This is because quasi-topological and Lovelock terms do not modify the black hole entropy from its Einstein gravity value~\cite{Hennigar:2017umz}, and it is the vanishing of $s$ that gives rise to the pole. It would be interesting to see if this behaviour persists at higher order in the curvature in four and higher dimensions.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{eta_over_s2.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Ratio of shear viscosity to entropy density}: Plots of the ratio $\eta/s$ in four (blue, solid), five (red, dashed) and six (black, dot-dashed) dimensions. In all cases, the thin grey line represents the universal Einstein gravity value of $\eta/s = 1/(4\pi)$. In all cases, a $[7|7]$ order Pad\'e approximant was used for $a_2$ (see Appendix~\ref{sec:pade}). }
\label{fig:etaOvers}
\end{figure}
To see the explicit $\mu$ dependence of $\eta/s$, we must resort to numerical techniques to determine the parameter $a_2$, or the Pad\'e approximant method outlined in the appendix. Either is computationally costly, and therefore we present only a few example dimensions in Figure~\ref{fig:etaOvers}. In these plots, we see the same characteristic structure: for $\mu = 0$, $\eta/s$ begins at $1/(4\pi)$ and then monotonically increases as $\mu \to \mu_p$. Increases the spacetime dimension shifts the curves down slightly, but the overall structure is the same in all dimensions.
Of course, there is no good reason to believe that sensible CFT duals will exist over the whole range $\mu \in (\mu_p, 0)$. Indeed, it was found in~\cite{Bueno:2018uoy} that the putative CFT dual of the four-dimensional theory is consistent only for $\mu > -100489 L^4/64314864$, which is a tighter constraint than that imposed by $\mu > \mu_p$. Determining the equivalent constraints for the higher-dimensional versions of the theory is an interesting --- and important --- task that would require a careful analysis of causality constraints and positivity of energy flux in the dual CFT (see, for example,~\cite{Hofman:2008ar, Myers:2010jv,Camanho:2014apa}). We hope to come back to these issues in subsequent work.
\section{Discussion}
We have studied electrically charged static AdS black holes in cubic generalized quasi-topological gravity. These black holes are characterized by a single metric function, and our study considered spherical, planar, and hyperbolic base manifolds. The full field equations due not admit an analytic solutions. We have constructed a number of numeric solutions to the full field equations, finding that the black holes are non-hairy generalizations of the usual Schwarzschild solutions, characterized by their mass and charge alone. We have found that increasing the electric charge has the effect of increasing the horizon radius. We have found that imposing that the theory admits solutions with sensible asymptotics requires that $\mu M < 0$, i.e. that the cubic coupling constant is negative for positive mass solutions.
While the field equations cannot be solved exactly, evaluating them near the horizon of a black hole simplifies them dramatically. In solving the equations order-by-order near the horizon, we find that the two lowest order equations involve powers of the temperature and horizon radius (along with the coupling constant and electric charge). Thus, the thermodynamic properties of the solutions can be studied exactly by solving these polynomial equations. We verified the extended first law and Smarr relation for the solutions, working in the framework of black hole chemistry, treating the cosmological constant as a thermodynamic pressure.
In both the charged and uncharged cases, the most dramatic differences between the cubic theory and Einstein gravity arise for small black holes. For example, in the four-dimensional case, small uncharged black holes are thermodynamically stable in the cubic theory, while unstable in Einstein gravity. In the five-dimensional case at fixed charge and coupling, the cubic theory does not admit arbitrarily small black hole solutions as eventually the mass becomes negative. Further, if the magnitude of the cubic coupling is made too large in five dimensions, the theory no longer admits large black hole solutions.
We have studied the phase structure of these black holes in the uncharged case. The four-dimensional case is dramatically different: ensuring that the black holes possess positive entropy, the usual Hawking-Page transition is replaced by a first order small/large black hole transition that terminates at a critical point, exhibiting van der Waals type behaviour that is typically seen only for charged solutions. In the five dimensional case, we see the usual Hawking-Page transition with only slight modifications, e.g. the transition temperature is larger for the cubic theory than in Einstein gravity.
Qualitatively, a similar behaviour is observed in the grand canonical (fixed potential) ensemble. In four dimensions for the cubic theory, black holes are thermodynamically preferred for all values of the electric potential and we observe a small/large black hole phase transition provided that $\Phi^2 < 4$. In four-dimensional Einstein gravity, we see a Hawking-Page type transition provided that $\Phi^2 < 4$ while black holes are thermally preferred for large values of the potential, but exhibit no further phase structure. In the five dimensional version of the cubic theory, the phase structure qualitatively the same as in five-dimensional Einstein gravity: at small values of the potential there is a Hawking-Page type transition, while at larger values of the potential black holes are always preferred. The difference is that, in five dimensions Hawking-Page transitions persist to larger values of $\Phi$ in the cubic theory than in Einstein gravity.
Most of our study of the thermodynamics has focused on the canonical (fixed charge) ensemble. Here we find that in four and five dimensions, physical critical points exist only for the five-dimensional solutions. In these cases, we find a variety of interesting phase structure, including Van der Waals type behaviour. Six dimensions is somewhat special in this ensemble, as there is the possibility for two physical critical points. By tuning the charge and coupling it is possible to merge these generically distinct critical points. At the point where they merge, we find that the critical exponents change resulting in what is known as an isolated critical point.
We have taken a first step toward holographic studies of these theories by studying the ratio of shear viscosity to entropy density $\eta/s$ in all dimensions. Interestingly, we find that in all dimensions the KSS bound is upheld in these theories, subject only to the constraint that the solutions possess well-behaved asymptotics. This extends the observation made in~\cite{Bueno:2018xqc} to all dimensions.
Finally, we close with a brief discussion of questions and issues raised by our study.
{\bf Negative entropy}. From the perspective of statistical mechanics, negative entropy would seem to make little sense. However, it has long been known that the Wald entropy of black holes in higher curvature theories can --- and often is --- negative. Ambiguities in the definition of the Wald entropy permit one to shift it by an arbitrary constant by, for example, adding a total derivative to the action. These ambiguities are present even in the context of four-dimensional Einstein gravity, since there one could add a Gauss-Bonnet contribution to the action, which would shift the black hole entropy by a constant proportional to the coupling while having no effect on the solutions themselves. While this ambiguity has no serious implications in the context of the canonical ensemble (since there one compares different branches of black hole solutions amongst themselves), it can have serious implications for thermodynamics of uncharged black holes and thermodynamics in the fixed potential ensemble (since there one compares the free energy of the black holes to the free energy of the vacuum). Since the entropy of the vacuum is unaffected by adding such a total derivative term, it is possible to, for example, completely eliminate the Hawking-Page transition or drastically alter the temperature at which it occurs through the addition of such a constant to the black hole entropy. It would seem that the most natural way to deal with this issue is by choosing the constant in the entropy so that $S \to 0$ when the spacetime does not contain a horizon. This would avoid any subtleties to do with the order of limits that would arise for arbitrary shifts in the entropy. However, this choice may not always be possible (for example, if multiple branches of black holes exist) and is certainly not the only option. Quite frequently the negative entropy solutions are thrown out as unphysical, and in the context of Gauss-Bonnet gravity it has been argued that some of these may be unstable~\cite{Cvetic:2001bk}. While beyond the scope of this work, it seems clear that the role of negative entropy and its connection with any instabilities/pathologies requires further investigation.
{\bf Holography}. In this work, we have limited our holographic analysis to the study of holographic hydrodynamics. This already shows that some of the interesting behaviour observed in four-dimensions extends to all dimensions. As this class of theories provides sensible holographic toy models in all dimensions four and larger, it would be beneficial to further extend the holographic dictionary for them. For example, computing the parameters characterizing the stress tensor three-point function would allow one to constrain the range of couplings for which the theory could describe sensible CFT duals, and would help establish further evidence for the conjectured relationship between derivatives of the embedding function $h(f_\infty)$ and the stress tensor correlators made in~\cite{Bueno:2018yzo}. It would also be interesting to extend holographic considerations to higher dimensions and higher-orders in curvature. Since the generalized quasi-topological theories are non-trivial in dimensions where both Lovelock and quasi-topological gravities are trivial, these models can help fill the gaps, providing toy models allowing for calculations non-perturbative in the higher-order couplings in all dimensions.
{\bf Generalized quasi-topological theories}. Our work also suggests a number of future directions concerning the generalized quasi-topological theories themselves. One avenue would involve considering how the properties of black hole solutions in higher-dimensions are affected by additional curvature terms. In four dimensions, it has been observed in the asymptotically flat case that properties of black holes in the cubic theory persist for an infinite family of essentially unique theories~\cite{Bueno:2017qce, GeometricInflation}. It is natural to wonder if this holds also in higher dimensions. For example, one may wonder if the non-hairy properties of the black holes persist in higher dimensions if multiple generalized quasi-topological terms --- like those constructed in~\cite{Ahmed:2017jod} --- are included in the action. One noteworthy observation is that in six and higher dimensions, there appear to be three families of solutions based on an analysis of the metric near $r = 0$, while it seems that only one of these represents a black hole with regular horizon. It would be interesting to see what the full geometry of the remaining solutions represents. Additionally, in this work we have observed that there are qualitative differences between the behaviour of the black hole solutions in four dimensions and in all higher dimensions. It would be interesting to investigate if this is a feature of all such theories in higher dimensions, or if it is a peculiar property of the cubic representative we have focused on in this work.
On the front of thermodynamics, it is clear that black holes in cubic GQG have a richer thermodynamic structure than do their counterparts in Einstein gravity. Explorations beyond this -- into higher curvature GQG theories, or black holes with more features (rotation, non-linear electromagnetic couplings, etc.) remain to be undertaken.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We thank Pablo Cano and Hugo Marrochio for helpful discussions. M. M. appreciates the hospitality of the University of Waterloo where this work was completed. The work of R.~A.~H.~is supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada through the Banting Postdoctoral Fellowship programme. The work of R.~B.~M.~was supported in part by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. The work of Jamil Ahmed is supported by the Higher Education Commission of Pakistan under its Project No. 20-2087 which is gratefully acknowledged.
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:introduction}
The goal of representation learning is to learn structured, meaningful
latent representations given large-scale unlabelled datasets.
It is widely assumed that such unsupervised learning will support myriad
downstream tasks, some of which may not be known {\em a priori} \cite{Bengio2013}.
To that end it is useful to be able to train on large amounts of hetergeneous
data, but then use conditional priors that isolate specific sub-spaces or manifolds
from the broader data distribution over the observation domain.
Building on probability flows \cite{Dinh2014,Dinh2016a,Kingma2018},
this paper introduces a flexible form of conditional generative model.
It is compositional in nature, without requiring {\em a priori} knowledge
of the number of classes or the relationships between classes.
Trained with maximum likelihood, the framework allows one to learn
from heterogeneous datasets in an unsupervised fashion, with concurrent
or subsequent specialization to sub-spaces or manifolds of the observation
domain, {\em e.g.}, conditioning on class labels or attributes.
The resulting model thereby supports myriad downstream tasks, while providing
efficient inference and sampling from the joint or conditional priors.
\subsection{Background}
\label{sec:background}
There has been significant interest in learning generative models in recent years.
Prominent models include variational auto-encoders (VAE), which maximize a variational lower
bound on the data log likelihood \cite{Rezende2014,Kingma2013,Berg2018,Papamakarios2017,Kingma2016},
and generative adversarial networks (GAN), which use an adversarial discriminator to enforce a
non-parametric data distribution on a parametric decoder or encoder
\cite{NIPS2014_5423,Makhzani2018,Makhzani2015,Chen2016}.
Inference, however, remains challenging for VAEs and GANs as neither model includes a
probability density estimator \cite{schmah2009,Papamakarios2017,Dinh2016a,Dinh2014}.
Auto-regressive models \cite{Germain2015,bengio1999,Larochelle2011} and normalizing
flows \cite{Dinh2014,Dinh2016a,Rezende2015,Kingma2018} train with maximum likelihood (ML),
avoiding approximations by choosing a tractable parameterization of probability density.
Auto-regressive models assume a conditional factorization of the density function,
yielding a tractable joint probability model.
Normalizing flows represent the joint distribution with a series of invertible
transformations of a known base distribution, but are somewhat problematic
in terms of the memory and computational costs associated with large volumes
of high-dimensional data ({\em e.g.} images).
While invertibility can be used to trade memory with compute requirements
\cite{Chen2018,Gomez2017}, training powerful density estimators remains challenging.
The attraction of unsupervised learning stems from a desire to exploit vast
amounts of data, especially when downstream tasks are either unknown {\em a priori},
or when one lacks ample task-specific training data.
And while samples from models trained on heterogeneous data may
not resemble one's task domain per se, conditional models can be used to isolate
manifolds or sub-spaces associated with particular classes or attributes.
The {TzK } framework incorporates task-specific conditioning in a flexible manner.
It supports end-to-end training of the full model. Or one to train a
powerful density estimator once, retaining the ability to later extend it
to new domains, or specialize it to sub-domains of interest.
We get the advantages of large heterogenous datasets, while retaining
fidelity of such specialized conditional models.
Existing conditional generative models allow one to sample from
sub-domains of interest ({\em e.g.}, \cite{Makhzani2018,Chen2016,Dupont2018}),
but they often require that the structure of the data and latent representation
be known {\em a priori} and embedded in the network architecture.
For example, \cite{Chen2016,Makhzani2018} allow unsupervised
learning but assume the number of (disjoint) categories is given.
In doing so they fix the structure of the latent representation to include a
1-hot vector over categories at the time of training.
Such models are therefore re-trained from scratch if labels change, or if
new labels are added, {\em e.g.} by augmenting the training data.
\citet{Kingma2018} train a conditional prior post hoc, given an existing Glow model.
This allows them to condition an existing model on semantic attributes,
but lacks the corresponding inference mechanism.
A complementary formulation, augmenting a generative model with a post hoc discriminator,
is shown in \cite{Oliver2018}.
Inspired by \cite{Kingma2018,Oliver2018}, {TzK } incorporates
conditional models with discriminators and generators, all trained jointly.
The proposed framework can be trained unsupervised on large volumes of data,
yielding a generic representation of the observation domain ({\em e.g.}, images),
while explicitly
supporting the semi-supervised learning of new classes in an online fashion.
Such conditional models are formulated to be compositional, without a prior knowledge
of all classes, and exploiting similarity among classes with a joint latent representation.
Finally, the formulation below exhibits an interesting connection between
the use of mutual information (MI) and ML in representation learning.
The use of MI is prevalent in learning latent representations
\cite{Hjelm2018,Chen2016,Dupont2018,Klys2018}, as it provides a measure of
the dependence between random variables. Unfortunately, MI is hard to compute;
it is typically approximated or estimated with non-parametric approaches.
A detailed analysis is presented in \cite{Hjelm2018},
which offers scalability with data dimensionality and sample size.
While it is intuitive and easy to justify the use of MI to enforce a relationship
between random variables ({\em e.g.}, dependency \cite{Chen2016} or independence \cite{Klys2018}),
MI is often used as a regularizer to extend an existing model.
The {TzK } formulation offers another perspective, showing how MI arises naturally
with the ML objective, following the assumption that a target distribution can be
factored into (equally plausible) encoder and decoder models. We exploit a lower bound
that allows indirect optimization of MI, without estimating MI directly.
\textbf{Contributions:}
We introduce a conditional generative model based on probability density
normalizing flows, which is flexible and extendable.
It does not require that the number of classes be known {\em a priori}, or that classes are
mutually exclusive.
One can train a powerful generative model on unlabeled samples
from multiple datasets, and then adapt the structure of the latent
representation as a function of specific types of knowledge in an online fashion.
The proposed model allows
high parallelism when training multiple tasks while maintaining a joint distribution over
the latent representation and observations, all with efficient inference and sampling.
\section{{TzK } Framework}
\label{sec:tzk}
We model a joint distribution over an observation domain ({\em e.g.}, images)
and latent codes ({\em e.g.}, attributes or class labels).
Let observation ${\bs t} \in \mathbb{R}^{D}$ be a random variable associated through
a probability flow with a latent state variable ${\bs z} \in \mathbb{R}^{D}$ \cite{Dinh2014,Dinh2016a,Rezende2015,Kingma2018}.
In particular, ${\bs z}$ is mapped to ${\bs t}$ through a smooth
invertible mapping $f_{\T}:\mathbb{R}^{D} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{D}$, {\em i.e.}, ${\bs t}=f_{\T}({\bs z})\label{eq:T-flow}$.
As such, $f_{\T}$ transforms a base distribution $p({\bs z})$ ({\em e.g.}, Normal) to
a distribution $p({\bs t})=p({\bs z}) \,\DETDF{f_{\T}}{{\bs z}}^{-1}$ over the
observation domain.
Normalizing flows can be formulated as a joint distribution
$p({\bs z},{\bs t})=\delta ({\bs z} - f_{\T}^{-1} ({\bs t} )) p({\bs t})=\delta ({\bs t} - f_{\T} ({\bs z}) ) p({\bs z})$,
but for notational simplicity we can omit ${\bs t}$ or ${\bs z}$ from
probability distributions by trivial marginalization of one or the other.
For conditional generative models within the {TzK } framework, the latent state
${\bs z}$ is conditioned on a latent code (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:tzk-model}b).
As such, they capture distributions within the observation domain
associated with subsets of the training data, or subsequent labelled data.
To this end, let ${{\bs k}^{i}}$ be a hybrid discrete/continuous random variable
${{\bs k}^{i}} \equiv ( {\mathrm{e}}^{i},{\bs{c}^{i}} )$, where ${\mathrm{e}}^{i} \in \{0,1 \}$
and ${\bs{c}^{i}} \in \mathbb{R}^{C}$, similar to \cite{Chen2016,Dupont2018}.
We refer to ${{\bs k}^{i}}$ as \textit{knowledge} of type $i$, while ${\bs{c}^{i}}$ is the latent
code of knowledge $i$, a structured latent representation of ${\bs t}$.
We call ${\mathrm{e}}^{i}$ the existence of knowledge $i$, a binary variable
that serves to indicate whether or not ${\bs t}$ can be generated by ${\bs{c}^{i}}$.
To handle multiple types of knowledge, let ${\bar{{\bs k}}} = \{ {{\bs k}^{i}} \}_{k=1}^{K}$
denote the set of latent codes associated with $K$ knowledge types.
Importantly, we do not assume that knowledge
types correspond to mutually exclusive class labels.
Rather, we allow varying levels of interaction between knowledge classes under
the {TzK } framework. This avoids the assumption of mutually exclusive classes
and allows a {TzK } model to share a learned representation between
similar classes, while still being able to represent distinct classes.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[b]{.5\columnwidth}
\centering \scalebox{0.85}{\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[obs] (T) {${\bs t}$};
\node[latent, above=of T] (Z) {${\bs z}$};
\node[latent, above=of Z, xshift=1.2cm] (ki) {${\mathrm{e}}^{i}$};
\node[obs, above=of Z, xshift=-1.2cm] (C) {${\bs{c}^{i}}$};
\edge{Z} {T} ; \edge {T} {ki,C} ; \edge {ki} {C} ;
\plate {Ki} {(C)(ki)} {$K$} ;
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\subcaption{encoder}\label{fig:tzk-model-encoder}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}[b]{.5\columnwidth}
\centering \scalebox{0.85}{\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[obs] (T) {${\bs t}$};
\node[latent, above=of T] (Z) {${\bs z}$};
\node[latent, above=of Z, xshift=1.2cm] (ki) {${\mathrm{e}}^{i}$};
\node[obs, above=of Z, xshift=-1.2cm] (C) {${\bs{c}^{i}}$};
\edge{Z} {T} ; \edge {ki,C} {Z} ; \edge {C} {ki} ;
\plate {Ki} {(C)(ki)} {$K$} ;
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\subcaption{decoder}\label{fig:tzk-model-decoder}
\end{minipage}
\vspace*{-0.6cm}
\caption{{TzK } framework models $\mathcal{P}({\bs t},{\bar{{\bs k}}})$, a joint distribution over task domain ${\bs t}$ and
multiple latent codes ${\bar{{\bs k}}} = \{{\bs{c}^{i}}, {\mathrm{e}}^{i} \}_{i=1}^{K}$ with a dual encoder/decoder.
The framework offers explicit representation of sub-domains of interest in $\mathcal{P}({\bs t},{\bar{{\bs k}}})$ by
conditioning on the latent codes which comprise a single compositional model.
}
\label{fig:tzk-model}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Formulation} \label{sec:tzk-formulation}
Our goal is to learn a probability density estimator of the joint
distribution $\mathcal{P} ({\bs t}, {\bar{{\bs k}}} )$. In terms of an encoder-decoder,
for effective inference and sample generation, we model $\mathcal{P}$
in terms of two factorizations, i.e.,
\begin{eqnarray}
p^{enc}\left({\bs t},{\bar{{\bs k}}}\right) &=& p\left({\bar{{\bs k}}}|{\bs t}\right)\, p\left({\bs t}\right)
\label{eq:tzk-encoder} \\
p^{dec}\left({\bs t},{\bar{{\bs k}}}\right) &=& p\left({\bs t}|{\bar{{\bs k}}}\right)\, p\left({\bar{{\bs k}}}\right)
\label{eq:tzk-decoder}
\end{eqnarray}
The encoder factorization in Eq.\ \eqref{eq:tzk-encoder} makes $p({\bar{{\bs k}}}|{\bs t})$
explicit, which is used for inference of the latent code given ${\bs t}$.
The decoder in Eq.\ \eqref{eq:tzk-decoder} makes $p({\bs t}|{\bar{{\bs k}}})$ explicit for
generation of samples of ${\bs t}$ given a latent code ${\bar{{\bs k}}}$.
As noted by \cite{Kingma2013,Agakov2004,Rezende2015,Chen2016},
inference with the general form of the posterior $p( {\bar{{\bs k}}} | {\bs t} )$ is
challenging. Common approaches resort to variational approximations
\cite{Kingma2013,Rezende2015,Kingma2016}.
A common relaxation in the case of discrete latent codes is the assumption of
independence ({\em e.g.}, $p(\k|{\bs t},\bar{\bs{c}} )=\prod_i p({\mathrm{e}}^{i}|{\bs t},\bar{\bs{c}} )$ ).
Alternatively, one can assume that such binary codes represent
mutually exclusive classes, e.g., with a single categorical random variable.
But this makes it difficult to model attributes, for which the presence or
absence of one attribute may be independent of other attributes,
or to allow for the fact that one image may belong to two different
classes ({\em e.g.}, it might be present in more than one database).
Here we design {TzK } to avoid the need for mutual exclusivity, or the
need to specify the number of classes a priori, instead allowing the model
to be extended with new classes, and to learn and exploit some degree of
similarity between classes.
To that end we assume that knowledge types exhibit statistical independence,
expressed in terms of the following encoder factorization,
\begin{eqnarray}
p^{enc}\left({\bs t},{\bar{{\bs k}}}\right) ~=~ p\left({\bs t}\right)\prod_{i}p\left({{\bs k}^{i}}|{\bs t}\right) ~,
\label{eq:tzk-encoder-compositionality}
\end{eqnarray}
and the corresponding decoder factorization
\begin{eqnarray}
p^{dec}({\bs t},{\bar{{\bs k}}})
&=& p({\bar{{\bs k}}})\, \frac{p({\bar{{\bs k}}}|{\bs t})\,p({\bs t})}{p({\bar{{\bs k}}})} \nonumber \\
&=& p({\bar{{\bs k}}})\,p({\bs t})\prod_{i}\frac{p({{\bs k}^{i}}|{\bs t})\,p({\bs t})}{p({{\bs k}^{i}})\,p({\bs t})} \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{\prod_{i}p\left({\bs t}|{{\bs k}^{i}}\right)p\left({{\bs k}^{i}}\right)}{p\left({\bs t}\right)^{K-1}} \label{eq:tzk-decoder-compositionality}
\end{eqnarray}
It is by virtue of this particular factorization that a {TzK } model is easily
extendable with different knowledge types (and conditional models) in an online fashion.
Taking the hybrid form of knowledge codes into account,
as in Fig.\ \ref{fig:tzk-model}, the model is further factored as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
p\left({{\bs k}^{i}}|{\bs t}\right)&=&p\left({\bs{c}^{i}}|{\mathrm{e}}^{i}, {\bs t}\right)p\left({\mathrm{e}}^{i}|{\bs t}\right)
\label{eq:tzk-encoder-KT} \\
p\left({\bs t}|{{\bs k}^{i}}\right)&=&p\left({\bs t}|{\mathrm{e}}^{i}, {\bs{c}^{i}}\right)
\label{eq:tzk-decoder-TK} \\
p\left({{\bs k}^{i}}\right)&=&p\left({\mathrm{e}}^{i}|{\bs{c}^{i}}\right)p\left({\bs{c}^{i}}\right)
\label{eq:tzk-decoder-K} ~.
\end{eqnarray}
Here, $p\left({\mathrm{e}}^{i}=1|{\bs t}\right)$ and $p\left({\mathrm{e}}^{i}=1|{\bs{c}^{i}}\right)$ act as
discriminators for binary variable ${\mathrm{e}}^{i}$, conditioned on ${\bs t}$ and ${\bs{c}^{i}}$ respectively.
Finally, the factors of the encoder and decoder in \eqref{eq:tzk-encoder-compositionality}
- \eqref{eq:tzk-decoder-K} are parametrized in terms of neural networks.
Accordingly, denoting the parameters of the encoder and decoder by ${\bs \phi}$ and
${\bs \psi}$, in what follows we write the parametrized model encoder and decoder
as $p^{enc}_{\encparams} ( {\bs t}, {\bar{{\bs k}}} )$ and $p^{dec}_{\decparams} ( {\bs t}, {\bar{{\bs k}}} )$.
(In what follows we use this more concise notation for the encoder and decoder,
except where we need the explicit factorization in terms of ${{\bs k}^{i}}$, ${\bs{c}^{i}}$ and ${\mathrm{e}}^{i}$.)
Details of our implementation are described in Sec.\ \ref{sec:implementation}.
\subsection{Learning} \label{sec:tzk-learning}
We would like to train a parametric model of the joint distribution
$\mathcal{P} ({\bs t},{\bar{{\bs k}}} )$ with the dual encoder/decoder factorization defined in
Eqs.\ \eqref{eq:tzk-encoder-compositionality} - \eqref{eq:tzk-decoder-K}.
Following the success of \cite{Dinh2014,Dinh2016a,Kingma2018} with high-dimensional
distributions, we opt to estimate the model parameters using maximum likelihood.
We aim to learn a single probabilistic model of $\mathcal{P} ({\bs t},{\bar{{\bs k}}} )$,
comprising a consistent encoder-decoder, with the factorization given
above, and a shared flow $f_{\T}$.
To do so, we define a joint distribution $\M_{\params}\left({\bs t},{\bar{{\bs k}}}\right)$ with parameters
${\bs \theta} = \{ {\bs \phi}, {\bs \psi} \} $. Expressed as a linear mixture, $\M_{\params}$ is
randomly selected to be $p^{enc}_{\encparams}$ or $p^{dec}_{\decparams}$ with equal probability, {\em i.e.},
\begin{equation}
\M_{\params}\left({\bs t},{\bar{{\bs k}}}\right) =
\frac{1}{2}\left( \,p^{enc}_{\encparams}\left({\bs t},{\bar{{\bs k}}}\right) + p^{dec}_{\decparams}\left({\bs t},{\bar{{\bs k}}}\right)\, \right) ~.
\label{eq:tzk-encoder-decoder}
\end{equation}
Choosing the mixing coefficients to be equal reflects our assumption of a
dual encoder/decoder parametrization of the same underlying joint distribution.
There are other ways to combine $p^{enc}$ and $p^{dec}$ into a single model;
we chose this particular formulation because it yields a very effective learning algorithm.
Learning maximum likelihood parameters entails maximizing
$\E{{\bar{{\bs k}}},{\bs t}\sim \mathcal{P}}{\log\M_{\params} ({\bar{{\bs k}}},{\bs t})}$ with respect to ${\bs \theta}$; equivalently,
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bs \theta}^{*} = \arg\max_{{\bs \theta}} -H(\mathcal{P}, \M_{\params} ) ~,
\label{eq:tzk-entropy-loss}
\end{eqnarray}
where $H\left( \cdot, \cdot \right)$ is the usual cross-entropy.
Instead of optimizing the negative cross entropy directly, which
can be numerically challenging, here we advocate the optimization
of a lower bound on $-H(\mathcal{P}, \M_{\params} )$.
Using Jensen's inequality it is straightforward to show that
$\log (\frac{1}{2} p^{enc}_{\encparams} + \frac{1}{2} p^{dec}_{\decparams} ) \ge \frac{1}{2} \logp^{enc}_{\encparams} + \frac{1}{2} \logp^{dec}_{\decparams}$,
and as a consequence,
\begin{eqnarray}
~ -H(\mathcal{P}, \M_{\params} ) \,\ge\,
-\frac{1}{2} \left[ \, H(\mathcal{P},p^{enc}_{\encparams}) + H(\mathcal{P},p^{dec}_{\decparams}) \, \right] \, .
\label{eq:tzk-entropy-loss-lower-bound}
\end{eqnarray}
The lower bound turns out to be very useful because, among other
things, it encourages consistency between the encoder and decoder.
To see this, we examine the bound in greater detail.
With some algebraic manipulation, ignoring expectation in
Eq.\ (\ref{eq:tzk-entropy-loss-lower-bound}), one can derive
the following:
\begin{equation}
\frac{\log p^{enc}_{\encparams}\! \!+\! \log p^{dec}_{\decparams}}{2} =
\log\M_{\params} -
\log\!\frac{
\sqrt{\frac{p^{enc}_{\encparams}}{p^{dec}_{\decparams}}} \! +\!
\sqrt{\frac{p^{dec}_{\decparams}}{p^{enc}_{\encparams}}}
}{2} \, . \!\!\!
\label{eq:tzk-entropy-loss-regularized}
\end{equation}
This implies that maximization of the lower bound (the expectation of the LHS)
entails maximization of the expectation of the two terms on the RHS, the first
of which is $-H(\mathcal{P}, \M_{\params} )$.
The expectation of the second term on the RHS of Eq.\ (\ref{eq:tzk-entropy-loss-regularized})
can be viewed as a regularizer that encourages the encoder and decoder to assign
similar probability density to each datapoint.
Importantly, it obtains its upper bound of zero when $p^{enc}_{\encparams} = p^{dec}_{\decparams}$, in which case
the inequality in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:tzk-entropy-loss-lower-bound}) becomes equality.
In practice, we find the bound is tight.
It is also interesting to note that $-H(\mathcal{P}, \M_{\params} )$ itself is a lower
bound on $-H\left(\mathcal{P}\right)$, since $-H\left(p\right) \ge -H\left(p, q\right)$
for any distributions $p$ and $q$.
If $\mathcal{P} ({\bar{{\bs k}}},{\bs t} )$ satisfies the factorization
of the {TzK } model in Eqs.\ (\ref{eq:tzk-encoder-compositionality}) - (\ref{eq:tzk-decoder-K})
then the entropy of the joint distribution can be expressed as
\begin{eqnarray}
-H({\bar{{\bs k}}},{\bs t}) &=&
-H({\bs t})\, -\, \sum_{i}H({{\bs k}^{i}}) \, \nonumber \\
& \ & +\, \frac{1}{2}\sum_{i}\left[\,I({{\bs k}^{i}};{\bs t}) + I({\bs z};{{\bs k}^{i}})\, \right] \, ,~
\label{eq:tzk-entropy}
\end{eqnarray}
where $H({\bs t})$ and $H({\bar{{\bs k}}})$ denote entropy of marginal distributions,
and $I({\bar{{\bs k}}},{\bs t})$ and $I({\bs z};{{\bs k}^{i}})$ denote mutual information, for which
all expectations are with respect to ${\bar{{\bs k}}},{\bs t} \sim \mathcal{P}$.
(The derivation of Eq.\ \eqref{eq:tzk-entropy} is given in the supplemental material.)
Eq.\ \eqref{eq:tzk-entropy} suggests that maximizing the MI between observations
and latent codes here follows from a design choice, for a model that can equally
well "understand" (encode) and "express" (decode) an independent set of latent
codes (as in Eqs.\ \eqref{eq:tzk-encoder-compositionality} and
\eqref{eq:tzk-decoder-compositionality}), within a shared observation domain.
We claim that the assumption of independent latent codes is a relatively mild
assumption, and has little affect on the ability of the model to represent
$p ({\bs t} | {\bar{\bs y}} )$ for a random variable ${\bar{\bs y}} $ over the same domain as ${\bar{{\bs k}}}$.
A sufficiently expressive flow ${\bs t} = f_{\T} ({\bs z} )$ will
allow for $p ({\bs t}|{\bar{\bs y}}) = \mathcal{P} ( f_{\T}({\bs z} )|{\bar{{\bs k}}} )$ for arbitrary ${\bar{\bs y}} \sim p({\bar{\bs y}})$, and
$p({\bar{{\bs k}}}) = \prod_i p({{\bs k}^{i}})\,$ \cite{Dinh2014}.
Effectively, we approximate the relationship between factors of ${\bar{\bs y}}$ by learning the relation
between conditional distribution of independent factors over the same observation domain.
Although such an approximation may not exist for priors, it is effective when dealing with
conditional distributions. As we demonstrate below, {TzK } can learn meaningful representations
of the joint knowledge $p({\bar{\bs y}})$.
\section{Implementation}
\label{sec:implementation}
The {TzK } model comprises probability distributions defined in
Eqs.\ (\ref{eq:tzk-encoder-compositionality}) - (\ref{eq:tzk-decoder-K}).
Each can be treated as a black box object with the functionality of a
probability density estimator, returning $\log p\left( x \right)$ given $x$,
and a sampler, returning $x \sim p\left(x\right)$ given $p\left(x\right)$.
The specific implementation choices outlined were made for the ease and efficiency of training.
We adopt a Glow-based architecture for probability density estimators, using
reparametrization \cite{Bernardo2003,Williams1992} and back-propagation with
Monte Carlo \cite{Rezende2014} for efficient gradient-based optimization
({\em e.g.}, see \cite{Rezende2015}).
Our flow architecture used fixed shuffle permutation rather than invertible $1\!\times\!1$
convolution used in \cite{Kingma2018} as we found it to suffer from accumulated numerical error.
We implemented {TzK } in Pytorch, using $swish\left(x\right) = x \cdot \sigma\left(x\right)$
non-linearity \cite{Ramachandran2017} instead of ReLU as the activation function.
We found that the ReLU-based implementation converged more slowly because of
the truncation of gradients for negative values.
We implemented separated $p\left({\bs{c}^{i}}|{\mathrm{e}}^{i}, {\bs t}\right)$ and $p\left({\bs t}|{\mathrm{e}}^{i}, {\bs{c}^{i}}\right)$ for ${\mathrm{e}}^{i} \in {0,1}$
with regressors from ${\bs t}$ and ${\bs{c}^{i}}$ to parameters of distributions over ${\bs{c}^{i}}$ and ${\bs t}$.
In practice, we regress to the mean and diagonal covariance of a multi-dimensional
Gaussian density.
We implemented $p\left({\mathrm{e}}^{i}=1|{\bs t}\right)$ and $p\left({\mathrm{e}}^{i}=1|{\bs{c}^{i}}\right)$,
discriminators for binary variable ${\mathrm{e}}^{i}$ conditioned on ${\bs t}$ and ${\bs{c}^{i}}$ respectively,
with regressors from ${\bs t}$ and ${\bs{c}^{i}}$ followed by sigmoid to normalize the output value to be in $[0,1]$.
We refer to the prior flow $p({\bs t}|{\bs z})$ as the ${\bs t}$-flow, and the flows in each conditional prior $p({\bs z}|{{\bs k}^{i}})$
as a ${\bs z}$-flow.
All experiments were executed on a single NVIDIA TITAN Xp GPU with 12GB, and
optimized with Pytorch ADAM optimizer \cite{Kingma2014}, with default parameters and $lr = 1e-5$,
a warm up scheduler \cite{Vaswani2017} $warmup\_steps = 4000$, and mini-batch size of 10.
Further details are included in the supplemental material.
\section{Experiments} \label{sec:experiments}
To demonstrate the versatility of {TzK } we train on up to six image datasets
(Table \ref{tab:datasets}), in unsupervised and semi-supervised settings.
All images were resized to $32\!\times\!32$ as needed, MNIST images were centered and
padded to $32\!\times\!32$. When using grayscale (GS) images in an RGB setting,
the GS channel was duplicated in R, G, and B channels.
In all experiments below the images, ${\bs t}$, and class labels, ${\mathrm{e}}^{i}$, for different
tasks are given. The latent codes, ${\bs{c}^{i}}$, are not. In this semi-supervised context
we sample the missing ${\bs{c}^{i}}$ according to the model, ${\bs{c}^{i}} \sim \M_{\params}$.
Specifically, at every mini-batch, we randomly choose $p^{enc}_{\encparams}$ or $p^{dec}_{\decparams}$ with
equal probability. When $p^{dec}_{\decparams}$ is chosen we sample from $p^{dec} ( {\bs{c}^{i}} )$, and for
$p^{enc}_{\encparams}$ we return the marginal over $p^{enc} ( {\bs{c}^{i}}|{\mathrm{e}}^{i}, {\bs t} )$ with
respect to the observed binary variable ${\mathrm{e}}^{i}$.
We chose CIFAR10 and MNIST as targets for conditional model learning.
Each comprises just 3.2\% of the entire multi-data training set of 1,892,916 images.
Table \ref{tab:experiments-summary} gives performance benchmarks in terms of
negative log-likelihood in bits per dimension (NLL) for existing flow-based models.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\scalebox{0.7}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
\textbf{Dataset} & \textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Image\\ Format\end{tabular}} & \textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}} \# Images \\ train / val \end{tabular}} & \% & \textbf{Classes} \\ \hline \hline
CIFAR10 & $32\!\times\!32$ RGB & 50,000 / 10,000 & 3.2 & 10 \\ \hline
MNIST & $28\!\times\!28$ GS & 60,000 / 10,000 & 3.2 & 10 \\ \hline
Omniglot \textdagger & $105\!\times\!105$ RGB & 19,280 / 13,180 & 1.7 & NA \\ \hline
SVHN \textdagger & $32\!\times\!32$ RGB & 73,257 / 26,032 & 5.3 & 10 \\ \hline
ImageNet \textdagger & Varying RGB & 1,281,167 / 150,000 & 75.8 & 1000 \\ \hline
Celeba \textdagger & $178\!\times\!218$ RGB & 200,000 / NA & 10.8 & NA \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\vspace*{-0.1cm}
\caption{\label{tab:datasets}
Datasets marked with \textdagger \, were used in unsupervised settings only.
GS denotes grayscale images.
The {\em multi-data} training set consists of all six datasets, namely,
CIFAR10 \cite{Krizhevsky2009a}, MNIST \cite{LeCun1998}, Omniglot \cite{Lake2015},
SVHN \cite{Netzer2011}, ImageNet \cite{Russakovsky2014}, Celeba \cite{Liu2015}.
There are 1,892,916 images in total.
\% gives each dataset's fraction of the entire multi-data training set.}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\vspace*{-0.1cm}
\centering
\scalebox{0.7}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
& \textbf{Glow} & \textbf{FFJORD} & \textbf{RealNVP} & \textbf{TzK Prior} & \textbf{TzK Cond.} \\ \hline \hline
CIFAR10 & 3.35 & 3.4 & 3.49 & 3.54 & \textbf{2.99} * \\ \hline
MNIST & 1.05 \textdagger\textdagger & \textbf{0.99} & 1.06 \textdagger\textdagger & 1.11 & 1.02 * \textdagger\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\vspace*{-0.1cm}
\caption{\label{tab:experiments-summary}
Comparison of negative log-likelihood bits per dimension (NLL) on test data (lower is better).
*Results of dataset conditional prior. \textdagger Model was trained on all 6 datasets (Table \ref{tab:datasets}).
We compare to Glow \cite{Kingma2018}, FFJORD \cite{Grathwohl2018}, and RealNVP \cite{Dinh2016a}.
Results marked with \,\textdagger\textdagger \, are taken from \cite{Grathwohl2018}.
\vspace*{-0.1cm}
}
\end{table}
All learning occurred in an online fashion, adding new conditional knowledge types as needed.
When training begins, we start with a model with no knowledge, {\em i.e.}, $K = 0$, which is
just a Glow probability density estimator. As data are sampled for learning, new knowledge
types are added only when observed, in a semi-supervised manner, {\em i.e.}, the class label
is given, the latent code ${\bs{c}^{i}}$ is not. In most of the experiments below the only
class label used is the identity of the dataset from which the image was drawn.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[b]{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.97\textwidth]{cifar10-data-sample.png}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}[b]{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.97\textwidth]{mnist-data-sample.png}
\end{minipage}
\vspace*{-0.7cm}
\caption{
Random training samples from CIFAR10 and MNIST.
}
\label{fig:samples-data}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[b]{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.97\textwidth]{cifar10-only-sample-1.png}
\subcaption{CIFAR10 only}\label{fig:cifar10-only-sample}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}[b]{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.97\textwidth]{mnist-only-sample-1.png}
\subcaption{MNIST only}\label{fig:mnist-only-sample}
\end{minipage}
\vspace*{-0.7cm}
\caption{
Random samples from two baseline models, each trained with a single dataset (CIFAR10 and MNIST).
The NLL for the CIFAR10 model is 3.54. The NLL for the MNIST model is 1.11.
}
\label{fig:samples-priors-1-data}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[b]{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.97\textwidth]{multi-data-sample-2.png}
\subcaption{multi-data}\label{fig:multi-data-sample}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}[b]{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.97\textwidth]{multi-data-bw-sample-1.png}
\subcaption{MNIST+Omniglot}\label{fig:multi-data-bw-sample}
\end{minipage}
\vspace*{-0.7cm}
\caption{
Samples from a model trained on all six datasets (\ref{fig:multi-data-sample}),
and from one trained on MNIST+Omniglot (\ref{fig:multi-data-bw-sample}).
Sample quality is similar to models trained solvely on CIFAR10 and MNIST (Fig.\ \ref{fig:samples-priors-1-data}), despite slightly higher NLL (3.6 for multi-data model
and 1.28 for MNIST+Omniglot model). Samples are more diverse, however, reflecting the greater
heterogeneity of the training data.
}
\label{fig:samples-priors-multi-data}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Baselines} \label{sec:baseline}
Two baseline models are trained on CIFAR10 and MNIST, training samples
for which are shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:samples-data}.
Each used a Glow architecture for the ${\bs t}$-flow, with 512 channels,
32 steps, and 3 layers. (See \cite{Kingma2018} for more details.)
These models give test NLL values of 3.54 and 1.11, comparable to the
state-of-the-art with flow-based models. Differences between our NLL numbers
and those reported for Glow by others in Table \ref{tab:experiments-summary}
are presumably due to implementation and optimization details.
Fig.\ \ref{fig:samples-priors-1-data} shows random samples from the two models,
the quality of which compare well with training samples (Fig.\ \ref{fig:samples-data}).
When we train the same architecture on all 6 datasets ({\em i.e.}, multi-data),
we obtain NLL of 3.6 when testing on CIFAR10.
Random samples from this model are shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:multi-data-sample}.
One can clearly see the greater diversity of the training data, with images
resembling faces and grayscale characters for example.
When the same architecture is trained on the union of MNIST and Omniglot,
and tested on MNIST, the NLL is 1.28.
Random samples of this model (Fig.\ \ref{fig:multi-data-bw-sample})
again show greater diversity.
Although the NLL numbers with these models, both learned from larger
training sets, are slightly worse, the image quality remains similar to
models trained on a single dataset (Fig.\ \ref{fig:samples-priors-1-data}).
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[b]{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.97\textwidth]{cifar10-only-interpolate-3.png}
\subcaption{CIFAR10}
\label{fig:interpolate-priors-cifar10}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}[b]{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.97\textwidth]{multi-data-interpolate-3.png}
\subcaption{multi-data}
\label{fig:interpolate-priors-multi-data}
\end{minipage}
\vspace*{-0.7cm}
\caption{
Given a model trained solely on CIFAR10, \ref{fig:interpolate-priors-cifar10} depicts
interpolation in ${\bs z}$ between random samples from CIFAR10, MNIST, and SVHN.
Interpolation reveals regions of ${\bs z}$ that correspond to relatively poor quality images.
This occurs even when the interpolated images are visually similar,
and reflects relatively sparse coverage of the high-dimensional image space.
Given a model trained on all six datasets (multi-data), the interpolation results
in \ref{fig:interpolate-priors-multi-data} are much better than those above in \ref{fig:interpolate-priors-cifar10}.
With more training data we obtain a denser model with visually better interpolation.
}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Interpolation - Visualizing Flow Expressiveness}
Insight into the nature of the generative model can be gleaned
from latent space interpolation. Here, given four images (observations ${\bs t}$),
we obtain latent space coordinates, ${\bs z} = f_{\T}^{-1}({\bs t})$.
We then linearly interpolate in ${\bs z}$ before mapping back to ${\bs t}$ for visualization.
In a flow-based generative model with a Gaussian prior on ${\bs z}$, we expect
interpolated points to have probability density as high or higher than
the end points, and at least as high as one of the two endpoints.
Despite Glow being a powerful model, the results in Fig.\ \ref{fig:interpolate-priors-cifar10}
reveal deficiencies. Training on CIFAR10 data produces a model that yields
interpolated images that are not always characteristic of CIFAR10
(e.g., the darkened images in Fig.\ \ref{fig:interpolate-priors-cifar10} ).
Even with color images ({\em i.e.}, SVHN), which are expected to be represented reasonably
well by a CIFAR10 model, there are regions of low quality interpolants.
One would suspect that a model trained on the entire multi-data training set,
rather than just CIFAR10, would yield a better probability flow, exhibiting
denser coverage of image space. Consistent with this, Fig.\
\ref{fig:interpolate-priors-multi-data} shows superior interpolation
in ${\bs z}$.
\subsection{Specializing a ${\bs t}$-Flow} \label{sec:specialization}
In this section we further explore the benefits of unsupervised training over large
heterogeneous datasets and the use of {TzK } for learning conditional models in an online
manner. To that end, we assume a ${\bs t}$-flow has been learned and then remains fixed
while we learn one or more conditional models, as one might with unknown downstream tasks.
The Glow-like architecture used for the ${\bs t}$-flow ({\em i.e.}, for $p({\bs t} | {\bs z})$) had 512 channels,
20 steps, and 3 layers, a weaker model than those in \cite{Kingma2018} and the baseline
models above with 3 layers of 32 steps. The architecture used for the ${\bs z}$-flow, for each of the
conditional models ({\em i.e.}, for $p({\bs z} | {{\bs k}^{i}})$), had one layer with just 4 steps.
In the first experiment the ${\bs t}$-flow is trained solely on CIFAR10 data,
entirely unsupervised. The ${\bs t}$-flow was then frozen, and conditional models
were learned, one for CIFAR10 and one for MNIST.
Doing so exploits just one bit of supervisory information, namely, whether each
training image originated from CIFAR10 or MNIST.
Although this is a relatively weak form of supervision, the benefits are significant.
The MNIST images serve as negative samples for the conditional CIFAR10 model,
and {\em vice versa}. This allows the discriminators of the respective conditional
models to learn tight conditional distributions.
Indeed, the resulting CIFAR10 conditional model exhibits a significant performance
gain, with a NLL of 2.99 when evaluated on the CIFAR10 test set, at or better than
state-of-the-art for CIFAR10, and a great improvement over the baseline ${\bs t}$-flow
(with 20 steps per layer), the NLL for which was 3.71 on the same test set.
Fig. \ref{fig:cifar10-cond-cifar10-sample} shows random samples from the conditional model.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[b]{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.97\textwidth]{cifar10-cond-cifar10-sample-1.png}
\subcaption{CIFAR10 conditional}\label{fig:cifar10-cond-cifar10-sample}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}[b]{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.97\textwidth]{cifar10-cond-mnist-sample-1.png}
\subcaption{MNIST conditional}\label{fig:cifar10-cond-mnist-sample}
\end{minipage}
\vspace*{-0.7cm}
\caption{
The ability of {TzK } to learn tight conditional priors is demonstrated here by freezing a
${\bs t}$-flow trained on CIFAR10 only, then learning conditional priors using CIFAR10 and MNIST.
Random samples from the CIFAR10 conditional are shown in \ref{fig:cifar10-cond-cifar10-sample}.
When tested on CIFAR10, the NLL for this model is just 2.99.
Random samples from the MNIST conditional, in \ref{fig:cifar10-cond-mnist-sample},
are surprisingly good given that MNIST data was not used to learn the ${\bs t}$ flow.
The NLL for the MNIST conditional, tested on MNIST, is 1.33.
}
\label{fig:sample-conditional-prior-cifar10}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[b]{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.97\textwidth]{multi-data-cond-cifar10-sample-1.png}
\subcaption{CIFAR10 conditional}\label{fig:multi-data-cond-cifar10-sample}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}[b]{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.97\textwidth]{multi-data-cond-mnist-sample-1.png}
\subcaption{MNIST conditional}\label{fig:multi-data-cond-mnist-sample}
\end{minipage}
\vspace*{-0.7cm}
\caption{
{TzK } offers a powerful framework to specialize a generative flow model trained in an
unsupervised fashion on a large heterogeneous dataset.
By learning tight conditional priors, these models are comparable to those trained end-to-end
on a single dataset. Here, we train two conditional priors concurrently.
Although trained concurrently, samples share the same latent representation ${\bs z}$.
The NLL for CIFAR10 (\ref{fig:multi-data-cond-cifar10-sample}) is 3.1.
The NLL for MNIST (\ref{fig:multi-data-cond-mnist-sample}) is 1.02.
}
\label{fig:sample-conditional-prior-multi-data}
\end{figure}
Just as surprising is the performance of the MNIST conditional, even though the CIFAR10
data on which the ${\bs t}$-flow was trained did not contain images resembling the grayscale
data of MNIST. Despite this, the conditional model was able to isolate regions of
the latent space representing predominantly grayscale MNIST-like images,
random samples of which are shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:cifar10-cond-mnist-sample}.
When evaluated on MNIST data, the conditional model produced a NLL 1.33.
While these results are impressive, one would not expect a flow trained on
CIFAR10 to provide a good latent representation for many different image domains,
like MNIST.
In the next experiment we train a much richer ${\bs t}$-flow from
the entire multi-data training set of 1,892,916 images, again unsupervised.
Once frozen, we again learn conditional models for CIFAR10 and MNIST.
Despite MNIST and Omniglot representing a small fraction of the training set,
the MNIST conditional model exhibits state-of-the-art performance, with NLL
of 1.02 on the MNIST test set. Random samples of the model are shown in
Fig.\ \ref{fig:multi-data-cond-mnist-sample}.
Similarly, the CIFAR10 conditional model exhibits state-of-the-art performance,
with NLL 3.1. While slightly worse than the model trained from CIFAR10,
it is still much better than our benchmark ${\bs t}$-flow, with 3
layers of 32 steps, and NLL of 3.54. Random samples from this CIFAR10
conditional model are shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:multi-data-cond-cifar10-sample}.
In terms of cost, the time required to train the conditional models is
roughly half the time needed to train our baseline ${\bs t}$-flow model (or
equivalently Glow).
Freezing the ${\bs t}$-flow allows for asynchronous optimization of all conditional priors,
resulting in significant gains in training time, while still maintaining a model of
the joint probability. That is, conditional models can be trained in
parallel so the training does not scale with the number of knowledge types.
End-to-end training also benefits from this parallelism, but
does require synchronization for the shared ${\bs t}$-flow.
Finally, training a weaker ${\bs t}$-flow with 20 steps and 3 layers is marginally
faster than training a more expressive flow with 32 steps.
\subsection{End-to-End Hierarchical training}
We next consider a hierarchical extension to {TzK } for learning larger models.
Suppose, for example, one wanted a {TzK } model with 10 conditional priors, one
for each MNIST digit.
Conditioning on 10 classes in {TzK } would require 10 independent discriminators,
and 40 independent regressors (2 for ${\bs{c}^{i}}$, 2 for ${\bs z}$, per knowledge type $i$).
This does not scale well to large numbers of conditional priors.
As an alternative, one can compose {TzK } hierarchically.
For example, the first {TzK } model could learn a conditional prior for MNIST images in general,
while the second model provides further specialization to digit-specific priors.
In particular, as depicted in Fig.\ \ref{fig:hierarchical-tzk}, the second {TzK } model
takes as input observations the latent codes from the MNIST conditional model, and
then learns a second {TzK } model comprising a new latent space,
on which the 10 digit-specific priors are learned.
The key advantage of this hierarchical {TzK } model is that the latent code space
for the generic MNIST prior in the first {TzK } model is low-dimensional, so
training the second {TzK } model with 10 conditional priors is much more efficient
in terms of both training time and memory.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[b]{.5\columnwidth}
\centering \scalebox{0.55}{\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[obs] (T) {${\bs t}$};
\node[latent, above=of T] (Z) {${\bs z}$};
\node[latent, above=of Z, xshift=1.2cm] (ki) {${\mathrm{e}}^{i}$};
\node[obs, above=of Z, xshift=-1.2cm] (Ci) {${\bs{c}^{i}}$};
\node[latent, above=of Ci] (Zi) {${\bs z}_{i}$};
\node[latent, above=of Zi, xshift=1.2cm] (kj) {${\mathrm{e}}^{j}$};
\node[obs, above=of Zi, xshift=-1.2cm] (Cj) {${\bs{c}^{j}}$};
\edge{Z} {T} ; \edge {T} {ki,Ci} ; \edge {ki} {Ci} ;
\edge{Zi} {Ci} ; \edge {Ci} {kj,Cj} ; \edge {kj} {Cj} ;
\plate {Ki} {(Ci)(ki)} {$\times 1$} ;
\plate {Kj} {(Cj)(kj)} {$\times 10$} ;
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\subcaption{encoder}\label{fig:tzk-model-encoder-hier}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}[b]{.5\columnwidth}
\centering \scalebox{0.55}{\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[obs] (T) {${\bs t}$};
\node[latent, above=of T] (Z) {${\bs z}$};
\node[latent, above=of Z, xshift=1.2cm] (ki) {${\mathrm{e}}^{i}$};
\node[obs, above=of Z, xshift=-1.2cm] (Ci) {${\bs{c}^{i}}$};
\node[latent, above=of Ci] (Zi) {${\bs z}_{i}$};
\node[latent, above=of Zi, xshift=1.2cm] (kj) {${\mathrm{e}}^{j}$};
\node[obs, above=of Zi, xshift=-1.2cm] (Cj) {${\bs{c}^{j}}$};
\edge{Z} {T} ; \edge {ki,Ci} {Z} ; \edge {Ci} {ki} ;
\edge{Zi} {Ci} ; \edge {kj,Cj} {Zi} ; \edge {Cj} {kj} ;
\plate {Ki} {(Ci)(ki)} {$\times 1$} ;
\plate {Kj} {(Cj)(kj)} {$\times 10$} ;
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\subcaption{decoder}\label{fig:tzk-model-decoder-hier}
\end{minipage}
\vspace*{-0.6cm}
\caption{
The modular nature of {TzK } allows to build hierarchical model, where ${\bs{c}^{i}}$ of one {TzK } model
is serving as ${\bs t}$ of a domain-specific {TzK } model. The joint objective is simple summation of the multiple objectives.
This results in a model that supports fine grain control through sub-division of likelihood manifolds.
}
\label{fig:hierarchical-tzk}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[b]{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.97\textwidth]{multi-data-bw-cond-mnist0-sample-1.png}
\subcaption{MNIST "0"}\label{fig:multi-data-bw-cond-mnist0-sample}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}[b]{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.97\textwidth]{multi-data-bw-cond-mnist1-sample-1.png}
\subcaption{MNIST "1"}\label{fig:multi-data-bw-cond-mnist1-sample}
\end{minipage}
\vspace*{-0.6cm}
\caption{
A ${\bs t}$-flow was first learned with all datasets, and then frozen,
after which an MNIST conditional over ${\bs t}$ was learned (the task) jointly with MNIST
digit conditional over ${\bs{c}^{i}}$ (the task domain).
This procedure allows efficient joint training for 10 conditional priors
over a low-dimensional ${\bs{c}^{i}} \in \mathbb{R}^{C}$, as depicted in Fig.\ \ref{fig:hierarchical-tzk}.
The NLL for the MNIST conditional prior (over ${\bs t}$) is 1.17.
The NLL for the digit class conditional prior (over ${\bs{c}^{i}}$) is 1.06.
}
\label{fig:hierarchical-class-conditional-tzk}
\end{figure}
To implement this idea, the ${\bs t}$-flow in the first {TzK } model comprised
3 layers with 10 steps, and 512 channels, a weaker flow than those used
in previous experiments with 20 or 32 steps. The ${\bs z}$-flow for the MNIST conditional
model consisted of 512 channels and 1 layer of 4 steps, with a 10D latent
code space for ${\bs{c}^{i}}$.
The second stage {TzK } model then maps the 10D ${\bs{c}^{i}}$ vectors to a latent
space with a probability flow comprising 1 layer of 4 steps with 64 channels,
on which 10 conditional priors are learned, each with a ${\bs z}$-flow comprising one
more layer of 4 steps and 64 channels, with 2D latent codes ${\bs{c}^{j}}$.
Fig.\ \ref{fig:hierarchical-tzk} depicts the model.
Training this two-stage {TzK } model entails optimization of the sum of two {TzK }
losses, defined in Eq.\ \eqref{eq:tzk-entropy-loss-lower-bound}.
The first ${\bs t}$-flow was learned from the multi-data traing set, and then fixed, as this flow is
somewhat expensive to train. Everything else ({\em i.e.}, the ${\bs z}$-flow in the first {TzK } model,
and all components of the second {TzK } model) was trained jointly end-to-end.
The trained model had NLL 1.17 for the MNIST prior (first {TzK } model),
and 1.06 for digit-specific priors; class-conditional samples are shown in
Fig.\ \ref{fig:hierarchical-class-conditional-tzk}.
This experiment also provides empirical evidence of consistency of
the encoder and decoder within a {TzK } model.
Quantitatively, the digit-conditional discriminative model had 0.87 classification
accuracy over ${\bs{c}^{i}}$. Although far from state-of-the-art in classification accuracy,
we note that we allowed more than one class to high probability, rather than choosing a
single category with highest probability.
Instead, the model learned a joint distribution over 10 independent classes.
Qualitatively, the consistency can be observed in the samples in Fig.\ \ref{fig:hierarchical-class-conditional-tzk},
which are strongly correlated with the classification accuracy. In other words,
samples are roughly aligned with 0.87 classification accuracy. In effect, {TzK } dual structure
results in consistency between the generative and discriminative components.
More importantly, this allows for multiple evaluation criteria of a {TzK } generative model ({\em i.e.},
per conditional prior), in addition to NLL, which is not necessarily a meaningful quantity
to measure the performance of a generative model.
We perform one additional experiment with CIFAR10 conditional. This time the model predicted
a binary representation of the label ({\em i.e.}, label 3 = $0011$) with 4 bits.
The trained model had NLL of 3.64 over the CIFAR10 conditional, and 0.74
classification of the domain task model.
The accuracy was independent per bit acknowledging similarity between classes,
as a result of the arbitrary division of classes according the label binary
representation. This last experiment again demonstrates the ability for {TzK }
to learn compositional structure that represents a joint distribution.
\section{Conclusions} \label{sec:conclusion}
This paper introduces a versatile conditional generative model based on
probability flows.
It supports compositionality without a priori
knowledge of the number of classes or the relationships between classes.
Trained with maximum likelihood, it provides efficient inference and
sampling from class-conditionals or the joint distribution.
This allows one to train generative models from multiple
heterogeneous datasets, while retaining strong prior models over
subsets of the data (e.g., from a single dataset, class label,
or attribute).
The resulting model is efficient to train, either end-to-end,
in two phases (unsupervised flow followed by conditional models),
or hierarchically.
In addition, {TzK } offers an alternative motivation for the use of MI in ML
models, as a natural term that arises given the assumption that the joint
distributions over observation and multiple latent codes has two equally
plausibly factorization of encoder and decoder.
Our experiments focus on models learned from six different image datasets,
with a relatively weak Glow architecture, conditioning on various types of
knowledge, including the identity of the source dataset, or class labels.
This yields log likelihood comparable to state-of-the-art, with compelling
samples from conditional priors.
\vspace*{-0.1cm}
\section*{Acknowledgements}
\vspace*{-0.15cm}
We thank Ethan Fetaya, James Lucas, Alireza Makhzani, Leonid Sigal, and Kevin Swersky
for helpful comments on this work.
We also thank the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research
and NSERC Canada for financial support.
|
\section{Introduction}
Clustering, the practice of partitioning data into different groups with similar observations, has a variety of applications in knowledge discovery for unknown phenomena in different fields such as object recognition \cite{1,2}, cyber-physical systems \cite{3,4}, or bioinformatics \cite{5}. Spectral clustering \cite{6,7,8} is a data analytics technique that has gained popularity in recent years. Due to its capability of high-quality clustering and handling non-convex clusters that are typically challenging for other methods \cite{8}, spectral clustering has been implemented in different domains like computer vision and speech separation with promising performance \cite{9,10,11,12}. An overview of the literature reveals that spectral clustering has been \emph{adopted and adapted} for different application domains. In this study, we have explored automated spectral clustering for feature spaces with multi-scale and higher dimensional attributes. Our vision has stemmed from the need for self-configuring algorithms in cyber-physical systems that need to adapt their behavior in different settings.
Spectral clustering decomposes the eigenvectors of a Laplacian matrix derived from an affinity matrix (i.e., similarity matrix) of the data and transforms the data into a new dimension, where it can be grouped with k-means or other algorithms that minimize a distortion metric. The affinity matrix in this context demonstrates the pairwise similarity between data points and is used to overcome the difficulties due to the lack of convexity in the data distribution. While considered as an unsupervised method, the algorithm calls for the determination of the number of clusters and a scaling parameter (that defines the behavior of the affinity matrix), which require algorithm tuning and \emph{a priori} data provision. These values are commonly provided based on data-driven parameter tuning (i.e., model selection) techniques or the general knowledge of a domain and therefore, make the autonomous application of algorithms more challenging. Accordingly, research efforts have been made on automated (also known as self-tuning) spectral clustering with a focus on particular problems.
The main body of work in automated spectral clustering has focused on challenging two-dimensional and image segmentation problems (e.g., \cite{13,14,15,16}). Automated spectral clustering for multi-scale high dimensional data (mainly time-series) is another domain of research that has been less explored. Clustering in higher dimensions could be a challenging task \cite{17}; however, it has interesting applications in domains such as energy or power consumption pattern analysis, gene expression groupings, or speech separation. In other words, with emerging (and fast-growing) technologies for autonomous systems and smart environments, mainly in the form of cyber-physical systems, the need for self-tuning and context-aware algorithms that do not require human intervention for cluster analysis is increasing. The challenges for clustering of this type of data include: (1) Different groups of data can reside on different scales creating a multi-scale nature for the feature space. Consequently, larger scale components can mask the distinction of complex patterns in the smaller scales, and (2) the presence of noise in the acquired data could add to the complexity of the clustering process. Accordingly, in this study, we have proposed a heuristic algorithm for automated spectral clustering of multi-scale higher-dimensional data in order to obviate the need for \emph{a priori} information (i.e., number of cluster $K$, and scaling parameter $\sigma$) so that the algorithms could configure their behavior by learning from the data.
Our proposed approach is built on the eigengap metric by introducing a new heuristic algorithm that couples eigengap with data-driven estimation of scaling parameter and a search framework that accounts for the multi-scale nature of the feature space. The performance of the proposed heuristic has been evaluated on real-world labeled datasets with multi-scale nature in a higher-dimensional space and compared to the performance of commonly used internal validation techniques that call for a threshold as the stopping criterion (i.e. the number of cluster optimization). The proposed method was initially motivated by the task of energy disaggregation, which is the practice of dividing the aggregate power series into individual appliance components with considerable power draw values (i.e., different scales). While there are recent well-known clustering studies for electricity energy monitoring (e.g. \cite{18,19}), they presume the number of appliances and only handle appliances with high power draws. However, due to our interest in the automation of cyber-physical systems, we are seeking to perform clustering without parameter-tuning or a priori information (i.e., number of clusters) provision. In addition to the application of the energy disaggregation, the approach has shown the potential to be applied to other similar data types as we have presented a benchmark gene expression clustering.
The rest of the paper has been structured as follows: In section \ref{sec2}, a background on automated (i.e., self-tuning) spectral clustering as well as clustering of high dimensional data is presented. Section \ref{sec3} presents the proposed heuristic by introducing methods for estimation of scaling parameter and the number of clusters ($K$) that formalize our proposed framework for automated clustering. Section \ref{sec4} discusses the datasets and their properties and then proceeds with presenting the results, evaluation, and efficacy of the heuristic algorithms. Finally, the conclusion summarizes the work and its findings.
\section{Related Works in Spectral Clustering}
\label{sec2}
Spectral clustering has gained popularity due to their ease of implementation and efficiency in clustering \cite{20,21}. Therefore, in recent decades, several clustering algorithms have been proposed and used for different applications. The focus in these algorithms has been on the application of the similarity matrix spectrum for dimensionality reduction and feature space transformation to introduce convexity. One of the well-known algorithms in this field is the one proposed by Ng, Jordan, and Weiss (referred to as NJW) \cite{8}. In addition to the efforts in the formalization of spectral clustering algorithms, a number of studies have focused on expanding the algorithms into instances, which are capable of self-tuning or automated identification of natural partitions (or groups) in the data. Natural in this context refers to the clusters (or groups) that represent the actual/physical separation in the data.
\subsection{Automated Spectral Clustering}
As a widely adopted technique, Zelnik-Manor and Perona introduced a self-tuning spectral clustering algorithm \cite{13} (built on NJW) that accounts for multiple scales in the feature space and automatically identifies the number of clusters using an optimization technique over a range of possible numbers for clusters. As part of this algorithm, they have proposed a novel similarity measure that integrates a data-driven scaling parameter by considering the distance of each point with some of its nearest neighbors. Scaling parameter refers to a parameter that controls the width of the neighborhood in the similarity metric. The number of clusters was estimated through examining a range of possible group numbers, recovering the rotation that best aligns the eigenvector of the matrix obtained from the data, and minimizing a cost function for possible rotations. The algorithm’s performance has been evaluated on a number of reference 2D problems (identified as benchmarks) as well as image segmentation problems, with promising performance.
A major part of the efforts in the field of automated spectral clustering has focused on the problem of image segmentation and thus the aforementioned study (i.e., \cite{13}) has been used as the benchmark for comparative analyses. In a class of these studies, it has been argued that the eigenvector selection is a crucial task for clustering because not all of the largest vectors are informative for natural segmentation of the data. These studies mainly sought the task of automatic determination of the number of clusters under noisy and sparse data. Different methods have been proposed to account for eigenvector selection. Identifying the relevance of the eigenvectors according to their contribution in determining the number of clusters \cite{14} and eigenvector selection through direct entropy ranking or a combination of elements in the ranking \cite{15} are examples of these methods. Other studies have proposed alternative solutions to address the problem of automated clustering in image segmentation. For example, \cite{16} uses non-normalized information of eigenvectors (rather than using a unit space for feature representation) and \cite{22} performed iterative cluster and merge in order to address the problem of image down-sizing (which can lead to losing fine details).
Unlike the aforementioned efforts that have proposed solutions for challenging 2D datasets and image segmentation, \cite{23} proposed a kernel spectral clustering for a large-scale network without parameter input. To this end, entropy was used to detect the block-diagonal of the affinity matrix that was created by the projections in the eigenspace. The efficacy of the proposed approach was studied through synthetic data and real-world network datasets. While these existing approaches \cite{14,16,22,23} were developed to tackle spectral clustering in an automated manner, they are either designed to solve the problem for multi-scale 2D and image segmentation or network data, which is different in nature from data with multi-scale higher dimensional attributes as sought here.
\subsection{Spectral Clustering in Higher Dimension}
Spectral clustering for higher dimensional feature spaces has also been the subject of some studies (e.g. \cite{24,25,26,27,28,29}) to address different challenges. One of the examples of higher dimensional spaces in the real-world application is the time-series data. High level of noise and uneven sequence of length in data representation were among the challenges that have been taken into account. A class of studies has coupled spectral clustering and hidden Markov models (HMM) to benefit from structure and parametric assumptions of HMMs. These algorithms were evaluated on real-world datasets of motion capture, handwriting time-series sequence, sign language, and noisy sensor network data (e.g., \cite{24}, \cite{30}). The inevitable challenge of noise in real-world data has led to studies on spectral clustering approaches that are robust to noise. Examples of techniques that focused on robustness to noise include using a mapping approach based on regularization into a new space to separate the noise points in a new cluster \cite{25}, and proposing a partitioning criterion (discriminative hypergraph) which considers the intra-cluster compactness and inter-cluster separation of vertices \cite{31}. The performance of these studies was evaluated on datasets including digit numbers with 256 features and gene expression data. In another class of studies with higher dimensional features, clustering of large-scale datasets (both in the number of features and instances) were explored since they are computationally expensive \cite{26,27,28,29,32}. These approaches typically integrate sparse coding-based graph or apply approximation methods to reduce cost while the performance might be deteriorated. Among the works that attempted to enhance the performance, we can mention the application of a landmark-based spectral clustering \cite{28} that selects representative data points so that original data points are the linear combination of these landmarks and utilization of a sparse matrix and local interpolation to improve the approximate outputs \cite{29}. These studies had a focus on the efficiency and improved performance of the algorithm or been applied toward a specific application solution. Therefore, they have considered parameter selection and prior knowledge of the domain.
Considering the existence of real-world data with higher dimensional attributes, our study focuses on a heuristic spectral clustering algorithm that can robustly reveal different groupings for a class of multi-scale data for autonomous systems that need to adapt to different contexts.
\section{An Automated Spectral Clustering Heuristic} \label{sec3}
The fundamentals of spectral clustering methods have been extensively described in the literature (e.g., \cite{8}, \cite{20}, \cite{13}, \cite{33,34}). Our heuristics is built on the NJW spectral clustering algorithm \cite{8}. A brief description of the NJW algorithm is followed to expand on it for our extended algorithm.
Assuming the data set $S=[s_1,s_2,s_3…,s_n ] \in R^{ n \times m}$ with $K$ clusters, the NJW algorithm steps are as follows:
1) Develop the affinity matrix $A\in R^{ n \times m}$, defined by:
\begin{equation}
A_{ij} = \begin{cases}
exp(-\frac{ \parallel s_i-s_j \parallel}{2\sigma^2}) & i \neq j\\
0 & i=j\\
\end{cases}
\label{equation1}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma^2$ is the scaling parameter of the model.
2) Using $D$, a diagonal matrix with the summation of the elements on the $i$-th ($i \in [1,2,…,n]$) row of $A$ as $D(i,i)$, the Laplacian matrix is defined as:
\begin{equation}
L = D^\frac{-1}{2} A D ^ \frac{1}{2}
\label{equation2}
\end{equation}
3) Compute $v_1,v_2,…,v_K$ the $K$ largest eigenvectors of $L$, and form the matrix $V=[v_1,v_2,…,v_K ] \in R^{n \times K}$
4) Form matrix $Y \in R^{n \times K}$ by renormalizing each row of $V$ as:
\begin{equation}
Y_{ij} = \frac{V_{ij}}{(\sum_{j} V_{ij}^2)^\frac{1}{2}}
\label{equation3}
\end{equation}
5) Cluster each row of $Y$ as a point in $R^K$ via K-means algorithm.
6) Original point $s_i$ belongs to cluster $k$, if and only if row $i$ of the matrix $Y$ is assigned to $k$.
As the above steps state, the algorithm calls for input information. This information includes (1) the number of clusters ($K$), similar to other clustering algorithms that either need $K$ (e.g., the well-known K-means) or other input parameters such as thresholds as stopping criteria or model parameters (e.g., hierarchical clustering or mean-shift \cite{35,36}), and (2) a scaling parameter ($\sigma^2$) for forming the affinity matrix. These parameters could be estimated by human knowledge for specific problem domains or through internal validation, which also requires a threshold identification as an input parameter. Specifically, as proposed by Ng et al. \cite{8}, scaling parameter can be automatically fine-tuned by running the algorithm several times and selecting an optimal value from a range so that least distorted clusters of the rows in $Y$ are obtained. However, identifying this range calls for knowledge of the data, which contradicts the self-configuration objective.
\subsection{Estimating Scaling Parameter}
The scaling parameter ($\sigma^2$), shown in Eq. (\ref{equation1}), defines the width of neighborhoods which subsequently affects the calculation of the affinity matrix. In other words, it is a reference distance, below which two points are evaluated as similar and beyond which dissimilar \cite{13}, \cite{37}. Ng et al. \cite{8} describe the scaling parameter as the parameter that controls how rapidly the affinity falls off with the distance between two observations (i.e., data points). Therefore, selection of this parameter characterizes the dissimilarity in the feature space and thus the structure of clusters. In order to illustrate the effect of scaling parameter on the clustering, we have presented the outcome of spectral clustering on a power dataset, with high dimensional data points (which are subsections of a power time-series) in Fig \ref{fig1}. The data in this figure represent selected feature vectors for a problem of energy disaggregation, which uses signal processing and machine learning algorithms to identify the contribution of individual appliances on the aggregated power time-series. The time-series data is collected through one sensor on the main circuit panel in a building to avoid extensive instrumentation. Thus, this figure also shows the challenges of clustering in energy disaggregation. The spectral clustering outcome was visualized in Fig \ref{fig1}(b) for different $\sigma$ values to demonstrate the sensitivity. NJW algorithm was used with three as the number of clusters. While in all the cases the number of clusters is set to the correct number ($k$=3) as depicted in Fig \ref{fig1}(a), variation of $\sigma$ can affect the performance. As in this case, $\sigma$=100 is a suitable estimation while $\sigma$=20 or $\sigma=40$ leads to false prediction. The performance is sensitive to the scaling value over different datasets, indicating the importance of correct inference for the automated approach. Therefore, in our proposed heuristic, we have adopted the following methods for data-driven scaling factor estimation.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.40\textwidth]{Fig1a.pdf}
\hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.40\textwidth]{Fig1b.pdf}
\caption{Sensitivity of $\sigma$ on clustering output for a power time-series data. (a) is the feature vectors for three appliances and (b) shows the clustering results for three different values of $\sigma$. ($\sigma$=100 gives the right prediction)}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{PCA-based Scaling Parameter} \label{sec311}
Scaling parameter identifies the boundaries of the similarity neighborhood. A larger $\sigma$ indicates the similarity with more distant data points, whereas smaller values highlight the neighboring points. Therefore, in order to estimate the scale of neighborhoods, we have adopted the application of principal component analysis (PCA), which utilizes an orthogonal transformation to map the original variables into new space with uncorrelated variables. Given the higher dimensionality of data, we employ PCA in our approach to ensure that we focus on components of the feature space that account for the most variance in the data. In this study, through observations, we consider the one-time standard deviation of major principal axes (that accounts for the maximum variance in the whole data) in order to estimate the $\sigma$. This assumption allows us to form an approximate boundary threshold for distinguishing similar and dissimilar points based on the distribution of data points. Since only the first few components constitute the most variance, the number of considered principal axes is selected such that at least 95 percent of total variance is granted. This ensures reducing the input while also accounting for the whole variability of data.
Let us consider a set of data points $S$ with $n$ observations and $m$ features as:
\begin{equation}
S = [s_1,s_2,s_3,...,s_n], \quad S \in R^{n \times m}
\label{equation4}
\end{equation}
The eigenvectors that correspond to the highest eigenvalues of the covariance of $S$ are associated with the highest variance. The projection matrix $U$ is formed by stacking the eigenvectors of corresponding eigenvalues sorted in the descending order. Using $U$, the sample data is transformed into the new space as follows:
\begin{equation}
P = S \times U, \quad P \in R^{n \times m}
\label{equation5}
\end{equation}
Each principal component is derived by selecting the corresponding column from $P$. We employ the variance information from principal components for evaluating the scaling parameter. Therefore, the scaling parameter ($\sigma^2$) will be estimated as follows:
\begin{equation}
\sigma^2 = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{y} w_i v_i}{\sum_{i=1}^{y} w_i }
\label{equation6}
\end{equation}
where $w_i$ is the data-driven weighting factor from $\pmb{w}$. $w_i$ denotes the ratio of the variance for the $i$-th principal axis to the summation of variance from all the principal axes (contained in $P$):
\begin{equation}
\pmb{w}^T=[w_1,w_2,...,w_m], \quad w_1>w_2>...>w_m
\label{equation7}
\end{equation}
We select $y$ major principal axes (in Eq. (\ref{equation6})) such that:
\begin{equation}
\frac{\sum_{i=1}^{y} w_i v_i}{\sum_{i=1}^{y} w_i }>0.95
\label{equation8}
\end{equation}
Here, $y$ is the smallest integer that satisfies the above inequality. The above inequality is used to consider almost the whole variability of data from PCA without considering all the principal axes. Typically, the first few principal axes account for the most variance in the data. An empirical analysis for Eq. (\ref{equation8}) is provided in section \ref{321}. \newline
Also, $\pmb{v}$ contains the variance of data points that are projected along the principal axes (each axis contains $n$ points, i.e., the total number of observations in the data).
\begin{equation}
\pmb{v}^T=[v_1,v_2,...,v_m], \quad v_1>v_2>...>v_m
\label{equation9}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Local scaling for self-tuning}
As a data-driven approach for estimation of the scaling parameter, Zelnik-Manor and Perona \cite{13} suggested that, instead of considering a global parameter for the whole affinity matrix, a local scale for each point allows the point-to-point distance self-tuning, which can further be used to compute the affinity for pairwise points. As proposed by \cite{13}, instead of using Eq. (\ref{equation1}) for calculating the affinity matrix, a local scale parameter is defined by each point, and Eq. (\ref{equation1}) is re-written as:
\begin{equation}
A_{ij} = exp(-\frac{ \parallel s_i-s_j \parallel}{\sigma_i \sigma_j})
\label{equation10}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\sigma_i = \parallel x_i-x_k \parallel
\label{equation11}
\end{equation}
$x_k$ is the $k$-th nearest neighbor of $x_i$. Through empirical observations, a value of $k$=7 was suggested \cite{13} that works for a range of applications. Local scaling provides a highly representative measure of scale for each data point. However, comparing to methods that use a global scale, this improvement in estimation comes with a higher computational cost since it calls for a KNN search for each data point in the process of forming the affinity matrix.
\subsection{Iterative Eigengap Search Heuristic}
Determining the number of clusters is a challenging problem even for human users and selecting the “right number of groups” is subject to different interpretation. In the case of spectral clustering, a commonly used heuristic is the eigengap that measures the stability of the eigenvectors in the Laplacian matrix. Based on the matrix perturbation theory, the subspace spanned by the first $i$ eigenvectors of the Laplacian matrix $L$ is stable if and only if the eigengap measure in Eq. (\ref{equation12}) is large:
\begin{equation}
\delta_i = \mid \lambda_i - \lambda_\text{i+1} \mid
\label{equation12}
\end{equation}
where $N$ is the total number of observations, $\delta_1,…, \delta_\text{n-1}$ are the eigengaps, and $\lambda_1,...\lambda_n$ are the eigenvalues of the Laplacian matrix $L$ (defined in Eq. (\ref{equation2})). \newline
The value of eigengap for subsequent eigenvalues can indicate the place to pick the number of clusters. By examining the eigenvalue measures, the number of clusters can be estimated through:
\begin{equation}
K=argmax_i(\delta_i)
\label{equation13}
\end{equation}
where $\delta_i$ is calculated through Eq. (\ref{equation12}).
Eigengap heuristic is a technique that mainly works in well-separated feature spaces \cite{10} but is not capable of properly partitioning the feature space in the presence of multi-scale data or mixed background as is the usual case in real-world data. In order to extend the capabilities of eigengap metric for multiscale data analysis, we propose to use an iterative eigengap search to reveal the complex topology of the feature space.
\subsubsection{Iterative Eigengap Search with global scale} \label{321}
In a multi-scale feature space, the data in the larger scale could mask the dissimilarities and therefore the microstructure of the smaller scales. However, if an algorithm explores the structure of feature space in different scales, the dissimilarities could be revealed and therefore, the eigengap metric could be utilized for identifying the number of clusters. This is the rationale behind our proposed Iterative Eigengap Search (IES) that partitions a feature space through searching along a tree-like structure. While at each iteration the eigengap might not find the final groupings of data points, it will segregate the data in different scales and consequently accentuates the dissimilarities at each scale. Therefore, the algorithm could refine the clusters through visiting each node (i.e., cluster) from the previous iteration by passing it to the spectral clustering algorithm. The process of refining the clusters will be carried out until eigengap cannot reveal finer structures in a leaf node. In other words, the stopping criterion is when all the nodes of the tree have been visited and all the leaf nodes contain only one cluster according to the eigengap measure.
Fig \ref{fig2} illustrates the conceptual process of Iterative Eigengap Search tree. In this tree structure, the root indicates the whole dataset, which is passed through eigengap heuristic (Eq.(\ref{equation12})) to determine an initial $K$ (Eq. (\ref{equation13})), and then clustered with NJW algorithm with a PCA-based global scaling parameter. Through empirical observations, we found that the $K$ should be sought in the first half of the vector of eigenvalues. Each of the produced nodes is processed with eigengap heuristic to be clustered again. As schematically shown in Fig \ref{fig2}, there are 6 nodes with estimated $k$=1 (after being analyzed with eigengap) that are accepted as final clusters, which all together form the data in the root node. The final clusters are thus the ones at the leaf nodes. At each level of the tree and for each node, the $\sigma$ measure is updated with respect to the content of that node to identify a scaling factor for that specific subset of data points.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{Fig2.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig2}Framework of Iterative Eigengap Search (IES) for discovering patterns in different scales (groups with $k$=1 are accepted as the final clusters)}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
As described in section \ref{sec311}, we used the inequality in Eq. (\ref{equation8}) to consider the major principal components. Considering the fact that the first major components typically account for the most variance in the data \cite{38}, we select the first major components such that at least 95 percent of variance is granted. As an empirical demonstration, we have considered all the datasets, later described in section \ref{42}, and measured the amount of variance and the percentage of major components for each generated node in the IES, as shown in Fig \ref{fig3}. As can be seen in Fig \ref{fig3}(a), the inequality results in an amount of variance that is close to 1 in our heuristic. On the other hand, as shown in Fig \ref{fig3}(b), in most cases, the number of principal components is limited to a small portion of the features to achieve the objective described in Eq. (\ref{equation8}). Therefore, we used the cut-off threshold of 0.95 to account for almost the whole variance by limiting the number of principal components.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Fig3a.pdf}
\hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Fig3b.pdf}
\caption{Empirical analysis for the selection of major components in the generated nodes in IES: (a) Amount of variance granted, (b) ratio of selected major components }
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Iterative Eigengap Search with local scale}
In this alternative of the heuristic, we have adopted the local scaling parameter that identifies the scale by quantifying the distance between nearest neighbors in our search tree framework. As proposed by the original work by Zelnik and Penora \cite{13}, we have utilized 7 nearest neighbors for the estimation. The selected number of neighbors was suggested in \cite{13} based on comprehensive analysis of both high dimensional and low dimensional data. This approach considers the impact of point-to-point distance in forming the affinity matrix such that multiple scales of data are accounted for. The local scale is used in the Iterative Eigengap Search to identify the structure in the feature space. Given that local scaling has already considered the multi-scale nature of data, the results through one iteration could be considered as the clustering output, which we call eigengap with local scaling (ELS).
Fig \ref{fig4} presents the pseudo-code for the Iterative Eigengap Search. The tree search is carried out similar to a depth-first search algorithm and therefore a stack data structure that uses the LIFO (last-in-first-out) feature is used to store the data (and the subsequent sub-sections).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.55\textwidth]{Fig4.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig4}Pseudo-code for Iterative Eigengap Search Heuristic}
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
In this work, we have adopted NJW, which uses the normalized Laplacian matrix to extract the structure of the data as the standard spectral clustering (SC) for our automated clustering method. In the past recent years, different variations of SC have been proposed that showed improvement over NJW from specific perspectives including improved eigenvector selection \cite{39,40}, alternate affinity matrix generation \cite{41}, and reduced computational cost \cite{42,43}. Nonetheless, we have adopted NJW as a seminal well-established algorithm. Considering the nature of the proposed framework for automated clustering, other variations of spectral clustering could be replaced instead, as long as they employ a graph Laplacian matrix (e.g., \cite{20,44}) that enables the use of eigengap heuristic and the scaling parameter in their similarity estimation.
\section{Algorithm Evaluation} \label{sec4}
We have evaluated the proposed heuristic spectral clustering algorithm on two categories of higher dimensional datasets, namely, power consumption time-series (as described for energy disaggregation) and cell cycle data (representing gene expression). Both types of datasets are of higher dimensions, comprised of different scales, and represent real-world data and therefore exposed to noise. No assumption regarding the number of clusters or scaling parameter is taken into account for the analysis. The evaluation metrics, dataset descriptions, and the results will follow.
\subsection{Evaluation Metrics}
In this study, the algorithm performance has been explored through external validation and was compared with internal validation techniques. Clustering validation is a domain which determines the goodness of clustering output \cite{33}. While external validation relies on the external data such as the class labels, internal validation only searches for the information in the data to check the goodness of partitioning, and can also be employed to find the optimal number of clusters \cite{45}. Both data types used in this study are labeled, which enables us to use external validation. However, we are also checking the performance against commonly used minimization of the sum of squared error in cluster dispersion to contrast the algorithm performance against conventional methods of automated clustering.
In internal validation, different metrics typically consider the compactness (high intra-cluster similarity) and separation (low inter-cluster similarity) to estimate the quality of partitions. These metrics can be used as a measure to find the optimal number of clusters. To measure the dispersion (or tightness) of clusters, the sum of the squared error (SSE) \cite{46,47} can be measured as:
\begin{equation}
SSE_k = \sum\nolimits_{i} \sum\nolimits_{x \in C_i} \parallel x - \bar{x_i} \parallel ^2 \quad i = 1,2,...,k
\label{equation14}
\end{equation}
where $x$ are the data points in cluster $i$, $\bar{x_i}$ is the centroid of cluster $i$, and $k$ is the total number of clusters.
The SSE is measured for a set of clustering outcome for a range of $k$ values to form an “elbow curve”. The optimal number of cluster is decided based on the rate of dispersion by identifying a threshold for change between subsequent values on the elbow curve.
For the external validation, as the data is fully labeled, we have adopted precision, recall, and F-measure of the confusion matrix. Based on a majority vote, we assign a dominant label to a cluster and form the confusion matrix.
\subsection{Dataset Description} \label{42}
\subsubsection{Power consumption datasets}
This category of data is focused on power time-series and the power draw of appliances in a typical building. As appliances change their operational states (e.g., going from off to on), the power draw changes. Clustering has applications in non-intrusive electricity consumption disaggregation, which uses minimal sensing in a building unit coupled with machine learning frameworks. More details on the need and challenges for automated clustering in this field of problems could be found in \cite{48}. In order to shed light on the nature of this data type, Fig \ref{fig5} shows a sample of raw time series data over a 3-hour period with 60Hz resolution. The red circles in this figure illustrate the events, when operational states of appliances were changed.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Fig5.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig5}Average of measurement difference for different labels}
\label{fig5}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{Fig6.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig5}Visualization of a power dataset (time series signal) that shows the effect of multiple scales for the clustering problem; the presence of different clusters are magnified from left to right. In the right frame, 7 groups exist while in the left frame their presence is entirely concealed due to the presence of other patterns with high measurement difference.}
\label{fig6}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.04\textwidth]{Fig7.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig7}Average of measurement difference for different labels}
\label{fig7}
\end{figure}
Events are detected using the Generalized Likelihood Ratio (GLR) event detection algorithm. Therefore, the dataset contains the noise due to performance of automated feature extraction algorithms as well. The transient in power draw in the vicinity of these events are defined as the appliance signatures and are used as feature vectors, rendering this problem as a feature-based time series clustering according to \cite{49}. In this study, we have used the transient signature (comprised of real and reactive power) for one second after each event and 2/3 of a second before each one. This dataset has been collected and labeled in three occupied apartments over the course of two weeks \cite{50}, in which we used the data from the first apartment for our analysis. The dataset is fully labeled under human supervision with the data from ground truth sensors. The labels represent appliances operational states, and each appliance could have several operational states. These labels have been used for external validation. \newline
Power data has a highly multi-scale nature, which has been visualized in Fig \ref{fig6} for one example dataset. This dataset contains 16 labels (i.e., different classes). In this figure, feature vectors for all instances have been plotted (only real power section of the vectors was presented). Going from left to right, feature vectors in the larger scales were recursively removed and thus the dissimilarities in smaller scales have been revealed. Differences in scales stem from differences in appliances’ power draw. In the smallest scale, the dataset contains 7 clusters that are completely masked when the scaling parameter is not estimated according to that scale. The challenging task of clustering in this problem arises from the fact that automated clustering can simply overlook distinguishing patterns in the small-scale region. In this study, we have used four power datasets, for which in Fig \ref{fig7}, the average of variations for all the events of particular labels were plotted. The wide range of power variations for a multitude of labels in all the datasets demonstrates the multi-scale characteristic of this type of data.
\subsubsection{Gene expression dataset}
While the inspiration for the proposed approach raised from the energy disaggregation problem with highly multi-scale nature, the proposed approach is a generic one and could be used in other domains with similar data types. As the second category of data, we have selected a gene expression data. Clustering is a popular approach for the analysis of gene expression in bioinformatics to study the variation of genes. The dataset has higher dimensions (compared to 2D benchmark problems). We have selected a gene expression data type \cite{51} that displays the fluctuation of the expression level of almost 6000 genes that were collected at 17 time points (resulting in 17 attributes). In \cite{52}, a subset of 384 genes with five phases of cell cycle (five classes) was extracted as a benchmark dataset for clustering, which we used here as one of our examples.
Table \ref{Table1} provides the description of all the datasets used in this study.
\begin{table}[]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{@{}lccc@{}}
\toprule
Dataset & \multicolumn{1}{l}{No. of data points} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{No. of features} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{No. of classes} \\ \midrule
Power dataset 1 & 756 & 202 & 16 \\
Power dataset 2 & 498 & 202 & 16 \\
Power dataset 3 & 1454 & 202 & 12 \\
Power dataset 4 & 2235 & 202 & 15 \\
Cell cycle dataset & 384 & 17 & 5 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Description of datasets} \label{Table1}
\end{table}
\subsection{Performance Assessment}
In this section, we provide details on qualitative and quantitative assessments. In the former, the effect of the proposed algorithm on the quality of clusters has been visually described. The latter evaluates the performance by using metrics including accuracy, F-measure and computational time. A comparative performance assessment has been also included for the comparison purpose.
\subsubsection{Qualitative performance assessment}
The qualitative assessment is presented for selected datasets that help illustrate (accentuate visual variations) the challenges and performance of the algorithm. Fig \ref{fig8} and Fig \ref{fig9} visualize the clustering output for power dataset 1. Fig \ref{fig8} shows the clustering outcome with Iterative Eigengap Search (IES) with global scaling after the first iteration on the search tree. $K$ is initially estimated as 3, and 3 child nodes are generated. As expected, conventional eigengap is not able to identify the structure of the feature space and resulted in low-quality clusters. Fig \ref{fig9} shows the outcome of the clustering for the iterative search of eigengap, in which 44 clusters were identified at the leaf nodes (where $k$=1). As Fig \ref{fig8} and Fig \ref{fig9} demonstrate, the Iterative Eigengap Search starts with a coarse level separation of clusters in the first iteration and refines the result iteratively to provide high-quality clusters as the outcome.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{Fig8.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig8}Clustering outcome after first iteration with the coarse-level division on power dataset 1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{Fig9.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig9}Clustering outcome using Iterative Eigengap Search with \textit{global scaling} on power dataset 1}
\end{figure}
For the cell cycle dataset, Iterative Eigengap Search starts by generating four clusters in the first iteration and generates more clusters in the next level. Due to random initialization of centroids in k-means clustering step (which could result in local optima), the final number of nodes may vary slightly. Fig \ref{fig10} visualizes the cluster results for the cell cycle dataset, where $K$ was found to be 8.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{Fig10.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig10}Clustering outcome using Iterative Eigengap Search with global scaling on cell cycle dataset}
\end{figure}
Fig \ref{fig11} shows the clustering outcome for Iterative Eigengap Search with local scaling on power dataset 2. In Fig \ref{fig11}-a, the clusters in root node were presented. As shown in this figure, a reasonable estimation for $k$ is achieved, but there are few clusters (highlighted with dash lines), which potentially could be improved. Fig \ref{fig11}-b presents how the iterative approach modifies the clusters. Local scaling results in a higher number of clusters in the first iteration with a shallower tree structure.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{Fig11a.pdf}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{Fig11b.pdf}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{\label{fig11} Clustering outcome using Iterative Eigengap Search with \textit{local scaling} on power dataset 2: (a) cluster outcome after first iteration (clusters with potential for improvement were highlighted) and (b) cluster outcome on the leaf nodes}
\end{figure}
The quantitative impact of this difference, both in terms of accuracy and computational time, will follow.
\subsubsection{Quantitative performance assessment}
Given that the labels for data points are known, we carried out external validations to quantify the algorithm performance in comparison to state-of-the-art and conventional internal validation. For internal validation, by considering a range for the number of clusters in ascending order, the SSE was obtained for each dataset using the concept described in Eq. (\ref{equation14}). Fig \ref{fig12} shows the elbow curves for all power datasets.
In all cases, PCA was used to estimate the scaling factor ($\sigma$). Since spectral clustering algorithm implements K-means in the last step, the results are affected by the random initialization of centroids, and thus the structure of the elbow curve for the subsequent number of $k$’s would be affected. To avoid this bias, we assigned fixed initial seeds values (i.e., the same specific data points for initialization of K-means) for all $k$ values in forming the elbow curve. As shown in Fig \ref{fig12}, the noisy structure of data brings about inconsistencies in descending trend of SSE values as $k$ increases, though the general pattern of flattening for measurement is preserved, except for case (d). For case (d), since the elbow curve within the considered range of $k$ is not presented, estimating $k$ based on this plot has not been considered. Upon forming the elbow curves, we have manually selected the number of clusters by visual evaluation of the rate of decrease in values for the internal validation.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Fig12.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig12}Elbow curves for a) power dataset 1, b) power dataset 2, c) power dataset 3, and d) power dataset 4}
\end{figure}
To associate the cluster label with the ground truth, we form a matrix that relates the cluster number (assigned by the algorithm) for each observation to its corresponding ground truth label and call it the association matrix henceforth. As an example, Table \ref{table2} shows the association matrix for power dataset 1. The association matrix is mapped to a confusion matrix for the performance quantification. In forming the confusion matrix, clusters are labeled based on the majority vote. In order to provide insight on labeling clusters with the majority vote, let us consider cluster number 23, which contains 20 feature vectors (i.e., data points) in total. It could be seen that 19 data points are from class 14501 and one instance is from class 18001. Considering the dominance of class 14501, it is assigned as the label for cluster 23.
\begin{table}[]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{Table2.pdf}
\caption{\label{table2}Association matrix between generated clusters and ground truth label (power dataset 1)}
\end{table}
Ideally, the number of generated clusters will be the same as the number of ground truth labels. However, as the number of generated clusters exceeds the number of ground truth labels, clusters with the same label will be merged to form the confusion matrix. For example, the contents of column 20 to 24 in Table \ref{table2} are cumulated and the groups are merged since they all represent class 14501. Fig \ref{fig13} shows the output of mapping to form the confusion matrix for power dataset 1.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Fig13.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig13}The equivalent confusion matrix mapped from association matrix (power dataset1)}
\end{figure}
The final clusters after assigning the associated label and (manual) merging of similar clusters is shown in Fig \ref{fig14}. Except for class 14301 that has similar signature representations with 14101, all other classes were retrieved and preserved through the clustering process. It must be noted that the abovementioned process of manual merging was performed only for visualization of clusters in association with the classes in the physical environment. Nonetheless, the quantitative performance assessment of the clustering process was carried out with respect to the direct output of the clustering algorithms through the association matrix (Table \ref{table2}) without any cluster merging.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{Fig14.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig14}Cluster representation after (manual) merging for power dataset 1. Each label represents an appliance transition state}
\end{figure}
To demonstrate the effectiveness of the Iterative Eigengap Search (IES) that is the focus of this study, for comparison, we provided the outcome of the following spectral clustering algorithms: (1) similar to our work, the ZP self-tuning technique \cite{13}, and MEG-CD \cite{53} are automated spectral clustering methods, (2) FUSE spectral clustering \cite{54} is specifically focused on multi-scale datasets; (3) and NJW \cite{8} and CPQR-based from \cite{55} are conventional spectral clustering algorithms that call for parameter inputs. In addition, the results for the internal validation, which is commonly used for the validation of clustering methods, as well as the legacy eigengap heuristic have been presented.
Calculated from the association matrix, Table \ref{Table3} presents the performance metrics of different methods on all the datasets. Five-fold cross-validation was used for evaluation, and the average is reported for the accuracy, precision, recall, and F-measure metrics to avoid bias in the quantification of performance metrics. As the values in Table \ref{Table3} indicate, Iterative Eigengap Search with global scaling shows the best performance. Followed by that is the Iterative Eigengap Search with local scaling with fewer number of clusters, which is more compatible with the natural separation of patterns in the feature space. As noted, Iterative Eigengap Search does not require any range for the number of clusters. For the ZP self-tuning \cite{13} and MEG-CD \cite{53}, although considered as automated clustering, they required a range of initial values to optimize over the number of clusters. Therefore, a range of 2 to 80 clusters for power datasets, and 2 to 20 for the cell cycle dataset were considered for ZP self-tuning \cite{13} and internal validation. A range of 100 to 3000 with intervals of 100 for $\sigma$ was considered for MEG-CD \cite{53}. We chose this range based on our empirical observations on the dataset. Since ZP self-tuning \cite{13} underestimates the number of clusters, it does not result in an accurate outcome, specifically for the power datasets. Similarly, legacy eigengap heuristic leads to a smaller number of clusters and consequently low performance due to its incapability of accounting for the multi-scale nature. MEG-CD \cite{53} performed better in terms of estimating the number of clusters but the inaccurate estimation of $\sigma$ (shown by the internal validation) led to a low performance in clustering. For NJW \cite{8}, since both $K$ and $\sigma$ are estimated manually, $K$ is assumed to be equal to the number of classes (input information), and $\sigma$ was selected such that the clusters with smallest distortion are obtained. The results show that while $K$ was manually selected to its true value, the performance in all the cases falls behind the Iterative Eigengap Search. For the recent multi-scale clustering algorithm, FUSE \cite{54}, the IES outperforms as well. Also, CPQR-based from \cite{55} showed to be less accurate compared to the IES in all cases, but the approach has the highest computational efficiency among all the methods. The last column in Table \ref{Table3} shows the total analysis runtime. It must be noted that for the NJW algorithm \cite{8} ZP self-tuning \cite{13}, and MEG-CD \cite{53}, we had to define a range for $\sigma$ and $K$, which consequently affects the reported runtime. Based on the extent of familiarity with the problem, a higher or lower range can be defined, which can significantly change the reported time.
\begin{table}[]
\centering
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{@{}llccccccc@{}}
\toprule
Method & Dataset & \multicolumn{1}{l}{$\sigma$ selection} & $K$ & Accuracy$^{\text{a}}$ & Precision$^{\text{a}}$ & Recall$^{\text{a}}$ & F-measure$^{\text{a}}$ & Runtime(s) \\ \midrule
\multirow{5}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}IES with Global\\ Scale (leaf node \\ clusters)\end{tabular}} & Power data1 & \multirow{5}{*}{PCA} & 44 & \textbf{0.97} & \textbf{0.97} & \textbf{0.97} & \textbf{0.96} & 15 \\
& Power data2 & & 40 & \textbf{0.89} & \textbf{0.85} & \textbf{0.89} & \textbf{0.86} & 9 \\
& Power data3 & & 38 & \textbf{0.97} & \textbf{0.96} & \textbf{0.97} & \textbf{0.96} & 24 \\
& Power data4 & & 60 & \textbf{0.96} & \textbf{0.95} & \textbf{0.96} & \textbf{0.95} & 78 \\
& Cell Cycle data & & 8 & 0.70 & 0.71 & 0.70 & 0.68 & 0.4 \\ \midrule
\multirow{5}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}One step IES with \\ Local Scale (ESL)\end{tabular}} & Power data1 & \multirow{5}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Local \\ Scaling\end{tabular}} & 27 & 0.88 & 0.84 & 0.88 & 0.85 & 6 \\
& Power data2 & & 10 & 0.84 & 0.78 & 0.84 & 0.80 & 4 \\
& Power data3 & & 25 & 0.93 & 0.89 & 0.93 & 0.90 & 8 \\
& Power data4 & & 17 & 0.93 & 0.89 & 0.93 & 0.91 & 13 \\
& Cell Cycle data$^{\text{b}}$ & & 4 & 0.67 & 0.58 & 0.67 & 0.62 & 1.6 \\ \midrule
\multirow{5}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}IES with Local \\ Scale (leaf node \\ clusters)\end{tabular}} & Power data1 & \multirow{5}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Local \\ Scaling\end{tabular}} & 30 & 0.90 & 0.87 & 0.90 & 0.88 & 55 \\
& Power data2 & & 24 & 0.89 & 0.84 & 0.89 & 0.85 & 43 \\
& Power data3 & & 28 & 0.93 & 0.89 & 0.93 & 0.91 & 50 \\
& Power data4 & & 20 & 0.94 & 0.90 & 0.94 & 0.92 & 47 \\
& Cell Cycle data & & 4 & 0.67 & 0.58 & 0.67 & 0.62 & 6.9 \\ \midrule
\multirow{5}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Internal \\ validation\end{tabular}} & Power data1 & \multirow{5}{*}{PCA} & 55 & 0.93 & 0.89 & 0.92 & 0.91 & 89$^{\text{c}}$ \\
& Power data2 & & 56 & 0.87 & 0.83 & 0.87 & 0.85 & 40 \\
& Power data3 & & 45 & 0.94 & 0.94 & 0.94 & 0.93 & 201 \\
& Power data4 & & N/A$^{\text{d}}$ & N/A & N/A & N/A & N/A & 1201 \\
& Cell Cycle data & & 14 & \textbf{0.73} & \textbf{0.73} & \textbf{0.73} & \textbf{0.72} & 4.5 \\ \midrule
\multirow{5}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Legacy\\ Eigengap\end{tabular}} & Power data1 & \multirow{5}{*}{PCA} & 3 & 0.44 & 0.25 & 0.44 & 0.30 & 1 \\
& Power data2 & & 3 & 0.37 & 0.17 & 0.3 & 0.22 & \textless{}1 \\
& Power data3 & & 6 & 0.60 & 0.36 & 0.59 & 0.44 & 5 \\
& Power data4 & & 5 & 0.51 & 0.26 & 0.51 & 0.35 & 15 \\
& Cell Cycle data & & 4 & 0.66 & 0.58 & 0.66 & 0.62 & 1 \\ \midrule
\multirow{5}{*}{NJW \cite{8}} & Power data1 & \multirow{5}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Least \\ Distortion\end{tabular}} & 16$^{\text{e}}$ & 0.82 & 0.73 & 0.82 & 0.76 & 30$^{\text{c}}$ \\
& Power data2 & & 16 & 0.66 & 0.61 & 0.66 & 0.61 & 20 \\
& Power data3 & & 12 & 0.89 & 0.82 & 0.89 & 0.85 & 115 \\
& Power data4 & & 15 & 0.54 & 0.30 & 0.54 & 0.38 & 520 \\
& Cell Cycle data & & 5 & 0.63 & 0.55 & 0.63 & 0.58 & 6 \\ \midrule
\multirow{5}{*}{MEG-CD \cite{53}} & Power data1 & \multirow{5}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Local \\ Scaling\end{tabular}} & 12 & 0.47 & 0.29 & 0.47 & 0.34 & 7$^{\text{c}}$ \\
& Power data2 & & 6 & 0.32 & 0.13 & 0.32 & 0.17 & 4 \\
& Power data3 & & 7 & 0.58 & 0.35 & 0.58 & 0.43 & 34 \\
& Power data4 & & 3 & 0.51 & 0.26 & 0.51 & 0.35 & 111 \\
& Cell Cycle data & & 2 & 0.48 & 0.30 & 0.48 & 0.35 & 2 \\ \midrule
\multirow{5}{*}{FUSE \cite{54}} & Power data1 & \multirow{5}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Local \\ Scaling\end{tabular}} & 16$^{\text{e}}$ & 0.76 & 0.66 & 0.76 & 0.69 & 27 \\
& Power data2 & & 16 & 0.68 & 0.53 & 0.68 & 0.58 & 19 \\
& Power data3 & & 12 & 0.86 & 0.78 & 0.86 & 0.81 & 17 \\
& Power data4 & & 15 & 0.94 & 0.90 & 0.94 & 0.92 & 50 \\
& Cell Cycle data & & 5 & 0.42 & 0.24 & 0.42 & 0.30 & 1.3 \\ \midrule
\multirow{5}{*}{CPQR-based from \cite{55}} & Power data1 & \multirow{5}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Local \\ Scaling\end{tabular}} & 16$^{\text{e}}$ & 0.80 & 0.76 & 0.80 & 0.77 & 2 \\
& Power data2 & & 16 & 0.83 & 0.76 & 0.83 & 0.80 & 1 \\
& Power data3 & & 12 & 0.86 & 0.75 & 0.86 & 0.80 & 2 \\
& Power data4 & & 15 & 0.91 & 0.84 & 0.91 & 0.87 & 4 \\
& Cell Cycle data & & 5 & 0.44 & 0.26 & 0.44 & 0.32 & 1.3 \\ \midrule
\multirow{5}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Self-tuning \\ ZP \cite{13}\end{tabular}} & Power data1 & \multirow{5}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Local\\ Scaling\end{tabular}} & 3 & 0.47 & 0.23 & 0.45 & 0.30 & 445$^{\text{c}}$ \\
& Power data2 & & 2 & 0.40 & 0.16 & 0.40 & 0.23 & 225 \\
& Power data3 & & 4 & 0.81 & 0.67 & 0.81 & 0.73 & 584 \\
& Power data4 & & 4 & 0.92 & 0.85 & 0.92 & 0.88 & 850 \\
& Cell Cycle data & & 4 & 0.63 & 0.53 & 0.63 & 0.57 & 3 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\begin{tablenotes}
\small
\item ${}^{a}$ These values are calculated based on the weighted average of each label.
\item ${}^{b}$ For this dataset, only one iteration is observed by using a local scaling parameter.
\item ${}^{c}$ Results of these columns with these methods are affected by the range of the considered parameters.
\item ${}^{d}$ Not applicable since the elbow curve structure is not formed in the identified range.
\item ${}^{e}$ $K$ for this approach is manually set to the number of classes since $K$ needs to be known in advance.
\end{tablenotes}
\caption{Performance quantification of different methods (Performance metrics are averaged over 5-fold cross-validation).} \label{Table3}
\end{table}
To provide a more accurate context for comparing the clustering outcome, two important factors of clustering quality were taken into account: (1) the ratio of the generated clusters to the number of class labels and (2) the ratio of the class labels retrieved after clustering. The former indicator shows how close the number of clusters is to the number of ground truth labels. Ideally, this value is equal to 1 when all the ground truth observations of each class are contained in one distinct cluster. The latter indicator denotes the percentage of class labels that possess a separate cluster after forming the confusion matrix. A value of 1 indicates the ideal case. However, the similarity between different classes and their significant unbalanced distribution can reduce this value (e.g., in a case where instances of a very small class are put in a cluster that also contains a ratio of a very large class, the majority vote selects the larger class). Fig \ref{fig15} presents the variation of these indicators versus F-measure for power datasets only. Each point in Fig \ref{fig15} represents one of the power datasets. As shown in Fig \ref{fig15}-a, IES with local scaling maintains a better balance between the 1st indicator and the performance. On the other hand, IES with global scaling results in better performance for all the cases at the cost of generating a larger number of clusters. Regardless of the number of clusters, the application of PCA for estimation of the global scaling factor results in improved performance. Considering the 2nd indicator, as shown in Fig \ref{fig15}-b, IES with global scaling outperforms in recalling class labels with high F-measure values (three out of four cases), which could be interpreted as the ability to retrieve natural patterns.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{Fig15a.pdf}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{Fig15b.pdf}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{\label{fig15} Variation of cluster quality indicators versus F-measure for (a) generated number of clusters, (b) ability for retrieving natural patterns. For the legend of this plot, IESG denotes IES with global scale (leaf node clusters); ESL denotes one step IES with local scale; IESL denotes IES with local scale (leaf node clusters)}
\end{figure}
In order to provide insight on the computational cost of these techniques, Fig \ref{fig16} presents the run-time for different methods. All the analyses were carried out through MATLAB implementation. As shown in this figure, eigengap search (only one iteration) with local scaling is the most computationally effective approach but it sacrifices the efficacy of results (as discussed from Fig \ref{fig15}(a) and (b) and Table \ref{Table3}). As expected, IES with local scaling generally takes more time compared to IES with global scaling. The result of the comparable self-tuning approach \cite{13} is excluded here to avoid bias since the publically available code was partially implemented with C++, which is known to be more efficient compared to MATLAB. However, since it considers a range of number for clustering as the post-processing step, the results are more computationally expensive unless a narrow range based on the knowledge of the domain is selected. In general, spectral clustering methods are very applicable in different domains. However, the computational cost can get high given the inherent $\mathcal{O}(n^3)$ complexity for eigenvector decomposition. To further improve the computational efficiency, different approximation methods could be adopted for large-scale datasets (e.g., \cite{26,42,43}).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.55\textwidth]{Fig16.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig16} Comparison of analysis runtime}
\end{figure}
To reflect on the computational efficiency and evaluate the impact of the dataset size on the runtime, we performed an experiment on larger datasets as well. To this end, we merged all power datasets and randomly sampled data points to construct datasets with the desired sizes. In cases that the size of the desired dataset was larger than the mentioned merged dataset, we created synthetic data observations by adding white noise to the original data points for each class. Increasing the number of data points in each class was proportional to the original size of each class. Different datasets with the sizes of 1K, 5K, 10K, and 15K were created for this experiment. All the analyses in this study were carried out on an Intel Xeon CPU 3.5 GHz with 16 GB ram through MATLAB implementation. We have provided the results in Fig \ref{fig17} for different algorithms. For FUSE \cite{54}, NJW \cite{8}, and the CPQR-based from \cite{55}, the number of clusters was set to the number of classes since these methods do not automatically estimate $K$. For self-tuning ZP \cite{13}, as it requires an optimization process over a range of $K$, we used a range of $\pm5$ numbers with respect to the actual number of classes as the estimation (i.e., the range includes 10 values in addition to the selected one by the algorithm). Similarly, for MEG-CD \cite{53}, an optimization over a range of $\sigma$ is required in which we considered 5 values higher and 5 values lower compared to the optimal selected value by the algorithm. As shown, the runtime of IESG was lower compared to the FUSE \cite{54} and ZP \cite{13}, and almost similar to MEG-CD \cite{53} for larger datasets. The higher runtime of IESG compared to the NJW \cite{8} is intuitive and due to the fact that NJW was used as the standard SC in our search tree framework for automated clustering at each node and was run iteratively on different segments of the data. The analysis involved for each node included the $\sigma$ estimation with PCA analysis and eigengap determination. Also, CPQR-based from \cite{55}, which calls for the number of clusters as an input, had the highest efficiency in the runtime compared to the others. Comparing with the automated or multi-scale methods that call for an optimization process (i.e., ZP, FUSE, and MEG-CD), IESG shows to be practical and scalable in terms of computational efficiency on a larger amount of data.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.55\textwidth]{Fig17.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig17} Runtime across a range of datasets with varying number of observations}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
We have proposed and evaluated an Iterative Eigengap Search (IES) heuristic for automated spectral clustering of multi-scale and higher dimensional feature spaces. The proposed heuristic does not require \textit{a priori} assumption for the number of clusters ($K$) or scaling parameter of affinity measures ($\sigma$) including a range of values for the number of clusters. The algorithm iteratively searches for eigengaps at different scales of the feature space along a tree structure to partition and refine generated clusters with eigengap heuristic. The scaling parameter is estimated through data-driven methods using (1) a PCA-based global scaling factor or (2) using a local-scaling factor that quantifies local scales by measuring the distance of each data point with its nearest neighbors. The scaling parameters are updated at each node of the tree to reveal the dissimilarities in the local structure of a feature space. We have evaluated the performance of the proposed heuristic on several real-world datasets with multiple classes. The datasets are of higher dimensions with multi-scale and heterogeneous nature. The performance of the IES has been compared against several well-known fundamental spectral clustering methods and an internal validation approach that seeks to minimize the dispersion of clustering outcome. The performance assessments showed that the IES heuristic outperforms comparable approaches in terms of accuracy (an average of 90\% for most of the evaluated cases) and capability of finding (recovering) natural partitions in a feature space.
\bibliographystyle{unsrtnat}
|
\section{Introduction}
The progenitor system that gives rise to a gamma-ray burst (GRB) has long been an unresolved problem, but a general framework has emerged. Long GRBs appear to be associated with massive stars and short GRBs with the merger of two compact objects (reviews that compile and discuss the evidence behind these associations for both long and short bursts include \cite{pir04, ZM04, Mesz06, GRRF09,KZ15,Lev16}; for short bursts specifically, see \cite{LRR07,Berg14,DAvanz15}).
A black-hole (BH) accretion disk system is a plausible outcome of these cataclysmic events \citep{Woos93,MW99,Heg03,FM13,Fry15}, although it is possible that these progenitors produce a highly magnetized ($B \gtrsim 10^{14}$ Gauss) and potentially hypermassive ($M \gtrsim 2M_{\odot}$) neutron star (NS) after the collapse/merger \citep{Usov92,DT92,Thomp94,ZM01,Mazz14,Row14,Metz15,Rea15,SD18}. The BH-disk system has been shown to be a viable engine for the GRB jet, from the standpoint of the timescales and energetics involved (e.g., consider the energy available from a $20 M_{\odot}$ star accreting $5 M_{\odot}$ at a rate of $.01 - 0.1 M_{\odot}s^{-1}$; for more discussion on this, see, for example, \cite{PWF99}).
Observationally, we see BH-accretion disks in active galactic nuclei (which can, in many ways, can be considered scaled cousins of GRBs; \cite{Nem12,Zhang13,wu16,LR18}), and infer they are behind the relativistic jets observed in these objects.
It was suggested in the 1970's \citep{bz77} that a magnetized BH-accretion disk system is capable of launching a powerful jet through the so-called Blandford-Znajek (BZ) process. The energy reservoir for the BZ process is the rotational energy of the central BH, extracted as the BH rotates in an external magnetic field. The process can be envisioned in a number of ways - for example, in terms of the torque exerted by the BH on magnetic flux tubes threading the horizon, and/or in terms of a dc-circuit analogy (a current is induced by changing magnetic flux near the horizon, and both the BH and force-free region around it have some effective impedance. One can calculate the power transmitted to the force-free region via Ohm's law). We refer the reader to the discussions in \cite{MT82} for a detailed analysis of both of these formulations.\footnote{The BZ process can also be modeled as a Penrose process. See \cite{BCP15} for a review and introductory discussion of Penrose processes and their wave analogues.}
No matter how one formulates the problem, the process reduces to the essential point that - given some extant magnetic flux around the BH - frame dragging effects near the BH horizon cause field lines closer to the BH to rotate faster than those further from the BH. The consequence of this can be (particularly if the angular velocity of the magnetic flux tubes rotate at approximately half the rate of the BH; \cite{MT82}) a powerful Poynting flux generated along the BH spin axis.
In addition, recent simulations have shown that BZ jets can realistically be launched in spinning BH-accretion disk systems \citep{LWB00, mg04, Nag11, tch11, McK12,Pen13, Brom16, Par18}), including those resulting from double NS mergers \citep{S17, Ruiz18}. The efficiency of this process in terms of extraction of the BH spin energy and/or accretion rate is discussed in \cite{mg04,mck05,tch11}. These simulations seem to indicate that the framework of the BZ mechanism powering a relativistic GRB jet is feasible (for additional detailed discussion of BZ jets in GRBs, see \cite{LWB00,LRR02,tm12,Lei13,Liu15,Lei17,xie17}; recent simulations and discussion of GRB jet launch in general can be found in \cite{Wang08,Mor10,Naga11,Miz13, LC13, LC16,Ito15,Harr18}).
A successful jet of course needs the power to make its way through any material surrounding the poles. For long GRBs in particular, we expect some amount of material (from a few to $\sim 10 M_{\odot}$) from the massive stellar collapse surrounding the inner engine (a so-called cocoon \cite{RR02,Laz05,Mors07}). In what follows, we assume GRB emission comes from a successfully launched relativistic jet - i.e. a jet that has indeed made its way through any surrounding material, and has only deposited a small fraction of its energy in the cocoon (see \cite{LML15} and references therein for a discussion of the issues involved in a successful jet launch).
Under the assumption that both long and short GRBs are powered by a successfully launched BZ jet, we constrain the necessary magnetic field and BH mass, assuming a rapidly rotating BH. We also explore how these constraints affect our progenitor models in terms of what we can say about the progenitor system's magnetic field and angular momentum.
Our paper is organized as follows: In \S 2, we discuss the theoretical framework of a BZ jet and the assumptions we make in our calculations. In \S 3, we present our results, exploring constraints put on the magnetic field and BH mass of long and short GRBs. We also make an estimate of the magnetic field of the progenitor system assuming magnetic flux conservation. In \S 4, we discuss magnetic field growth in GRB disks and potential implications for producing a magnetically arrested disk (MAD) scenario. In \S 5, we explore in more detail the necessary conditions for progenitors of GRBs to produce the required angular momentum to launch a BZ jet. Conclusions are given in \S 8.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,height=2.8in]{BHspinsXRBAGN.png}
\caption{BH spin parameters inferred from 10 X-ray binaries (blue dots), and 20 AGN (green dots). Data was taken from tables in McClintock et al., 2014, for the X-ray binaries, and Reynolds, 2014, for the AGN.}
\label{fig:bhspins}
\end{figure}
\section{Theoretical Framework and Assumptions}
The analysis below is carried out in the context that the GRB jet is a result of the BZ process. We can distill the details of the BZ process into a relatively simple expression for the luminosity from the jet (see, e.g., \cite{TNM10,TG15}):
\begin{equation}
\centering
\begin{aligned}
L_{BZ} = & (kfc^{5}/64\pi G^{2})a^{2}\phi_{BH}^{2}M_{BH}^{-2} \\ \\
& \approx 10^{53} {\rm erg} \ (a/0.9)^{2}(\phi_{BH}/10^{29}{\rm G}cm^{2})^{2}(5M_{\odot}/M_{BH})^{2}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\noindent where k is a geometrical factor related to the magnetic field geometry (of order $\sim 0.05$), and $f$ is a correction factor related to the BH spin $a = Jc/GM_{BH}^{2}$ ($J$ being the BH angular momentum). For $a \lesssim 0.95$, $f \approx 1$. The parameter $\phi_{BH}$ is the magnetic flux near the horizon, and $M_{BH}$ is the mass of the BH. Again, although this equation was originally derived for slowly spinning ($a \sim 0.1$) BHs, it has been shown to describe the BZ luminosity from more rapidly spinning BHs (up to $a \sim 0.95$) within the correction factor $f$ (for additional discussion of the validity of equation 1, see \cite{mck05, TNM10,TG15}).
If the GRB ultimately derives its power from the rotational energy of the central BH via the BZ jet, the observed luminosity of the GRB, $L_{GRB}$, is some fraction $\eta$ of $L_{BZ}$: $L_{GRB} = \eta L_{BZ}$.
Under this basic premise, we can use the observed GRB prompt luminosity $L_{GRB}$ to explore the parameter space for which this equation is viable.
Throughout our paper, we assume an efficiency factor $\eta$ of $0.1$ - i.e. $10$ percent of of the Blanford-Znajek jet power goes in to producing the gamma-ray luminosity. The efficiency of conversion of jet energy to GRB radiation has been discussed extensively in the literature (see, e.g., \cite{guet01,lrz04,fp06}). Although we do not have a definitive handle on this number $\eta$ either observationally or theoretically, our value of $0.1$ is consistent with (and even conservative compared to) estimates from GRB afterglow observations \citep{lrz04,fp06,rp09}. Note that our results below for the values of the magnetic field and BH masses will scale accordingly, changing by a factor of about 3 for every order of magnitude change in the efficiency $\eta$.
We assume a jet opening angle of $\theta \approx 10^{\circ}$, so that the luminosity in the GRB jet is $L_{GRB} = \frac{1}{2}(1-{\rm{cos}}(\theta))L_{iso}$, where $L_{iso}$ is the isotropic equivalent luminosity. Although - again - we don't have extremely strong constraints on the jet opening angle from observations of long or short GRBs, in a number a cases a clear break in the afterglow light curve suggests the presence of jet with opening angles of $\sim 5$ to $10$ degrees (for example, see results reported in \cite{Ghir04,Berg14,fong15,Dain17,Wang18}). In some cases, the inferred opening angle can be less by a factor of 2 or so \citep{Wang18}. We point out the inferred average opening angle for long GRBs seems to be somewhat larger than that of short GRBs, although a value of $\theta = 10^{\circ}$ lies in the range for both populations (see, e.g. Figure 18 of \cite{Berg14}). A larger jet opening angle will require more power from our BZ jet; hence, we consider $\theta \sim 10^{\circ}$ , a conservative estimate in the sense that it requires more extreme values of magnetic fields and BH masses compared to smaller jet opening angles. \\
We also assume a roughly poloidal magnetic field configuration on the BH, which produces the strongest possible jet (the details of the field structure are contained in the factor $k$ in equation 1 above). The magnetic field is estimated from the magnetic flux through the relationship $\phi \approx B \Omega R^{2}$, where $B$ is the magnetic field, $\Omega$ is the solid angle of the jet, and $R$ is the Kerr radius given by $R = GM/c^{2} + \sqrt{(GM/c^{2})^{2} - a^{2}}$. Note that expressing magnetic flux in terms of magnetic field and relating the Kerr radius to the BH mass, we see that:
\begin{equation}
\centering
L_{GRB} \approx 10^{50} {\rm erg} (\eta/0.1) (a/0.9)^{2}(B/10^{16}{\rm G})^{2}(M_{BH}/5M_{\odot})^{2}
\end{equation}
Throughout this paper, we assume an $a=0.9$, which is consistent (and in some cases comfortably above) the value needed to launch a GRB jet according to the simulations referenced in the introduction (e.g. \cite{,McK12, Ruiz18}). Such high values of BH spin have indeed been inferred through observations of stellar mass BHs in X-ray binaries, as well as in supermassive BHs powering AGN (for reviews on these measurements, see \cite{MNS14} and \cite{Rey14}). Figure~\ref{fig:bhspins} shows BH spin parameters from X-ray binary observations (blue circles) and AGNs (green circles), using data from the previous two references. The data indicate that the majority of these objects have high values BH spins $a \gtrsim 0.6$.
On the other hand, estimates of the spins of remnant BHs from BH-BH merger seen by LIGO indicate very low ($a \sim 0.05$) inferred spin values. Hence, the distribution of BH spin parameter and its dependence on the progenitor system is still an open question. We discuss the implications of our relatively high spin constraint - particularly in terms of the requirements it puts on GRB progenitor angular momentum - in \S 5.2 below.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in,height=2.7in]{BfMbhLONG2.png}\includegraphics[width=3.5in,height=2.7in]{BfMbhSHORT2.png}
\caption{Inferred magnetic field as a function of BH mass for 22 long GRBs (left panel) and 22 short GRBs (right panel). Each blue line represents a different observed GRB luminosity, with luminosity increasing from bottom to top. The spin parameter of the BH is assumed to be $a=0.9$.}
\label{fig:bfmbh}
\end{figure*}
\section{Results}
\subsection{Long GRBs}
Given the assumptions above, we can explore the range of magnetic fields and BH masses required to produce observed GRB luminosities. For a representative set of long GRB luminosities, we use those in Table 1 from \cite{wu16}. The \cite{wu16} sample is originally from \cite{sonbas15} who analyze a sample of {\em Swift} and Fermi GRBs with measurable prompt (gamma-ray) temporal statistics. For our purposes, we consider this sample representative of the long GRB population.
To estimate a reasonable range of BH masses, we assume the GRB comes from either a massive star collapse or a Helium merger (and indeed produces a BH rather than a NS inner engine). In this scenario, we can estimate the expected BH mass from the duration of the long GRB. For example, for typical long GRB durations between $\sim 20 - 100$ s, accreting at $0.1 M_{\odot}/s$ \citep{PWF99}, we need at least $2$ to $10 M_{\odot}$ of material in the disk. For the progenitors mentioned above, this leaves anywhere from a few to tens of solar masses left over to form the BH (ignoring any additional mass expelled in the process; note the black hole seed mass from the iron core is $\sim 2 M_{\odot}$ for a $10 - 15 M_{\odot}$ star before collapse; \cite{WH06}).
Within this mass range, we can then compute the magnetic field needed to satisfy equation 1, given our observed GRB luminosities. The left panel of Figure~\ref{fig:bfmbh} shows the magnetic field at the horizon as a function of BH mass, for 22 values of observed long GRB luminosities.
As one can see in this figure, for BH masses between $2$ and $10$ solar masses, we require field strengths from $\sim 5x10^{14} G$ to $\sim 10^{17} G$ to power the GRB jet. We discuss both the generation of these magnetic fields as well as the implications of such high magnetic fields in \S 4 below.
\subsubsection{Progenitor Magnetic Field}
If we naively assume all of our BH flux originated from the progenitor star of the GRB, we can make an estimate of the nascent magnetic field needed to provide our required flux on the BH. In other words, we can get a crude estimate of the progenitor (``p'') magnetic field under the simple assumption of magnetic flux conservation $B_{p}R_{p}^{2} \approx B_{BH}R_{BH}^{2}$ (where we have assumed flux conservation over the same solid angle between the progenitor and BH system).
The left panel of Figure~\ref{fig:bprog} shows a histogram of magnetic fields for a single progenitor of radius $R_{\star} = 10^{12} \rm cm$ and a remnant black hole mass of $5 M_{\odot}$, under the assumption of magnetic flux conservation. The inferred fields are roughly $\sim 10^{6}$ G. Typical {\em surface} magnetic fields of massive stars have been observed to be anywhere from 300G to 30kG \citep{wal12,hub16}. However, we are currently unable to probe the magnetic fields in the interiors of these stars, which in principle may be much larger. Recent astroseismology analysis of intermediate mass stars ($\sim 2 M_{\odot}$) using Kepler data have shown that some stars exhibit evidence of interior fields $\sim 10^{6}$ to $10^{7}$ G \citep{stel16}. Hence, a dynamo in the convective cores of massive stars may indeed be able to generate such fields. Even if this is a rare phenomenon, it is possible that GRBs come from the subset of those stars able to produce such fields.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in,height=2.7in]{BproglongLOG.png}\includegraphics[width=3.5in,height=2.7in]{BprogshortLOG.png}
\caption{Inferred magnetic field of GRB progenitor star with radius $R_{\star} = 10^{12}$ cm, assuming magnetic flux is conserved (left panel). Inferred magnetic field of a NS with radius $R = 10^{6}$ cm, under the assumption that the short GRB is a result of the merger of two NSs, and the magnetic flux of the two NSs was conserved and equal to the magnetic flux of the short GRB jet (right panel).}
\label{fig:bprog}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Short GRBs}
As mentioned above, we assume the progenitor system for short GRBs is the merger of two NSs. We take our short GRB luminosities from \cite{fong15}, where we define GRB prompt isotropic luminosity as $E_{iso}/T_{90}$. The \cite{fong15} sample includes all short GRBs with measured redshifts, and we consider this sample representative of the short GRB population.
Because NSs fall in a fairly narrow mass range, we have a limited mass range for a resultant BH, which we take between $0.5$ and $4.0$ $M_{\odot}$. The right panel of Figure~\ref{fig:bfmbh} shows the magnetic field at the horizon as a function of BH mass, for 22 representative values of observed short GRB luminosities. For our range of BH masses, we require field strengths from $\sim 10^{15} G$ to $\sim 10^{17} G$ to power the short GRB jet.
\subsubsection{Progenitor Magnetic Field}
We can again simply naively assume that all of the magnetic flux in the BH-accretion disk system came from the progenitor system and was conserved. Under this (admittedly overly-simplistic) assumption, we can estimate the magnetic fields of the two NSs before the merger.
The right panel of Figure~\ref{fig:bprog} shows a histogram of the inferred magnetic fields of a DNS system in which the radius of each NS is $R_{\star} = 10^{6} \rm cm$.
These fields span the range from $3x10^{14}$ G to $5x10^{15}$ G. This is in the range inferred for so-called magnetars \citep{Usov92,Thomp94}, and NSs with magnetic fields in these ranges have been invoked as the engine behind a number of astrophysical phenomena, including long and short GRBs, soft gamma-ray repeaters, fast radio bursts, and superluminous supernovae (see, for example, the discussion in \cite{Mar18}). For larger assumed NS radius (or alternatively a harder equation of state), these field strengths will decrease.
\section{On High Magnetic Fields}
The magnetic fields inferred from our analysis are extreme, and it is worth discussing how such fields in practice can be generated and sustained. A number of studies have looked at the growth of magnetic fields, particularly in the case of double NS mergers. In these systems, \cite{Ros02} showed that massive fields $\sim 10^{17} G$ can be produced through differential rotation of the central object in a DNS merger. Both \cite{PR06} and \cite{Ob10} showed that Kelvin-Helmholtz instabilities can amplify fields to $\sim 10^{16} G$ on very short timescales ($\sim ms$), although \cite{Ob10} argue these fields are not long lasting (only a few milliseconds). \cite{ZM13} examined turbulent amplification of magnetic fields in DNS systems and showed fields up to $\sim 10^{16} G$ can be produced.
For the more general case of a BH-accretion disk system, it is well known that a small extant magnetic field in the disk can be amplified by the magneto-rotational instability (MRI) \citep{V59, Chan60,AH73,BH91}.
\subsection{MRI Growth}
Simulations that examine the MRI in accretion disks\footnote{See \cite{FA13} and references therein for a review.} generally start with some seed magnetic field $B_{o}$, which grows at a rate $B=B_{o}e^{\omega t}$; the parameter $\omega$ is the maximum growth rate of the MRI, $\omega = (1/2 )r d\varpi/dr$, where $\varpi$ is the rotational velocity in the disk \citep{BH98}.
From this equation for the growth rate, we can estimate the magnetic field growth from the MRI in the context of GRB disks. Because $\varpi$ (which for our purposes here we simply take as the Keplerian velocity in the disk) depends on radius, we evaluate the maximum growth rate at some fiducial radius. One possibility for this radius is the innermost stable circular orbit (ISCO), $R_{isco} = 6GM_{BH}/c^{2}$ for a non-rotating BH. For prograde rotation, which is a reasonable assumption for the BH and the disk, since they arose from the same (rotating) progenitor, the ISCO will be smaller than this and is given by:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
R_{isco} & = GM_{BH}/c^{2}(3 + Z_{2} + \sqrt{(3-Z_{1})(3+Z_{1}+2Z_{2})} \\
& Z_{1} = 1 + (1-x^{2})^{1/3}[(1+x)^{1/3}+(1-x)^{1/3}]\\
& Z_{2} = \sqrt{3x^{2}+Z_{1}^{2}}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\noindent and $x = a/R_{Sch} = ac^{2}/2M_{BH}$.
For the range of BH masses and spins we consider above for both long and short GRBs, we find the maximum growth rate $\omega \sim 10^{5} s^{-1}$. This means for a seed field $B_{o} \sim \mu$G, the MRI will take only $t \sim 5x10^{-4}$s to reach fields of $B \sim 10^{15}$G at the maximum growth rate. This timescale is much shorter than the relevant timescales in both long and short GRBs, $ M/\dot{M} \sim $ seconds (where, again, $M$ is the mass in the disk and $\dot{M}$ is the accretion rate). In other words, if the MRI operates in a GRB disk in the linear regime, it is an efficient way to grow the magnetic field to the values we require to power the GRB-BZ jet.
This is of course a simple analytic estimate and ignores the non-linearities that come into play as the field develops. In particular, we've not considered at what point the magnetic field growth may saturate in the GRB disk. This is not a well understood problem and depends on many factors related to the microphysics as well as global structure of the disk. \cite{PWF99} estimated GRB magnetic fields in a BZ context, assuming that the magnetic field energy density reaches $1\%$ of the accretion disk kinetic energy density: $B^{2}/8\pi \sim 0.01\rho v^{2}$, where $\rho$ is the density in the disk and $v$ is the velocity. Using an $\alpha-$ disk prescription \citep{SS73}, they estimated magnetic fields in the range of $10^{14} - 10^{16} G$ (see their Table 4). Allowing the magnetic field energy to reach closer to equipartition with the disk energy can allow fields up to $10^{18} G$, under these arguments.
We are also neglecting that the field grows at a different rate in different parts of the disk (the growth rate is fastest at the ISCO), and that the orbital velocity is not Keplerian near the horizon. Numerical simulations (see, e.g., figure 7 in \cite{SDGN12}) indicate that magnetically-driven turbulence becomes dominant in the disk, and thus that the magnetic field is large, after about 500 $GM_{BH}/c^3$, or $t\sim 5\times 10^{-3}$ seconds. This is an order of magnitude longer than our rough growth time estimate above, but still far shorter than the characteristic time of the GRB. For further discussions of these issues, we refer the reader to \cite{PP05,BP07,BS13} and references therein.
\subsection{MAD Disks}
Given the possibility of growth of a large amount of magnetic flux near the ISCO of our BH-accretion disk, our system may very well be in a magnetically arrested disk (MAD) configuration \citep{NIA03}. In a MAD state, the magnetic field pressure is large enough to balance the ram pressure of the infalling matter, and the accretion can be halted or arrested. Although it is an open question whether the disk can actually maintain such a high flux near the BH, simulations seem to indicate it may be viable (see, e.g., \cite{tch11} who examined MAD disks for similar values of magnetic flux and spin that we consider here). Studies by \cite{Lis18,LTQ18} and \cite{TAM18} found that even thin disks can maintain large magnetic flux on rotating BHs and a powerful outflow is launched (note these simulations were done in the context of AGN disks).
Recently \cite{lr16,LR18} examined GRB properties in the context of the MAD model and found that the GRB variability timescale, as well as observed correlations \citep{wu16} between: {\bf a)} the bulk Lorentz factor $\Gamma$ with minimum variability timescale $t_{min}$ in the gamma-ray light curve ($t_{min} \propto \Gamma^{-4.8 \pm 1.5}$ ), and {\bf b)} gamma-ray luminosity with the minimum variability timescale in the prompt light curve ($t_{min} \propto L^{-1.1 \pm 0.1 }$) are naturally explained in a MAD model with a Blanford-Znajek jet.
In \cite{LR18}, accretion rates of long GRBs were estimated in the context of the MAD model using
\begin{equation}
\dot{M} = (0.1 M_{\odot} s^{-1}) a^{-2}\eta^{-1}\epsilon_{MAD} (L_{GRB}/10^{52}erg s^{-1})
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\epsilon_{MAD} \sim 0.001$ is a parameter estimating the degree of ``arrestedness'' of the accretion flow in the disc. Using isotropic equivalent luminosities, they found accretion rates for long GRBs $\sim 0.5 M_{\odot}/s$, although ranging from $\sim 0.005$ to $10 M_{\odot}$ in the most extreme cases (see their Table 1). Because the average luminosity of our sample of short GRBs is lower than that of the long GRBs by roughly an order of magnitude, the accretion rates for short GRBs will be correspondingly lower by the same factor (i.e. $\dot{M} \sim 0.05 M_{\odot}/s$). Correcting for the opening angle of the jet, these rates would drop by a factor of $\sim 0.1$ (our assumed jet opening angle in this work). \\
Finally, we briefly comment on QED processes that arise in the presence of strong magnetic fields. When the energy associated with the gyro-frequency of an electron ($\omega_{g}$) is equal to twice its rest mass ($m_{e}$) energy, pair production can occur in the presence of a magnetic field. This requires $h \omega_{g} \gtrsim 2m_{e}c^{2}$, where $\omega_{g} = eB/m_{e}c$ . Therefore in fields greater than $B \gtrsim 2m_{e}^{2}c^{3}/h \approx 4 x 10^{13} G$, electron-positron pairs can be produced \citep{DH83}. Some amount of pair production is necessary to keep the region around the BH force-free which allows the BZ process to operate with maximum power output \citep{MT82}. However, a third order QED process - photon splitting - can suppress pair production in high magnetic field (this has long been suggested as a mechanism to explain radio quiet pulsars \cite{BH95,BH01}), if all three channels of photon splitting operate \citep{BH01}.
In this work, we assume that neither of these processes (pair production or photon splitting) measurably compare to the energy in our magnetic field, nor do they affect the operation of the BZ process, so that they can effectively be ignored. A detailed examination of these effects in very strong magnetic fields is the subject of a future investigation.
\section{Progenitor Angular Momentum}
Throughout this paper, we have assumed a BH spin parameter of $a \sim 0.9$. As discussed above and displayed in Figure~\ref{fig:bhspins}, there is ample observational evidence for BH spin parameters of this magnitude, in both stellar mass and supermassive BHs. Theoretically, it is still a question how to achieve these spin parameters in the process of making the BH. Below, we discuss the conditions for which that assumption is reasonable, given our long and short gamma-ray progenitors.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth, height=2.7in]{avm.pdf}
\caption{BH spin parameters as a function of core mass for stellar models over a range of zero-age main sequence mass and two metallicities~\citep{belczynski17}. }
\label{fig:avm}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Long GRBs}
Figure~\ref{fig:avm} shows the spin parameter as a function of BH mass for a variety of initial stellar masses and metallicities, using a suite of models from \cite{belczynski17}, which employs the {\em Geneva} stellar evolutionary code~\citep{Geo13}. These models assume there are no dynamo-generated magnetic fields driving coupling between layers in the stars, and give a maximum to the rotation rate of any single star. Material is accreted onto the BH layer by layer and the angular momentum added to the BH is set by the angular momentum of the accreting material: $j=min(j_{\rm infall},j_{\rm ISCO}$) where $j_{\rm infall}$ is the specific angular momentum of the accreting material and $j_{\rm ISCO}$ is the angular momentum of a disk at the innermost stable circular orbit. This equation assumes that, if there is sufficient angular momentum to form a disk, only the angular momentum at the innermost stable circular orbit is accreted onto the BH. From this process, we can estimate the spin of the BH.
A wide range of angular momenta can be produced in stellar models, depending both on mass and metallicity. Not all of these systems will actually form the BH accretion disks needed to form GRBs. The size of the disk produced in these collapsing stars is determined by the radius at which the centrifugal force of the rotating, infalling material equals the gravitational force (based on the enclosed mass). For many of these systems, there is not enough angular momentum and this radius falls below the ISCO (so that no disk forms). Some systems with enough angular momentum (corresponding to a BH spin parameter of $\sim 0.8$) do form a disk, depending on the initial properties of the progenitor and the BH mass. Figure~\ref{fig:rdisk} illustrates this point. This plot finds the radius where the centrifugal force equals gravity: $r_{\rm disk}=j^2/(G M_{\rm BH})$ where $j$ is the specific angular momentum of the infalling material, $G$ is the gravitational constant and $M_{\rm BH}$ is the mass of the BH set by the mass of the material enclosed at each Lagrangian mass point.
A number of mechanisms have been studied showing that angular momentum is transported out of stellar cores, producing even more slowly rotating cores (see, e.g., the recent review by \cite{AMR18}); these stars will not have enough angular momentum to produce GRBs \citep{JSP18}. Hence, GRBs may be the special subset of collapsing stars for which the remnant BH spin parameter is high (above 0.9).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth, height=2.7in]{rdisk.pdf}
\caption{Radius of the disk formed in the collapsing star as a function of the interior mass for the models discussed in Figure~\ref{fig:avm}. For our slowly-rotating progenitors, this disk or hang-up radius is less than the innermost stable circular orbit, meaning no stable disk is formed.}
\label{fig:rdisk}
\end{figure}
The helium merger model (produced when a NS or BH spirals into the helium core of a massive star) produces even faster rotation rates~\citep{fryer98,zhang01}. The disks formed tend to be large (above 10,000\,km) and the subsequent accretion rates are lower. The BH spins for all of these systems will quickly spin up to values above 0.8-0.9 unless the initial compact remnant mass is large compared to the helium core.
\subsection{Short GRBs}
The spin period of the remnant of a double NS merger is very much an open question and depends on a number of things, including the masses of the NSs, their equations of state, the initial spins of each NS, etc. (for a recent discussion of these issues, see \cite{Rad16,PGP17}). Using results of Newtonian merger calculations \citep{kor12} and various equation of state studies, \cite{Fry15} examined a suite of models to determine the fate of the compact remnant of a DNS merger (see, e.g. their Table 1). For core masses above $2 M_{\odot}$, they find angular momenta (column 5 of their Table 1) corresponding to remnant core spin parameters between $\sim 0.35$ and $\sim 0.65$. \cite{Zappa18} looked at the spin parameter of the BH remnant of a DNS merger using a large sample of numerical relativity simulations with different binary parameters and input physics. They find BH remnants with spin parameters between $0.6$ and $0.9$ for a wide range of models (finding an empirical relation between the the total gravitational radiation and the angular momentum of the remnant; see their Figure 4). Finally, \cite{Ruiz16} also simulated DNS mergers for equal mass, magnetized NSs with an n=1 polytrope equation of state. They find a BH remnant with $a \sim 0.74$. These initial spins from the BH remnant of a DNS merger approach the high value of the spin parameter we assumed above to explain short GRB luminosities.
\section{Conclusions}
We have examined the constraints that observed GRB luminosities place on GRB inner engine properties in the context of a BZ jet powering the GRB. Our main results are as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item{For long GRBs with BH masses in the range of $2 - 10 M_{\odot}$, and a BH spin parameter of $a \sim 0.9$, magnetic fields from $\sim 10^{17} G$ (for the less massive BHs) down to $\sim 5 x 10^{15} G$ (for more massive BHs) are needed to explain the range of observed GRB luminosities, assuming $10 \%$ of the BZ power goes into GRB emission.}
\item{For short GRBs with BH masses in the rage of $0.5 - 4 M_{\odot}$, and a BH spin parameter of $a \sim 0.9$, magnetic fields from $\sim 10^{17} G$ (for the less massive BHs) down to $\sim 10^{15} G$ (for more massive BHs) are needed to explain the observed sGRB luminosity assuming $10 \%$ efficiency.}
\item{The inferred fields of the progenitor systems under the simple assumption of magnetic flux conservation are $\sim 10^{6}$ G for single star/collapsar systems powering long GRBs, and $\sim 10^{15} G$ for double NS systems powering short GRBs.}
\item{These magnetic field values can be reached through MRI growth on timescales much shorter than the duration or variability timescales in GRBs. The consequences of such high magnetic flux include magnetically arrested disks (MADs), which have been shown to explain a number of observed phenomena in GRB light curves \citep{lr16,LR18}.}
\end{itemize}
We have assumed a relatively conservative jet opening angle of $10^{\circ}$ throughout. For more narrowly beamed systems (and therefore less emitted luminosity), the constraints on our BZ jets are lessened.
The detailed properties of GRB disks and how they ultimately relate to the BZ jet power need to be explored further. For example, the estimates in \cite{PWF99} indicate that for a constant accretion rate, the disk density will scale inversely with BH mass; therefore - under the assumption that the magnetic field is some fraction of the disk kinetic energy - higher mass BHs will result in smaller magnetic fields. This simple scaling argument, however, should be examined in detail. In particular, the physics of the accretion process and how the rate of accretion scales with BH mass (and varies throughout a GRB) are important processes that will affect this picture.
We note that that in this work, we have neglected any contribution from a jet powered by neutrino annihilation \citep{Eichler89}. For some disk models, this process could enhance jet power, possibly substantially.
Finally, simulations exploring the generation of high magnetic flux at the BH horizon and its consequences, as well as a more detailed look at the connection between progenitor angular momentum and the spin parameter of the BH remnant could help validate some of the assumptions in this work, and - more importantly - uncover the nature of the GRB inner engine.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We are indebted to the referee for a very careful reading of this manuscript and numerous valuable suggestions. N. L.-R. thanks Peter Polko and Oleg Korobkin for interesting discussions on accretion disks and DNS mergers, respectively, Greg Salvesen for discussions and references on BH spins, and Thomas Maccarone for bringing up the issue of photon splitting in strong magnetic fields. C.T. thanks the NSF Step program for financial support while some of this work was carried out. This work was supported by the US Department of Energy through the Los Alamos National Laboratory. Additional funding was provided by the Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program and the Center for Nonlinear Studies at Los Alamos National Laboratory under project number 20170508DR. Los Alamos National Laboratory is operated by Triad National Security, LLC, for the National Nuclear Security Administration of U.S. Department of Energy (Contract No. 89233218CNA000001). LA-UR-18-31627
\bibliographystyle{mnras}
\section{Introduction}
The journal \textit{Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society} (MNRAS) encourages authors to prepare their papers using \LaTeX.
The style file \verb'mnras.cls' can be used to approximate the final appearance of the journal, and provides numerous features to simplify the preparation of papers.
This document, \verb'mnras_guide.tex', provides guidance on using that style file and the features it enables.
This is not a general guide on how to use \LaTeX, of which many excellent examples already exist.
We particularly recommend \textit{Wikibooks \LaTeX}\footnote{\url{https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/LaTeX}}, a collaborative online textbook which is of use to both beginners and experts.
Alternatively there are several other online resources, and most academic libraries also hold suitable beginner's guides.
For guidance on the contents of papers, journal style, and how to submit a paper, see the MNRAS Instructions to Authors\footnote{\label{foot:itas}\url{http://www.oxfordjournals.org/our_journals/mnras/for_authors/}}.
Only technical issues with the \LaTeX\ class are considered here.
\section{Obtaining and installing the MNRAS package}
Some \LaTeX\ distributions come with the MNRAS package by default.
If yours does not, you can either install it using your distribution's package manager, or download it from the Comprehensive \TeX\ Archive Network\footnote{\url{http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/macros/latex/contrib/mnras}} (CTAN).
The files can either be installed permanently by placing them in the appropriate directory (consult the documentation for your \LaTeX\ distribution), or used temporarily by placing them in the working directory for your paper.
To use the MNRAS package, simply specify \verb'mnras' as the document class at the start of a \verb'.tex' file:
\begin{verbatim}
\documentclass{mnras}
\end{verbatim}
Then compile \LaTeX\ (and if necessary \bibtex) in the usual way.
\section{Preparing and submitting a paper}
We recommend that you start with a copy of the \texttt{mnras\_template.tex} file.
Rename the file, update the information on the title page, and then work on the text of your paper.
Guidelines for content, style etc. are given in the instructions to authors on the journal's website$^{\ref{foot:itas}}$.
Note that this document does not follow all the aspects of MNRAS journal style (e.g. it has a table of contents).
If a paper is accepted, it is professionally typeset and copyedited by the publishers.
It is therefore likely that minor changes to presentation will occur.
For this reason, we ask authors to ignore minor details such as slightly long lines, extra blank spaces, or misplaced figures, because these details will be dealt with during the production process.
Papers must be submitted electronically via the online submission system; paper submissions are not permitted.
For full guidance on how to submit a paper, see the instructions to authors.
\section{Class options}
\label{sec:options}
There are several options which can be added to the document class line like this:
\begin{verbatim}
\documentclass[option1,option2]{mnras}
\end{verbatim}
The available options are:
\begin{itemize}
\item \verb'letters' -- used for papers in the journal's Letters section.
\item \verb'onecolumn' -- single column, instead of the default two columns. This should be used {\it only} if necessary for the display of numerous very long equations.
\item \verb'doublespacing' -- text has double line spacing. Please don't submit papers in this format.
\item \verb'referee' -- \textit{(deprecated)} single column, double spaced, larger text, bigger margins. Please don't submit papers in this format.
\item \verb'galley' -- \textit{(deprecated)} no running headers, no attempt to align the bottom of columns.
\item \verb'landscape' -- \textit{(deprecated)} sets the whole document on landscape paper.
\item \verb"usenatbib" -- \textit{(all papers should use this)} this uses Patrick Daly's \verb"natbib.sty" package for citations.
\item \verb"usegraphicx" -- \textit{(most papers will need this)} includes the \verb'graphicx' package, for inclusion of figures and images.
\item \verb'useAMS' -- adds support for upright Greek characters \verb'\upi', \verb'\umu' and \verb'\upartial' ($\upi$, $\umu$ and $\upartial$). Only these three are included, if you require other symbols you will need to include the \verb'amsmath' or \verb'amsymb' packages (see section~\ref{sec:packages}).
\item \verb"usedcolumn" -- includes the package \verb"dcolumn", which includes two new types of column alignment for use in tables.
\end{itemize}
Some of these options are deprecated and retained for backwards compatibility only.
Others are used in almost all papers, but again are retained as options to ensure that papers written decades ago will continue to compile without problems.
If you want to include any other packages, see section~\ref{sec:packages}.
\section{Title page}
If you are using \texttt{mnras\_template.tex} the necessary code for generating the title page, headers and footers is already present.
Simply edit the title, author list, institutions, abstract and keywords as described below.
\subsection{Title}
There are two forms of the title: the full version used on the first page, and a short version which is used in the header of other odd-numbered pages (the `running head').
Enter them with \verb'\title[]{}' like this:
\begin{verbatim}
\title[Running head]{Full title of the paper}
\end{verbatim}
The full title can be multiple lines (use \verb'\\' to start a new line) and may be as long as necessary, although we encourage authors to use concise titles. The running head must be $\le~45$ characters on a single line.
See appendix~\ref{sec:advanced} for more complicated examples.
\subsection{Authors and institutions}
Like the title, there are two forms of author list: the full version which appears on the title page, and a short form which appears in the header of the even-numbered pages. Enter them using the \verb'\author[]{}' command.
If the author list is more than one line long, start a new line using \verb'\newauthor'. Use \verb'\\' to start the institution list. Affiliations for each author should be indicated with a superscript number, and correspond to the list of institutions below the author list.
For example, if I were to write a paper with two coauthors at another institution, one of whom also works at a third location:
\begin{verbatim}
\author[K. T. Smith et al.]{
Keith T. Smith,$^{1}$
A. N. Other,$^{2}$
and Third Author$^{2,3}$
\\
$^{1}$Affiliation 1\\
$^{2}$Affiliation 2\\
$^{3}$Affiliation 3}
\end{verbatim}
Affiliations should be in the format `Department, Institution, Street Address, City and Postal Code, Country'.
Email addresses can be inserted with the \verb'\thanks{}' command which adds a title page footnote.
If you want to list more than one email, put them all in the same \verb'\thanks' and use \verb'\footnotemark[]' to refer to the same footnote multiple times.
Present addresses (if different to those where the work was performed) can also be added with a \verb'\thanks' command.
\subsection{Abstract and keywords}
The abstract is entered in an \verb'abstract' environment:
\begin{verbatim}
\begin{abstract}
The abstract of the paper.
\end{abstract}
\end{verbatim}
\noindent Note that there is a word limit on the length of abstracts.
For the current word limit, see the journal instructions to authors$^{\ref{foot:itas}}$.
Immediately following the abstract, a set of keywords is entered in a \verb'keywords' environment:
\begin{verbatim}
\begin{keywords}
keyword 1 -- keyword 2 -- keyword 3
\end{keywords}
\end{verbatim}
\noindent There is a list of permitted keywords, which is agreed between all the major astronomy journals and revised every few years.
Do \emph{not} make up new keywords!
For the current list of allowed keywords, see the journal's instructions to authors$^{\ref{foot:itas}}$.
\section{Sections and lists}
Sections and lists are generally the same as in the standard \LaTeX\ classes.
\subsection{Sections}
\label{sec:sections}
Sections are entered in the usual way, using \verb'\section{}' and its variants. It is possible to nest up to four section levels:
\begin{verbatim}
\section{Main section}
\subsection{Subsection}
\subsubsection{Subsubsection}
\paragraph{Lowest level section}
\end{verbatim}
\noindent The other \LaTeX\ sectioning commands \verb'\part', \verb'\chapter' and \verb'\subparagraph{}' are deprecated and should not be used.
Some sections are not numbered as part of journal style (e.g. the Acknowledgements).
To insert an unnumbered section use the `starred' version of the command: \verb'\section*{}'.
See appendix~\ref{sec:advanced} for more complicated examples.
\subsection{Lists}
Two forms of lists can be used in MNRAS -- numbered and unnumbered.
For a numbered list, use the \verb'enumerate' environment:
\begin{verbatim}
\begin{enumerate}
\item First item
\item Second item
\item etc.
\end{enumerate}
\end{verbatim}
\noindent which produces
\begin{enumerate}
\item First item
\item Second item
\item etc.
\end{enumerate}
Note that the list uses lowercase Roman numerals, rather than the \LaTeX\ default Arabic numerals.
For an unnumbered list, use the \verb'description' environment without the optional argument:
\begin{verbatim}
\begin{description}
\item First item
\item Second item
\item etc.
\end{description}
\end{verbatim}
\noindent which produces
\begin{description}
\item First item
\item Second item
\item etc.
\end{description}
Bulleted lists using the \verb'itemize' environment should not be used in MNRAS; it is retained for backwards compatibility only.
\section{Mathematics and symbols}
The MNRAS class mostly adopts standard \LaTeX\ handling of mathematics, which is briefly summarised here.
See also section~\ref{sec:packages} for packages that support more advanced mathematics.
Mathematics can be inserted into the running text using the syntax \verb'$1+1=2$', which produces $1+1=2$.
Use this only for short expressions or when referring to mathematical quantities; equations should be entered as described below.
\subsection{Equations}
Equations should be entered using the \verb'equation' environment, which automatically numbers them:
\begin{verbatim}
\begin{equation}
a^2=b^2+c^2
\end{equation}
\end{verbatim}
\noindent which produces
\begin{equation}
a^2=b^2+c^2
\end{equation}
By default, the equations are numbered sequentially throughout the whole paper. If a paper has a large number of equations, it may be better to number them by section (2.1, 2.2 etc.). To do this, add the command \verb'\numberwithin{equation}{section}' to the preamble.
It is also possible to produce un-numbered equations by using the \LaTeX\ built-in \verb'\['\textellipsis\verb'\]' and \verb'$$'\textellipsis\verb'$$' commands; however MNRAS requires that all equations are numbered, so these commands should be avoided.
\subsection{Special symbols}
\begin{table}
\caption{Additional commands for special symbols commonly used in astronomy. These can be used anywhere.}
\label{tab:anysymbols}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline
Command & Output & Meaning\\
\hline
\verb'\sun' & \sun & Sun, solar\\[2pt]
\verb'\earth' & \earth & Earth, terrestrial\\[2pt]
\verb'\micron' & \micron & microns\\[2pt]
\verb'\degr' & \degr & degrees\\[2pt]
\verb'\arcmin' & \arcmin & arcminutes\\[2pt]
\verb'\arcsec' & \arcsec & arcseconds\\[2pt]
\verb'\fdg' & \fdg & fraction of a degree\\[2pt]
\verb'\farcm' & \farcm & fraction of an arcminute\\[2pt]
\verb'\farcs' & \farcs & fraction of an arcsecond\\[2pt]
\verb'\fd' & \fd & fraction of a day\\[2pt]
\verb'\fh' & \fh & fraction of an hour\\[2pt]
\verb'\fm' & \fm & fraction of a minute\\[2pt]
\verb'\fs' & \fs & fraction of a second\\[2pt]
\verb'\fp' & \fp & fraction of a period\\[2pt]
\verb'\diameter' & \diameter & diameter\\[2pt]
\verb'\sq' & \sq & square, Q.E.D.\\[2pt]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\caption{Additional commands for mathematical symbols. These can only be used in maths mode.}
\label{tab:mathssymbols}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline
Command & Output & Meaning\\
\hline
\verb'\upi' & $\upi$ & upright pi\\[2pt]
\verb'\umu' & $\umu$ & upright mu\\[2pt]
\verb'\upartial' & $\upartial$ & upright partial derivative\\[2pt]
\verb'\lid' & $\lid$ & less than or equal to\\[2pt]
\verb'\gid' & $\gid$ & greater than or equal to\\[2pt]
\verb'\la' & $\la$ & less than of order\\[2pt]
\verb'\ga' & $\ga$ & greater than of order\\[2pt]
\verb'\loa' & $\loa$ & less than approximately\\[2pt]
\verb'\goa' & $\goa$ & greater than approximately\\[2pt]
\verb'\cor' & $\cor$ & corresponds to\\[2pt]
\verb'\sol' & $\sol$ & similar to or less than\\[2pt]
\verb'\sog' & $\sog$ & similar to or greater than\\[2pt]
\verb'\lse' & $\lse$ & less than or homotopic to \\[2pt]
\verb'\gse' & $\gse$ & greater than or homotopic to\\[2pt]
\verb'\getsto' & $\getsto$ & from over to\\[2pt]
\verb'\grole' & $\grole$ & greater over less\\[2pt]
\verb'\leogr' & $\leogr$ & less over greater\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
Some additional symbols of common use in astronomy have been added in the MNRAS class. These are shown in tables~\ref{tab:anysymbols}--\ref{tab:mathssymbols}. The command names are -- as far as possible -- the same as those used in other major astronomy journals.
Many other mathematical symbols are also available, either built into \LaTeX\ or via additional packages. If you want to insert a specific symbol but don't know the \LaTeX\ command, we recommend using the Detexify website\footnote{\url{http://detexify.kirelabs.org}}.
Sometimes font or coding limitations mean a symbol may not get smaller when used in sub- or superscripts, and will therefore be displayed at the wrong size. There is no need to worry about this as it will be corrected by the typesetter during production.
To produce bold symbols in mathematics, use \verb'\bmath' for simple variables, and the \verb'bm' package for more complex symbols (see section~\ref{sec:packages}). Vectors are set in bold italic, using \verb'\mathbfit{}'.
For matrices, use \verb'\mathbfss{}' to produce a bold sans-serif font e.g. \mathbfss{H}; this works even outside maths mode, but not all symbols are available (e.g. Greek). For $\nabla$ (del, used in gradients, divergence etc.) use \verb'$\nabla$'.
\subsection{Ions}
A new \verb'\ion{}{}' command has been added to the class file, for the correct typesetting of ionisation states.
For example, to typeset singly ionised calcium use \verb'\ion{Ca}{ii}', which produces \ion{Ca}{ii}.
\section{Figures and tables}
\label{sec:fig_table}
Figures and tables (collectively called `floats') are mostly the same as built into \LaTeX.
\subsection{Basic examples}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{example}
\caption{An example figure.}
\label{fig:example}
\end{figure}
Figures are inserted in the usual way using a \verb'figure' environment and \verb'\includegraphics'. The example Figure~\ref{fig:example} was generated using the code:
\begin{verbatim}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{example}
\caption{An example figure.}
\label{fig:example}
\end{figure}
\end{verbatim}
\begin{table}
\caption{An example table.}
\label{tab:example}
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
\hline
Star & Mass & Luminosity\\
& $M_{\sun}$ & $L_{\sun}$\\
\hline
Sun & 1.00 & 1.00\\
$\alpha$~Cen~A & 1.10 & 1.52\\
$\epsilon$~Eri & 0.82 & 0.34\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The example Table~\ref{tab:example} was generated using the code:
\begin{verbatim}
\begin{table}
\caption{An example table.}
\label{tab:example}
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
\hline
Star & Mass & Luminosity\\
& $M_{\sun}$ & $L_{\sun}$\\
\hline
Sun & 1.00 & 1.00\\
$\alpha$~Cen~A & 1.10 & 1.52\\
$\epsilon$~Eri & 0.82 & 0.34\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\end{verbatim}
\subsection{Captions and placement}
Captions go \emph{above} tables but \emph{below} figures, as in the examples above.
The \LaTeX\ float placement commands \verb'[htbp]' are intentionally disabled.
Layout of figures and tables will be adjusted by the publisher during the production process, so authors should not concern themselves with placement to avoid disappointment and wasted effort.
Simply place the \LaTeX\ code close to where the figure or table is first mentioned in the text and leave exact placement to the publishers.
By default a figure or table will occupy one column of the page.
To produce a wider version which covers both columns, use the \verb'figure*' or \verb'table*' environment.
If a figure or table is too long to fit on a single page it can be split it into several parts.
Create an additional figure or table which uses \verb'\contcaption{}' instead of \verb'\caption{}'.
This will automatically correct the numbering and add `\emph{continued}' at the start of the caption.
\begin{table}
\contcaption{A table continued from the previous one.}
\label{tab:continued}
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
\hline
Star & Mass & Luminosity\\
& $M_{\sun}$ & $L_{\sun}$\\
\hline
$\tau$~Cet & 0.78 & 0.52\\
$\delta$~Pav & 0.99 & 1.22\\
$\sigma$~Dra & 0.87 & 0.43\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table~\ref{tab:continued} was generated using the code:
\begin{verbatim}
\begin{table}
\contcaption{A table continued from the previous one.}
\label{tab:continued}
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
\hline
Star & Mass & Luminosity\\
& $M_{\sun}$ & $L_{\sun}$\\
\hline
$\tau$~Cet & 0.78 & 0.52\\
$\delta$~Pav & 0.99 & 1.22\\
$\sigma$~Dra & 0.87 & 0.43\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\end{verbatim}
To produce a landscape figure or table, use the \verb'pdflscape' package and the \verb'landscape' environment.
The landscape Table~\ref{tab:landscape} was produced using the code:
\begin{verbatim}
\begin{landscape}
\begin{table}
\caption{An example landscape table.}
\label{tab:landscape}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccccc}
\hline
Header & Header & ...\\
Unit & Unit & ...\\
\hline
Data & Data & ...\\
Data & Data & ...\\
...\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\end{landscape}
\end{verbatim}
Unfortunately this method will force a page break before the table appears.
More complicated solutions are possible, but authors shouldn't worry about this.
\begin{landscape}
\begin{table}
\caption{An example landscape table.}
\label{tab:landscape}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccccc}
\hline
Header & Header & Header & Header & Header & Header & Header & Header & Header & Header\\
Unit & Unit & Unit & Unit & Unit & Unit & Unit & Unit & Unit & Unit \\
\hline
Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data\\
Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data\\
Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data\\
Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data\\
Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data\\
Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data\\
Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data\\
Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data & Data\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\end{landscape}
\section{References and citations}
\subsection{Cross-referencing}
The usual \LaTeX\ commands \verb'\label{}' and \verb'\ref{}' can be used for cross-referencing within the same paper.
We recommend that you use these whenever relevant, rather than writing out the section or figure numbers explicitly.
This ensures that cross-references are updated whenever the numbering changes (e.g. during revision) and provides clickable links (if available in your compiler).
It is best to give each section, figure and table a logical label.
For example, Table~\ref{tab:mathssymbols} has the label \verb'tab:mathssymbols', whilst section~\ref{sec:packages} has the label \verb'sec:packages'.
Add the label \emph{after} the section or caption command, as in the examples in sections~\ref{sec:sections} and \ref{sec:fig_table}.
Enter the cross-reference with a non-breaking space between the type of object and the number, like this: \verb'see Figure~\ref{fig:example}'.
The \verb'\autoref{}' command can be used to automatically fill out the type of object, saving on typing.
It also causes the link to cover the whole phrase rather than just the number, but for that reason is only suitable for single cross-references rather than ranges.
For example, \verb'\autoref{tab:journal_abbr}' produces \autoref{tab:journal_abbr}.
\subsection{Citations}
\label{sec:cite}
MNRAS uses the Harvard -- author (year) -- citation style, e.g. \citet{author2013}.
This is implemented in \LaTeX\ via the \verb'natbib' package, which in turn is included via the \verb'usenatbib' package option (see section~\ref{sec:options}), which should be used in all papers.
Each entry in the reference list has a `key' (see section~\ref{sec:ref_list}) which is used to generate citations.
There are two basic \verb'natbib' commands:
\begin{description}
\item \verb'\citet{key}' produces an in-text citation: \citet{author2013}
\item \verb'\citep{key}' produces a bracketed (parenthetical) citation: \citep{author2013}
\end{description}
Citations will include clickable links to the relevant entry in the reference list, if supported by your \LaTeX\ compiler.
\defcitealias{smith2014}{Paper~I}
\begin{table*}
\caption{Common citation commands, provided by the \texttt{natbib} package.}
\label{tab:natbib}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline
Command & Ouput & Note\\
\hline
\verb'\citet{key}' & \citet{smith2014} & \\
\verb'\citep{key}' & \citep{smith2014} & \\
\verb'\citep{key,key2}' & \citep{smith2014,jones2015} & Multiple papers\\
\verb'\citet[table 4]{key}' & \citet[table 4]{smith2014} & \\
\verb'\citep[see][figure 7]{key}' & \citep[see][figure 7]{smith2014} & \\
\verb'\citealt{key}' & \citealt{smith2014} & For use with manual brackets\\
\verb'\citeauthor{key}' & \citeauthor{smith2014} & If already cited in close proximity\\
\verb'\defcitealias{key}{Paper~I}' & & Define an alias (doesn't work in floats)\\
\verb'\citetalias{key}' & \citetalias{smith2014} & \\
\verb'\citepalias{key}' & \citepalias{smith2014} & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
There are a number of other \verb'natbib' commands which can be used for more complicated citations.
The most commonly used ones are listed in Table~\ref{tab:natbib}.
For full guidance on their use, consult the \verb'natbib' documentation\footnote{\url{http://www.ctan.org/pkg/natbib}}.
If a reference has several authors, \verb'natbib' will automatically use `et al.' if there are more than two authors. However, if a paper has exactly three authors, MNRAS style is to list all three on the first citation and use `et al.' thereafter. If you are using \bibtex\ (see section~\ref{sec:ref_list}) then this is handled automatically. If not, the \verb'\citet*{}' and \verb'\citep*{}' commands can be used at the first citation to include all of the authors.
\subsection{The list of references}
\label{sec:ref_list}
It is possible to enter references manually using the usual \LaTeX\ commands, but we strongly encourage authors to use \bibtex\ instead.
\bibtex\ ensures that the reference list is updated automatically as references are added or removed from the paper, puts them in the correct format, saves on typing, and the same reference file can be used for many different papers -- saving time hunting down reference details.
An MNRAS \bibtex\ style file, \verb'mnras.bst', is distributed as part of this package.
The rest of this section will assume you are using \bibtex.
References are entered into a separate \verb'.bib' file in standard \bibtex\ formatting.
This can be done manually, or there are several software packages which make editing the \verb'.bib' file much easier.
We particularly recommend \textsc{JabRef}\footnote{\url{http://jabref.sourceforge.net/}}, which works on all major operating systems.
\bibtex\ entries can be obtained from the NASA Astrophysics Data System\footnote{\label{foot:ads}\url{http://adsabs.harvard.edu}} (ADS) by clicking on `Bibtex entry for this abstract' on any entry.
Simply copy this into your \verb'.bib' file or into the `BibTeX source' tab in \textsc{JabRef}.
Each entry in the \verb'.bib' file must specify a unique `key' to identify the paper, the format of which is up to the author.
Simply cite it in the usual way, as described in section~\ref{sec:cite}, using the specified key.
Compile the paper as usual, but add an extra step to run the \texttt{bibtex} command.
Consult the documentation for your compiler or latex distribution.
Correct formatting of the reference list will be handled by \bibtex\ in almost all cases, provided that the correct information was entered into the \verb'.bib' file.
Note that ADS entries are not always correct, particularly for older papers and conference proceedings, so may need to be edited.
If in doubt, or if you are producing the reference list manually, see the MNRAS instructions to authors$^{\ref{foot:itas}}$ for the current guidelines on how to format the list of references.
\section{Appendices and online material}
To start an appendix, simply place the \verb' |
\section{Introduction
The photon-to-charge conversion efficiency\cite{1} is an important aspect of photocell. However, the radiative upward transition and its reversal, the radiative downward transition coexist simultaneously, which produced the detailed balance limit\cite{2} in 1961 by Shockley and Queisser. And the radiative recombination has been considered as the fundamental limit\cite{2} on the conversion efficiency and was accepted widely in the artificial light-harvesting systems. But beyond that, other energy loss processes, such as surface reflection, internal resistance, thermalization losses, unabsorbed photons with energy less than band gap\cite{3} still exit in the photocell. And many of these unessential energy loss processes can be minimized by appropriately designed structures\cite{4,5,6,7,8}, such as multi-junction\cite{9,10,11} and intermediate band photocells \cite{12,13,14,15,16}, etc..
Recently, theoretical and experimental studies\cite{17,18,19} have demonstrated that the quantum coherence can alter the conditions of the detailed balance between the absorption and radiative recombination, and thereby the suppressed radiative recombination enhances the conversion efficiency in quantum photocells\cite{20,21,22,23}. One of the possible ways suggested by Scully\cite{17} is to cancel the emission processes via the quantum coherence induced by an external source\cite{18}. Consequently, the quantum coherence of the delocalized donor states alters the conditions for the thermodynamic detailed balance, and then brings out the enhanced efficiency in the photocell\cite{20,21,22,23}.
Considering a higher conversion efficiency achieved in the triple-junction photocells\cite{24,25}, in the following, we focus on RRR in a proposed quantum photocell with three p-n junctions simulated by three electron donors and discuss the approach to inhabit the RRR, which may bring out the enhanced photon-to-charge efficiency. The results indicate some positive significance and some encouraging trends, which may attract the further experimental investigations.
The work is organized as follows: in section 2, we describe the quantum photocell model with three electron donors. And we present the results and the corresponding discussions regarding the RRR dependent some parameters and possible experimental realization in section 3. A concise summary is given in the final section.
\section{Quantum photocell model with three electron donors}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.45\columnwidth]{f1.eps}\includegraphics[width=0.45\columnwidth]{f2.eps}}
\caption{Schematic diagram: quantum photocell models with the acceptor and (a) three uncoupled donors, (b) three dipole-dipole coupled donors. Solar radiation drives electron transport between the valence band (VB) state \(|b\rangle\) and the conduction band (CB) state \(|i\rangle_{(i=1,2,3)}\) in Fig.(a). Transitions between levels \(|i\rangle_{(i=1,2,3)}\) \(\leftrightarrow\) \(|\alpha\rangle\), \(|\beta\rangle\) \(\leftrightarrow\) \(|b\rangle\) are driven by ambient thermal phonons. Levels \(|\alpha\rangle\) and \(|\beta\rangle\) are connected to a load. The three degenerate excited levels in Fig.1(a) split into Fig.1(b) because of the couplings between three donors, and the dark level \(|a_{2}\rangle\) is optically forbidden and has no electron transfer path to the acceptor \(|\alpha\rangle\).}
\label{f1}
\end{figure}
Proceeding with the analysis, we consider a quantum photocell model with the conduction band (CB) states \(|i\rangle_{(i=1,2,3)}\) and the valence band (VB) state \(|b\rangle\) [depicted in Fig.1(a)] as the donors. And level \(|\alpha\rangle\) and level \(|\beta\rangle\) connecting to a load are assumed the acceptor molecule. The excitation of a molecule is simply modeled as a two-level system with the excited state \(|i\rangle_{(i=1,2,3)}\) and the ground state \(|b\rangle\). Then the excited electrons driven by solar radiation can be transferred to the acceptor molecule, the conduction reservoir state \(|\alpha\rangle\), with any excess energy radiated as a phonon into the ambient thermal phonons reservoirs. The excited electron is then assumed to be used to perform work, leaving the conduction reservoir state \(|\alpha\rangle\) decaying to the sub-stable state \(|\beta\rangle\) at a rate \(\Gamma\). The recombination between the acceptor and the donor is modeled as \(\chi_{i}\Gamma\) (i=1,2) in Fig.1, where \(\chi_{i} \) is the RRR, a dimensionless fraction. The recombination process brings the system back into the VB state \(|b\rangle\) without producing a work current, which could be a significant source of inefficiency. Finally, the state \(|\beta\rangle\) decays back to the VB state \(|b\rangle\) at a rate \(\Gamma_{c}\) and the cycle terminates. In Fig.1(a), the three donors are assumed to be identical and degenerate, and their three uncoupled excited states \(|i\rangle_{(i=1,2,3)}\) have the same excitation levels \(E_{1}\)=\(E_{2}\)=\(E_{3}\)=E, and their transition dipole moments are aligned in the same direction, i.e., \(\vec{\mu}_{i}\)=e\(\langle i |\vec{r}|b\rangle_{(i=1,2,3)}\)=\(\vec{\mu}\), where \(\vec{r}=\vec{r}_{b}-\vec{r}_{i}\), and \(\vec{\mu}_{i}\) is located at \(\vec{r}_{i}\). The dipole-dipole interaction only exists in the nearest neighbors and the dipole-dipole couplings are denoted by J=\(\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon\epsilon_{0}}[\frac{\vec{\mu}_{i}\cdot\vec{\mu}_{j}}{r^{3}}-\frac{3(\vec{\mu}_{i}\cdot \vec{r})(\vec{\mu}_{j}\vec{r})}{r^{5}}]\) between \(|a_{1}\rangle \) and \(|a_{2}\rangle \), and \(|a_{2}\rangle \) and \(|a_{3}\rangle \) in Fig.1(b), but there is no coupling between \(|a_{1}\rangle \) and \(|a_{3}\rangle \). The strength of the dipole-dipole coupling J is much weaker than the excitation energy \(E- E_{b}=\hbar\omega\). The Hamiltonian of the three coupling donors can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
&\hat{H}=&\sum^{3}_{i} \hbar\omega {\hat{\sigma}}^{\dag}_{i} {\hat{\sigma}}_{i} + J(\hat{{\sigma}}^{-}_{1}{\hat{\sigma}}^{\dag}_{2}+{\sigma}^{-}_{2}{\sigma}^{\dag}_{3}+H.c.),
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent where H.c. means Hermitian conjugation, \( \hat{\sigma}^{\dag}_{i}\) and \( \hat{\sigma}^{-}_{i}\) are the Pauli raising and lowering operators, respectively. The three single-excitation states of the above Hamiltonian are \(|a_{1}\rangle\) =\(\frac{1}{2}\)(\(|1\rangle\)+\(\sqrt{2}|2\rangle\)+\(|3\rangle\)), \(|a_{2}\rangle\) =\(\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\)(\(|1\rangle\)-\(|3\rangle\))
, \(|a_{3}\rangle\) =\(\frac{1}{2}\)(\(|1\rangle\)-\(\sqrt{2}|2\rangle\)+\(|3\rangle\)), and their eigenvalues are obtained as
\(E_{a_{1}}\)=\(E\)+\(\sqrt{2}\)J, \(E_{a_{2}}\)=\(E\), \(E_{a_{3}}\)=\(E\)-\(\sqrt{2}\)J. The dynamics behavior of the donors-acceptor system can describe via the master equations for the three uncoupled donors case in Eqn(2)(shown in Fig.1(a)) and the three dipole-dipole coupled donors case in Eqn(3)(shown in Fig.1(b)) as follows, respectively.
\begin{eqnarray*}
&\dot{\rho_{11}}=&\gamma_{h}[n_{h}\rho_{bb}\!-\!(1+n_{h})\rho_{11}]\!+\!\gamma_{c}[n_{c}\rho_{\alpha\alpha}\!-\!(1+n_{c})\rho_{11}],\\
&\dot{\rho_{22}}=&\gamma_{h}[n_{h}\rho_{bb}\!-\!(1+n_{h})\rho_{22}]\!+\!\gamma_{c}[n_{c}\rho_{\alpha\alpha}\!-\!(1+n_{c})\rho_{22}], \\
&\dot{\rho_{33}}=&\gamma_{h}[n_{h}\rho_{bb}\!-\!(1+n_{h})\rho_{33}]\!+\!\gamma_{c}[n_{c}\rho_{\alpha\alpha}\!-\!(1+n_{c})\rho_{33}], ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(Eqn.2) \\
&\dot{\rho_{\alpha\alpha}}=&\gamma_{c}(1+n_{c})(\rho_{11}\!+\!\rho_{22}+\rho_{33})\!-\!3\gamma_{c}n_{c}\rho_{\alpha\alpha}\!-\!\Gamma(1+\chi_{1})\rho_{\alpha\alpha},\\
&\dot{\rho_{\beta\beta}}=&\Gamma_{c}[N_{c}\rho_{bb}\!-\!(1+N_{c})\rho_{\beta\beta}]+\Gamma\rho_{\alpha\alpha},
\end{eqnarray*}
and
\begin{eqnarray*}
&\dot{\rho}_{a_{1}a_{1}}=&\gamma_{1h}[n_{1h}\rho_{bb}-(1+n_{1h})\rho_{a_{1}a_{1}}]+\gamma_{12}[n_{12}\rho_{a_{2}a_{2}}
\\&&-(1+n_{12}) \rho_{a_{1}a_{1}}+\gamma_{13}[n_{13}\rho_{a_{3}a_{3}}-(1+n_{13})\rho_{a_{1}a_{1}}] \\&&+\gamma_{1c}[n_{1c}\rho_{\alpha\alpha}-(1+n_{1c})\rho_{a_{1}a_{1}}],\\
&\dot{\rho}_{a_{2}a_{2}}=&\gamma_{12}[(1+n_{12})\rho_{a_{1}a_{1}}-n_{12}\rho_{a_{2}a_{2}}]+\gamma_{23}[n_{23}\rho_{a_{3}a_{3}}\\
&&-(1+n_{23})\rho_{a_{2}a_{2}}],~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(Eqn.3)\\
&\dot{\rho}_{a_{3}a_{3}}=&\gamma_{3h}[n_{3h}\rho_{bb}-(1+n_{3h})\rho_{a_{3}a_{3}}]+\gamma_{23}[(1+n_{23})\rho_{a_{2}a_{2}}
\\&&-n_{23}\rho_{a_{3}a_{3}}]+\gamma_{13}[(1+n_{13})\rho_{a_{1}a_{1}}-n_{13}\rho_{a_{3}a_{3}}] \\&&+\gamma_{3c}[n_{3c}\rho_{\alpha\alpha}-(1+n_{3c})\rho_{a_{3}a_{3}}],\\
&\dot{\rho}_{\alpha\alpha}=&\gamma_{1c}[(1+n_{1c})\rho_{a_{1}a_{1}}-n_{1c}\rho_{\alpha\alpha}]+\gamma_{3c}[(1+n_{3c})\rho_{a_{3}a_{3}}
\\&&-n_{3c}\rho_{\alpha\alpha}]-\Gamma(1+\chi_{2})\rho_{\alpha\alpha},\\
&\dot{\rho}_{\beta\beta}=&\Gamma\rho_{\alpha\alpha}+\Gamma_{c}[\emph{N}_{c}\rho_{bb}-(1+\emph{N}_{c})\rho_{\beta\beta}],
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent where \(n_{h}\)=\(\frac{1}{exp(\frac{E-E_{b}}{K_{B}T_{s}})-1}\), \(n_{ih(i=1,3)}\)=\(\frac{1}{exp(\frac{E_{a_{i}}-E_{b}}{K_{B}T_{s}})-1}\) describe the average numbers of photon with frequencies matching the transition energies from the VB state \(|b\rangle\) to the CB states \(|i\rangle_{(i=1,2,3)}\) in Fig.1(a), and \(|a_{i}\rangle_{(i=1,3)}\) in Fig.1(b) at the temperature \(T_{s}\)=(300 +\(\Delta\))K, where \(\Delta\) stands for the temperature difference. \(n_{c}\)=\(\frac{1}{exp(\frac{E-E_{\alpha}}{K_{B}T_{s}})-1}\) and \(n_{ic(i=1,3)}\)=\(\frac{1}{exp(\frac{E_{a_{i}}-E_{\alpha}}{K_{B}T_{s}})-1}\) are the thermal occupation numbers of ambient phonons at temperature \(T_{s}\). \(N_{c}\)=\(\frac{1}{exp(\frac{E_{\beta}-E_{b}}{k_{B}T_{s}})-1}\) is the corresponding thermal occupation number at the ambient temperature \(T_{s}\) with the energy (\(E_{\beta}\)-\(E_{b}\)). \(n_{12}\), \(n_{13}\), and \(n_{23}\) represent the corresponding thermal occupations at the ambient temperature \(T_{s}\) with energy gaps (\(E_{a_{1}}\)-\(E_{a_{2}}\)), (\(E_{a_{1}}\)-\(E_{a_{3}}\)), and (\(E_{a_{2}}\)-\(E_{a_{3}}\)), respectively. The rates in Eqn. (2) and Eqn. (3) lead to a Boltzmann distribution for the level population \(|\alpha\rangle\) ( \(p_{\alpha}=exp(-\frac{E_{\alpha}-\mu_{\alpha}}{k_{B}T_{s}})\), \(\mu_{\alpha}\) is defined as the chemical potential of lead \(\alpha\)) when the thermal averages for the photon and phonon reservoirs are in a common temperature. We consider the initial condition to be a fully occupied ground state\cite{22}, i.e., \(\rho_{bb}\) = 1.
\section{Summary and Discussion}
In what follows, we calculate the steady solutions of Eqn.(2) and Eqn.(3) for the RRRs, \(\chi_{1}\) and \(\chi_{2}\). Considering the cumbersome expression for \(\chi_{1}\) and \(\chi_{2}\), we follow the numerical approach to carry out the discussion. And we use the following parameters, \(E_{\alpha}-\mu_{\alpha}\)=0.10 ev, \(E-E_{\alpha}\)=\(E_{\beta}-E_{b}\)=0.20 ev, \(\gamma_{c}\)=6 Mev, \(\Gamma\)=0.40 ev, \(\Gamma_{c}\)=0.15 ev\cite{21,22}. And other parameters are \(\gamma_{h}\)=0.62 ev in Fig.1(a), and \(\gamma_{1h}\)=0.62 ev ,\(\gamma_{3h}\)=0.45 ev, \(\gamma_{1c}\)=\(\gamma_{3c}\) =0.15\(\ast\)\((\frac{3}{2}\) +\(\sqrt{2}\)) ev, J=0.10 ev, \(\gamma_{12}\)=\(\gamma_{23}\) =\(\frac{1}{2}\)\(\gamma_{13}\)=0.15\(\ast\)\(\sqrt{2}\) ev in Fig.1(b).
Fig.2 plots the RRR (\(\chi_{i}\)) as a function of the temperature difference \(\Delta\)(K) with the energy gaps (\(E-E_{b}\)) being the control-parameters.
In Fig.2 (a), the linear curves decline with the temperature difference \(\Delta\)(K), and at room temperature (\(\Delta\)=0) the RRRs decrease with the increasing energy gaps (\(E-E_{b}\)). It indicates that in the quantum photocell with three uncoupled electron donors, the increasing circumstance temperature and energy gaps (\(E-E_{b}\)) can block the radiative recombination from the donors to acceptor. Therefore, the transported electrons to VB via the radiative recombination become less and more excited electrons were transported to perform useful work. These features suggest that the quantum photocell with three uncoupled electron donors operates at a slight higher temperature and wider band gap will bring out more excited electrons to perform useful work. However, we must take account of the fact that, increasing the band gap and environmental temperature will cause less absorption and much more phonon-electron scattering. Therefore, Fig.1(a) may indicate that the room temperature with a proper energy gap (\(E-E_{b}\)) is the optimal operating condition for the photocell with three uncoupled electron donors in the real environment.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.45\columnwidth]{f3.eps}\includegraphics[width=0.46\columnwidth]{f4.eps}}
\caption{(Color online) (a) The RRR \(\chi_{1}\) with three uncoupled donors, (b) The RRR \(\chi_{2}\) with three dipole-dipole coupled donors as a function of the temperature difference \(\Delta\)(K) with different gaps (\(E-E_{b}\)) within three donors, respectively. \label{2}}
\end{figure}
However, a contrary result appears in the case of three dipole-dipole coupled donors in Fig.2(b). It notes that the increasing circumstance temperature promotes the RRRs but the energy gaps (\(E-E_{b}\)) can inhabit the RRR. And at the room temperature (\(\Delta\)=0) in Fig.2(b), the values of RRR are much smaller than those in Fig.2(a). The reason comes from their difference, i.e., the quantum photocell with three uncoupled donors in Fig.2(a) while with three dipole-dipole coupled donors in Fig.2(b). Therefore, in the condition of higher circumstance temperature, the quantum coherence generated from different electronic transport channels was strengthened in Fig.2(b), which holds back more electrons to perform work but radiate to the VB state \(|b\rangle\) directly in the donor molecules. Hence, just taking three dipole-dipole coupled donors into account, the increasing circumstance temperature inhabits the photon-to-charge efficiency. Although, Fig.2(b) demonstrates that the p-n junction with a slightly large energy gap(\(E-E_{b}\))
will decrease the possibility of the electronic radiative recombination in the photocell, increasing the band gap leading to less absorption should be considered in the photocell design.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.44\columnwidth]{f5.eps}\includegraphics[width=0.45\columnwidth]{f6.eps}}
\caption{(Color online) (a) The RRR \(\chi_{1}\) with three uncoupled donors, (b) The RRR \(\chi_{2}\) with three dipole-dipole coupled donors as a function of the temperature difference \(\Delta\)(K) with different energy gaps (\(E-E_{\alpha}\)) between the donors and the acceptor molecular. \label{3}}
\end{figure}
In the photocell, the gap between the donors and acceptor molecular, (\(E-E_{\alpha}\)) may be an interesting parameter to the RRR. Next, we carry out its influence on the RRR with the gaps (\(E-E_{b}\))=0.38 ev, and 0.7 ev in Fig.3(a) and (b), respectively, and other parameters are the same to those in Fig.2. The same physical features are shown in
Fig.3 as those in Fig.2. It notes that the ambient circumstance temperatures can suppress the RRR in Fig.3(a) with three uncoupled electron donors but enhance the RRR in Fig.3(b) with three dipole-dipole coupled electron donors, and at the room temperature (\(\Delta\)=0) the RRRs in Fig.3 (a) and (b) are smaller than those in Fig.2 (a) and (b), respectively. Not only that, but the RRR is inhabited by the decreasing gaps (\(E-E_{\alpha}\)) between the donors and the acceptor molecular in Fig.3. It is intuitively believed that it is not easy for the excited electrons transporting to the external load with a larger gap (\(E-E_{\alpha}\)) but radiative to the VB state \(|b\rangle\). And the curves in Fig.3 both (a) and (b) demonstrate this conclusion.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.45\columnwidth]{f7.eps}\includegraphics[width=0.44\columnwidth]{f8.eps}}
\caption{(Color online) The RRR \(\chi_{2}\) with three dipole-dipole coupled donors as a function of the electrostatic dipole-dipole coupling strength \(J\) with different energy gaps at room temperature.(a)(\(E-E_{b}\))=1.6 ev, (b) (\(E-E_{\alpha}\))=0.05 ev, and other parameters are the same to those in Fig.2. \label{4}}
\end{figure}
The increasing electrostatic dipole-dipole coupling strength \(J\) can bring out the stepped-up quantum interference between the different donors. To deeply investigate the quantum interference between the three dipole-dipole coupled donors in this quantum photocell, the following discussion about the RRR \(\chi_{2}\) versus the electrostatic dipole-dipole coupling strength \(J\) will be carried out in Fig.4 at room temperature. It shows that \(\chi_{2}\) monotonically decreases with the increasing \(J\) in both Fig.4(a) and (b), and the less gap (\(E-E_{\alpha}\)) in Fig.4(a) and (\(E-E_{b}\)) in Fig.4(b) generates the less RRR \(\chi_{2}\). However, the sharp decrease of \(\chi_{2}\) appears about in the range 0.8\(<\) \(J\) \( <\)1 in Fig.4(a) but appears about in the range 0.3\(<\) \(J\) \( <\)0.5 in Fig.4(b), and the final values of \(\chi_{2}\) are in close proximity to 0.05 in Fig.4(a), while the RRRs values infinitesimally approach to 0.2 in Fig.4(b). These results indicate that the increasing electrostatic dipole-dipole coupling strength \(J\) and the less gaps (\(E-E_{\alpha}\)) and (\(E-E_{b}\)) enhance the quantum interference between the three dipole-dipole coupled donors, which can inhabit the RRR \(\chi_{2}\) ultimately. And the RRR can be suppressed to a minimum but can't be canceled out\cite{17} due to the radiative upward and downward transition coexisting in the quantum photocell. When the gap (\(E-E_{b}\)) was fixed, the less gaps (\(E-E_{\alpha}\)) and the increasing electrostatic dipole-dipole coupling strength \(J\) enhance the quantum interference simultaneously, which leads to the suppressed \(\chi_{2}\). Then, the larger \(J\) generates the sharp decrease of \(\chi_{2}\) about in the range of 0.8\(<\) \(J\) \( <\) 1 in Fig.4(a). But in the case of (\(E-E_{\alpha}\)=0.05 ev), the increasing gap (\(E-E_{b}\)) cause less absorption solar photons. Therefore, the sharp decrease of \(\chi_{2}\) appears about in a smaller range about 0.3\(<\) \(J\) \( <\) 0.5 in Fig.4(b).
\section{ Possible experimental realization }
Up to now, we have investigated the features of RRR dependent the circumstance temperature, gaps and the electrostatic coupling strength of the dipole-dipole coupling \(J\) in this quantum photocell with three electron donors. Now let us suggest some potential experimental researches about this quantum photocell. First of all, two type of energy gaps discussed here display some significant results about the radiative recombination. It manifests that the semiconductor materials with appropriate energy gaps can effectively inhibit radiative recombination. Therefore, seeking a semiconductor material with suitable band gap in experiment may be an interested direction to suppress the radiative recombination. Secondly, the energy gap between the donors and acceptor may be another experimental investigation according our results, and best-effort to reduce this gap is a possible experimental realization for the suppressed RRR. How to align the donors of photocells for an intense electrostatic dipole-dipole coupling strength \(J\) in the manufacturing process may be another research field. The scenario proposed here may be a different approach for the efficient photon-to-charge conversion and deserve further experimental investigation.
\section{Conclusion}
To summarize, in this work we explored the RRR dependent ambient circumstance temperature, gaps and the electrostatic coupling strength of the dipole-dipole coupling \(J\) in a quantum photocell system with three electron donors. It showed that the RRR could be suppressed in this photocell with three uncoupled electron donors but be enhanced with three dipole-dipole coupled electron donors by the ambient circumstance temperatures, and the increasing energy gap in the donors, the decreasing gap between the donors and acceptor inhabited the RRR with three dipole-dipole both coupled and uncoupled electron donors. When the photocell was manipulated by the electrostatic dipole-dipole coupling strength \(J\) at room temperature, the RRR was suppressed to a smaller minimum by the gap between the donors and acceptor than those by different gaps in the donors. These results suggest an encouraging research direction to the high photon-to-charge conversion efficiency via the suppressed RRR in this quantum photocell, and some strategies for the suppressed RRR, such as seeking a semiconductor material with suitable band gap, minimizing the gap between the donors and acceptor and aligning properly the donors for an intense electrostatic dipole-dipole coupling strength \(J\) deserve the further experimental confirmation.
\begin{acknowledgments}
We thank the financial supports from the National Natural Science Foundation of China ( Grant Nos. 61205205 and 61565008 ), and
the General Program of Yunnan Applied Basic Research Project, China ( Grant No. 2016FB009 ).
\end{acknowledgments}
\bibliographystyle{99}
|
\section{Introduction}
Lattice gauge theories are quantum mechanical lattice models with local conservation laws which often harbor unconventional phases of matter~\cite{fradkin2013field,Wen:2004ym} and can simulate the behavior of the vacuum of our universe~\cite{kogut1979introduction}. Traditionally they have been proposed as descriptions of certain frustrated quantum magnets, such as spin ice materials \cite{Gingras}, but there is also recent interest in alternative platforms such as cold atomic systems~\cite{Zohar,UJW}.
A simple model which realizes a lattice gauge theory is the quantum dimer model (QDM) in the square lattice introduced by Rokhsar and Kivelson (RK) nearly thirty years ago~\cite{RK}. A closely related model is the quantum six vertex model (Q6VM) which can be viewed as a quantum spin ice model in the checkerboard lattice~\cite{Shannon,Moessner2004,rom}. These models fall within the class of quantum link models studied by the lattice gauge theory community~\cite{Chandrasekharan:1996ih,Horn:1981kk}. Both models realize a U(1) lattice gauge theory~\cite{fradkin2013field}, and can be viewed as restrictions to different subspaces of the Gauss law for a common underlying microscopic Hamiltonian, as we will revisit in the next section. This RK Hamiltonian contains a single independent parameter, $v$, that can be tuned to realize different phases. Various features are shared between the QDM and Q6VM. For $v<1$ the ground states in the square lattice are broken symmetry phases, in which the charges are confined from the gauge theory point of view~\cite{Polyakov}. For $v=1$, the Hamiltonian realizes the celebrated RK point, at which a soft quadratically dispersing photon mode appears. For $v>1$ the Hamiltonian has a large number of degenerate states that grows exponentially with the linear dimension of the lattice~\cite{Roderich2011}, and both systems exhibit a form of fragile sub-dimensional deconfinement~\cite{Batista,Shannon}.
\begin{figure}
\label{cartoon}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{cartoon6vm.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{cartoondimer.pdf}
\caption{Drude weight and phases for the electric field line for the Q6VM (\textit{top}), which maps onto the spin-1/2 XXZ chain, and the QDM (\textit{bottom}), which maps onto a spin-1/2 two-leg ladder. Insets depict the ground state of the electric field lines in the different regimes. We see similar trends in Q6VM and QDM, with a fluid state intervening between two solids, although in the latter we rely on exact diagonalization of small systems. The solid phases are precursors to the columnar and staggered phases and the liquid is a precursor to the resonant plaquette phase in two dimensions.}
\label{cartoon}
\end{figure}
Remarkably, in spite of its history, the precise nature of phases of the QDM in the square lattice is still a matter of debate. An early numerical study found evidence for a columnar phase for all $v<1$~\cite{Sachdev}. Two subsequent studies advocated for an intervening plaquette valence bond solid phase separating the columnar phase and the RK point, although they disagreed on its location~\cite{Leung,Plaquette}. A third possibility was put forth in Ref.~\cite{Ralko}, which found evidence for a mixed columnar-plaquette phase intervening between the pure columnar and pure plaquette phases. This study also advocated for a considerably reduced region for the potential pure plaquette phase. More recently, by employing height mappings~\cite{Henley}, two Monte Carlo studies have reached larger system sizes and brought the discussion full circle by advocating that there is no intervening plaquette or mixed phase separating the columnar phase and the RK point~\cite{Banerjee,Garrahan}.
In contrast, the situation is more clear in the Q6VM. An exact diagonalization study~\cite{Shannon} found evidence for a columnar phase for $v \lesssim -0.4$, undergoing a phase transition into a plaquette phase that is stabilized for $-0.4 \lesssim v \leq 1$. Similar conclusions were reached in a subsequent Monte Carlo study employing a height mapping~\cite{Banerjee2013}. This study argued that the transition was first order but it found it to be anomalously weak, which was interpreted as arising from proximity to the terminal tricritical point of the first order phase transition line, although such a putative tricritical point has not yet been explicitly accessed to the best of our knowledge.
In addition to their local conservation laws, which encode the local Gauss law constraint, U(1) lattice gauge theories can have additional global conservation laws that depend on the topology of the space. For example in a 2D torus, there are two topological conserved quantities that measure the total electric flux along the periodic directions in the torus, known as t'Hooft operators~\cite{fradkin2013field}. These two operators, also referred to as winding numbers, can be used to further split the QDM and Q6VM Hilbert spaces into decoupled subspaces or sectors. One can think of these operators as measuring the total number of electric field lines that thread the torus in a given direction. The global ground state of the RK Hamiltonian for $v<1$ belongs to the sector with zero winding in which there are as many electric field lines going to the left, to the right, the up and down directions. For $v>1$, many large winding sectors become degenerate and there is no unique global ground state; a set of exactly degenerate ground states emerges which grows exponentially with the perimeter of the torus, as we will revisit in \Sec{sec:6VM}.\footnote{It is often stated that for $v>1$ the staggered pattern of dimers is the ground state of the RK Hamiltonian, but this is only true if one restricts to a specific winding sector and ignores the degeneracy coming from the sectors.} At the RK point, $v=1$, one indeed has an even larger number of exactly degenerate zero energy ground states. This is because, in addition to the aforementioned ground states that appear in large winding sectors for $v>1$, there appears at least one exact zero energy ground for every winding sector, since at the RK point the Hamiltonian is a sum of projectors. The number of winding sectors in a 2D torus scales as the linear size of the system, thus leading to an additional order $\sim L$ ground states at the RK point.
In the present paper, we study the phase diagram of these models using an unconventional line of attack. We will exploit the conserved winding numbers to isolate the quantum dynamics of a single electric field line. This can be achieved in the torus by restricting to the sectors of the Hilbert space with large winding numbers. Similarly in open boundary conditions, one may study a single electric field connecting two static charges in a background vacuum of inert, fully polarized electric field lines. As we will show, the Hamiltonian governing the quantum mechanics of these isolated electric field lines can be mapped exactly onto one dimensional models. In the case of the six-vertex model, the electric field line maps onto the XXZ spin 1/2 chain. This chain is exactly solvable and its phases are well understood. It has three: a gapped symmetry-breaking anti-ferromagnet, an XY magnet with quasi-long-range order (Luttinger liquid), and a ferromagnet. As we will see, these are, respectively, the natural precursors to the columnar, plaquette, and staggered phases of the two dimensional Q6VM. The RK point corresponds to the critical point between the Ising and XY magnet, and hence has an exact underlying SU(2) symmetry. This will allow us to demonstrate that in the largest winding sectors the RK point has a form of \textit{ perfect charge deconfinement} with exactly zero string tension for finite charge separations. We will also show that the single electric field line of the QDM model maps into a two-leg ladder spin 1/2 chain, which to our knowledge has not been previously studied. We find numerical evidence for three phases in this ladder: a gapped phase, a Luttinger liquid, and a phase-separated state. The Luttinger liquid is the natural precursor of the plaquette phase at zero winding, but we find that it has a substantially reduced Drude weight, compared to the Q6VM case, indicating that the liquid is closer to crystallizing. These results are summarized in \Fig{cartoon} where we show the Drude weight and schematic diagrams of the ground state electric field configurations. We caution, however, that our numerical results are limited to very small system sizes and thus it is possible that richer behavior might arise for the QDM two-leg ladder at larger system sizes.
The resemblance of the quasi-one-dimensional single electric field line problem and the full two-dimensional problem in the zero winding sector suggests that much of the behavior of the latter might be understood by thinking of it as a closely packed array of electric field lines which by themselves are undergoing non-trivial phase transitions. This idea is not unprecedented and was advocated in pioneering work by Orland~\cite{Orland1992,Orland1994}, which, however, incorrectly argued the ground state of the QDM and Q6VM to be a gapless liquid like state. A closely related treatment of the problem of quantum spin ice in the presence of Zeeman fields was developed as well in \Ref{PhysRevLett.108.247210}. A related line of thinking has also been used to study the quantum dynamics of stripes~\cite{Eskes}. In this work, we will follow this line of thinking by focusing on understanding the behavior of a single electric field line in the QDM and Q6VM. In an effort to make our presentation self-contained, we have provided a short introduction to the lattice gauge theory formulations of the QDM and Q6VM in \Sec{sec:structure}. In \Sec{sec:sol} we describe the mappings of the Q6VM and QDM as well as their analytical and numerical characterizations.
\section{U(1) GAUGE STRUCTURE OF THE QDM AND Q6VM}
\label{sec:structure}
In this section we revisit the gauge structure of the QDM and Q6VM. These two models can be viewed as arising from the same underlying microscopic Hamiltonian restricted to two different subspaces of Gauss' theorem. The Hilbert space of this underlying Hamiltonian consists of spin 1/2 degrees of freedom lying on the links of the square lattice. We label lattice sites by $\mathbf{r}=(x,y)$, and assign a rightward orientation to the horizontal links and an upward orientation to the vertical links. The two outgoing links from a given site {\bf r} are labeled by the ordered pair $\mathbf{r},x$ for the rightward link and $\mathbf{r},y$ for the upward link.
The electric field is viewed as a vector directed along each link, and its orientation relative to that of the link is given by the corresponding $\sigma_z$ operator:
\begin{equation}
E_{\mathbf{r},x} = \sigma^{z}_{\mathbf{r},x}\;, \qquad E_{\mathbf{r},y} = \sigma^{z}_{\mathbf{r},y}.
\end{equation}
To emulate Gauss' theorem in the lattice, we define a charge operator at every site $Q_{\mathbf{r}}$ as the discrete divergence of the electric field:
\begin{equation}
\nabla \cdot \mathbf{E}_{\mathbf{r}} =
E_{\mathbf{r},x} - E_{\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{\hat{x}},x} +
E_{\mathbf{r},y} - E_{\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{\hat{y}},y} \equiv Q_{\mathbf{r}}.
\end{equation}
The charge operators are the generators of the local gauge transformations at every site r, which are explicitly implemented by the action of
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{U} = \exp \left( i \sum_{\mathbf{r}} \theta_{\mathbf{r}} Q_{\mathbf{r}} \right).
\end{equation}
There are then two essential requirements that any Hamiltonian must satisfy in order to qualify as a gauge theory: it must commute with every $Q_{\mathbf{r}}$ and it should be a sum of local terms. The gauge transformations acting on the spin raising and lowering operators, $\sigma^{\pm}_{\mathbf{r},\ell}$, as follows:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{U}\sigma^{\pm}_{\mathbf{r},\ell \,}\mathcal{U}^{\dagger} =
e^{\left(\pm 2i \mathlarger{\int} \nabla \theta\cdot d\boldsymbol{\ell} \right)}\sigma^{\pm}_{\mathbf{r},\ell} =
e^{\pm 2i \left( \theta_{\mathbf{r}+\mathbf{\hat{l}}}-\theta_{\mathbf{r}} \right)}\sigma^{\pm}_{\mathbf{r},\ell} .
\end{equation}
Thus, $\sigma^{\pm}_{\mathbf{r},\ell}$ transforms like a charge hopping
(or dipole creation) operator of the form $c^\dag_{\mathbf{r} + \ell} c_{\mathbf{r}}$, endowing these operators with the following notion of directionality:
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{matrix}
\includegraphics[scale=1]{dimers-arxiv0-cropped.pdf}
\end{matrix} .
\end{eqnarray}
More generally we can introduce a charge hopping operator associated with a directed line $\gamma$ that starts at site ${\bf r}$ and ends at site ${\bf r'}$, by taking ordered products of $\sigma^{\pm}_{\mathbf{r},\ell}$ following the natural convention for a discrete line integral, as follows:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
\label{eq:chargehopping}
L_{\pm} &= \prod_{\mathbf{r} \in \gamma} \sigma^{\pm}_{\mathbf{r}} \ .
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
The above charge hopping operator for open lines is not gauge invariant. Gauge invariant operators can be obtained by taking ordered products of $\sigma^{\pm}_{\mathbf{r},x(y)}$ to form oriented closed loops, which guarantees that the phases from gauge transformations cancel in pairs. The smallest non-trivial closed loop, associated with each plaquette, is:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Magnetic-loop-contract}
\begin{matrix}
\includegraphics[scale=1]{dimers-arxiv1-cropped.pdf}
\end{matrix}
\end{equation}
We will sometimes refer to these closed loop charge hopping operators as magnetic loop operators.
As we have described, the divergence of the electric field is a locally conserved quantity in a U(1) lattice gauge theory. This conservation law expresses a dynamical conservation of the number of oriented electric field lines pierce any given region bounded by a contractible loop. This can be made more explicit by making use of the lattice version of Gauss's theorem, which reads as follows:
\begin{equation}
\int_{S} \nabla\cdot \mathbf{E} = \sum_{\mathbf{r}\in S}\nabla\cdot \mathbf{E}_{\mathbf{r}}
= \sum_{\mathbf{r}\in \partial S} \mathbf{\hat{n}}\cdot \mathbf{E}_{\mathbf{r}} = \oint_{\partial S} (\mathbf{\hat{n}}d\ell) \cdot \mathbf{E}_{\mathbf{r}}
\end{equation}
It is convenient to transform the integral above into a conventional line integral. For this purpose we define a \textit{dual electric field} $\mathbfcal{E} = \textbf{E} \times \hat{z}$, which is a rotated version of the electric field $\mathbf{E}$. Since it is rotated, it is often convenient to visualize it as residing on the links of the dual lattice. In this way, Gauss' theorem law for a region bounded by a contractible loop can be expressed as a conventional line integral of the dual electric field
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
\int_{S} \nabla\cdot \mathbf{E} &= \oint_{\partial S} (d \ensuremath{\boldsymbol\ell} \times \hat{\mathbf{z}}) \cdot \mathbf{E}_{\mathbf{r}} = \oint_{\partial S} d \ensuremath{\boldsymbol\ell} \cdot \mathbfcal{E}
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
Therefore, any closed line integral of the dual electric field over a contractible oriented loop in the dual lattice is a constant of motion. Now, in geometries with non-trivial topology such as the torus, it is possible to have non-contractible loops for which Gauss' theorem as described above cannot strictly be applied. However, it is easy to show that provided that the underlying Hamiltonian is local and also gauge invariant (i.e. that it commutes with the divergence of the electric field at every site), then the line integral of the dual electric field over such noncontractible loops necessarily commutes with the Hamiltonian as well \cite{fradkin2013field}. These operators are known as t'Hooft operators or winding operators. In a torus there are two independent t'Hooft operators associated with the two principal non-contractible loops, defined as:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:thooft}
\begin{split}
W_{x} &= \oint +d\ell_{y}E_{\mathbf{r},x} = \sum_{\uparrow}E_{\mathbf{r},x}
= \sum_{\uparrow}\sigma^{z}_{\mathbf{r},x} \\
W_{y} &= \oint -d\ell_{x}E_{\mathbf{r},y} = \sum_{\leftarrow}E_{\mathbf{r},y}
= \sum_{\leftarrow}\sigma^{z}_{\mathbf{r},y}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $x,y$ designates the direction of the electric lines which are integrated (see \Fig{fig:tHooft-operators}). We will refer to the eigenspaces with definite t'Hooft operators as winding sectors. Therefore, a U(1) lattice gauge theory has additional topological conservation laws which are distinct from the local conservation laws associated with charge conservation. These global conservation laws are associated with a gauge group $\mathrm{U(1)}_{x}\otimes \mathrm{U(1)}_{y}$ which acts as:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{G}(\theta_{x},\theta_{y}) = \exp\left(
i \theta_{x}W_{x} + i \theta_{y}W_{y}
\right) .
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{dimers-arxiv2-cropped.pdf}
\caption{The links intersected by the above two non-contractible loops on the torus are those that are summed over to form the 't Hooft operators described in Eq~\eqref{eq:thooft}. }
\label{fig:tHooft-operators}
\end{figure}
Notice that charge hopping line operators as defined in \Eq{eq:chargehopping} commute with t'Hooft operators only if they intersect an even number of times because $[\sigma^z, \sigma^{\pm}] = \mp \sigma^\pm$, so each adds a term to the commutator of alternating sign.
This implies that any closed contractible magnetic loop, such as that from \Eq{eq:Magnetic-loop-contract} , commutes with the t'Hooft operators. However, this is not the case for closed non-contractible magnetic loop operators (Wilson loop operators) and for open line charge hopping operators which intersect the t'Hooft operator an odd number of times.
The commutator between the t'Hooft operators and one such charge hopping or Wilson loop operator, $L$, is:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
\null [W_{x'}, L ] &= [ \sigma^z_{\mathbf{r}',x'}, \sigma^\pm_{\mathbf{r}',x'}] \prod_{x \neq x'} \sigma^\pm _{\mathbf{r},x} = \pm L ,
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
where the $\pm$ sign is dictated by the direction of the line integral used to obtain $L$. Therefore, the Wilson loop operators act as raising and lowering operators for the t'Hooft operators, and move between different winding sectors of the Hilbert space. The action of the Wilson loop operators can be interpreted as the process of creating a pair of opposite charges from the vacuum and annihilating them after hopping them over a non-contractible loop, which results in change in the winding number.
\subsection{Construction of the Hamiltonian}
The structure described above is generic to $\mathrm{U}(1)$ lattice gauge theories in 2+1D. In this section we will describe a specific Hamiltonian that reduces to the RK Hamiltonians of the QDM and Q6VM in the appropriate subspaces of the Gauss law. The Hamiltonian reads
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ham}
H = -t \sum_{P} \left( L^{\textcolor{white}{\dagger}}_{P}+L^{\textcolor{black}{\dagger}}_{P} \right)
+ V \sum_{P} \left( L^{\textcolor{black}{\dagger}}_{P}L^{\textcolor{white}{\dagger}}_{P}
+ L^{\textcolor{white}{\dagger}}_{P}L^{\textcolor{black}{\dagger}}_{P} \right) \ .
\end{equation}
where the plaquette operator $L_{P}$ is defined in Eq.~\eqref{eq:Magnetic-loop-contract}. The first term is the analogue of the magnetic field term in Maxwell theory which induces quantum fluctuations of the electric field configurations. The second term is diagonal in the electric field configurations and acts as a potential. In fact,
\begin{equation}
L^{\dagger}_{P}L_{P} = \resizebox{.8\hsize}{!}{$\left(\dfrac{1-\sigma^{z}_{\mathbf{r},x}}{2}\right) \left(\dfrac{1-\sigma^{z}_{\mathbf{r}+\mathbf{\hat{x}},y}}{2}\right) \left(\dfrac{1+\sigma^{z}_{\mathbf{r}+\mathbf{\hat{y}},x}}{2}\right) \left(\dfrac{1+\sigma^{z}_{\mathbf{r},y}}{2}\right)$}
\end{equation}
Thus we see that $L_{P}^{\dagger}L_{P}$ projects onto a loop eigenstates of the electric field at a given plaquette. These two configurations are depicted in Fig~\ref{fig:Six-vertex-Path-1} and are denoted by $\ket{\circlearrowleft}$ and $\ket{\circlearrowright}$. If a plaquette has either of these two electric field configurations, we call it flippable (otherwise, not flippable). Notice that the Hamiltonian in \Eq{eq:ham} only acts on flippable plaquettes; non-flippable plaquettes are annihilated by both the magnetic and the electric field terms. Therefore, the Hamiltonian can be expressed in the following more intuitive notation:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
\label{eq:ham2}
H &= \sum_{\Box} -t (\ket{\circlearrowleft} \bra{\circlearrowright} + \ket{\circlearrowright} \bra{\circlearrowleft}) + V (\ket{\circlearrowleft} \bra{\circlearrowleft} + \ket{\circlearrowright} \bra{\circlearrowright} ).
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
Notice that the term proportional to $V$ counts the total number of flippable plaquettes and the $t$ term exchanges flippable plaquettes. There is a single parameter $v \equiv V/t$ which controls the physics. The RK point is located at $v= 1$ where the Hamiltonian becomes a sum of projectors.
\subsection{Six-vertex model}
The six-vertex model is realized in the subspace in which the charge operator is set to zero, $Q_{\mathbf{r}} = 0$, for every site $\mathbf{r}$, which constrains the electric fields at each site to one of the six configurations shown in Fig. \ref{fig:Six-vertex-model}, and hence the name of the model. Additionally, the Hilbert space further separates into winding sectors specified by the t'Hooft operators $W_{x,y}$ from \Eq{eq:thooft}. Let us consider the sector with maximal winding: $W_x = L_x, W_y = L_y $ where $L_{x,y}$ are the number of sites along the $x,y$ directions. This maximal winding sector contains a single eigenstate in which the electric field at every link is $\sigma_{\mathbf{r}, x(y)} = +1$. Such state is trivially a zero energy eigenstate of the Hamiltonian in \Eq{eq:ham2} as it contains no flippable plaquettes and is one of the exponentially large number of degenerate ground states realized to the right of the RK point for $v>1$. We will see this trivial sector as the reference vacuum on top of which we will create a single electric field line by the action of a charge hopping operator $L$ from \Eq{eq:chargehopping} along a suitably chosen path.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{dimers-arxiv3-cropped.pdf}
\caption{Six vertices consistent with $Q_{\mathbf{r}}=0$.}
\label{fig:Six-vertex-model}
\end{figure}
Specifically, we act on the reference vacuum with a charge hopping operator $L$ which reverses the electric field along this path and terminates at two sites where charges $Q_\mathbf{r}=\pm 2$ are created. This state then evolves under the Q6VM Hamiltonian, \Eq{eq:ham2}. An example of the action of $H$ is depicted in Fig. \ref{fig:Six-vertex-Path-1}, in which it is shown how a plaquette flips with a corresponding change in the electric field line configuration. As we will show in \Sec{sec:xxzmap}, this problem maps identically into the spin 1/2 XXZ chain.
\label{sec:6VM}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{dimers-arxiv4-cropped.pdf}
\caption{One possible path on the lattice before (left) and after (right) having acted with $L_{P}^{\dagger}$ on the counterclockwise flippable plaquette of the figure on the left.}
\label{fig:Six-vertex-Path-1}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Quantum dimer model}
The QDM model is realized in a different subspace of the Gauss law. This is achieved by splitting the sites of the square lattice into two sub-lattices and requiring:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
Q_{\mathbf{r}} &= 2(-1)^{r_x + r_y}.
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
We call the positive (negative) charge sub-lattice A (B). There are four allowed configurations for the electric field lines in the links touching a site in either the A or B sublattices. For the A sublattice, three electric field lines always flow into the site, while a single field line goes out, and the reverse holds for the sublattice B. We can denote the configurations by covering the unique link where the electric field flows into the A sublattice with a dimer. This is also the unique link which flows out of the B sublattice. Since every lattice site is touched by one and only one of these dimers, the allowed configurations of electric field lines in this subspace are in one to one correspondence to arrays of closely packed non-overlapping dimers that fully cover the lattice.
Similarly to the Q6VM, the reference vacuum is chosen so that there are no flippable plaquettes and is a state with an staggered array of dimers such as that depicted in \Fig{fig:dimer}. Notice that this state has winding numbers for the t'Hooft operators given by $W_x = 0,W_y = L_y$. Therefore, unlike the Q6VM, within the subspace of the QDM model, it is impossible to simultaneously maximize the winding numbers along both directions of the torus.
This staggered vacuum is an exact zero energy eigenstate of the RK Hamiltonian from \Eq{eq:ham2}. We can again study how the addition of charges alters the reference vacuum. As we will show in \Sec{sec:mapdimer}, we can act on the background with a open charge hoping line operator. If the path satisfies certain simple conditions, charges will only be created at the ends of the line. The resulting state will now be dynamical, and, as we will see, it maps onto a two-leg ladder of spin 1/2 degrees of freedom. In \Fig{fig:dimer}, we show an example of such a state and the action of the Hamiltonian.
\section{Solution of the Models}
\label{sec:sol}
In this section, we consider the problem of a pair of charges connected by a single fluctuating electric field line. We will map these problems to the XXZ chain for the Q6VM and a two-leg ladder for the QDM. The phase diagram is known in the former case, and we will provide numerical evidence that the diagram is the qualitatively similar for the latter.
\subsection{Mapping the electric field line of the Q6VM to the XXZ chain}
\label{sec:xxzmap}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{dimers-arxiv5-cropped.pdf}
\caption{\textit{Top:} Two states of a string on a square lattice. \textit{Left: } The state at $t=0$ has five flippable plaquettes and is an eigenstate with energy $5V$. \textit{Right:} The state has seven flippable plaquettes, and is an eigenstate too, with energy $5V$. This is also a maximally kinked state.
\textit{Bottom:} The equivalent configuration of the hardcore boson chain. }
\label{fig:path}
\end{figure}
We construct a state with a single electric field line on top of the fully polarized state, which we call the reference vacuum. This reference vacuum is the unique state where the electric field is positive along every link of the lattice. We then add two charges $\pm2$ to prepare the electric field line. Preservation of the local Gauss law requires that the two charges must be connected by a sequence of contiguous links on which we reverse the electric field relative to the reference vacuum. Notice that a flippable plaquette appears at every corner of the electric field line, and therefore such corners have non-trivial quantum dynamics under the action of the Hamiltonian, \Eq{eq:ham2} as depicted in \Fig{fig:path}. Since the reversed electric field line must flow against the polarization of the reference vacuum, it is bounded by the rectangle whose corners are defined by the charges. We take one charge to be sitting at the origin and the other at the site ${\bf r}=(\ell_x, \ell_y)$. The constraint that the line must run against the polarization of the vacuum gives rise to a dynamical conservation of its length, measured using the taxicab distance $|\ell_x| + |\ell_y|$. An analogous dynamical constraint appears in the strong coupling expansion of lattice QCD \cite{RevModPhys.55.775,PhysRevD.23.2945}.
To map this fluctuating electric field line onto a conventional $1D$ system, we unfold the line into a chain of $L\equiv \ell_x + \ell_y$ sites labeled by $i$. We fill the chain with hardcore bosons $b^\dag_i$ defined by
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
\null [b_i, b_j] &= 0, \quad i \neq j \\
\{ b_i, b^\dag_i \}&= 1 \ ,\\
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
so that every horizontal segment corresponds to an empty site and every vertical segment corresponds to a filled site. Because both $\ell_x$ and $\ell_y$ are conserved quantities, the system has a global $U(1)$ symmetry generated by the conservation of the total particle number:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
N_b &= \sum_i b^\dag_i b_i = \ell_y .
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
This allows us to define a filling $\nu = \frac{N_b}{L} = \frac{1}{1+\ell_x/\ell_y}$.
To write the Hamiltonian of the boson chain, we note that the action of the kinetic term in \Eq{eq:ham2} is to flip a corner, reversing the order of its constituent horizontal and vertical segments. This corresponds to hopping a boson between nearest neighbor sites. The potential term counts the number of corners. Therefore these corners can be viewed as counting the links of the 1D lattice on which there is a change of the absolute value of the occupation number of the bosons. Thus, the Hamiltonian can be written as:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
\label{hline}
H_{6v} &= \sum_{i=1}^{L} -t (b^\dag_i b_{i+1} + h.c.) + V (n_i - n_{i+1})^2 , \\
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
Note that we may fix $t>0$ because its sign may be changed via a unitary transformation $b^i \to (-1)^i b_i$. The single electric field line has therefore a Hamiltonian which is equivalent to a 1D Bose-Hubbard model with nearest neighbor hopping and interactions. This model has a particle-hole symmetry $\Theta$:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
\Theta^\dag b_i \Theta &= b^\dag_i \\
\Theta^\dag b^\dag_i \Theta &= b_i \\
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
which takes $\Theta^\dag n_i \Theta = 1 - n_i$. The ground state is only invariant under this symmetry for $\nu = \frac{1}{2}$. This particle-hole conjugation can be interpreted as the a reflection of the electric field line configuration along the diagonal of the square lattice that intersects the charge located at the endpoint of the electric field line at the origin $(0,0)$ and therefore swaps the coordinates of charge at the end-point located at $(l_x,l_y)$, $l_x \leftrightarrow l_y$. Therefore the ground state is invariant only for charges displaced diagonally on the lattice.
As is well known, this model can be mapped from hard-core bosons onto spin 1/2 degrees of freedom. We let $b_i = S_i^-, b^\dag_i = S_i^+, n_i = S^z_i + \frac{1}{2}$ and find
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
H_{6v} &= -J \sum_{i=1}^L \left( S_i^x S_{i+1}^x + S^y_i S^y_{i+1} + v S^z_i S^z_{i+1} - \frac{v}{4} \right)
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
where $J = 2t, v = V/t$. This Hamiltonian generalizes the one first obtained by Orland in \Ref{Orland1992} to non-zero values of $v$. This is the well-known XXZ spin chain which is an exactly solvable model \cite{Yang:1966ty, PhysRev.150.327}. At zero magnetization, or half filling, there are three phases for XXZ model: a gapped Ising ferromagnet for $v>1$, a gapless XY-like magnet with power law correlations for $|v|<1$, and a gapped Ising anti-ferromagnet for $v<-1$, as illustrated in \Fig{fig:XXZ}. The energy density of these phases, defined as the total energy divided by the total number sites, plays the role of the tension of the electric field line and dictates the interaction law between the charges. In general it can be written as:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
E(v,M) &= f(v,M) L + O(L^{-1}), \\
M &= \frac{2}{L} \sum_i S^z_i = \frac{\ell_y - \ell_x}{L}
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
where $M$ is the conserved magnetization and $f(v,M)$ is the free energy density. \Ref{PhysRev.150.327} contains expressions for $f(v,M)$ obtained from the Bethe Ansatz. We will included selected results from this work in the following more detailed description of the phases, and the reader is otherwise referred to the original paper.
We begin in the $v > 1$ ferromagnetic phase at fixed $M$. The global ground state is the trivial fully polarized state with $|M|=1$ and energy $E=0$. For $|M| \neq 1$, the system is unable to reach the global fully-aligned ground state due to the conservation of $M$. Instead, a domain wall is created, corresponding in the bosonic picture to phase separation and in the electric field line picture to the path approaching its bounding rectangle. When this domain wall is large compared to the lattice scale (namely when $v \to 1$), it can can be modeled using a semi-classical continuum description. Using the $\mathrm{U}(1)$ symmetry, we can fix the spin to lie in a plane with $S^z_i \to \sin \theta(x),S^x_i \to \cos \theta(x)$. In this approximation, the energy is given by
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
E &= \int_0^L dx \left( \frac{\rho}{2} \left( \frac{d \theta}{dx} \right)^2 - \lambda \cos^2 \theta \right) \\
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
with $\rho = J , \lambda = J(v - 1)$ in units where the lattice spacing is one. One can minimize this energy using Euler-Lagrange equations, and they may be exactly solved in terms of Jacobi amplitudes for finite $L$. In the limit $L \to \infty$ the solution is given by
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
S^z(x) &= \tanh \frac{x-x_0}{w}, \quad w = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2(v -1)}}
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
where $w$ is the width of the domain wall and $\frac{x_0}{L} = \frac{1-M}{2}$ fixes the magnetization. This solution has $\theta \sim 0, \pi$ except in the region $|x-x_0| \lesssim w$, so the presence of a domain wall contributes an energy $O(L^0)$ to the system, which can be estimated to leading order in $v-1$ to be:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
E &=2 \sqrt{2} J \sqrt{v -1} \\
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
This result is noteworthy as it encodes a form of subdimensional charge deconfinement emerging in the staggered phase to the right of the RK point for $v>1$~\cite{Shannon,Batista}. Namely, when two charges are separated strictly along the horizontal and vertical directions of the square lattice they have an electric field line that costs zero energy and are therefore deconfined; however, when the charges try to move perpendicularly, a domain wall is created that incurs in an energy cost $2 \sqrt{2} J \sqrt{v -1}$. This form of subdimensional deconfinement differs however from the recently studied case of fracton models (see e.g \cite{Chamon,Haah,Yoshida,Vijay,Pretko}).
A remarkable implication of our mapping is that an $\mathrm{SU}(2)$ symmetry emerges at the RK point, since it occurs at $v = 1$ where the XXZ chain becomes the isotropic ferromagnetic Heisenberg model. This has profound consequences on charge confinement. Since the exact ground state of the ferromagnetic is a simple tensor product of spins pointing in the same direction, the exact ground state energy is $E=0$. Because the ferromagnet can smoothly cant away from the $z$ axis without any energy cost due to the exact $\mathrm{SU}(2)$ symmetry, the electric field has vanishing tension independent of orientation of the charges. One should bear in mind that the background we are considering has exactly zero energy at the RK point, so it belongs to the full zero energy manifold even when the restriction of global winding numbers is removed. Recall that at the RK point, all states have non-negative energy because the Hamiltonian is a sum of projectors. Therefore, we have proven that there is ground state at the RK point with exactly zero string tension even for finite charge separations. This is a form of \textit{perfect} charge deconfinement, which contrasts with the generic deconfinement in which the vanishing string tension appears in the asymptotic thermodynamic limit of large charge separations compared to the lattice scale.
The system then enters a gapless phase with power law correlations for $|v| < 1$, undergoing a continuous spin-flop type transition from an Ising magnet with easy axis anisotropy to an XY magnet with easy plane anisotropy through an SU$(2)$ invariant point. The kinetic term dominates and the plaquettes are strongly resonating. Much of the behavior of this phase can be understood by studying the point $v = 0$, at which the Hamiltonian may be mapped into free $1D$ fermions with the Jordan-Wigner transformation. This is most easily seen from \Eq{hline} where the interaction term vanishes. It is then simple to obtain
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
f(0, M) &= -\frac{J}{\pi} \cos \frac{\pi}{2} M \\
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
This function is mimized at $M=0$ where the electric field line is oriented diagonally. We will see later that this is also the preferred orientation of the antiferromagnet.
Because of its strong plaquette flipping fluctuations (which correspond to boson hopping processes), the present gapless phase can be seen as a precursor to the resonating plaquette phase of the full 2D zero winding sector of the Q6VM. Such zero winding sector can be seen as containing a finite density of electric field lines which we have studied. The electric field lines have, however, strong interactions, and these are presumably responsible for turning the liquid Luttinger phase that we encountered into the plaquette crystalline phase seen in numerical studies~\cite{Shannon,Banerjee}.
At $v =-1$, the system undergoes a form of the Kosterlitz-Thouless transition and the free energy is smooth to all orders \cite{PhysRev.150.327} \footnote{An SU$(2)$ symmetry also exists at $v=-1$, as can be seen after a rotating the spins on alternating sites to flip the sign of the $XY$ terms. Thus, $H_{v=1} = - H_{v=-1}$. As a result, the ground state at $v=-1$, a spin singlet, is the highest excited state at $v=1$, where the ground state is fully polarized. } . In \Fig{fig:Q6Vspec0}, we compute the lowest two energy levels at each momentum for a finite sized system; the RK point is clear in the spectrum at $v=1$ but the transition at $v=-1$ is much less so. The gap reopens for $v < -1$ and the system becomes antiferromagnetic for the rest of the parameter space, corresponding in the boson language to a charge density wave. In this regime, the path approaches the diagonal, becoming jagged, and quantum fluctuations freeze out as $|v|$ increases.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{XXZdrude}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,trim=1.5cm 0 0 0]{XXZphases}
\caption{\textit{Top}: The Drude weight of the model is computed for systems of size $L= 3,\dots, 8$ using exact diagonalization. The phase transition at the RK is obvious as $\mathcal{D} \to 0$ at $v = 1$, but the convergence is slower for the infinite order Kosterlitz-Thouless transition at $v = -1$. The inset shows the second derivative of the Drude weight $\frac{d^2 \mathcal{D}}{d^2 v}$ which changes sign roughly at the phase transitions. \textit{Bottom}: The exact phase diagram is shown at $M=0$.}
\label{fig:XXZ}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
It is instructive to compare the behavior of the model with explicit numerical solutions. Although this is not strictly needed in the present case where the phases can be understood exactly, it will prove essential for the QDM model where we lack exact solutions. To diagnose and distinguish fluid and gapped phases, it is useful to introduce the Drude weight $\mathcal{D}$. The Drude weight is finite in the gapless Luttinger liquid phase in which the bosons can flow in response to a probe electric field and vanishes in the insulating phases. The Drude weight can be conveniently computed by twisting the boundary conditions of a length $L$ one-dimensional chain~\cite{Kohn}, which we implement by adding a phase $e^{i\phi}$ at the last bond as follows: \footnote{Notice that this is still a translationally invariant problem with a conserved momentum as the flux can be spread uniformly by changing the gauge via a unitary transformation $b^\dag_j \to e^{ i\frac{j\phi}{L}} b^\dag_j$, which leads to a complex hopping amplitude $t e^{i \phi/L}$. }
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
H_{6v, closed} &= H_{6v, open} + e^{i \phi} t b^\dag_1 b_L + h.c. \ .
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
\noindent The eigenvalues of the Hamiltonian can be determined as functions of $\phi$ numerically and the Drude weight can be computed as the stiffness for twisting boundary conditions~\cite{Kohn}:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
\mathcal{D} \equiv L \frac{d^2 E_{0}}{d\phi^2} \ .
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
In \Fig{fig:XXZ}, we see that the Drude weight distinguishes the conducting and insulating phases fairly well even for modest $L$. We will find a similar behavior for the QDM.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{Q6Vspec0}
\caption{The two lowest energy states in each $k$ sector for $L=7$ are shown relative to the ground state energy for $\phi =0$. At large negative $v$, the odd and even charge density waves at $k=0, \pi$ become degenerate, and the low lying excitations are propagating domain walls. The discontinuity in the first derivative at the RK is visible. On the right, the lowest energy state at each $k$ become approximately degenerate.}
\label{fig:Q6Vspec0}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Mapping the Electric Field line of the QDM to a two-leg ladder}
\label{sec:mapdimer}
Having studied the Q6VM, we now search for a similar mapping in the QDM. To create a single electric field line, we follow an analogous procedure. Without loss of generality, we choose the line to start and end on the A sublattice sites with charges $Q_{\mathbf{r}} = +2$~\footnote{When the path terminates in the B sublattice the last link remains inert under the action of the Hamiltoninan.}. We draw a directed line through a sequence of connected links always against the flow of the background configuration. Notice that flowing against the reference vacuum requires the path to follow a sequence of links which alternates between those with dimers and those without. The line is constructed so that defect monomer charges appear only at the ends of the line, with values $Q_{\mathbf{r}0} = 0$ at the starting site and $Q_{\mathbf{r}f} = +4$ at the ending site, as illustrated in \Fig{fig:dimer}. Along this path, we reverse the direction of the electric field compared to the reference vacuum. This causes the dimers initially present in the background configuration to become unoccupied, and the initially unoccupied links of the path to now contain dimers. At the ends of the line, two dimers overlap the first site and no dimers touch the last.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{dimers-arxiv6-cropped.pdf}
\caption{\textit{Left:} Figures (a), (b) and (c) show succesive states of an open string after having acted with the Hamiltonian on the right flippable plaquette. \textit{Right:} The same configurations and shown in the triangular lattice where the dimers are contracted to points.\textit{Bottom:} The projection into a $1D$ chain is shown, including the flipping from diagonal to horizontal configurations as hoppings from odd to even sites. }
\label{fig:dimer}
\end{figure}
To map the problem into a conventional 1D system, it is convenient to simplify the picture by representing the dimers of the background configuration as points. In this way the electric field line appears as a directed string joining the sites of a triangular lattice as depicted in \Fig{fig:dimer}. In this picture, a single flippable (triangular) plaquette is created when segments of opposite slope are joined into a triangular corner, and \textit{two} are created when the segment is horizontal. No flippable plaquettes are created when a horizontal segment joins a sloped segment. This dictates the form of the diagonal potential term. The kinetic term locally changes the electric field line by flipping triangular corners to horizontal segments. One such possibility is shown in \Fig{fig:dimer} (b). As demonstrated there, string's length along the triangular lattice is not conserved, making mapping to a 1D chain less straightforward. Notice that in this case the string is also constrained to move within a finite region determined by the position of the charges similarly to the Q6VM. In the triangular lattice picture this region is a parallelogram as illustrated in \Fig{fig:dimer}.
We have found, however, a mapping onto 1D hard-core bosons moving in a chain with a basis of two distinct sites which can be viewed as an asymmetric two leg ladder. This chain is obtained by projecting the triangular lattice on a horizontal line to make a one-dimensional lattice as depicted in \Fig{fig:dimer}. This one-dimensional lattice is viewed as having a two-site basis per unit cell of a tight-binding model. The two sites correspond respectively to the projection of the vertices and the projection of the bonds of the triangular lattices onto the horizontal axis and are depicted by the ticks and the links respectively in~\Fig{fig:dimer}. The sites corresponding to the projected vertices will be taken to be even sites (ticks in~\Fig{fig:dimer}) and the neighbouring sites coming from the projected bonds (links in~\Fig{fig:dimer}) will be denoted as odd sites.
We place hardcore bosons on this chain with the following convention: a downward slopping segment of the path in the triangular lattice corresponds to placing a boson on the odd site (links in~\Fig{fig:dimer}) and an upward segment of the path corresponds to an empty odd site. A horizontal segment of the path in the triangular lattice corresponds to a placing boson on the even site (ticks in~\Fig{fig:dimer}), as depicted in \Fig{fig:dimer}. As in the Q6VM, we take one charge at the end of the electric field line to be at the origin, while the other one is placed at a site located at ${\bf r}=(2 \ell_x, \ell_y)$ in the dimer lattice. It is often convenient to visualise triangular lattice as a square lattice rotated by $45^\circ$, this makes the path resemble the one in the Q6VM except that now it is also allowed to occupy one of the diagonals of the square lattice. In this picture one charge would be placed at ${\bf r'}=(\ell_x, \ell_y)$. In the $1d$ representation, the chain would have a total number of sites (counting both even and odd sites) given by $4\ell_x-1$ and a total number of bosons $N = \ell_x - \ell_y$.
Although this convention assigns a unique boson configuration to every allowed path between the two charges, not every boson configuration corresponds to a physical path. Following the rules described above, there is no allowed dimer configuration corresponding to two bosons occupying two nearest neighbor sites, one site being even and the other being site odd. Additionally, there are no allowed configurations with two bosons occupying adjacent second nearest neighbor sites which are both even; namely if a boson sits at site $2i$ there cannot be another boson at site $2i+2$. These boson configurations need to be projected out. This is easily accomplished because the two constraints are local and can be enforced by adding a large energy penalty to those configurations with a term of the form:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
\label{eq:con}
H_{con} &= U \sum_i n_i n_{i+1} + U \sum_{i \, even} n_i n_{i+2}, \quad U \to \infty \ .
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
After these two constraints are imposed, the path and boson Hilbert spaces are in one to one correspondence and one can show that the filling of the model is $\nu \sim \frac{1}{4}(1- \ell_y/\ell_x)$. Notice that the constraints impose that the maximum allowed filling is $\nu = 1/2$.
Let us now describe the quantum dynamics induced by the action of the RK Hamiltonian~\eqref{eq:ham} on the dimer configurations. There is a single kinetic term that flips plaquettes and acts on the path in the triangular lattice by flipping a horizontal segment into either up-down or down-up segment as depicted in \Fig{fig:dimer}. Therefore, just as in the Q6VM, this term acts on the bosons simply as a single particle-hopping term given by
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
H_{hop} &= - \sum_{i} t b^\dag_i b_{i+1} + h.c. \ . \\
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
Now we describe the potential terms which are diagonal in the path configuration and in the boson occupation basis. When the bosons lie in the odd sites (namely when the path has no horizontal segment) then a flippable plaquette appears at every corner of the path, which corresponds to every link of the 1D lattice in which there is a change of occupation of the odd sites, in complete analogy to what was found in the Q6VM. This leads to a potential energy term for the odd sites of the form:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
\label{eq:pot1}
H_{pot,1} = V \sum_{i \, odd} (n_{i} - n_{i+2})^2 \ .
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
Now, every horizontal segment of the path has two adjacent flippable plaquettes as depicted in \Fig{fig:dimer}, and therefore there is a term that acts as a the local chemical potential shift on the odd the sites of the form
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
\label{eq:pot2}
H_{pot,2} &= 2V \sum_{i \, even} n_i \ .
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
In addition when there is a horizontal segment of the path that is adjacent to a downward segment, there is one less flippable plaquette than those counted by the terms in \Eqs{eq:pot1}{eq:pot2} and therefore such energy is removed by a term of the form:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
H_{pot, 3} &= - V \sum_{i } n_i n_{i+3} \ .
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
Thus the complete Hamiltonian is a sum of the terms above; explicitly
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
\label{eq:dimer}
H_{dimer} &= H_{hop} + H_{pot,1}+H_{pot,2}+H_{pot, 3}+H_{con}.
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
This Hamiltonian generalizes the one first obtained by Orland in \Ref{Orland1994} to non-zero values of $v$. Notably, unlike the Q6VM, this model does not reduce to free fermions at $V=0$ due to the presence of the constraint interactions in \Eq{eq:con}. For periodic boundary conditions the Hamiltonian is invariant under translations by two:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
\label{eq:T}
\null [H, T] = 0, \quad T b^\dag_i T^{-1} = b^\dag_{i+2}
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
In addition to this symmetry, there is a particle-hole-like symmetry, which can be understood in the triangular lattice picture as the symmetry that reflects the path along the horizontal axis that intersects the charge at the origin. Viewing the triangular lattice as a square lattice rotated by 45$^\circ$ makes this symmetry look analogous to the particle-hole symmetry we encountered in the Q6VM. This symmetry is presumably responsible for a degeneracy we observe in numerics at quarter filling ($\nu=1/4$), between momenta at $k$ and $k+\pi$ for anti-periodic boundary conditions but we have not found a rigorous proof for this.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=1]{dimers-arxiv7-cropped.pdf}
\caption{Odd and even CDW states. Figures (a) and (c) show CDW on odd sites and are related under the particl-hole-like symmetry, while (b) shows the CDW on even sites. }
\label{fig:CDW}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Phase diagram}
In the remainder we restrict to the case of quarter filling where the charges are only horizontally displaced from each other by $\ell_x = L, \ell_y = 0$ on the triangular lattice, and corresponds to the largest Hilbert space which is expected to be closest precursor to the behavior of the full two-dimensional underlying QDM. We consider a periodic chain of length $\ell = 4 L$ in order to exploit the conservation of total many-body momentum of the $L$ bosons. We begin considering the limit $V \to - \infty$, in which the plaquette resonance terms acts as a perturbation on classical ground states, which in the boson language can be thought of as charge density wave (CDW) states with a definite occupation of the sites. Remarkably, and unlike the Q6VM case, there are two distinct degenerate CDW states in this limit for the QDM. They correspond to the bosons occupying either the even or the odd sites. Each of these states spontaneously breaks the translation symmetry defined in \Eq{eq:T}, and each of them has a symmetry related copy leading to a total of four ground states in the thermodynamic limit, depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:CDW}. The explicit wavefunction in the $V\to -\infty$ limit of the two distinct states is:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
\ket{odd} = \prod_{i=0}^{L-1} b^\dag_{4i + 1} \ket{0}, \quad \ket{even} = \prod_{i=1}^L b^\dag_{4i -2} \ket{0}\\
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
and their symmetry related copies are obtained by translating those above by two units. In the path picture on the triangular lattice, they are either maximally jagged (odd) or maximally straight (even), each having the maximal number (2$\ell$) of flippable plaquettes (see Fig. \ref{fig:CDW}).
Because there is no symmetry relating these states, quantum fluctuations will select a unique true ground state at finite $t$ out of these two. As we will see, however, their competition is delicate and is only resolved at fourth order in perturbation theory in $t$. All odd terms in $t$ must vanish, because the sign of $t$ can be changed by a gauge transformation, and thus the perturbation series begins at $t^2$. These are easily seen to be degenerate because in both CDWs the particle can hop one site in either direction. At fourth order, this degeneracy splits due to competition between single-particle and two-particle processes. On the odd sublattice, a single particle is able to hop two spaces in either direction and return to its original site, thus lowering the energy by delocalizing. In contrast, $H_{con}$ prevents this on the even sublattice. However, the pair encounters raise the energy for $V <0$. On the odd sublattice where particles are more mobile, these interactions raise the energy. Explicitly, we find
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
\frac{E_{odd}}{L} &= 2V - \frac{2t^2}{|V|} + \frac{t^4}{|V|^3} + O(t^6) \\
\frac{E_{even}}{L} &= 2V - \frac{2t^2}{|V|} + 0 + O(t^6)\\
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
leaving the even sublattice CDW as the true ground state. The spectrum at $L=7$ is shown in \Fig{fig:dimerspec0}; the 4 ground states at $k=0, \pi$ are evident, along with the excitations above them.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{dimerspec0}
\caption{The two lowest energy states in each $k$ sector for $L=7$ are shown relative to the ground state energy at $\phi =0$. At large negative $v$, the odd and even charge density waves at $k=0, \pi$ become degenerate. The discontinuity in the first derivative at the RK is visible. On the right, the lowest energy state at each $k$ become approximately degenerate, forming the phase-separated eigenstates in \Eq{eq:phasesep}.}
\label{fig:dimerspec0}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
As we raise $V$ from $-\infty$, the bosons spread into the other sublattice in order to lower their energy by delocalizing under the increasingly strong kinetic term. This allows for the possibility of a phase transition like the one we encountered at $v=-1$ in the Q6VM. Even for small $v$, the model is strongly interacting due to $H_{con}$, and it is non-trivial to study the system here analytically. From the original 2D Hamiltonian, and as will be evident from the numerics, the system has a phase transition at the RK point $v = 1$ above which we can perform a strong coupling expansion. For $v>1$, particles in the odd sublattice experience the nearest neighbor attraction resulting from \Eq{eq:pot1}, and the constraints impose no restriction for them to cluster on the odd sublattice. This state is phase separated and has vanishing energy density, much like the ferromagnetic phase of the XXZ chain. This is most easily seen on the triangular lattice where the classical $V \to \infty$ ground state is given by a large triangular path, degenerate with its reflection under particle-hole symmetry. For periodic boundary conditions, there would be two flippable plaquettes, the second appearing where the string reconnects. Because of translational symmetry, a larger quasi-degenerate manifold would appear due to the delocalisation of the domain walls. At quarter filling, these $2L$ quasi-degenerate states are given by
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
\label{eq:phasesep}
\ket{k} &= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2L}} \sum_{n=0}^{2L-1} e^{-ik n} \prod_{i=1}^L b^\dag_{2i+1 +2n} \ket{0}, \quad k \in \frac{2\pi}{2L} \mathbb{Z} \ , \\
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
and are all degenerate as $V \to \infty$. One can perform standard perturbation theory to find this energy to be:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}
E &= 2V - \frac{2 t^2}{V} + \dots \ .
\end{aligned} \end{equation}
This is twice the domain wall energy (twice because of the periodic boundary conditions). Since the uniform ground state has exactly zero energy density, there is strictly zero string tension, and all the energy is localized within the domain wall. This encodes the same kind of subdimensional deconfinement that we previously encountered in the case of the Q6VM between the monomer charges at the end of the electric field line.
As we have discussed, the two limits of $V \to \pm \infty$ lead to classical insulating CDW-type states. Metallic Luttinger-liquid-like states could appear in between these two limits. To explore this possibility quantitatively, we calculate the Drude weight from the exact diagonalization of the system for $\ell=2, \dots, 7$ with $\phi$ flux through the periodic system. In analogy with the Q6VM case, the twisted boundary conditions are implemented by adding one extra site at the end and localizing the phase change $\phi$ in final bond. We implement the numerical code using only the physical states derived from the string picture to avoid the extended Hilbert space of the bosons. The Drude weight at a selection of system sizes is shown in \Fig{fig:dimerphase}.
Our numerical results confirm the intuition above --- that there appears a metallic region intervening between the two insulating phases realized at $V \to \pm \infty$, which we interpret as the natural 1D precursor to the 2D plaquette phase. The RK point appears clearly. There is evidence in the softer falloff at $V<0$ for a second critical point like in the Q6VM with a conducting region in between. We caution that our numerics are restricted to small system sizes, preventing us from making systematic extrapolations to the thermodynamic limit. Interestingly, the behavior of the Drude weight as a function of $v$ is notably different from the Q6VM result. In the Q6VM we see that the second derivative of the Drude weight with respect to $v$ changes sign only two times as function of $v$ near the critical points between the insulating and metallic phase, as shown in the inset of~\Fig{fig:XXZ}. However, the second derivative of the Drude weight appears to change sign ${\it four}$ times in the QDM, as shown in the inset to~\Fig{fig:dimerphase}. This could indicate the presence of more than one phase intervening between the two classical ground states at $V \to \pm \infty$, but verifying such speculation would certainly require accessing much larger system sizes, which should be possible in DMRG studies.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{New_Figure_10}
\caption{Drude weight of $H_{dimer}$ is computed for systems $L=2, \dots, 7$ via exact diagonalization for the ground state in the $k=0$ momentum sector. The RK point appears sharply at $v=1$ and there is evidence for an intermediate conducting phase. Unlike the Q6VM, there is much more structure in the putative critical region; as shown in the inset, the second derivative of the Drude weight (for $L = 7$) changes sign three times.}
\label{fig:dimerphase}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Summary and Discussion}
We have studied the problem of a single fluctuating quantum electric field lines connecting two isolated charge monomers in the QDM and Q6VM. By constructing these isolated strings on top of trivial inert vacua that appear as ground states to the right of the RK point, we have been able to map the problems exactly onto conventional one-dimensional systems with local Hamiltonians.
In the case of the Q6VM model, the electric field line maps exactly onto the spin-$1/2$ quantum XXZ chain, which is an exactly solvable and well understood. This reveals three distinct phases which correspond to the Ising ferromagnet, the XY magnet, and the Ising antiferromagnet. These three phases are natural one-dimensional precursors to the full two-dimensional phases, seen in numerical studies of the Q6VM~\cite{Shannon,Banerjee2013}. In particular the resonant plaquette phase appears as the Luttinger liquid-like XY magnet state. This mapping has allowed us to reveal an underlying SU(2) symmetry in the RK point for large winding sectors, which corresponds to the critical point between the Ising and the XY magnet in the XXZ chain. This SU(2) symmetry leads to a {\it perfect} charge deconfinement in which the string tension separating charges vanishes even for finite string length. It also allows to understand the sub-dimensional deconfinement present in the staggered phase~\cite{Shannon} as a form of phase separation and domain wall formation that occurs in the Ising magnet when the global magnetization is fixed.
In the case of the QDM model, the electric field line maps exactly onto a one-dimensional lattice of hard-core bosons with two sites per unit cell (or equivalently a two-leg spin-$1/2$ ladder). We have not been able to solve this problem analytically but have been able to understand perturbatively the phases that occur far away from the RK point. These two phases correspond to a CDW state (analogous to the Ising AFM in the Q6VM case) and a phase separated state (analogous to the phase separated Ising FM in the Q6VM case). These two states are the natural precursors to the columnar and the staggered phases of the full two-dimensional QDM. Subdimensional deconfinement appears in the phase separated state, corresponding to the deconfinement in the staggered dimer phase~\cite{Batista}. By numerically computing the Drude weight, we have found evidence for a liquid state intervening between the two crystals that exist away from the RK point. We interpret this liquid, delocalized phase as the one-dimensional precursor of the plaquette valence bond solid in the full two-dimensional problem.
The resemblance of the quasi-one-dimensional single electric field line problems that we have studied and the full two-dimensional problems indicates that the behavior of the latter might be understood by thinking of them as a closely packed array of electric field lines which by themselves are undergoing non-trivial phase transitions. More specifically, as we described in \Sec{sec:structure}, the decoupling of the Hilbert space into winding sectors can be interpreted as a conservation law for the the total number of electric field lines. The zero winding sector where the global ground state of the full Hilbert space resides at the left of the RK point contains a large number of such electric field lines. These lines can be viewed as bosonic strings with hard-core interactions so that the electric field lines do not overlap. This perspective provides a natural understanding of why the crystalline phases of the one-dimensional electric field line survive in the fully two-dimensional multistring case. However, these strong interactions are presumably responsible for the freezing out of the quantum fluctuations of the Luttinger liquid type phase that we have encountered, transforming it into the resonant plaquette crystal state that is seen in numerical studies of the full two-dimensional problem of the six-vertex model. We hope that in the future, more systematic numerical studies of our current setting and of its generalizations to the few strings problems might offer an alternative window the behavior of the less well understood aspects of the presumed resonant plaquette phase of quantum dimer model.
\section{Acknowledgements}
We are thankful for valuable discussions with Cristian Batista, Roderich Moessner, Alet Fabien, Gregoire Misguich, Yi-Ping Huang, Markus Heyl, and Arnab Sen. Special thanks to Debasish Banerjee for teaching us many aspects of these models and of lattice gauge theory.
|
\section{Introduction}
There exist two basic extended solitonic objects in eleven dimensional
M-theory, a membrane and a fivebrane. The membrane's dynamics are
described by eight scalar fields and their spinorial superpartners and
can be derived from the usual super-p-brane action \cite{BeSeTe87}. On
the other hand the dynamics of the fivebrane are much more complicated
since they include a self-dual three form tensor field. The equations
of motion for this system have only been obtained relatively recently
an provide us with an interesting physical system which has received
substantial attention.
There are essentially two formalisms for the dynamics of the
M-fivebrane. The first is based on the manifestly covariant
superembedding formalism \cite{HowSez97,HoSeWe97a} which we will study
here. There is a second approach based on the non-covariant
description of \cite{PerSch97,AgPaPoSch97}. This latter approach was
then later expanded into a covariant form \cite{BLNPST97a} by the
introduction of an auxiliary scalar. In this case the equations of
motion can be obtained from an action and hence many physical
quantities such as the energy density can be readily obtained.
However, there are serious objections to the use of an action for the
M-fivebrane \cite{Wit96,LamWes98b} due to subtleties associated with the
self-duality constraint.
We are therefore interested here in extending the covariant
superembedding approach which does not invoke the use of an action.
To date a draw back has been that various physical quantities such as
the energy have not been identified within this formalism. Thus in
this paper we aim to derive directly from the covariant equations of
motion the full non-linear energy momentum tensor for bosonic fields
of the M-theory fivebrane.
In addition the covariant equations of motion can lead to lengthy
calculations and one expects that a knowledge of the energy, and more
generally the energy momentum tensor, will offer physical insights
into the structure of this highly nonlinear theory. This should also
be helpful when finding and studying new solutions. Finally, since in
the action framework the energy is known it might also lead to a
better understanding of the relation between the two approaches.
This paper is organised as follows: we start by giving a brief
introduction into the covariant formulation of the M-fivebrane. We
then construct a two parameter family of all symmetric second rank
tensors which are covariantly conserved when the fields obey their
equations of motion. After fixing the free parameters using the six
dimensional supersymmetry we are naturally led to a unique form for
the energy momentum tensor. As expected the resulting energy density
is positive definite.
Following this we will evaluate the tensor for a number of solitonic
solutions to the M-fivebrane equations of motion which involve the
self-dual three form \cite{HoLaWe98,GaLaWe98}. We reproduce the
results for the energy in all cases where it was previously obtained
using the Hamiltonian formalism and also obtain it for one additional
case; two intersecting self-dual strings.
\section{The M-Theory Fivebrane}
Let us consider an M-fivebrane in the $x^0,x^1,x^2,...,x^5$ plane.
The field content consists of
five scalars $X^{a'}$, $a' = 6,7,8,9,10$ and a 16 component spinor $\Theta$
corresponding to the breaking of translation and half the spacetime
supersymmetry respectively. However it also contains an antisymmetric
second rank tensor gauge field $B$ whose field strength obeys a
self-duality condition.
The classical equations of motion of the fivebrane in the absence of
fermions and background fields are \cite{HoSeWe97a}
\[
G^{ m n} \nabla_m \nabla_n X^{a'}= 0,
\]
and
\[
G^{ m n} \nabla_{ m}H_{ n p q} = 0.
\]
We use $m,n,p,\ldots=0,1,\ldots,5$ and $ a, b, c,\ldots=0,1,\ldots,5$
for world and tangent indices respectively. The symbols that occur in
the equations of motion are defined as follows: the usual induced
metric for a $p$-brane is given, in static gauge and flat background
superspace, by
\[
g_{ m n} \equiv \eta _{ m n}+ \partial _{ m}X^{a'} \partial _{
n}X^{b'}\delta _{a' b'}.
\]
The covariant derivative in the equations of motion is defined using
the Levi-Civita connection associated with the metric $g_{mn}$.
We define the world surface sechsbein associated with the above metric
in the usual way via $e_m{}^a \eta_{ab} e_n{}^b\equiv g_{mn}$. There is
another inverse metric $G^{ m n}$ which occurs in the equations of
motion, mediating the coupling between the scalars and the gauge field
and
the self-coupling of the latter. It is related to the usual induced
metric given above by the equation
\[
G^{mn} \equiv (e^{-1})_c{}^m \eta^{ c a} m_{ a}^{\ d} m_{ d}
^{\ b} {(e^{-1})}_b{}^n, \lb{bigG}
\]
where the matrix $m$ is given by
\[
m_{ a}^{\ b} \equiv \delta_{ a}^{\ b} -2h_{ a c d}h^{ b c d}.
\]
The field $h_{ a b c}$ is a three-form which is
self-dual
\[
h_{ a b c}= {1\over3!}\varepsilon_{ a b c d e f}h^{ d e f},
\]
with $\varepsilon^{012345}=1$ and $\eta_{ab}={\rm
diag}(-1,+1,\ldots,+1)$, but it is not the curl of a three-form
gauge field. It is related to the field $H_{ m n p}\equiv 3\partial
_{[m}B_{np]}$ which appears in the equations of motion and is the curl
of the two-form gauge field $B_{np}$, but $H_{mnp}$ is not self-dual
in the linear sense. The relationship between the two fields is given
by
\[
H_{ m n p}= e_{ m}^{\ a} e_{ n}^{\ b} e_{ p}^{\ c} {({m }^{-1})}_{
c}^{\ d} h_{abd}.
\]
Clearly, the self-duality of $h_{abd}$ transforms into a
condition for $H_{ m n p}$ and vice versa for the Bianchi identity
$dH=0$.
\section{Constructing the Tensor}
\subsection{The Three-Form Case}
With all scalar fields set to zero the fivebrane dynamics reduce to
the a system involving a self-interacting three-form in 6-dimensional
flat Minkowski-spacetime. For convenience we shall work in the
tangent frame in this section. In this case the self-dual
three-form tensor field $h_{abc}$ equation of motion becomes \cite{HoSeWe97b}
\[
m^{ab}\partial_a h_{bcd}=0,\lb{eom}
\]
where we write $m_{ab}$ as
\[
m_{ab} = \eta_{ab} - 2 k_{ab},
\]
defining a new matrix $k_{ab}$ by
\[
k_{ab} \equiv h_a{}^{cd} h_{bcd}.
\]
We shall need some consequences of the self-duality of $h_{abc}$,
namely
\[
k^a{}_a=0,
\]
and
\[
k^{ab}k_{bc} = \frac16 \delta^a{}_c k^2,
\]
where
\[
k^2 \equiv k^{ab} k_{ab}.
\]
We now want to find the energy momentum tensor associated with
this system. To be precise we want to construct a second rank
symmetric tensor $T_{ab}$ obeying the conservation equation
\[
\partial^a T_{ab}=0.
\]
Observe that the equation of motion \Eq{eom} has a symmetry, we
can send $h_{abc}$ to $-h_{abc}$ and the equation remains
unchanged. Demanding that the energy momentum tensor respects this
symmetry implies that $h_{abc}$ can appear only quadratically i.e.\ in
the form of $k^2$ or $k_{ab}$.
The most general ansatz compatible with this restriction is
\[
T_{ab} = f_1(k^2) \eta_{ab} + f_2(k^2) k_{ab},
\]
where $f_1$ and $f_2$ are two arbitrary functions. From \Eq{eom} we can
obtain an equation of motion for $k_{ab}$, namely
\[
m^{ab} \partial_a k_{bc} = \partial^a k_{ac} -2 k^{ab} \partial_a k_{bc}=0.
\]
We can iterate this equation as follows
\[
\begin{array}{rcl}
\partial^a k_{ab} &=& 2 k^{ac} \partial_a k_{cb},\\[9pt]
&=& 2 \partial_a (k^{ac}k_{cb}) - 2 k_{cb} \partial_a k^{ac},\\[9pt]
&=& \tfrac13 \partial_b k^2 -4 k_{cb} k^{ad} \partial_a k_d{}^c,\\[9pt]
&=& \tfrac13 \partial_b k^2 +4 k_{cb} k_d{}^c \partial_a k^{ad} -4 k_{cb}\partial_a
k^{ad} k_d{}^c,\\[9pt]
&=& \tfrac13 \partial_b k^2 +\tfrac23 k^2 \partial^a k_{ab} - \tfrac23
k_{ab}\partial^a k^2,\\[9pt]
&=& \tfrac13 m_{ab} \partial^a k^2 + \tfrac23 k^2 \partial^a k_{ab}.
\end{array}
\]
Rewriting the last line gives
\[
\partial^a k_{ab} = \frac{\tfrac13 m_{ab}\partial^a k^2}{1-\tfrac23 k^2}.
\]
Plugging this into our ansatz we get
\[
\partial^a T_{ab} &=&\partial_b f_1(k^2) + k_{ab} \partial^a f_2(k^2) + f_2(k^2) \partial^a
k_{ab},\nonumber \\
&=& f_1'\partial_b k^2 + k_{ab} f'_2 \partial^a k^2+f_2\frac{m_{ab}\partial^a k^2}{3- 2
k^2},\\
&=& \left(f'_1 + f_2 \frac1{3-2k^2}\right) \partial_b k^2 + \left(f'_2 -2f_2
\frac1{3-2k^2}
\right)
k_{ab}\partial^a k^2.\nonumber
\]
Demanding conservation implies that the expressions in the two
brackets should vanish. This gives two ordinary differential equations for
$f_1$ and $f_2$. The general solutions are
\[
f_2 = \frac\alpha{3-2k^2},\qquad \mbox{and} \qquad
f_1 = -\frac12 \frac\alpha{3-2k^2} + \beta,
\]
with two constants $\alpha$ and $\beta$.
Hence the most general conserved symmetric tensor built out of
$k_{ab}$ has the form
\[
T_{ab} &=& \beta \eta_{ab} -\frac12 \frac\alpha{3-2k^2} \eta_{ab} +
\frac\alpha{3-2k^2} k_{ab}
= \beta \eta_{ab} - \frac12 \frac\alpha{3-2k^2} m_{ab}.
\]
\subsection{The Covariant Generalisation}
There is an obvious generalisation of this tensor to the case of
active scalars, namely by interpreting the flat-space coordinates of
the previous section as coordinates of the tangent-frame. However it
is not obvious that this doesn't spoil our earlier reasoning. The
setup remains the same apart from the equation of motion \Eq{eom}
which becomes \cite{HoSeWe97a}
\[
m^{ab} \nabla_a h_{bcd} =0.
\]
The main difference between working in flat space and working in the
moving frame is the fact that the covariant derivatives do not
commute. But since all our calculations only involve a single
derivative everything goes through as before and we find that
\[
T_{ab} = \beta \eta_{ab} - \frac12 \frac\alpha{3-2k^2} m_{ab},
\]
is covariantly conserved
\[
\nabla^a T_{ab} =0.
\]
We can now find the canonical tensor simply by switching to the coordinate
frame using the sechsbeins. We will furthermore include a conventional
factor of $\sqrt{-g}$ into our tensor to make sure that
\[
E_{\rm tot }=-\int d^5\!x T^{00},
\]
is the invariant total energy. This allows us to interpret the
fivebrane-model alternatively as a nonlinear theory in six-dimensional
flat space where $d^6\!x$ rather than $\sqrt{-g}d^6\!x$ is the
natural measure.
Rescaling $\alpha$ for later convenience
we get
\[
T^{mn} = \beta\sqrt{-g}g^{mn} + \alpha\sqrt{-g}Q^{-1}m^{mn},\lb{genTensor}
\]
where we introduced $Q\equiv 1-\frac23 k^2$.
\subsection{Fixing the Parameters}
The alert reader might be surprised about the appearance of two free
parameters in the conserved tensor. This is however to be expected
since the energy contains two arbitrary parameters, namely the
scale and the origin. Indeed the second constant $\beta$
multiplies the metric $g_{mn}$ which is always covariantly constant
and therefore by our construction $\beta$ is entirely arbitrary.
On the other hand in a supersymmetric theory there is an alternative
way of computing energy and momentum; they appear on the right hand
side of the anti-commutator of two supersymmetry transformations. This
relation will allow us to fix one of the parameters.
The most general form of the (2,0) supersymmetry algebra in six
dimensions is
\[
\{Q_\alpha^i,Q_\beta^j\} = \eta^{ij} \gamma^m_{\alpha\beta} P_m + \gamma^m_{\alpha\beta}
Z^{ij}_m + \gamma^{mnp}_{\alpha\beta} Z^{ij}_{mnp},\lb{GenSuSy}
\]
where $\eta^{ij}$ is the Spin(5) invariant tensor, $P_m$ is the
momentum and $Z^{ij}_m$ and $Z^{ij}_{mnp}$ are central charges. The
spinor indices $\alpha,\beta,\ldots$ run from 1 to 4 as do the internal
Spin(5) indices $i,j,\ldots$. The $\gamma$-matrices should not be
confused with ordinary $\Gamma$-matrices satisfying $\{\Gamma^m,\Gamma^n\}=2
\eta^{mn}$. They arise as building blocks of the eleven dimensional
$\Gamma$-matrices via
\[
\Gamma^m = \left(
\begin{array}{cc}0 & \gamma^m \\ \tilde{\gamma}^m & 0
\end{array}
\right).
\]
The basic relations are
\[
\{ \gamma^m, \gamma^n \} \equiv \gamma^m \tilde{\gamma}^n + \gamma^n \tilde{\gamma}^m=2\eta^{mn},
\]
with $\tilde{\gamma}^m = \gamma^m$ for $m\neq0$ and $-\tilde{\gamma}^0 =
\gamma^0=1$. The antisymmetric product is defined as
\[
\gamma^{m_1m_2m_3\ldots} \equiv \gamma^{[m_1}\tilde{\gamma}^{m_2} \gamma^{m_3} \ldots,
\]
and one also has the following duality relation
\[
\gamma^{m_1m_2\ldots m_n}= - \frac1{(6-n)!}(-1)^{\frac{n(n+1)}{2}}
\epsilon^{m_1m_2\ldots m_n m_{n+1}\ldots m_6}\gamma_{ m_{n+1}\ldots m_6}.
\]
We need the local version of equation \Eq{GenSuSy}. Recall that to every
symmetry of a physical system one can construct an associated
conserved current $j_\mu$ which upon integration gives rise to a time
independent charge
\[
Q = \int d^{d-1}\!x j_0,
\]
which acts as a generator of the symmetry on the fields of the model via
\[
\delta \phi = [Q,\phi].
\]
The expression on the right hand side of the last equation is
understood to be evaluated in terms of the Poisson brackets of the
fundamental fields.
Hence the local version of equation \Eq{GenSuSy} is given by
\[
\int d^5\!x \{Q_\alpha^i,j_{0\beta}^j\}=\int d^5\!x\eta^{ij} \gamma^m_{\alpha\beta}
T_{0m}\mbox{ + central charge terms,}
\]
where $j_{m\beta}^j$ is the supercurrent and $T_{mn}$ the energy
momentum tensor. We can rewrite this as
\[
\int d^5\!x \delta_\alpha^i j_{0\beta}^j=\int d^5\!x\eta^{ij} \gamma^m_{\alpha\beta}
T_{0m}\mbox{ + central charge terms,}
\]
from which we learn that the energy momentum tensor can be obtained as
the supervariation of the supercurrent.
To make our calculation simpler we shall consider the linearised
supersymmetry and also ignore all interactions. This will allow us to
use the free-field Poisson brackets and yet will still determine
the constant $\beta$.
Since we are only interested in the bosonic part of the energy
we can focus on the part of the supercurrent which is
of the form
\[
j=\Theta B\mbox{ + terms cubic in $\Theta$},
\]
where $B$ is constructed out of bosonic fields only. The
full supervariation of the supercurrent is then given by
\[
\delta j = B \delta \Theta,
\]
plus terms which vanish if we set the Fermions to zero.
To determine $B$ consider the supervariation of $\bar{\Theta}$, the
Dirac conjugate of $\Theta$. We have
\[
\delta\bar{\Theta} = \{Q,\bar{\Theta}\} = \int d^5\!x \{j,\bar{\Theta}\}
= \int d^5\!x \{\Theta B,\bar{\Theta}\}
= \int d^5\!x B \{\Theta,\bar{\Theta}\}= B,
\]
where we used the free Fermion Poisson bracket
$\{\Theta(x),\bar{\Theta}(x')\}=\delta(x-x')$ and ignored terms which vanish if
we set the Fermions to zero. Hence can read off all information from
the supervariation of the Fermions, which was calculated for the most
general case in \cite{GaLaWe98}. We have, at linearised level,
\[
\delta \Theta_\beta^j = \frac12\epsilon^{\alpha i}\partial_m X^{c'} \gamma^m_{\alpha\beta} \gamma_{c'
i}{}^j
-\epsilon^{\alpha j}\frac16 h_{m_1m_2m_3} \gamma^{m_1m_2m_3}_{\alpha\beta}.
\]
For the supervariation of the supercurrent we find from our earlier
reasoning
\[
\delta j &=&\frac14(\epsilon_1)^{\alpha i}\partial_m
X^{c'} (\gamma^m\gamma^0)_{\alpha\beta} \gamma_{c' i}{}^j \partial_n X^{d'}
(\gamma^n)^\beta{}_\gamma \gamma_{d'
j}{}^k (\epsilon_2)_{\gamma k}\nonumber \\
&&-\frac1{36} (\epsilon_1)^{\alpha i} h_{m_1m_2m_3} (\gamma^{m_1m_2m_3}\gamma^0)_{\alpha\beta}
h_{m_4m_5m_6} (\gamma^{m_4m_5m_6})^{\beta\gamma} (\epsilon_2)_{\gamma i}\nonumber \\
&&-\frac16 (\epsilon_1)^{\alpha i}\partial_m
X^{c'} (\gamma^m\gamma^0)_{\alpha\beta} \gamma_{c' i}{}^j h_{m_1m_2m_3} (\gamma^{m_1m_2m_3})^{\beta\gamma}
(\epsilon_2)_{\gamma j}\nonumber \\
&&+\frac16 (\epsilon_1)^{\alpha i} h_{m_1m_2m_3} (\gamma^{m_1m_2m_3}\gamma^0)_{\alpha\beta} \partial_m
X^{c'} (\gamma^m)^{\beta\gamma} \gamma_{c' i}{}^j
(\epsilon_2)_{\gamma j},
\\
&=&
\frac14(\epsilon_1)^{\alpha i} (\gamma^m\gamma^0\gamma^n)_\alpha{}^\gamma
(\gamma_{c'}\gamma_{d'})_i{}^k
\partial_m X^{c'}\partial_n X^{d'}(\epsilon_2)_{\gamma k}\nonumber \\
&&-\frac1{36} (\epsilon_1)^{\alpha i} (\gamma^{m_1m_2m_3}\gamma^0\gamma^{m_4m_5m_6})_\alpha{}^\gamma
h_{m_1m_2m_3} h_{m_4m_5m_6} (\epsilon_2)_{\gamma i}
\nonumber \\
&&+\frac16 (\epsilon_1)^{\alpha i} ([\gamma^{m_1m_2m_3}\gamma^0,\gamma^m])_\alpha{}^\gamma
\gamma_{c' i}{}^j \partial_m
X^{c'} h_{m_1m_2m_3}
(\epsilon_2)_{\gamma j}.\nonumber
\]
For simplicity we take only one of the scalars fields to be active,
namely $X\equiv X^{5'}$. Using the identities
\[
h_{m_1m_2m_3}h_{m_4m_5m_6} \gamma^{m_1m_2m_3}\gamma^0\gamma^{m_4m_5m_6}=
2 (3!)^2 \gamma_m k^{m0},
\]
and
\[
\partial_m X \partial_n X \gamma^m \gamma^0 \gamma^m = 2 \gamma_m (\tfrac12 \eta^{m0} \partial^p X \partial_p X
-\partial^m X \partial^0 X),
\]
and neglecting the last term which is a central
charge contribution we find
\[
\delta j &=& \frac12 \epsilon_1 \gamma_m \epsilon_2 \left\{
\frac12 \eta^{m0} \partial^p X \partial_pX - \partial^mX \partial^0X -4 k^{m0}\right\}.
\lb{SuSyTensor}
\]
Expanding \Eq{genTensor} up to terms quadratic in fields gives
\[
T^{mn} = (\alpha+\beta)(\eta^{mn} + \tfrac12 \eta^{mn}\partial^p X \partial_p X -
\partial^mX \partial^n X) - 2 \alpha k^{mn}.\lb{BraneTensor}
\]
The two expressions look similar except for the first term in
\Eq{BraneTensor} which does not appear in \Eq{SuSyTensor}.
This is to be expected,
however, since a configuration with all fields set to zero corresponds
to the vacuum and hence must have zero energy in a supersymmetric
theory. From the 11-dimensional viewpoint the same configuration is a
flat, static brane which has the constant energy density normalised to
one.
Comparing the other coefficients gives the relation $\beta=-\tfrac12
\alpha$ and we find that
\[
T^{mn} = \alpha \tfrac12 \frac{\sqrt{-g}}{Q} \left((2-Q) g^{mn} - 4
k^{mn}\right),\lb{emtensor}
\]
is the unique conserved, symmetric rank two tensor that is compatible
with supersymmetry, justifying the name energy momentum tensor.
Following our earlier reasoning we can normalise the tensor by
demanding that it reduces to $\eta^{mn}$ if all fields are set to zero.
This gives $\alpha=2$, a choice we adopt from now on.
For a static configuration we find the following simple formula for
the energy density
\[
E = \frac{\sqrt{-g}}{Q}\left(2-Q + 4 k^{00}\right).
\]
Recall that the field $h_{mnp}$ is not closed and the physics
is most naturally described by $H_{mnp}$.
We would therefore like to find
$T^{mn}$ in terms of $H_{mnp}$. To this end we note two
identities which can be readily derived \cite{GaLaWe98}
\[
Q &=& -{3\over H^2}\left(1 - \sqrt{1 +{2\over3}H^2}\right),\\
h_{mnp} &=& QH^{(+)}_{mnp} ,
\]
where $H^{(+)}_{mnp}$ is the self-dual part of $H_{mnp}$. Therefore
one finds
\[
k^{mn} = Q^2 H^{(+)mpq}H^{(+)n}{}_{pq}.
\]
Finally we note that we can rewrite this tensor in a much simpler form in
terms of the natural metric $G^{mn}$ occurring in the superembedding formalism.
To this end recall the definition of the inverse metric \Eq{bigG},
\[
G^{mn} = (1+ \tfrac23 k^2)g^{mn} - 4 k^{mn} = (2-Q) g^{mn} -4 k^{mn}.
\]
Using this we find that
\[
T^{mn} = \sqrt{-g} Q^{-1} G^{mn}.
\]
We can replace the determinant as well. Using
\[
\sqrt{-G} = Q^{-3} \sqrt{-g}
\]
we find a third expression for the tensor, namely
\[
T^{mn} = \sqrt{-G} Q^2 G^{mn}.
\]
From this final expression it is obvious that the energy, given by $E=
-T^{00}$, is always positive definite. Note that $\sqrt{-G}$ and $Q^2$
are always positive and $G^{00}$ is the time-time-component of the
metric which occurs naturally in the embedding formalism. Using our
conventions this implies that $G^{00}$ is negative definite and hence
the energy is positive definite. We note that this agrees with the
energy momentum tensor obtained using the action formulation
\cite{BLNPST97b}.
\section{Applications}
To make contact with previous work on the energy of fivebrane
configurations we now evaluate our tensor for some of the known solitonic
solutions to the fivebrane equations of motion. For most cases
expressions for the energy are also known \cite{GaGoTo98,GaLaWe98}
from the noncovariant Hamiltonian formalism
\cite{PerSch97,AgPaPoSch97,BLNPST97a}. Here we are able to reproduce
these known results and also to determine the energy for the intersecting
self-dual string solution of \cite{GaLaWe98,LamWes98c}.
\subsection{The Self-Dual String}
We are looking for a string-soliton whose world sheet lies in the
$(x^0,x^5)$-plane and hence take all fields to be independent of these
two coordinates. We shall denote indices ranging from
0 to 5 from indices ranging from 1 to 4 by putting a hat on the
former. We use the following ansatz \cite{HoLaWe98}
\[
X^{6'} &\equiv& \phi, \nonumber\\
h_{05a} &\equiv& v_a, \\
h_{abc} &=& \epsilon_{abcd} v^d,\nonumber
\]
the last equation being a consequence of the self-duality of $h$.
All other scalars and all other components of
$h_{\hat{a}\hat{b}\hat{c}}$ are set to zero. To evaluate the
energy-momentum tensor we have to calculate the $m$-matrix. In the
tangent frame we get:
\[
m_{\hat{a}}{}^{\hat{b}} = \left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
1+4v^2 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & (1-4v^2) \delta_a{}^b + 8 v_a v^b & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1+4v^2
\end{array}\right).
\]
The usual induced metric reduces in static gauge to
\[
g_{\hat{m}\hat{n}}= \left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
-1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & \delta_{mn} + \partial_m \phi \partial_n \phi & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1
\end{array}\right).
\]
We shall also need the inverse metric and the associated sechsbein,
they take the form of
\[
g^{\hat{m}\hat{n}}= \left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
-1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & \delta_{mn} + \frac{\partial_m \phi \partial_n \phi}{g} & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1
\end{array}\right),
\]
and
\[
e_{\hat{m}}{}^{\hat{a}} = \left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & \delta_m^a +c \partial_m \phi \partial^a \phi & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1
\end{array}\right),
\]
where $ -g=-\det g = 1 + |\partial \phi |^2$ and
$c = \frac{-1 \pm \sqrt{-g}}{|\partial \phi |^2}$.
We are only interested in the energy of this
configuration. We find
\[
-E = T^{00} = \sqrt{-g}g^{00} e_0{}^0 e^0{}_0 (2 m_0{}^0Q^{-1} -
\delta_0{}^0)= -2\sqrt{-g} (1+4v^2)Q^{-1} +\sqrt{-g}.
\]
Using $Q=1 - \tfrac23 k^2 = 1 - 16 v^4$ this reduces to
\[
E = \sqrt{-g}\frac2{1-4v^2} - \sqrt{-g}.
\]
Demanding that the solution preserves half the supersymmetries leads
to the Bogomol'nyi condition
\[
v_a = \frac12 \frac{\partial_a \phi}{1+\sqrt{1+|\partial \phi |^2}}.\lb{StringBogo}
\]
A bit of algebra gives $1-4 v^2= \tfrac2{1+ \sqrt{-g}}$
and hence finally
\[
E=-g = 1+ |\partial \phi|^2,
\]
which agrees with the result obtained using the non-covariant formalism
\cite{GaGoTo98,GaLaWe98}.
\subsection{Neutral Strings: The Instanton}
This solution is obtained by setting all scalars to zero, and taking
the remaining fields to be independent of the $x^0$ and $x^5$
directions. Since with all scalars inactive the induced metric is the
flat metric we shall work in the tangent frame in
this section. Furthermore we take the three-form to be
\[
h_{0ab} = \pm h_{5ab} \equiv F_{ab},
\]
with all other components set to zero. Depending on the sign the
two-form $F_{ab}$ is taken to be either self-dual or anti-self-dual.
We get the following expression for $k_{\hat a}{}^{\hat b}$,
\[
k_{\hat a}{}^{\hat b} = \left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
-F^2 & 0 & F^2 \\
0 & 0 & 0 \\
-F^2 & 0 & F^2
\end{array}\right),
\]
where $F^2=F^{ab}F_{ab}$ and the scalar $k^2$ vanishes. Focusing on the energy we have
\[
E=-T^{00}=1+4 F^2.
\]
This also agrees, up to a rescaling of $F \rightarrow \tfrac14 F$, with
the result obtained from the non-covariant formalism \cite{GaLaWe98}.
\subsection{Combining Neutral and Self-Dual Strings}
If we superpose the solutions of the two previous subsections we get
the following expression \cite{GaLaWe98} for $k_{\hat a}{}^{\hat b }$
\[
k_{\hat a}{}^{\hat b} = \left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
-F^2-2 v^2 & \sqrt2v_c F^{bc} & F^2 \\
4 \sqrt2 v^c F_{ac} & 2v^2\delta_a{}^b -4 v_a v^b & -4 \sqrt2 v^c F_{ac} \\
-F^2 & \sqrt2 v_c F^{bc} & F^2-2v^2
\end{array}\right).
\]
Using the Bogomol'nyi condition \Eq{StringBogo} gives after a
lengthy calculation the following expression for the energy
\[
E = 1+ |\partial \phi |^2 + (1+\sqrt{1+|\partial \phi |^2})^2F^2.
\]
This result uses the unphysical field $F_{ab}$ which is not the curl
of a one-form gauge field. Recall that in general the self-dual
three-form $h_{\hat a \hat b \hat c}$ is not equal to the physical
three-form $H_{\hat a \hat b \hat c}$. The relation between $F_{ab}$
and the physical field $K_{ab}=H_{0ab}$ is given by
\[
K_{ab} &=& (1-4v^2)^{-1} F_{ab} = \tfrac12 (1+ \sqrt{1+|\partial \phi |^2}) F_{ab}.
\]
Hence in terms of $K$ the energy is given by
\[
E = 1+ |\partial \phi |^2 + 4 K^2,
\]
which up to a rescaling $K \rightarrow \tfrac14 K$ agrees with the expression for the
energy obtained using the Hamiltonian formalism \cite{GaLaWe98}.
\subsection{Intersecting Self-Dual Strings: The Monopole}
As a final example we now consider two intersecting self-dual strings
\cite{GaLaWe98,LamWes98c}. This soliton can be related to monopole
configurations in $N=2$ supersymmetric Yang-Mills theories \cite{LamWes98c}
and the evaluation of the energy is therefore of some interest.
We have two active scalars, $X^{6'}$ and $X^{7'}$, depending on the 4
spacetime coordinates $x^0,\ldots,x^3$ and two additional
coordinates $x^4$ and $x^5$. It will be useful to introduce complex
coordinates for these
\[
z\equiv x^4+ix^5,
\]
and also to combine the two real scalar fields into a single complex scalar
field
\[
s \equiv X^{6'}+i X^{7'}.
\]
We denote the associated derivatives by
\[
\partial \equiv \partial_4+i\partial_5.
\]
In this section we use indices $a,b,c,\ldots=0,1,2,3$ in the
tangent-frame, where we will perform all calculations, indices
$m,n,p,\ldots=0,1,2,3$ in the world-frame and put hats on these to
denote indices taking the full range from 0 to 5. In the tangent frame
we shall also use $i,j,k,\ldots =1,2,3$ to denote purely spatial indices.
In the complex coordinate system the flat metric and its inverse are given by
\[
\eta_{\hat{a}\hat{b}} \equiv \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\eta_{ab} & 0 \\
0 & \smallmatrix
0 & \tfrac12 \\
\tfrac12 &0
\endsmallmatrix
\end{array}\right),
\quad
\mbox{and}
\quad
\eta^{\hat{a}\hat{b}} \equiv \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\eta^{ab} & 0 \\
0 & \smallmatrix
0 & 2 \\
2 &0
\endsmallmatrix
\end{array}\right),
\]
where $\eta_{ab}$ and $\eta^{ab}$ denote the usual four-dimensional flat
Minkowski-metric and its inverse. In the world-frame we find
\[
g_{\hat{m}\hat{n}} = \eta_{\hat{m}\hat{n}} + \tfrac12 \partial_{\hat{n}}s\partial_{\hat{m}}\bar{s}
+ \tfrac12 \partial_{\hat{n}}\bar{s}\partial_{\hat{m}}s.
\]
We also need the determinant which is given by
\[
\begin{aligned}
-g= -\det g &= (1+ |\partial s|^2 - |\bar{\partial} s|^2)^2 + 4 |\bar{\partial} s|^2\\
&\hphantom{=(+}+ |\partial_i s|^2(1 + |\partial s|^2 + |\bar{\partial} s|^2)
+ (\partial_i s)^2 \bar{\partial} s\bar{\partial} \bar{s} + (\partial_i \bar{s})^2 \partial s\partial \bar{s}.
\end{aligned}
\lb{detg}
\]
We will only consider static solutions, i.e.\ have set $\partial_0\equiv0$ and
also have expanded all expressions up to second order in the spatial derivatives
for simplicity. The process of solving the fivebrane equations starts
with making an ansatz for the six-dimensional three-form. We decompose
$h$ into four-dimensional two-forms and vectors as follows
\[
h_{abz} = \kappa\cF_{ab}, \quad h_{ab\bar{z}}=\bar{\gk}\bar{\cF}_{ab}, \quad h_{az\bar{z}} = i v_a.
\]
Self-duality of $h$ implies that $h_{abc}= 2 \epsilon_{abcd} v^d$ and
$\cF_{ab} = \tfrac{i}2 \epsilon_{abcd} \cF^{cd}$.
Demanding preservation of half of the supersymmetry leads to the
following set of Bogomol'nyi-conditions \cite{GaLaWe98,LamWes98c}. Given in the
tangent frame they are
\[
\kappa \cF_{0i}
&=& {1\over8}\eta\left({1+|\partial s|^2-|\bar{\partial} s|^2\over X^2 - |\bar{\partial} s|^2}\right)
\left(
{X^2\partial_is + \partial\bar{s}\partial s\partial_i\bar{s}\over X \det e}
\right)\ ,\nonumber\\
v_0 &=& +{i\over16}\eta\left({1+|\partial s|^2-|\bar{\partial} s|^2\over (X^2-|\bar{\partial} s|^2)^2}\right)\left[
(1+|\partial s|^2+|\bar{\partial} s|^2){\bar\partial s\partial_is\partial^i\bar{s}\over(\det e)^2}\right. \nonumber\\
&&\left. \ \ \ +|\bar{\partial} s|^2
{(\partial s\partial_i\bar{s}\partial^i\bar{s}-\bar\partial\bar{s}\partial_i s\partial^i s)
\over (\det e)^2}\right]+ {i\over4}\eta{\bar\partial s\over X^2 - |\bar{\partial} s|^2},\\
v_i &=& {1\over16}\eta\bar\partial s\left({1+|\partial s|^2-|\bar{\partial} s|^2\over (X^2-|\bar{\partial} s|^2)^2}\right)
{\epsilon_{ijk}\partial^js\partial^k\bar{s}\over \det e}\ ,\nonumber\\
{\bar \partial}s &=& -\partial\bar{s}\nonumber,
\]
where $\eta = \pm 1$ and the conditions for the remaining components of
$\cF$ are obtained by using its self-duality. We have used the following
convenient expressions
\[
\det e &\equiv& \sqrt{(1+|\partial s|^2-|\bar{\partial} s|^2)^2+4|\bar{\partial} s|},\\
X^2 &\equiv& \frac12 (1+|\partial s|^2+|\bar{\partial} s|^2+\det e).
\]
Here $\det e$ denotes not the full determinant of the vielbein but only
the part without spatial derivatives.
In the static case we have the following formula for the energy
\[
E = \sqrt{-g} \frac{2-Q-4 k_0^0}{Q}.
\]
We only need to know $Q$ and $k_0{}^0$ which are given by
\[
Q &=& 1-256v_0^2(v_0^2-2|\kappa|^2\cF_{0i}\bar{\cF}^{0i}),\\
k_0{}^0 &=& -8 v_0^2 + 8 |\kappa|^2\cF_{0i}\bar{\cF}^{0i}.
\]
Despite the complexity of the Bogomol'nyi conditions we finally get a
remarkably simple answer for the energy, namely
\[
E = \frac{-g}{1 + |\partial s|^2 - |\bar{\partial} s| ^2},
\]
where the determinant of the spacetime metric is given by
\Eq{detg}.
If we take $s$ to be
a holomorphic function of $z$ the energy reduces to
\[
E= 1 + |\partial s|^2 + |\partial_i s|^2.
\]
Reverting to the real scalar fields and setting $\partial\equiv0$ we find
\[
E = 1+ (\partial_i X^6)^2 + (\partial_i X^7)^2,
\]
which agrees with the energy obtained using the Hamiltonian formalism
as given in \cite{GaLaWe98}.
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper we have shown that the tensor
\[
T^{mn} = \frac{\sqrt{-g}}{Q} \left((2-Q) g^{mn} - 4 Q^2 H^{(+)mpq}H^{(+)n}{}_{pq}
\right),
\]
where $Q = -\tfrac{3}{H^2}(1 - \sqrt{1 +{2\over3}H^2})$ and
$H^{(+)}$ denotes the selfdual part of $H$,
is covariantly conserved, compatible with supersymmetry and gives
expressions for the energy of solitonic configurations which agree
with the Hamiltonian expressions in all known cases.
In closing we remark that although the change of variables between the
covariant and action approaches is rather complicated \cite{BLNPST97b}
our results and those of \cite{GaLaWe98} suggest that, for BPS states, we
may simply identify
\[
\tilde H^{\rm PST}_{mn} = \tfrac14 H^{\rm covariant}_{mnp}v^p,
\]
where $v^p$ is the unit vector in the action formulation \cite{BLNPST97a}.
Perhaps this observation will lead to a better
understanding of the relation between the two approaches.
|
\section{Introduction}
Biological systems provide an important motivation to study the
physics of active processes which on a molecular scale are able to
transduce chemical energy into mechanical work and motion. Important
examples are motor proteins and enzymes which move actively along DNA
\cite{albe94}. The properties of such systems differ
in several respects from macroscopic machines and heat engines: (i)
active phenomena occur on a molecular scale in a very viscous
environment with overdamped dynamics, motion is thus stochastic and
obeys only on average the first and second laws of thermodynamics;
(ii) these systems are isothermal and operate strictly at constant
temperature as they are in intimate contact with a thermal bath.
In recent years, a number of theoretical approaches to describe
this class of systems have been developed
\cite{ajda92A,ajda92B,magn93,astu94,pros94,astu97,juli97B}.
In order to discuss the energy transduction of such systems, the
concepts which have been developed for macroscopic motors have to be
applied with some care. Recently, there has been a growing interest
in the energetics of Brownian motors
\cite{feyn66,magn94,juli95,seki97,shib97,soko97,juli98,mats98,dere98,parr98,hond98,kame98,seki98}. It is the aim of
this article to discuss generic aspects of energy transduction of
Brownian motors driven by a chemical reaction and to provide several
specific examples which reveal new and interesting properties.
The two-state models which we use \cite{juli97B} represent a useful
paradigm for the description of energy transduction of isothermal
motors in the overdamped regime. They are motivated by cytoskeletal
motor proteins which move along polar and periodic filaments. Coupling
a two state model to a chemical reaction, which induces transitions
between the two states of the motor, leads to motion and
force-generation if the chemical potential difference $\Delta \mu$
between the fuel and its reaction products is nonzero and if the
system has a polar symmetry. Assuming that the chemical reservoirs
coupled to a single motor are macroscopic in size, this chemical
potential difference can be defined even under out-of equilibrium
conditions since in this limit the reaction driving the microscopic
motor affects the reservoir only weakly. Using $\Delta
\mu$ as the relevant control parameter, the consumed chemical free
energy by the active process is well defined. This leads to a simple
definition of efficiency $\eta$ as the ratio of the mechanical work
performed and the consumed chemical free energy.
We find three important results:
\begin{itemize}
\item The efficiency calculated for these
models can be maximized far from equilibrium.
\item Close to thermal equilibrium there exists a linear response
regime which is important because of its universal features. We
demonstrate that the dependence of the efficiency in this regime on
temperature is strongly model dependent and can be non-monotonous
in which case thermal fluctuations are essential for an efficient
energy transduction.
\item The efficiencies vanish at stalling conditions (
zero average velocity) except in a singular limit where they reach
the ideal value $\eta=1$.
\end{itemize}
The outline of our paper is as follows. In section II, we discuss
generic aspects which are completely independent of the model
chosen. We define the efficiency and identify the generalized currents
and forces which allow us to write a linear response theory. We
discuss the generic features of efficiency in this regime, in
particular the maximal efficiency under reversible conditions and the
efficiency at stalling conditions. In Section III we choose an
explicit realization of the transport equations where the motor is
described as a two-state model which is coupled to a chemical
reaction and we identify the energy fluxes in the system. Section IV
discusses the
energy transduction properties for specifically chosen examples. We
show that efficiency is typically optimized in the irreversible regime
and give examples for the temperature dependence of $\eta$ when the
system operates in the linear response regime. In our concluding
remarks, we relate our results to biological motors and discuss
alternative definitions of efficiency which have been used in the
literature.
\section{Isothermal ratchets: Generic Aspects}
\subsection{Force, velocity and efficiency}
Motivated by linear biological motor proteins which move along a
linear filament, we will consider chemically driven systems which can
induce motion along a one-dimensional track. The energy source is the
difference of the chemical potentials $\Delta \mu$ of fuel and
products. Being motivated by biological motors, we use the hydrolysis
ATP $\rightleftharpoons$ ADP + P as example \cite{albe94}. We define
\begin{equation}
\Delta\mu=\mu_{A}-\mu_P
\end{equation}
where $\mu_{A}$ and $\mu_P$ are the chemical potentials of ATP and ADP+P,
respectively. In order to perform useful mechanical work, the system
has to move against an external force $f _{\rm ext}$ applied parallel to the
track. In addition to the two generalized forces $\Delta \mu$ and
$f _{\rm ext}$ acting on the system, we can define two generalized velocities:
(i) the average velocity of motion $v$ of the motor along the track;
and (ii) the chemical reaction rate $r$ defining the average number of
ATP molecules consumed per unit time. The motor can thus be
characterized by the equations of state
\begin{eqnarray}
v & = & v(f _{\rm ext},\Delta\mu) \\
r & = & r(f _{\rm ext},\Delta\mu) \label{eq:eqst}
\end{eqnarray}
which describe the velocities of the system as a function of the
generalized forces \cite{footnote1}. The mechanical work performed
per unit time against the external force is given by
\begin{equation}
\dot W = f _{\rm ext} v \quad .
\end{equation}
The amount of chemical energy consumed per unit time is
\begin{equation}
\dot Q = r \Delta\mu \quad .
\end{equation}
For a system which performs mechanical work, i.e. $f _{\rm ext} v<0$, we can
define the (mechanical) energy transduction efficiency as \cite{hill74}
\begin{equation}
\eta = -\frac{f _{\rm ext} v}{r \Delta\mu} \label{eq:eff}
\end{equation}
Because of energy conservation,
the amount of energy dissipated per unit time therefore
reads:
\begin{equation}
\Pi \equiv f _{\rm ext} v + r \Delta \mu \quad .\label{eq:diss}
\end{equation}
From the second law of thermodynamics it follows that $\Pi$ must
always be positive.
\subsection{Linear response theory}
Close to thermal equilibrium, i.e. for small forces $f _{\rm ext} \ll T/l$ and
$\Delta\mu\ll T$, where $l$ is a typical length scale of the motor
and $T$ is the temperature measured in units of $k_B $, we
can expand Eq. (\ref{eq:eqst}) to linear order:
\begin{eqnarray}
v & = & \lambda_{11} f _{\rm ext} + \lambda_{12} \Delta\mu \nonumber\\
r & = & \lambda_{21} f _{\rm ext} + \lambda_{22} \Delta\mu \quad .\label{eq:ons}
\end{eqnarray}
The matrix $\lambda_{ij}$ of linear response coefficients has the
following physical meaning: $\lambda_{11}$ is a mobility giving the
response of the velocity to the applied force. $\lambda_{22}$ plays a
similar role for fuel consumption. It describes the 'chemical
admittance' or the response of the chemical reaction rate $r$ to the
chemical force $\Delta \mu$. The coefficients $\lambda_{12}$ and
$\lambda_{21}$ are mechano-chemical coupling coefficients which are
responsible for energy transduction.
Looking at the symmetry of the problem, we find that $v$ and $f _{\rm ext}$
transform like vectors for $x\rightarrow -x$ while $r$ and $\Delta
\mu$ are scalars which do not change under inversions. As a
consequence, the coefficients $\lambda_{11}$ and $\lambda_{22}$
transform as scalars while $\lambda_{12}$ and $\lambda_{21}$ are
vector coefficients. The latter can be nonzero only if the system has
a polar symmetry. Thus, the polarity of the system (polar filaments)
is essential for motion to exist.
Calculating the dissipation rate $\Pi$ in the linear regime, we find
that $\Pi$ is positive exactly if the diagonal
elements are positive, $\lambda_{ii}>0$ and if the determinant is
positive
\begin{equation}
\lambda_{11}\lambda_{22}-\lambda_{12}\lambda_{21}
>0 \quad .\label{eq:detlam}
\end{equation}
On general grounds, we expect a symmetry relation between the
Onsager coefficients if microscopic
reversibility is obeyed:
\begin{equation}
\lambda_{12}=\lambda_{21} \quad \label{eq:ons_rel} \quad .
\end{equation}
This is a general result of non-equilibrium thermodynamics.
\subsection{Modes of operation}
Different modes of operation of the motor can be distinguished by
looking at the input and output of energy of the system. The
dissipation rate $\Pi$ corresponds to the total flux of energy to the
thermal bath at temperature $T$. Passive regimes of the motor are
those cases where both $r \Delta \mu$ and $f _{\rm ext} v$ are positive: Work
performed on the system is dissipated and lost.
More interesting are the active regimes where the motor transforms
chemical energy into mechanical work or vice versa while dissipating
only a part of the energy input. Four such active regimes exist, see
Fig. \ref{f:lin_regimes}:
\begin{itemize}
\item[A:] $r \Delta\mu >0$, $f _{\rm ext} v<0$, The motor uses the chemical
energy of the ATP in excess as input and performs mechanical work
moving with $v>0$ against a negative force $f _{\rm ext}<0$.
\item[B:] $r \Delta\mu <0$, $f _{\rm ext} v>0$,
The motor produces ATP, although already in excess, from mechanical
input due to a negative force $f _{\rm ext}<0$ inducing a negative velocity
$v<0$.
\item[C:] $r \Delta\mu >0$, $f _{\rm ext} v<0$,
The motor uses ADP in excess to perform mechanical work.
\item[D:] $r \Delta\mu <0$, $f _{\rm ext} v>0$,
The motor produces ADP already in excess from mechanical work.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\psfig{file=fig1.ps,width=7.0 cm}}
\vspace{0.5cm}
\caption{Operation diagram for an isothermal motor in the linear response
regime as a function of external force $f _{\rm ext}$ and chemical potential
difference $\Delta\mu$. General case with four different regimes
A-D, separated by lines $v=0$ and $r=0$ where the velocity and the
fuel consumption vanish, respectively. The maximal efficiency occurs
along a line $\eta_{\rm max}$.}
\label{f:lin_regimes}
\end{figure}
The different regimes are separated by the lines $f _{\rm ext} =0$,
$\Delta\mu=0$, $v=0$ and $r=0$. For regimes A and C, where the motor
performs mechanical work the mechanical efficiency is the one defined
in Eq. (\ref{eq:eff}): $\eta=-f _{\rm ext} v/r\Delta\mu$. Similarly, in
regimes B and D, where the system performs chemical work, the chemical
efficiency $\eta_c\equiv -r\Delta\mu/f _{\rm ext} v$ is more useful.
Within the linear response
regime, the efficiency can be calculated using the Onsager coefficients
\begin{equation}
\eta = -\frac{\lambda_{11} a^2+ \lambda_{12} a}
{\lambda_{21}a+\lambda_{22}} \quad ,
\label{eq:etaml}
\end{equation}
where $a=f _{\rm ext}/\Delta\mu$. If we choose a constant $\Delta\mu>0$, the
efficiency vanishes for $f _{\rm ext}=0$ (no work is performed). $\eta$
becomes positive for $f _{\rm ext}<0$ (note the minus sign which indicates that
the force is applied in the direction opposing movement), reaches a
maximum for a certain value of the force and becomes zero again at the
stall force for which $v=0$. According to Eq. (\ref{eq:etaml}), the
efficiency is constant along straight lines $f _{\rm ext}=a \Delta\mu$ which
correspond to constant $a$. Thus, at the origin of the
$(f _{\rm ext},\Delta\mu)$-plane which corresponds to thermal equilibrium and
reversible, quasistatic operation, the efficiency $\eta$ has a
singularity and is multi-valued.
Maximal efficiency occurs for a certain value $a$ for
which $\partial \eta/\partial a=0$. It is given by
\cite{kede65,juli97B}
\begin{equation}
\eta_{\rm max}=(1-\sqrt{1-\Lambda})^2/\Lambda \quad .\label{eq:lin_eta}
\end{equation}
Here, $\Lambda \equiv \lambda_{12}^2/(\lambda_{11}\lambda_{22})$. It
varies between $\eta_{\rm max}=0$ for $\lambda_{12}=0$ and $\eta_{\rm
max}=1$ if $\lambda_{12}^2=\lambda_{11}\lambda_{22}$. Larger values
$\Lambda>1$ violate thermodynamics according to Eq. (\ref{eq:detlam})
and the Onsager relation (see Eq. (\ref{eq:ons_rel})).
These arguments demonstrate that the efficiency vanishes under
stalling conditions $v=0$. This is an important difference from Carnot
engine for which the efficiency is optimized under quasistatic
conditions without net motion. It results from the fact that the
energy transduction driven by a chemical reaction considered here will
in general still have a nonzero consumption rate $r$ even when motion
stops, or in other words $v=0$ and $r=0$ do not occur for the same
conditions.
There is however one limiting case where this is no longer true: If
$\Lambda\rightarrow 1$, the two lines $r=0$ and $v=0$ in the
$(f _{\rm ext},\Delta\mu)$-plane tend towards each other.
In this limit the chemical reaction and motion are strictly coupled
(i.e. one can't occur without the other) and the efficiency reaches
the maximum $\eta=1$. This situation is an idealized case which
applies to good approximation to polymerization forces and motion
generated by polymerization processes as in the case of RNA polymerase
\cite{dogt97,juli98}
\section{Two state model}
\subsection{Transport equations}
We study energy transduction and efficiencies of isothermal motors
using simple two-state models. The motor is characterized by its
position $x$ along a one dimensional coordinate describing the polar
and periodic track. We assume that the motor exists in two different
conformations or states $\sigma=1$,$2$. The interaction between motor
and track depends on $\sigma$ and is described by potentials
$W_\sigma(x)$ with polar symmetry which are periodic with period $l$.
The role of the chemical reaction is to trigger transitions between
the two states. We introduce the position dependent rate constants
$\omega_{1}(x)$ and $\omega_2(x)$ which characterize the probability
per unit time for the transitions $1\rightarrow 2$ and $2\rightarrow
1$ at position $x$, respectively. The probability densities $P_1(x,t)$
and $P_2(x,t)$ for the system to be at time $t$ at position $x$ in one
of the two states obey the Fokker-Planck Equations \cite{pros94}
\begin{eqnarray}
\partial_t P_1 + \partial_x J_1& =& -
\omega_1(x) P_1 + \omega_2(x) P_2 \nonumber\\
\partial_t P_2 + \partial_x J_2& =&
\omega_1(x) P_1 - \omega_2(x) P_2 \quad \label{eq:Psp}
\end{eqnarray}
The particle currents are given by
\begin{equation}
J_\sigma \equiv \xi^{-1} [-T\partial_x P_\sigma
- P_\sigma \partial_x W_\sigma + P_\sigma f _{\rm ext} ] \quad ,\label{eq:J}
\end{equation}
where $\xi^{-1}$ is an effective mobility, the temperature $T$ is measured
in units of $k_B$ and $f _{\rm ext}$ is the external force introduced above.
For given rates $\omega_\sigma$ the system relaxes to a steady state
with $\partial_t P_\sigma=0$. The normalized distributions which
satisfy periodic boundary conditions ($\int_0^l dx\; (P_1+P_2)=1$,
$P_\sigma(0)=P_\sigma (l)$ and $\partial_x P_\sigma(0)=\partial_x
P_\sigma (l)$) in the steady state allow us to calculate the average
velocity
\begin{equation}
v=\int_0^ldx\;(J_1+J_2) \quad .\label{eq:v}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Coupling to a chemical reaction}
We now consider the situation where the transitions between states $1$
and $2$ occur as a result of a chemical reaction scheme which we model
separately. In order to be general and to capture different
situations, we consider the following scheme:
\begin{eqnarray}
ATP + M_1 & \begin{array}{c c c}
&\alpha_1 & \\
& \rightleftharpoons & \\
& \alpha_2 &
\end{array}
& M_2 + ADP + P \\
ADP+P + M_1 & \begin{array}{c c c}
&\gamma_1 & \\
& \rightleftharpoons & \\
& \gamma_2 &
\end{array}
& M_2 + ATP \\
M_1 & \begin{array}{c c c}
&\beta_1 & \\
& \rightleftharpoons & \\
& \beta_2 &
\end{array}
& M_2 \quad ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\alpha_i$, $\gamma_i$ and $\beta_i$ denote the forward and
backward rates, respectively. The reaction pathway $\alpha$ involves
ATP hydrolysis with chemical free energy gain $\Delta\mu$ when
changing from state $1$ to state $2$, while pathway $\gamma$ involves
hydrolysis in the opposite direction. The transitions $\beta$ are do
not involve a chemical potential difference. Chemical kinetics requires
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\alpha_1}{\alpha_2}& =& e^{(W_1-W_2+\Delta\mu)/ T} \\
\frac{\gamma_1}{\gamma_2}& =& e^{(W_1-W_2-\Delta\mu)/ T} \\
\frac{\beta_1}{\beta_2}& =& e^{(W_1-W_2)/ T}\quad .
\end{eqnarray}
The transition rates can therefore be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
\omega_1 & = &\! \alpha_2 e^{(W_1-W_2+\Delta\mu)/ T}\!+\!\gamma_2 e^{(W_1-W_2-\Delta\mu)/ T}\!+\!\beta_2 e^{(W_1-W_2)/ T} \nonumber \\
\omega_2 & = &\! \alpha_2\! +\! \gamma_2\!+\!\beta_2 \quad , \label{eq:om1om2}
\end{eqnarray}
where unknown ($l$-periodic) functions $\alpha_2(x)$, $\gamma_2(x)$
and $\beta_2(x)$ define the conformation dependence of transitions
rates \cite{footnote2}. With these expressions, the net steady state
ATP consumption rate is given by
\begin{equation}
r = \int_0^l dx
\left [ (\alpha_1(x)-\gamma_1(x)) P_1(x)-
(\alpha_2(x)-\gamma_2(x)) P_2(x) \right ] .\label{eq:r}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Detailed balance}
If $\Delta\mu=0$, the chemical reaction is in equilibrium and the
transition rates are just thermal fluctuations and obey the relation
of detailed balance $\omega_1/\omega_2 =
\exp((W_1-W_2)/T)$. Breaking of detailed balance for $\Delta\mu\neq 0$
is a requirement for spontaneous motion and force generation to be
possible. In order to quantify the departure from thermal equilibrium
and the extend to which detailed balance is broken, we define the
quantity
\begin{equation}
\Omega(x) = \omega_1(x)
- \omega_2(x) \exp\left(-\frac{\Delta W(x)}{T}\right) \quad ,
\end{equation}
with $\Delta W(x)=W_2(x)-W_1(x)$. Detailed balance is obeyed only
if $\Omega(x)=0$ for all $x$.
Using the transition rates as given by Eq.
(\ref{eq:om1om2}), we find
\begin{equation}
\Omega(x) = e^{-\Delta W/T} \left [\alpha_2(x)\left(e^{\Delta\mu/T}-1\right)
+ \gamma_2(x)\left(e^{-\Delta\mu/T}-1\right)\right ] .
\end{equation}
If $\Delta\mu\neq 0$, we distinguish two interesting limits: for small
$\Delta\mu/T\ll 1$
\begin{equation}
\Omega(x)\simeq (\alpha_2(x)-\gamma_2(x))
e^{-\Delta W/T} \frac{\Delta\mu}{T} \quad ,
\label{eq:Odmu}
\end{equation}
indicating that $\Omega$ is proportional to $\Delta \mu$.
If $\Delta\mu/T$ is large compared to one,
$\Omega$ depends only on the ratio $k=[ATP]/[ADP][P]$:
\begin{equation}
\Omega(x)\simeq (\alpha_2(x)e^{\Delta\mu^0/T} k
+ \gamma_2(x)e^{-\Delta\mu^0/T}k^{-1}) \quad ,
\end{equation}
where $ \Delta \mu^0 = \mu^0_{ATP} -\mu^0_{ADP} -\mu^0_{P}$. Here, we
used the relation $\mu_i=\mu_i^0+T \ln [i]$ where $[i]$ is the
concentration of species $i$, and $\mu_i^0$ the so called standard
chemical potential.
\subsection{Energy conservation and dissipation}
\label{s:diss}
The first law of thermodynamics requires that the energy flow
through the system is conserved as described by Eq. (\ref{eq:diss}).
This energy conservation can be derived from the transport
equations. This leads to expressions for the local density
of energy dissipation which gives interesting insights in how
energy transduction is occurring.
We distinguish two types of dissipation rates: (i) the dissipation
rates $\Pi_\sigma$, with $\sigma=1,2$ corresponding to sliding within
the potential profiles and (ii) the dissipation rates $\Pi_\mu$, with
$\mu=\alpha,\beta,\gamma$ corresponding to transitions between the two
states. In addition to the total dissipation rates $\Pi_\sigma$ and
$\Pi_\mu$, we introduce local dissipation densities $\Theta_\sigma(x)$
and $\Theta_\mu(x)$ with $\Pi=\int_0^l dx
\Theta(x)$.
For a particle sliding in the potential $W_\sigma(x)$ with a steady state
distribution $P_\sigma(x)$ \cite{lebo55,degr62}
\begin{equation}
\Theta_\sigma= - J_\sigma \partial_x H_\sigma \label{eq:dissdens}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\Pi_{\sigma} = - \int_0^l dx
\; J_\sigma(x) \partial_x H_\sigma(x) \quad , \label{eq:dissloc}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
H_\sigma(x) \equiv W_\sigma(x) -f _{\rm ext} x + T \ln (P_\sigma(x))
\end{equation}
is an enthalpy whose gradient induces the
Fokker-Planck current $J_\sigma$:
\begin{equation}
J_\sigma= - \xi^{-1} P_\sigma\partial_x H_\sigma \quad .
\end{equation}
Therefore, $\Pi_\sigma$ is positive definite as expected for a
dissipation rate. Similarly, the dissipation densities corresponding
to chemical transitions are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\Theta_\alpha &=& (\alpha_1 P_1 -\alpha_2 P_2)
(H_1-H_2+\Delta\mu) \nonumber \\
\Theta_\gamma &=& (\gamma_1 P_1 -\gamma_2 P_2)
(H_1-H_2-\Delta\mu) \nonumber \\
\Theta_\beta &=& (\beta_1 P_1 -\beta_2 P_2)
(H_1-H_2) \quad ,
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{equation}
\Pi_{\mu} = \int_0^l dx\; \Theta_\mu(x) \quad ,
\label{eq:diss_th}
\end{equation}
for $\mu=\alpha,\beta,\gamma$. Again, $\Pi_{\alpha}$, $\Pi_{\beta}$
and $\Pi_{\gamma}$ are positive definite as required. For a steady
state with periodic boundary conditions, we can partially integrate
Eq. (\ref{eq:dissloc}) and find together with Eq. (\ref{eq:Psp})
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lll}
\Pi_1 + \Pi_2 & = & \int_0^l dx\; (H_1 \partial_x J_1 +
H_2 \partial_x J_2) +f _{\rm ext} v \\
& = & \int_0^l dx\;
(H_1-H_2) (\omega_1 P_1 - \omega_2 P_2) +f _{\rm ext} v\quad .
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Using Eqns. (\ref{eq:J}),(\ref{eq:om1om2}) and (\ref{eq:r}), we find
that, the total dissipation rate
\begin{equation}
\Pi=\Pi_1+\Pi_2+
\Pi_\alpha+\Pi_{\beta}+\Pi_{\gamma}\label{eq:pi12abc}
\end{equation}
satisfies Eq. (\ref{eq:diss}) and energy
conservation is obeyed.
For small $\Delta\mu$ and small $f _{\rm ext}$, the two state model has a
linear response regime which obeys the general properties
required by thermodynamics. In particular it can be demonstrated
that the model satisfies the symmetry relation of
Eq. (\ref{eq:ons_rel}) as we describe in appendix \ref{s:ons_rel}.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\psfig{file=fig2.ps,width=6.0cm}}
\vspace{0.5cm}
\caption{Three choices of potentials $W_1$ and $W_2$ with period $l$
and transition regions indicated in grey. The position $a$ of the
maximum of $W_1$ characterizes the potential asymmetry, $U$ denotes
the potential amplitudes. (a) System A with potentials shifted by a
distance $\delta$ and offset $U_0$. Active transitions $\alpha$ and
thermal transitions $\beta$ are localized within regions of size $d$
near the potential minima. (b) System B with symmetric states. The
potentials are shifted by a distance of $l/2$, active transitions
$\alpha$ and $\gamma$ are chosen such that the system is symmetric
with respect to an exchange of the two states. (c) System C with a
flat potential $W_2$, localized active transitions $\alpha$ and
non-localized thermal transitions $\beta$.}
\label{f:pot}
\end{figure}
\section{Efficiencies close to and far from equilibrium}
\subsection{Specific examples}
We have introduced a general framework which allows us to study a
large variety of systems which differ in their potential shapes and in
the transition rates $\alpha_2$, $\gamma_2$ and $\beta_2$. We now
discuss three particular examples which we have chosen as prototypes
to illustrate the physics of energy transduction.
{\bf System A} is a system with two periodic potentials of equal
amplitude $U$ which are piecewise linear and which are shifted with
respect to each other by a displacement $\delta$ as shown
schematically in Fig. \ref{f:pot} (a).
Furthermore, they differ by a constant value $U_0$: $W_2(x)=
W_1(x-\delta)+U_0$. The potentials are characterized by the asymmetry
parameter $a$ which denotes the position of the potential maximum of
$W_1$. We choose a reaction scheme with chemically activated
transitions $\alpha_{1,2}$ between the low energy state $1$ and the
high energy state $2$, passive transition $\beta_{1,2}$ and
$\gamma_{1,2}=0$. The chemical cycle corresponds to subsequent
transitions $\alpha$ and $\beta$ which we choose localized within
intervals of size $d$:
\begin{equation}
\alpha_2(x) = \left\{
\begin{array}{l l}
\omega & \quad {l-d\leq x\leq l} \\
0 & \quad \hbox{\rm otherwise,}
\end{array}
\right .\label{eq:alpha2}
\end{equation}
localized near the minimum of $W_1$ and
$\beta_2(x)=\alpha_2(x-\delta)$ localized near the minimum of $W_2$,
see Fig. \ref{f:pot} (a). Here we have for simplicity introduced a
single parameter $\omega$ which sets the typical time scale of
transition rates.
The transition rates $\omega_\sigma$ of system A obey
\begin{eqnarray}
\omega_1(x) =\alpha_2(x) &e^{(W_1-W_2+\Delta\mu)/T} &+ \alpha_2(x-\delta)
e^{(W_1-W_2)/T} \nonumber \\
\omega_2(x) =\alpha_2(x) & &+ \alpha_2(x-\delta)
\quad .
\label{eq:tr_modA}
\end{eqnarray}
System A is chosen in such a way that diffusion within the
potentials is not necessary for motion generation and each chemical
cycle generates with high probability a forward step along the
$x$-coordinate.
{\bf System B} has different symmetry and different topology of the
chemical reaction scheme as compared to system A, see Fig
\ref{f:pot} (b). The two potentials are shifted by exactly half a
potential period $\delta=l/2$: $W_2=W_1(x-l/2)$ and $U_0=0$. This
allows us to introduce a new symmetry: the system is invariant under a
shift $x\rightarrow x+l/2$ if at the same time the states are
exchanged: $1\rightarrow 2$. This situation is realized by choosing
transition rates $\beta_{1,2}=0$ and $\gamma_1(x)=\alpha_2(x-l/2)$
where we localize all transitions near the potential minima. We can
therefore write for system B
\begin{eqnarray}
\omega_1(x) =&\alpha_2(x)e^{(W_1-W_2+\Delta\mu)/T} +
\alpha_2(x-l/2)& \nonumber \\
\omega_2(x) =&\alpha_2(x) + \alpha_2(x-l/2) e^{(W_2-W_1+\Delta\mu)/T}&
\quad , \label{eq:tr_modB}
\end{eqnarray}
with $\alpha_2(x)$ given by Eq. (\ref{eq:alpha2}). Note, that system
B involves {\em two} active chemical steps per potential period.
However, because of its additional symmetry it is $l/2$-periodic.
Furthermore, all chemical transitions involve ATP hydrolysis, there
are no passive transitions.
{\bf System C} is shown in Fig. \ref{f:pot} (c). It is a variant of model
A with a weakly bound state $W_2(x)=U_0$ of constant energy. As for
system A we choose a reaction scheme with $\gamma_{1,2}=0$ and
localized active transitions near the minima using again definition
(\ref{eq:alpha2}). Since the potential $W_2$ is structureless, we
assume passive transitions to be non-localized with
$\beta_2(x)=\omega$. Therefore in system C
\begin{eqnarray}
\omega_1(x) =\alpha_2(x) &e^{(W_1-W_2+\Delta\mu)/T} &+ \omega
e^{(W_1-W_2)} \nonumber \\
\omega_2(x) =\alpha_2(x) & &+ \omega
\quad .
\label{eq:tr_modC}
\end{eqnarray}
In this case motion generation involves a diffusive step in
state $2$ which we expect to reduce the efficiency of energy
transduction.
In order to discuss these models, we identify the relevant
dimensionless parameters: the dimensionless position $\bar
x=x/l$, reduced temperature $t=T/U$, reduced potentials
$w_\sigma=W_\sigma/U -f _{\rm ext} l/U$ and reduced transition rates
$\bar\omega_\sigma=\omega_\sigma/\omega$. Eqns. (\ref{eq:Psp}) and
(\ref{eq:J}) can for a steady state be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
-\partial_{\bar x}(t\partial_{\bar x} P_1+
P_1\partial_{\bar x}w_1 )&=& \chi(-\bar\omega_1 P_1 +\bar\omega_2 P_2)
\nonumber \\
-\partial_{\bar x}(t\partial_{\bar x} P_2+
P_2\partial_{\bar x}w_2 )&=& \chi(\bar\omega_1 P_1 -\bar\omega_2 P_2)
\quad . \label{eq:adim}
\end{eqnarray}
The dimensionless parameter
\begin{equation}
\chi\equiv \frac{\omega \xi l^2}{U} \label{eq:chi}
\end{equation}
compares two time-scales: (i) the typical chemical time $\omega^{-1}$
and (ii) the typical sliding time in the potentials $\xi l^2/U$.
For $\chi\gg 1$ transitions are fast compared to sliding while for
$\chi\ll 1$ sliding is fast. The model is fully characterized by the
dimensionless parameters $\chi$, $T/U$, $\Delta\mu/U$, $a/l$, $d/l$, $\delta/l$
and $U_0/U$. The results discussed in the following section are
obtained by numerically solving Eq. (\ref{eq:adim}) with periodic
boundary conditions for the three different systems.
\subsection{Efficiencies close to equilibrium}
Numerical examples for the maximal efficiency in the linear response
regime as a function of temperature are displayed in
Fig. \ref{f:efflin} for systems A, B and C and different values
of $\chi=\omega\xi l^2/U$.
They have been obtained by first
calculating Onsager coefficients from steady state solutions for small
$\Delta\mu$ and small $f _{\rm ext}$ and using Eq. (\ref{eq:lin_eta}). The
orders of magnitude of the efficiency differ for systems A, B and
C. The efficiency $\eta$ depends on $\chi$ and increases in general
with increasing $\chi$. System B has the largest efficiency which
approaches $\eta\simeq 1$ for small $T/U$ and decreases monotonically
as a function of temperature. For systems A and C the efficiency
has a maximum as a function of temperature and vanishes in the limit
of small $T/U$. This indicates in these cases the importance of
thermal fluctuations for energy transduction. Note, that the limit of
small temperatures is subtle since in linear response $\Delta\mu \ll
T$ must be obeyed. Therefore, this limit corresponds to first sending
$\Delta\mu$ to zero and $T$ afterwards. Even for small temperatures
the system thus remains in a regime where thermally activated passage
over energy barriers rests important. While system A can have
significant efficiencies of the order of $\eta\simeq 0.06$ in the
linear response regime, the efficiency of system C which relies on
diffusive steps is small ($\eta\simeq 10^{-4}$), see
Fig. \ref{f:efflin}.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\psfig{file=fig3.ps,width=6.0cm}}
\vspace{0.5cm}
\caption{Maximal efficiency $\eta_{\rm max}$ in the linear response
regime as function of reduced temperature $T/U$
for systems A, B and C with $a/l=0.1$ as shown in Fig.
\protect\ref{f:pot}. (a) System A with $\delta/l=0.65$,
$U_0/U=0.4$, at different $\chi$. (b) Same diagram for system B at
different $\chi$. (c) Same diagram for system C with $U_0/U=1.2$ at
different $\chi$.}
\label{f:efflin}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\psfig{file=fig4.ps,width=5.5cm}}
\vspace{0.0cm}
\caption{
Energy transduction of system (A) with $a/l=0.1$ and $U_0/U=0.4$. (a)
Efficiency $\eta$ as a function of the external force $f _{\rm ext}$ for
$\Delta\mu/U=0.8$, $\chi=\xi l^2 \omega/U=200$, and different reduced
temperatures $T/U$. Broken lines represent the approximation
discussed in the text. (b) Maximal efficiency $\eta_{\rm max}$ as a
function of $\Delta\mu/U$ for $\chi=200$ and different temperatures.
(c) Maximal efficiency as a function of $\chi$ for $\Delta\mu/U=0.8$
and different temperatures. (d) Relative dissipation rates as a function of
$\Delta\mu$ for the same system: shown are the fraction of energy
dissipated by potential sliding $\eta_1+\eta_2$ and the fraction
dissipated via active transitions $\eta_\alpha$. For details see
text.}
\label{f:eff_nl}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Efficiencies far from equilibrium}
We have shown that the two state model transduces chemical energy into
mechanical work in the linear response regime, however with varying
efficiencies.
In linear response the chemical action represents a
small bias of the dominant thermal fluctuations. We are now comparing
these results with the properties of energy transduction far from
equilibrium.
{\bf System A}: Fig. \ref{f:eff_nl} (a) displays the efficiency $\eta$
as a function of the applied force for the system A as defined in
Fig. \ref{f:pot} for $\Delta\mu/T=8$ and different temperatures.
The efficiency vanishes for $f _{\rm ext}=0$ as well as for the stall force for
which the velocity vanishes.
For an intermediate value of the force,
the efficiency reaches a maximum. This value $\eta_{\rm max}$ is
displayed in Fig. \ref{f:eff_nl} (b) as a function of $\Delta
\mu$. This diagram reveals the main characteristics of energy
transduction: for small $\Delta\mu$ we find again the non-vanishing
efficiency of the linear regime. The efficiency increases as a
function of $\Delta\mu$, reaches a maximal value and decreases for
large $\Delta\mu$ to zero. For sufficiently large values of
$\Delta\mu$ the efficiency increases for decreasing temperatures and
reaches in the example shown a value of $\eta\simeq 0.4$ for
$T/U\simeq 0.1$.
The results obtained for different temperatures
intersect for small $\Delta\mu$ which corresponds to the observation
discussed above that the efficiency in the linear regime displays a
maximum as a function of temperature. Fig. \ref{f:eff_nl}(c) shows
the behavior of $\eta_{max}$ for fixed $\Delta\mu/U$ as a function of
$\chi=\xi l^2\omega/U$ over a range of $6$ decades.
The efficiency
increases monotonically with increasing $\chi$ from zero to a plateau
value. As an important result we find that the largest values of the
efficiency for the relevant energy scale $T/U\simeq 0.1$ are of the
order of $\eta\simeq 0.5$ and occur for $\Delta\mu\sim U$ comparable
to the energy difference between the two states at the
transition and thus far from the linear regime.
The dissipation rate $\Pi$ can, according to Eq. \ref{eq:pi12abc}, be
divided into separate contributions of potential sliding $\Pi_\sigma$
and chemical transitions $\Pi_\mu$, with $\mu=\alpha,\beta,\gamma$.
It is useful to define relative dissipation rates $\eta_\sigma =
\Pi_\sigma/r\Delta\mu$ and $\eta_\alpha=\Pi_\alpha/r\Delta\mu$ which
are analog to the efficiency and describe the fraction of dissipated
energy relative to the consumed chemical work. Note that
$\eta+\eta_1+\eta_2+\eta_\alpha+\eta_\beta+\eta_\gamma=1$ follows from
energy conservation. Fig. \ref{f:eff_nl} (d) shows the dominant
relative dissipation rates together with the efficiency $\eta$. The
dominant dissipation is $\Pi_1+\Pi_2$ resulting from potential
friction, dissipation $\Pi_\alpha$ of chemical transitions, plays a
minor role. The dissipation $\eta_\beta$ corresponding to passive
transitions is smaller than $0.01$ and can be neglected. It is
therefore not shown. The maximum of $\eta$ corresponds to a minimum of
$\eta_1+\eta_2$.
The main energy loss results
from thermally activated backward steps. This idea can be directly
tested by calculating the local dissipation density
$\Theta_1(x)+\Theta_2(x)$ as defined in Eq. (\ref{eq:dissdens}). This
quantity is displayed in Fig. \ref{f:diss_loc}.
The plot reveals that maximal dissipation occurs for
$\delta-a<x<\delta$, i.e. along the steep potential slope of the
potential $W_2$.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\psfig{file=fig5.ps,width=7.0 cm}}
\vspace{0.5cm}
\caption{Density $\Theta_1(x)+\Theta_2(x)$ as defined in
Eq. (\protect\ref{eq:dissdens}) of the dissipation rate as a function
of position $x$ for system A with $Ul/f _{\rm ext}=-0.48$, $\chi=200$,
$\Delta\mu/U=0.80$.}
\label{f:diss_loc}
\end{figure}
A second maximum of local dissipation exists for
$0<x<a$ along the steep slope of $W_1$. In contrast, minimal
dissipation occurs near the potential minima where transitions between
states take place. The steep potential slopes where the density of
energy dissipation is large indeed are accessed via thermally
activated backward hopping events. The probability of such events
increases in the presence of an ``adverse'' external force which
limits the efficiency of the system.
{\bf System B}: Fig. \ref{f:eff_nl_kin} displays the same information
for system B. The diagram reveals that efficiencies are in general
larger than for system A, reaching values up to $\eta\simeq 0.7$ for
$T/U=0.05$.
Furthermore, the maximum of the efficiency as a function
of $\Delta\mu$ is less pronounced and shifted to small values of
$\Delta\mu$ as compared to system A. One might expect that the
dissipation due to passive transitions $\eta_\beta$ in system A which
does not exist in system B could play a role in improving the
efficiency of system B. However as discussed above $\eta_\beta$ can be
neglected and is thus not responsible for this effect. The main
reason for the improved efficiency of system B is the fact that the
effective energy barrier for thermally activated passage over the
potential maxima is larger in system B as compared to system A.
Therefore, fluctuations leading to ``backward steps'' in the opposite
direction of average motion which completely dissipate a consumed ATP
molecule are less likely. Each active chemical transition is thus
transduced into work with high probability. Fig. \ref{f:eff_nl_kin}
(c) shows qualitatively the same behavior of the efficiency as a
function of $\chi$ for system B as compared to system A. Also as
discussed for system A, the dominant dissipation process
corresponds to sliding in the potentials, see
Fig.\ref{f:eff_nl_kin} (d). Note that the efficiency is larger than in
system A, which correlates with the increased barrier height reducing
the probability of backward steps.
{\bf System C}: Energy transduction of system C which involves
diffusive steps and non-localized de-excitations.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\psfig{file=fig6.ps,width=5.5cm}}
\vspace{0.0cm}
\caption{
Energy transduction of system B with $a/l=0.1$. (a) Efficiency
$\eta$ as a function of the external force $f _{\rm ext}$ for
$\Delta\mu/U=0.4$, $\chi=\xi l^2 \omega/U=400$, and different reduced
temperatures $T/U$. (b) Maximal efficiency $\eta_{\rm max}$ as a
function of $\Delta\mu/U$ for $\chi=400$ and different temperatures.
(c) Maximal efficiency as a function of $\chi$ for $\Delta\mu/U=0.4$
and different temperatures. (d) Relative dissipation rates as a function of
$\Delta\mu$: the fraction of energy dissipated by potential sliding
$\eta_1+\eta_2$ and the fraction dissipated via active transitions
$\eta_\alpha + \eta_\gamma$.}
\label{f:eff_nl_kin}
\end{figure}
Maximal efficiencies
are of the order of $0.02$ and thus much smaller than those for
systems A and B, see Fig. \ref{f:eff_nl_flat}.
As in system A the largest efficiencies occur for $\Delta\mu\gg T$ and
thus far from equilibrium. The reason for the reduced efficiency
becomes clear when studying the relative dissipation rates shown in
Fig. \ref{f:eff_nl_flat} (b): Most energy is in this case dissipated
by the passive and active transitions, potential sliding is less
important. In particular, the non-localized and passive de-excitations
dominate dissipation far from equilibrium.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\psfig{file=fig7.ps,width=6.0cm}}
\vspace{0.5cm}
\caption{
Energy transduction of system C with $a/l=0.1$. (a) Maximal
efficiency $\eta$ as a function of $\Delta\mu/U$ for $\chi=\xi l^2
\omega/U=5$, $U_0/U=1.2$ and different reduced temperatures $T/U$.
(b) Relative dissipation $\eta_1+\eta_2$ in the potentials as well
as the dissipation of transitions $\eta_\alpha$ and $\eta_\beta$
corresponding to (a). (c) Maximal efficiency as a function of $\chi$
for $\Delta\mu/U=1.2$ and different temperatures.}
\label{f:eff_nl_flat}
\end{figure}
Very striking is the
behavior of the efficiency as a function of $\chi$ shown in Fig.
\ref{f:eff_nl_flat} (c): The efficiency displays a maximum for
certain values of $\chi$ but vanishes both for large and small
$\chi$. This property reflects the fact that a matching of
time scales is crucial for this system: The life-time in the
excited state should be comparable to the diffusion-time over a potential
period:
\begin{equation}
l^2\sim T /\xi \omega \quad.
\end{equation}
Therefore, the optimal value of $\chi$ should behave as $\chi_{\rm
opt} \sim T/U$ which explains the temperature-dependence of the
maximum in Fig. \ref{f:eff_nl_flat} (c).
\subsection{Approximation for small forces}
\label{s:smallf}
The efficiency far from equilibrium for $\Delta\mu/T\gg 1$ but for
small forces can be understood by a simple approximation which we
discuss for system A. In the limit of large $\Delta\mu$ and $U/T$ we
ignore spontaneous hopping events over the maxima of potential
$W_1$.
Every ATP consumption event corresponds to a transition to the
second state from which the particle will eventually decay to the
first state. During this process, it undergoes a forward step with
probability $p_+$, a backward step with probability $p_-$ or it will
return to the initial position with probability $p_0$. Here, we have
ignored multiple steps, see Fig. \ref{f:prob}.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\psfig{file=fig8.ps,width=7.0 cm}}
\vspace{0.5cm}
\caption{Schematic diagram of events after consumption
of one fuel molecule. Forward steps occur with probability $p_+=p_1
p_2$, backward steps with probability $p_-=(1-p_2)(1-p_1)$ and neutral
steps with $p_0=p_2(1-p_1)+p_1(1-p_2)$ .}
\label{f:prob}
\end{figure}
In the presence of an external force $f _{\rm ext}$, the efficiency can thus be
estimated as
\begin{equation}
\eta \simeq -\frac{f _{\rm ext}}{\Delta\mu} <x> \quad ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
<x>\simeq l(p_+ - p_-) \simeq v/r \label{eq:etaapp}
\end{equation}
is the average displacement per consumed ATP. The probabilities
$p_\pm$ can be written as
\begin{equation}
p_+= p_2(0) p_1(\delta) \quad ,
\quad p_-=(1-p_2(0))(1-p_1(\delta)) \quad . \label{eq:ppm}
\end{equation}
Here, we have introduced the probabilities $p_\sigma(x)$ for motion in
the forward direction after a particle appears in state $\sigma$ at
position $x$. Similarly, $1-p_\sigma(x)$ is the probability for
backward motion, see Fig. \ref{f:prob}. Since the two potentials are
shifted with respect to each other $p_2(x)=p_1(x-\delta)$. The
probability $p_+$ requires two subsequent forward movements of this
type, $p_-$ results from two backward movements. As described in
appendix \ref{a:q}, the probabilities $p_\sigma(x)$ can be calculated
approximatively for large $U/T$. Fig. \ref{f:eff_nl} (a) shows the
efficiency estimated by Eqns. (\ref{eq:etaapp}) and (\ref{eq:ppm})
together with the numerically obtained values for comparison. For
small forces the agreement is good, thus confirming our simplified
picture of energy transduction in this regime.
\section{Concluding remarks}
In the previous sections, we have studied the efficiency of energy
transduction from chemical energy to mechanical work using a simple
two-state model under isothermal conditions. We considered three
different examples: system A with two shifted potentials and both
active and thermal transitions between the two states localized at the
potential minima; system B with an additional symmetry between the
two states and no passive thermal transitions; and finally system C
with a flat weakly bound state and non-localized passive transitions.
We demonstrated that energy transduction can be very efficient in the
systems A and B with localized transitions and shifted potentials
and is at least two orders of magnitude smaller in system C which
requires diffusive steps for motion to occur. Interestingly, the
largest efficiency can occur far from equilibrium. This is in
particular the case for systems A and C which both are not very
efficient in the linear response regime.
\subsection{Isothermal motors, heat engines and Brownian ratchets}
Efficiencies of energy transduction have been studied and discussed
for a long time. Of particular significance is the concept of Carnot
which defines the efficiency of macroscopic heat engines coupled to
two thermal baths at temperatures $T^\pm$ and $T^+>T^-$ as
\begin{equation}
\eta_{\rm Carnot}=-\frac{f _{\rm ext} v}{\dot Q^+} \quad , \label{eq:etaC}
\end{equation}
where $\dot Q^+$ is the rate of heat transfer from the {\em hot}
reservoir. This definition then leads to an upper limit of the
efficiency $\eta_{\rm Carnot} \leq (T^+-T^-)/T^+$ which cannot be surpassed by
any heat engine. In order to characterize energy transduction in
biological systems, a natural choice is \cite{hill74}
\begin{equation}
\eta=-\frac{f _{\rm ext} v}{r \Delta\mu} \quad ,
\end{equation}
which we have adopted in this paper, see Eq. (\ref{eq:eff}), and which
is based on the chemical potential difference between fuel and
reaction products. As we have discussed, this efficiency obeys $\eta
\leq 1$ in order to satisfy the first law of thermodynamics, but there
is no nontrivial upper bound. In addition to the obvious fact that
$\eta_{\rm Carnot}$ describes a heat engine and $\eta$ an isothermal motor, there
remains a fundamental difference between the two cases: the definition
of $\eta_{\rm Carnot}$ assumes that all heat dissipated in the bath $T^-$ is
lost. This is true in most practical cases, however if the bath at
$T^-$ was also used as the hot bath of a second heat engine, some of
this energy could in principle be reused. Similarly, the
definition of $\eta$ takes into account the energy of the lower-energy
reservoir, thus assuming that the energy of the reaction products
remains available. One might think that it is possible to avoid this
difference between the two definitions by choosing:
\begin{equation}
\eta' = -\frac{f _{\rm ext} v}{r \mu_{A}}
\end{equation}
where $\mu_{A}$ would be the chemical potential of the fuel (ATP). This
definition would share with Carnot's definition the viewpoint that the
energy of the reaction products are not useful, and since $\eta'=\eta\Delta\mu/\mu_{A}$ would lead to the upper bound $\eta'\leq
(\mu_{A}-\mu_P)/\mu_{A}$. Such a choice, however, suffers from a serious
shortcoming: only chemical potential differences are physically
meaningful. Depending on the state of reference used for defining
$\mu_{A}$, the value of $\mu_{A}$ could be positive, negative or even
vanish.
The example given above demonstrates that comparing efficiencies can
be dangerous as they may be based on different definitions
corresponding to different points of view. This is also the case for
ratchet models which have been studied in many variants and under
widely varying physical conditions. All definitions described above
have been used in the literature: The definition $\eta_{\rm Carnot}$
for systems driven by temperature differences
\cite{feyn66,seki97,soko97,mats98,dere98}, the definition for $\eta$ given by
Eq. (\ref{eq:eff}) \cite{hill74,juli97B,juli98} as well as $\eta'$
\cite{shib97}. Alternative definitions
have been proposed for situations where the chemical reaction is not
fully specified \cite{juli95,parr98}. Other definitions of energy
transduction efficiencies have been used for systems which are driven
by stochastic or deterministic forces
\cite{seki97,hond98,kame98,seki98}. Recently,
Sekimoto has presented a unified picture which includes most systems
in a common framework \cite{seki97}. However, in general, a given
definition is adapted to one particular physical situation.
\subsection{The two-state model and biological motors}
One important motivation of this work is to clarify the general
properties of energy transduction of biological motors. The
characteristic behaviors of our system A and B with localized
transitions and shifted potentials are similar to those observed for
processive biological motors such as e.g. kinesins which move along
microtubules and for which the consumption of ATP and the subsequent
stepping are strongly correlated for small external forces
\cite{svob93,schn97,hua97}. Kinesin motors consist of two identical
active head groups which both hydrolize ATP \cite{mand99}. There is
evidence suggesting that the motor could ``walk'' in a head-over-head
fashion along microtubules, detaching a head in the back and
reattaching in front of the molecule while keeping the second head
bound \cite{bloc98,hanc98}. In such a picture each ATP-hydrolysis
cycle leads to a new situation where both heads have exchanged their
roles and the center of mass of the molecule has advanced one filament
period. This type of motion is captured in a simple way in the variant
B of our model which is symmetric with respect to the two
states. Because of this symmetry, both states are indistinguishable
but the corresponding potentials are shifted by $l/2$:
$W_2(x)=W_1(x-l/2)$. We therefore identify each of the two states with
one kinesin head and $l/2$ with the filament period, see
Fig. \ref{f:pot} (b). Recently, system C with a structureless excited
state has been used for single kinesin heads which were observed to
move processively along a microtubule \cite{okad99}. Models of this
type have typically been considered in the context of non-processive
motors such as myosins which have a weakly bound state during their
interaction cycle. Myosins interact with a filament to generate
displacements of the order of several nm, but they do not continuously
move along a filament as individual motors since they easily lose
their track and diffuse away \cite{spud90,howa97}. The latter
phenomenon is not captured in the one-dimensional two-state model,
however the flat potential of system C requires diffusive steps for
average motion and the efficiency is therefore smaller than for
systems A and B. Under physiological conditions non-processive motors
operate not as isolated enzymes but move together in large groups. In
this situation, however, diffusive steps become unimportant and the
efficiency becomes large and reaches the same orders of magnitude as
for model A and B described here \cite{davi69,hill80,juli95}.
When comparing our simple models with biological motors, the value of
the adimensional parameter $\chi=\omega\xi l^2/U$ introduced in
Eq. (\ref{eq:chi}) is crucial. The relevant orders of magnitude for
most parameters are well known: Energy scales are $U\simeq 10 T$
\cite{hill74}, typical time scales of conformational changes are
$\omega^{-1}\simeq 1$ms and the relevant length scale is $l\simeq
5-10$nm \cite{spud90}. However, the friction coefficient $\xi$ is
unknown and difficult to estimate. Therefore, we do not know at which
value of $\chi$ biological motors operate. The role of $\chi$ on the
functioning of the system can be discussed by comparing both the
maximal efficiency and the dimensionless velocity $v/\omega l$ as a
function of $\chi$, see Fig. \ref{f:eff_vmax}.
The diagram reveals that for large values of $\chi$ for which the
efficiency is large the velocities become small. For small $\chi$
velocities are optimal but efficiency becomes negligible. This
observation suggests that optimal conditions are obtained in the
intermediate regime $\chi\simeq 0.1-1$ where chemical times and
sliding times along the potential slopes become comparable.
If linear molecular motors operate in this regime, the microscopic
friction coefficient $\xi$ is of the order of $10^{-7}-10^{-6}$ kg/s.
If we estimate $\xi$ from simple hydrodynamic arguments
($\xi_{\rm h} \simeq 6 \pi \eta_{\rm vis} l$), where $\eta_{\rm
vis}$ is some measure of a ``local'' viscosity, we find $\eta_{\rm
vis}\simeq 10 - 100$ Poise, $10^3 - 10^4$ times the viscosity of
water, values compatible with dense macromolecular solutions.
Interestingly, this order of magnitude, corresponds to a diffusion
coefficient of $4 \cdot 10^{-14}$ m$^2$/s, a value reported recently for
single headed kinesin \cite{okad99}.
This observation together with our estimate suggest that linear molecular
motors are optimized both from the velocity and the efficiency standpoint.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\psfig{file=fig9.ps,width=7.0 cm}}
\vspace{0.5cm}
\caption{
Maximal efficiencies (broken line) and normalized velocities (solid
line) as a function of $\chi$ for system B and $\Delta\mu/U=0.6$ and
$T/U=0.05$.}
\label{f:eff_vmax}
\end{figure}
\acknowledgements
We acknowledge stimulating discussions with S. Camalet, R. Everaers,
P.G. de Gennes, K. Sekimoto and T. Shibata.
|
\section{Acknowledgements}
Stimulating discussions with D. E. Oates are thankfully acknowledged. Work at Northeastern
was supported by NSF-9711910 and AFOSR.
\end{multicols}
\bibliographystyle{prsty}
|
\section{Setting the Scene}
In order to obtain direct information on the angle $\gamma$ of the
unitarity triangle of the CKM matrix in an experimentally feasible way,
$B\to\pi K$ decays appear very promising. Fortunately, experimental data
on these modes are now starting to become available. In 1997, the
CLEO collaboration reported the first results on the decays
$B^\pm\to\pi^\pm K$ and $B_d\to\pi^\mp K^\pm$; last year, the first
observation of $B^\pm\to\pi^0K^\pm$ was announced.\cite{stone}\,
So far, only results for CP-averaged branching ratios have been reported,
with values at the $10^{-5}$ level and large experimental uncertainties.
However, already such CP-averaged branching ratios may lead to highly
non-trivial constraints on $\gamma$.\cite{fm2}\, The following three
combinations of $B\to\pi K$ decays were considered in the literature:
$B^\pm\to\pi^\pm K$ and
$B_d\to\pi^\mp K^\pm$,\cite{fm2}$^{\mbox{-}}$\cite{groro}
$B^\pm\to\pi^\pm K$ and
$B^\pm\to\pi^0 K^\pm$,\cite{grl}$^{\mbox{-}}$\cite{BF}
as well as the combination of the neutral decays
$B_d\to\pi^0 K$ and $B_d\to\pi^\mp K^\pm$.\cite{BF}\,
\section{Probing \boldmath$\gamma$ with $B^\pm\to\pi^\pm K$ and
$B_d\to\pi^\mp K^\pm$\unboldmath}
Within the framework of the Standard Model, the most important contributions
to these decays originate from QCD penguin topologies. Making use of the
$SU(2)$ isospin symmetry of strong interactions, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{rel1}
A(B^+\to\pi^+K^0)\equiv P,\quad A(B_d^0\to\pi^-K^+)=-\,
\left[P+T+P_{\rm ew}^{\rm C}\right],
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
T\equiv|T|e^{i\delta_T}e^{i\gamma} \quad\mbox{and}\quad
P_{\rm ew}^{\rm C}\equiv-\,\left|P_{\rm ew}^{\rm C}\right|
e^{i\delta_{\rm ew}^{\rm C}}
\end{equation}
are due to tree-diagram-like topologies and electroweak (EW) penguins,
respectively. The label ``C'' reminds us that only ``colour-suppressed''
EW penguin topologies contribute to $P_{\rm ew}^{\rm C}$. Making use of
the unitarity of the CKM matrix and applying the Wolfenstein parametrization
yields
\begin{equation}
P\equiv A(B^+\to\pi^+K^0)=-\left(1-\frac{\lambda^2}{2}\right)\lambda^2A\left[
1+\rho\,e^{i\theta}e^{i\gamma}\right]{\cal P}_{tc}\,,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\rho\,e^{i\theta}=\frac{\lambda^2R_b}{1-\lambda^2/2}
\left[1-\left(\frac{{\cal P}_{uc}+{\cal A}}{{\cal P}_{tc}}\right)\right],
\end{equation}
and $\lambda\equiv |V_{us}|$, $A\equiv|V_{cb}|/\lambda^2$,
$R_b\equiv|V_{ub}/(\lambda V_{cb})|$. Note that $\rho$ is strongly
CKM-suppressed by $\lambda^2R_b\approx0.02$. In the parametrization
of the $B^\pm\to \pi^\pm K$ and $B_d\to\pi^\mp K^\pm$ observables,
it turns out to be very useful to introduce
\begin{equation}
r\equiv\frac{|T|}{\sqrt{\langle|P|^2\rangle}}\,,\quad\epsilon_{\rm C}\equiv
\frac{|P_{\rm ew}^{\rm C}|}{\sqrt{\langle|P|^2\rangle}}\,,
\end{equation}
with $\langle|P|^2\rangle\equiv(|P|^2+|\overline{P}|^2)/2$, as well
as the strong phase differences
\begin{equation}
\delta\equiv\delta_T-\delta_{tc}\,,\quad\Delta_{\rm C}\equiv
\delta_{\rm ew}^{\rm C}-\delta_{tc}\,.
\end{equation}
In addition to the ratio
\begin{equation}\label{Def-R}
R\equiv\frac{\mbox{BR}(B_d\to\pi^\mp K^\pm)}{\mbox{BR}(B^\pm\to\pi^\pm K)}
\end{equation}
of CP-averaged $B\to\pi K$ branching ratios, also the ``pseudo-asymmetry''
\begin{equation}
A_0\equiv\frac{\mbox{BR}(B^0_d\to\pi^-K^+)-\mbox{BR}(\overline{B^0_d}\to
\pi^+K^-)}{\mbox{BR}(B^+\to\pi^+K^0)+\mbox{BR}(B^-\to\pi^-\overline{K^0})}
\end{equation}
plays an important role to probe $\gamma$. Explicit expressions for $R$
and $A_0$ in terms of the parameters specified above are given in Ref.\ 8.
So far, the only available experimental result from the CLEO collaboration
is for $R$:\cite{stone}
\begin{equation}\label{RFM-exp}
R=0.9\pm0.4\pm0.2\pm0.2,
\end{equation}
and no CP-violating effects have been reported. However, if in addition
to $R$ also the pseudo-asymmetry $A_0$ can be measured, it is possible to
eliminate the strong phase $\delta$ in the expression for $R$, and to
fix contours in the $\gamma\,$--$\,r$ plane,\cite{defan}\, which correspond
to the mathematical implementation of a simple triangle
construction.\cite{PAPIII}\, In order to determine $\gamma$, the quantity
$r$, i.e.\ the magnitude of the ``tree'' amplitude $T$, has to be fixed.
At this step, a certain model dependence enters. Since the properly
defined amplitude $T$ does not receive contributions only from
colour-allowed ``tree'' topologies, but also from penguin and annihilation
processes,\cite{defan,bfm} it may be shifted sizeably from its
``factorized'' value. Consequently, estimates of the uncertainty of $r$
using the factorization hypothesis, yielding typically
$\Delta r={\cal O}(10\%)$, may be too optimistic.
Interestingly, it is possible to derive bounds on $\gamma$ that do {\it not}
depend on $r$ at all.\cite{fm2}\, To this end, we eliminate again $\delta$
in $R$ through $A_0$. If we now treat $r$ as a ``free'' variable, we find
that $R$ takes the following minimal
value:\cite{defan}
\begin{equation}\label{Rmin}
R_{\rm min}=\kappa\,\sin^2\gamma\,+\,
\frac{1}{\kappa}\left(\frac{A_0}{2\,\sin\gamma}\right)^2\geq
\kappa\,\sin^2\gamma\,.
\end{equation}
Here, the quantity
\begin{equation}\label{kappa-def}
\kappa=\frac{1}{w^2}\left[\,1+2\,(\epsilon_{\rm C}\,w)\cos\Delta+
(\epsilon_{\rm C}\,w)^2\,\right],
\end{equation}
with $w=\sqrt{1+2\,\rho\,\cos\theta\cos\gamma+\rho^2}$, describes
rescattering and EW penguin effects. An allowed range for $\gamma$ is
related to $R_{\rm min}$, since values of $\gamma$ implying
$R_{\rm exp}<R_{\rm min}$ are excluded. In particular, $A_0\not=0$
would allow us to exclude a certain range of $\gamma$ around $0^\circ$
or $180^\circ$, whereas a measured value of $R<1$ would exclude a
certain range around $90^\circ$, which would be of great phenomenological
importance. The first results reported by CLEO in 1997 gave $R=0.65\pm0.40$,
whereas the most recent update is that given in (\ref{RFM-exp}).
The theoretical accuracy of these constraints on $\gamma$ is limited both
by rescattering processes of the kind $B^+\to
\{\pi^0K^+,\pi^0K^{\ast+},\ldots\}$,\cite{FSI,neubert} and by
EW penguin effects.\cite{groro,neubert}\, The rescattering
effects, which may lead to values of $\rho={\cal O}(0.1)$, can be controlled
in the contours in the $\gamma$--$r$ plane and the associated constraints
on $\gamma$ through experimental data on $B^\pm\to K^\pm K$ decays, the
$U$-spin counterparts of $B^\pm\to\pi^\pm K$.\cite{defan,BKK}\, Another
important indicator for large rescattering effects is provided by
$B_d\to K^+K^-$ modes, for which there already exist stronger experimental
constraints.\cite{groro-FSI}
An improved description of the EW penguins is possible if we use the
general expressions for the corresponding four-quark operators,
and perform appropriate Fierz transformations. Following these
lines,\,\cite{defan,neubert} we arrive at
\begin{equation}\label{EWP-expr1}
\frac{\epsilon_{\rm C}}{r}\,e^{i(\Delta_{\rm C}-\delta)}=
0.66\times \left[\frac{0.41}{R_b}\right]\times a_{\rm C}\,e^{i\omega_{\rm C}},
\end{equation}
where $a_{\rm C}\,e^{i\omega_{\rm C}}=a_2^{\rm eff}/a_1^{\rm eff}$ is the
ratio of certain generalized ``colour factors''. Experimental data on
$B\to D^{(\ast)}\pi$ decays imply $a_2/a_1={\cal O}(0.25)$. However,
``colour suppression'' in $B\to\pi K$ modes may in principle be different
from that in $B\to D^{(\ast)}\pi$ decays, in particular in the presence of
large rescattering effects.\cite{neubert}\, A first step to fix the hadronic
parameter $a_{\rm C}\,e^{i\omega_{\rm C}}$ experimentally is provided by
the mode $B^+\to\pi^+\pi^0$. Detailed discussions of the impact of
rescattering and EW penguin effects on the strategies to probe $\gamma$
with $B^\pm\to\pi^\pm K$ and $B_d\to\pi^\mp K^\pm$ decays can be found in
Refs.\ 7, 8 and 12.
\section{Probing \boldmath$\gamma$ with $B^\pm\to \pi^\pm K$ and
$B^\pm\to\pi^0K^\pm$\unboldmath}
Several years ago, Gronau, Rosner and London proposed an interesting
$SU(3)$ strategy to determine $\gamma$ with the help of
$B^{\pm}\to\pi^{\pm} K$, $\pi^0K^{\pm}$, $\pi^0\pi^{\pm}$ decays.\cite{grl}\,
However, as was pointed out by Deshpande and He,\cite{dh} this elegant
approach is unfortunately spoiled by EW penguins, which play an important
role in several non-leptonic $B$-meson decays because of the large top-quark
mass.\cite{rf-ewp}\, Recently, this approach was resurrected by Neubert
and Rosner,\cite{nr} who pointed out that the EW penguin contributions
can be controlled in this case by using only the general expressions for
the corresponding four-quark operators, appropriate Fierz transformations,
and the $SU(3)$ flavour symmetry (see also Ref.\ 3). Since a detailed
presentation of these strategies can be found in Ref.\ 16, we will just
have a brief look at their most interesting features.
In the case of $B^+\to\pi^+K^0$, $\pi^0K^+$, the $SU(2)$ isospin
symmetry implies
\begin{equation}
A(B^+\to\pi^+K^0)\,+\,\sqrt{2}\,A(B^+\to\pi^0K^+)=
-\left[(T+C)\,+\,P_{\rm ew}\right].
\end{equation}
The phase stucture of this relation, which has no $I=1/2$ piece, is
completely analogous to the $B^+\to\pi^+K^0$, $B^0_d\to\pi^-K^+$ case
(see (\ref{rel1})):
\begin{equation}
T+C=|T+C|\,e^{i\delta_{T+C}}\,e^{i\gamma},\quad
P_{\rm ew}=-\,|P_{\rm ew}|e^{i\delta_{\rm ew}}\,.
\end{equation}
In order to probe $\gamma$, it is useful to introduce observables
$R_{\rm c}$ and $A_0^{\rm c}$ corresponding to $R$ and $A_0$;\cite{BF}\,
their general expressions can be otained from those for $R$ and $A_0$ by
making the following replacements:
\begin{equation}
r\to r_{\rm c}\equiv\frac{|T+C|}{\sqrt{\langle|P|^2\rangle}}\,, \quad
\delta\to \delta_{\rm c}\equiv\delta_{T+C}-\delta_{tc}\,,\quad
P_{\rm ew}^{\rm C}\to P_{\rm ew}.
\end{equation}
The measurement of $R_{\rm c}$ and $A_0^{\rm c}$ allows us to fix
contours in the $\gamma$--$r_c$ plane in complete analogy to the
$B^\pm\to\pi^\pm K$, $B_d\to\pi^\mp K^\pm$ strategy. There are, however,
important differences from the theoretical point of view. First, the
$SU(3)$ symmetry allows us to fix $r_c\propto|T+C|$:\cite{grl}
\begin{equation}\label{SU3-rel1}
T+C\approx-\,\sqrt{2}\,\frac{V_{us}}{V_{ud}}\,
\frac{f_K}{f_{\pi}}\,A(B^+\to\pi^+\pi^0)\,,
\end{equation}
where $r_c$ thus determined is -- in contrast to $r$ -- not affected by
rescattering effects. Second, in the strict $SU(3)$ limit, we have\cite{nr}
\begin{equation}\label{SU3-rel2}
\left|\frac{P_{\rm ew}}{T+C}\right|\,
e^{i(\delta_{\rm ew}-\delta_{T+C})}=0.66\times
\left[\frac{0.41}{R_b}\right].
\end{equation}
In contrast to (\ref{EWP-expr1}), this expression does not involve a
hadronic parameter.
The contours in the $\gamma$--$r_c$ plane may be affected -- in analogy
to the $B^\pm\to\pi^\pm K$, $B_d\to\pi^\mp K^\pm$ case -- by rescattering
effects.\cite{BF}\, They can be taken into account with the help of
additional data.\cite{defan,BKK,FSI-recent}\, The major theoretical
advantage of the $B^+\to\pi^+K^0$, $\pi^0K^+$ strategy with respect to
$B^\pm\to\pi^\pm K$, $B_d\to\pi^\mp K^\pm$ is that $r_c$ and
$P_{\rm ew}/(T+C)$ can be fixed by using only $SU(3)$ arguments.
Consequently, the theoretical accuracy is mainly limited by non-factorizable
$SU(3)$-breaking effects.
\vspace*{-0.1cm}
\section{Probing \boldmath$\gamma$ with $B_d\to \pi^0 K$ and
$B_d\to\pi^\mp K^\pm$\unboldmath}
The strategies to probe $\gamma$ that are allowed by the observables of
$B_d\to \pi^0 K$, $\pi^\mp K^\pm$ are completely analogous to the
$B^\pm\to\pi^\pm K$, $\pi^0K^\pm$ case.\cite{BF}\, However, if we require
that the neutral kaon be observed as a $K_{\rm S}$, we have an additional
observable at our disposal, which is provided by ``mixing-induced'' CP
violation in $B_d\to\pi^0K_{\rm S}$ and allows us to take into account
the rescattering effects in the extraction of $\gamma$.\cite{BF}\, To this
end, time-dependent measurements are required. The theoretical accuracy
of the neutral strategy is only limited by non-factorizable $SU(3)$-breaking
corrections, which affect $|T+C|$ and $P_{\rm ew}$.
|
\chapter{Decay of hyperons in nuclei}
It is well known that weak, pionic decays of strange mesons and hyperons
strongly favour $\Delta$I=1/2 amplitudes over {\it a priori} comparable
$\Delta$I=3/2 amplitudes \cite{DAL63}. This phenomenological rule may
be interpreted on the level of a simple quark model as
an indication that decays proceed via a transformation of the
s-quark (with S=-1,I=0) into a u-quark (with S=0,I=1/2)
whereas all other quarks play the role of spectators. The question arises
whether the same, simple picture also holds in strangeness changing,
weak interaction between two baryons, such as a $\Lambda$-hyperon and a
nucleon. Since it is difficult to realize hyperon - nucleon scattering
experimentally, the only practical way to study the weak YN interaction is
to examine the non-mesonic decays $\Lambda$p$\rightarrow$np and
$\Lambda$n$\rightarrow$nn of hyperons bound in hypernuclei.
The current theoretical models of the YN weak interaction, which rely
on the validity of the $\Delta$I=1/2 rule, have achieved
a reasonable agreement
with data on the total non-mesonic decay rates but they are not able
to reproduce ratios of partial decay rates, i.e. neutron-induced to
proton-induced decays \cite{COH90}. Thus the applicability of the
$\Delta$I=1/2 rule to the non-mesonic decay mode is an open question.
The analysis of existing data on non-mesonic decays of the lightest hypernuclei
\cite{SCH92} suggests that the $\Delta$I=1/2 rule might be violated in the weak
hyperon-nucleon interaction. It was also recently shown \cite{RAM97} that the
theoretical analysis of the shape of proton spectra from the decay of
$^{12}_{\Lambda}$C leads to the conclusion that the $\Delta$I=1/2 rule is not
preserved in the non-mesonic decay.
The present letter examines another method of testing the validity of the
$\Delta$I=1/2 rule in the non-mesonic decay. It is based on the fact that the
mass dependence of the lifetime of hypernuclei is sensitive (for heavy
hypernuclei) to the ratio R$_n$/R$_p$ of the neutron - induced (R$_n$)
to proton - induced (R$_p$) decay rates of the $\Lambda$-hyperon.
Furthermore, it is known that the R$_n$/R$_p$ ratio should
be less or equal to 2 if the $\Delta$I=1/2 rule
holds for the non-mesonic decay \cite{DAL63}. Thus an experimental evidence
for R$_n$/R$_p > 2$ obtained from the investigation of the
mass dependence of the $\Lambda$- lifetime in heavy hypernuclei
would imply a violation of the $\Delta$I=1/2 rule.
We recall that the mass dependence of the $\Lambda$-lifetime in hypernuclei
may be due to several effects:
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\begin{enumerate}
\item[i] The Pauli blocking strongly affects the mesonic decay mode
($\Lambda \rightarrow N \pi$) and depends on the mass of the hypernuclei,
but practically does not influence the nonmesonic decay process.
This is caused by the different energy release in
mesonic ($\approx$ 40 MeV) and non-mesonic ($\approx$ 180 MeV) decays.
Furthermore, this energy is almost equally shared among both nucleons
emerging from the non-mesonic decay, whereas the pion - due to momentum
conservation - carries most of the energy released in the mesonic decay.
Thus the nucleon in the final state from the mesonic decay is coming from far
below the Fermi energy whereas the final nucleons from the non-mesonic decay
are both highly above the Fermi energy.
\item[ii] Another source for the lifetime dependence on the mass of hypernuclei
is the variation of the hyperon - nucleus potential with
mass A of hypernuclei and a resulting variation of the hyperon
wave function. This dependence in turn will affect both, the mesonic and
non-mesonic decay rates.
\item[iii] The last effect
is the variation of the ratio N/Z with the mass of hypernuclei.
This is the most important
effect for our purposes because such a variation can lead to
a mass dependence of the $\Lambda$-lifetime in hypernuclei only
if the ratio R$_n$/R$_p$ deviates from unity. Thus the mass dependence
of the lifetime of heavy hypernuclei appears to be sensitive to
the R$_n$/R$_p$ ratio.
\end{enumerate}
In order to estimate the decay width of the mesonic decay a phase-space model
has been used in line with the Coupled - Channel - Boltzmann - Uhling -
Uhlenbeck approach \cite{RUD95} . The decay width in units of the free
$\Lambda$-hyperon decay width including Pauli blocking is given by:
$$
\Gamma_{mesonic}/\Gamma_{free} =
\frac{1}{(2 \pi)^3} \int d^3 r \int d^3 p
\int d^3 p'
$$
\begin{equation}
\label{formula4}
f_{\Lambda}({\bf r, p})
(1 - f_N({\bf r, p'}))
\delta({\bf p-p_\pi-p'})
\end{equation}
with $p_\pi = 102 MeV/c$,
where $f_{\Lambda}({\bf r, p})$ is approximated by a Gaussian s-state
phase-space density from the harmonic oscillator model
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{\Lambda}({\bf r, p})=\frac{1}{\pi^3}
exp(-\frac{\bf r^2}{\gamma^2}) \times
exp(-\gamma^2{\bf p^2}) \hspace*{1.0cm} ; \nonumber \\
\gamma=\sqrt{\frac{\hbar}{\mu \omega}} \hspace{0.6cm} ; \hspace{0.6cm}
\hbar\omega = 41 A^{-1/3} [MeV]
\end{eqnarray}
normalized to unity, whereas the nucleon
phase-space distribution is taken in the semiclassical limit, i.e.
\newline
\begin{equation}
f_N({\bf r, p'}) = \Theta(p_F({\bf r})-p')
\end{equation}
\noindent
with $p_F({\bf r})$ denoting the local
Fermi momentum defined by the experimental density for the nucleus
of interest, $ p_F({\bf r}) = \left(\frac{3}{2}\pi^2 \rho({\bf r})
\right)^{1/3}$ and $\Theta(x)$ is the step - function, i.e.
$\Theta(x)$=1 for $x \ge 0$ and $\Theta(x)$=0 for $x<0$.
The same conceptional approach is applied to the non-mesonic decay and
leads to the following width that also includes the blocking
of the final nucleon states \cite{RUD95}:
$$
\Gamma_{non-mesonic} \approx R_{N} \frac{4}{(2\pi)^6}
\int d^3 r \int d^3 p \int d^3 p_N \int d^3 p_1'
$$
$$
\int \frac{d \Omega}{4 \pi}
\ | v_{\Lambda N} |
\frac{d \sigma_{\Lambda N \rightarrow \Lambda N}}
{d \Omega} (\sqrt{s})
f_{\Lambda}({\bf r, p}) f_N({\bf r, p_N}) \times
$$
\begin{equation} \label{alphapar}
(1- f_N({\bf r, p_2'})
(1 - f_N({\bf r, p_1'}) \delta({\bf p+p_N-p_1'-p_2'}), \hspace{0.5cm}
\end{equation}
\noindent
where the phase-space distributions are the same as in eq.
(\ref{formula4}) and the
differential cross section $d \sigma_{\Lambda N \rightarrow N N}/d \Omega$
has been approximated by $R_{N} \ d\sigma_{\Lambda N \rightarrow \Lambda N}
/d \Omega$ \cite{RUD95}
with a weak decay constant $R_{N}$. The latter is the squared ratio of the
weak transition matrix element to that for the strong interaction
$\Lambda$N$\rightarrow \Lambda$N.
The quantity $v_{\Lambda N}$, furthermore, is the relative velocity of
the $\Lambda$-hyperon and the nucleon in their collision.
The constant $R_{n}$ for the process
$n + \Lambda \rightarrow n + n$ might have a different value
from the constant $R_{p}$
for the $p + \Lambda \rightarrow p + n$ channel.
This is due to the fact that the final NN system can have
both isospin $I_{NN}=0$ or $I_{NN}=1$ in case of neutron--proton
final states and only $I_{NN}=1$ in case of two final neutrons.
Anyway, one can always write
$\Gamma_{non-mesonic}$ = $\Gamma_n$ + $\Gamma_p$, where
$\Gamma_n$ and $\Gamma_p$ can be separately calculated via formula
(\ref{alphapar}) using instead of
R$_N$ the effective strength equal to N$\cdot$R$_n$/A or Z$\cdot$R$_p$/A for
neutrons and protons, respectively.
\renewcommand{\topfraction}{0.90}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{minipage}{15cm}
\epsfig{file=mesonic3log.ps,height=60mm,
,angle=0,bbllx=20,bblly=140,bburx=580,bbury=640}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{15cm}
\epsfig{file=98polik10h.pl99.ps,height=60mm,
,angle=0,bbllx=20,bblly=140,bburx=580,bbury=640}
\end{minipage}
{\caption{ \footnotesize \label{pauliblo}
Upper part: phase--space model calculation of the lifetime $\tau_M$
of the $\Lambda$--hyperon
due to the mesonic decay inside the hypernucleus of mass A
according to eq. (\ref{formula4}) presented in units of the lifetime of the
free $\Lambda$--hyperon $\tau^{free}_{\Lambda}$ = 263 ps;
Lower part:
calculations of the $\Lambda$-lifetime $\tau_{M+NM}$ due to
the mesonic and nonmesonic decay as a function
of hypernucleus mass A in comparison to the data of
Ref. \cite{BHA98,SZY91,KUL98}.
The COSY--13 collaboration result for a Bi target \cite{KUL98}
is marked by the cross.
In the theoretical calculations both mesonic and non-mesonic decay modes
are taken into account whereas
the unknown ratio of the weak decay rates
$R_{n}$/$R_{p}$ in equation (\ref{alphapar})
is varied assuming the values: $R_{n}$/$R_{p}$ = 1,2,3,4 and 30.
} }
\end{figure}
The lifetime $\tau_{M} = \hbar/\Gamma_{mesonic}$ of the
$\Lambda$--hyperon due to the pure $\pi N$ decay channel
evaluated according to formula (\ref{formula4})
is displayed in the upper part of Fig. \ref{pauliblo}
as a function of the mass A of the hypernucleus.
It shows a dramatic
increase of $\tau_{M}$ due to Pauli-blocking
what contradicts the tendency of the experimental
mass dependence of the lifetime
depicted in the lower part of Fig. \ref{pauliblo}.
This indicates clearly that the non--mesonic decay
dominates for medium--mass and heavy hypernuclei.
The results for $\tau_{\Lambda} = \hbar/(\Gamma_{mes} + \Gamma_{non-mesonic})$,
where $\Gamma_{non-mesonic}$ = $\Gamma_{n}$ + $\Gamma_{p}$
are shown in the lower part of Fig. \ref{pauliblo} as a function
of the mass A.
The calculations were performed for several ratios
$R_n$/$R_p$ while keeping
$R_{av}$ = $(R_{n}$ + $R_{p})$/2
constant. $R_{av}$ was
fixed by the requirement that the constructed model
has to describe the lifetime data for
light hypernuclei, i.e. $^{11}_\Lambda$B and
$^{12}_\Lambda$C \cite{BHA98,SZY91}.
The lifetimes calculated
for hypernuclei in the neighbourhood of mass number A=200 are
equal to $\approx$175 ps for the ratio $R_{n}$/$R_{p}$=2, i.e. the
limiting value which is still compatible with the $\Delta$I=1/2 rule.
Smaller values of the lifetime for these heavy hypernuclei
correspond to ratios $R_{n}$/$R_{p} > 2 $ and therefore
they imply a violation of the $\Delta$I=1/2 rule.
It should be noted, that in order to obtain a convincing conclusion
about the violation of the $\Delta$I=1/2 rule the errors of
the lifetime measurements should be very small.
Recently, the COSY--13 collaboration \cite{KUL98} has
measured the lifetime for heavy hypernuclei
produced in the p+Bi interaction with experimental
errors distinctly smaller than other published results \cite{ARM93,OHM97}.
This value for the lifetime $\tau_{\Lambda}$ = (161$\pm$21) ps
leads to the conclusion that the
R$_n$/R$_p$ ratio is larger than 2 on the confidence level
of 0.75. This suggests that the phenomenological $\Delta$I=1/2
rule may be violated for the non--mesonic decay of the $\Lambda$--hyperon.
It should be noted that the lines
displayed in Fig. 1 have been obtained for the average N/Z ratio
as expected \cite{RUD96} for the cold hypernuclei produced
in the p+Bi experiment \cite{KUL98}.
The estimation of the confidence
level was performed taking into account both, the inaccuracy of
the R$_{av}$
due to the experimental errors for the lifetime of light hypernuclei and
the inaccuracy of the experimental determination of the lifetimes for heavy
hypernuclei.
It was assumed that the distribution of R$_{av}$ as well as
the distribution of the experimental lifetime of heavy hypernuclei
are described
by normal distributions, i.e. N(${<}R_{av}{>},\sigma(R_{av}$)) and
N(${<}\tau_{\Lambda}{>},\sigma(\tau_{\Lambda})$), respectively.
The parameters
${<}R_{av}{>}$, $\sigma(R_{av}$) were found from a fit of the theoretical
curve to the lifetimes of the light hypernuclei, i.e. $^{11}_{\Lambda}$B
and
$^{12}_{\Lambda}$C \cite{BHA98,SZY91}
whereas ${<}\tau_{\Lambda}{>}$ and $\sigma(\tau_{\Lambda})$ are
known from the p+Bi experiment \cite{KUL98}.
Then the confidence level has been evaluated by convolution of these
two distributions according to:
\begin{eqnarray}
P & = &{\int}_{-\infty}^{+\infty} dR_{av} \ N({<}R_{av}{>},\sigma(R_{av})) \cdot \\
\nonumber
& & \cdot \int_{-\infty}^{\tau_{max}(R_{av},\frac{R_{n}}{R_{p}}=2)}
d\tau_{\Lambda} \ N({<}\tau_{\Lambda}{>},\sigma(\tau_{\Lambda})) ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\tau_{max}(R_{av},\frac{R_{n}}{R_{p}}=2)$ is the theoretical
lifetime evaluated for heavy hypernuclei with the proper value of R$_{av}$ and
limiting value of the R$_n$/R$_p$ ratio.
\newpage
In order to put more stringent limits
to the $R_{n}$/$R_{p}$ ratio and thus
to test further the validity of the $\Delta$I=1/2 rule
on a higher confidence level
it is necessary to obtain new precise data
on the lifetime
of medium--mass and heavy hypernuclei.
Such experiments
are planned both by the COSY--13 collaboration
at Forschungszentrum J\"ulich \cite{BOR98}
for heavy hypernuclei and by the E369 collaboration
at KEK for $_{\Lambda}^{89}$Y \cite{BHA98}.
It should be emphasized, that the origin
of the $\Delta$I=1/2 rule is not fully understood
at present \cite{PAR98}, though theoretical calculations in most cases
rely on the validity of this rule \cite{COH90}.
Therefore, experimental results which indicate a violation of this rule will
have relevant implications for all theoretical
models of the weak interaction
of baryons. \vspace*{0.3cm} \\
{\footnotesize This work was partly supported by the International Bureau of the BMBF,
Bonn, DLR, and by the Polish Committee for Scientific Research.}
|
\section{Introduction}
The last two decades have witnessed an intensif\/ication of research in
granular f\/low dynamics, in large measure spurred by a burgeoning array of
engineering and industrial applications of particle technology. There are
several features that make granular f\/low research attractive to engineers,
mathematicians and scientists, among which are the following: A need still
exists to formulate the underlying principles of particle interactions in a
completely satisfactory manner; there are as yet few if any def\/initive
mathematical models that can reliably predict a wide range of granular
f\/lows; particle f\/low phenomena such as arching, surface waves and convection
are still not entirely understood from a mathematical or engineering
perspective; there is a panoply of extremely complex nonlinear dynamical
behaviors exhibited in granular f\/low regimes that has not yet been fully
analyzed and has severely tested or exceeded the capabilities of current
experimental and computer technologies for accurate characterization; and
the techniques and devices for optimizing certain features of particle f\/lows
are for the most part only understood on an ad hoc basis. In this paper we
use some averaging and limiting ideas associated with inf\/inite-dimensional
dynamical systems theory to derive a new class of continuum mathematical
models for granular f\/low that may be capable of predicting the dynamical
characteristics of particle f\/lows in a large variety of circumstances, and
thereby help to make some progress in solving the many outstanding problems
in this f\/ield. Our purpose is not to compete with the host of interesting
models that try to incorporate as much of the physics of granular f\/lows as
possible, including (vibrational) energy equations. Rather, we aim to
produce mathematical models that are relatively tractable and ignore just
enough of the physics to still provide useful predictions of granular f\/low
dynamics for a wide range of applications.
Although there have been several partial successes in recent
years, the state-of-the-art in mathematical modeling of granular
f\/low phenomena pales in comparison to that of f\/luid mechanics
where there is a universally accepted model -- the Navier-Stokes
equations~-- whose reliability has been tested and conf\/irmed for
over a century, and is considered in many quarters to be capable
of apprehending even what may be the most elusive of all physical
processes~-- f\/luid turbulence. Approaches based on continuum
mechanics (transport theory) and kinetic theory (statistical
mechanics) have been those most often used for obtaining
mathematical models for particle f\/lows in the form of systems of
partial dif\/ferential equations. Notable examples derived using
these methods which have enjoyed some success in predicting
granular f\/low dynamics may be found in An \& Pierce~\cite{blackmore:An},
Anderson \& Jackson~\cite{blackmore:And}, Farrel, Lun \& Savage~\cite{blackmore:Far},
Gardiner \& Schaef\/fer~\cite{blackmore:Gard}, Goldshtein \&
Shapiro~\cite{blackmore:Gold}, Jenike \& Shield~\cite{blackmore:Jeni}, Jenkins \&
Savage~\cite{blackmore:Jen}, Jenkins \& Richman~\cite{blackmore:Jen2}, Johnson, Nott
\&
Jackson~\cite{blackmore:John}, Lun~\cite{blackmore:Lun}, Lun \& Savage~\cite{blackmore:Lun3},
Numan \& Keller~\cite{blackmore:Num}, Pasquarell~\cite{blackmore:Pasq}, Pitman~\cite{blackmore:Pit},
Rajagopal~\cite{blackmore:Raj}, Richman~\cite{blackmore:Rich}, Tsimring \& Aranson~\cite{blackmore:Tsim},
Savage~\cite{blackmore:Sav,blackmore:Sav2}, Savage \& Jef\/frey~\cite{blackmore:Sav3}, Schaef\/fer~\cite{blackmore:Scha},
Schaef\/fer, Shearer \& Pitman~\cite{blackmore:Scha2} and Shen \& Ackermann~\cite{blackmore:Shen}
(see also Fan \& Zhu~\cite{blackmore:Fan} and Walton~\cite{blackmore:Walt}). Several of these models have
proven to be rather ef\/fective in
characterizing certain granular f\/lows, for example in chutes and hoppers
with simple geometries, but they tend to be fairly complicated systems of
nonlinear partial dif\/ferential equations that are dif\/f\/icult to analyze and
solve except by approximate numerical methods, and the information they
provide has barely made a dent in the host of practical problems associated
with industrial uses of particle technology. There have also been a number
of simple, idealized models formulated by neglecting a variety of physical
factors, but these tend to miss many of the features of granular f\/low of
interest in applications. Much work still remains in f\/inding a really
ef\/fective balance between mathematical tractability and adherence to the
underlying principles of physics in the models for a large class of granular
f\/low phenomena. It is hoped that the models introduced here will provide
a useful step in the direction of achieving such a balance.
Granular f\/lows have also been extensively studied using methods inspired by
molecular dynamics research. The basic idea of the molecular dynamics
approach is to use realistic models for interparticle forces, developed from
both theory and empirical investigations, in a Newtonian dynamics context
with a large number of particles (hundreds or thousands) to determine the
evolution of a particle f\/low conf\/iguration. Analytical means are of little
use in solving the very high dimensional dynamical systems encountered in
such an approach, but some very sophisticated simulations, employing a
variety of numerical solution techniques, have been devised for studying
granular f\/lows, such as those of Goldhirsch et al.~\cite{blackmore:Goldh},
Lan \& Rosato~\cite{blackmore:Lan2,blackmore:Lan},
McNamara \& Luding~\cite{blackmore:McN}, P{\"o}eschel \& Herrmann~\cite{blackmore:Poesch},
Rosato et al.~\cite{blackmore:Ros4}, Swinney et al.~\cite{blackmore:Swin} and Walton~\cite{blackmore:Walt}.
Alternative approaches based on cellular automata models and
kinetic models of random walks in discrete lattices have also proven to be
quite useful; see, for example,
Baxter \& Behringer~\cite{blackmore:Baxter} and Caram \& Hong~\cite{blackmore:Caram}.
These and other
simulations have proven to be so remarkably accurate in manifesting most of
the complex aspects of particle f\/low behavior, that one is inescapably drawn
to the conclusion that the formulation of a more concise and tractable
mathematical representation of such simulations should greatly enhance our
ability to analyze particle f\/low phenomena.
It was this idea of f\/inding more succinct ways of mathematically
characterizing granular f\/low simulations for extremely large numbers of
particles that served as the inspiration for the new models derived in this
paper by computing limiting forms of the relevant Newtonian dynamical
systems. To be more precise, we obtain systems of nonlinear partial
dif\/ferential equations~-- inf\/inite-dimensional dynamical systems~-- for
velocity f\/ields of granular f\/lows by using an averaging method together with
the computation of a limit as the number of particles tends to inf\/inity,
followed by a Taylor series approximation. The approach employed is akin to the
methods used to obtain limiting partial dif\/ferential equations for systems
of ordinary dif\/ferential equations (as the size of systems tend toward
inf\/inity) in the theory of inf\/inite-dimensional dynamical systems; for
example, as when the Korteweg-de Vries equation is obtained as the ''limit''
of an inf\/inite string of coupled nonlinear oscillators (cf. Tabor~\cite{blackmore:Tab}
and Temam~\cite{blackmore:Tem}). Our method leads to an inf\/inite class of mathematical models
of widely varying levels of complexity, depending on the form of the
particle-particle force laws chosen and the order of the Taylor series
expansions employed. Several of these models appear to enjoy certain
advantages over existing models in terms of simplicity and ease of analysis,
and they have the potential for providing a better developed mathematical
understanding of granular f\/low phenomena.
This paper is organized as follows: The
particle-particle models, based on the Hertz-Mindlin theory and some
empirical observation, that we shall employ for the granular f\/lows under
consideration are described in Section~2. Then, in Section~3 we develop the
Newtonian dif\/ferential equations of motion for the particle f\/low dynamics
using the particle-particle force formulas introduced in Section~2, and we
describe a decomposition of the forces into interparticle forces, body
forces and transmitted forces. In Section~4 we delineate a limiting procedure
on the Newtonian equations of motion of the granular f\/low, ignoring boundary
contributions, that produces a system of integro-partial dif\/ferential
equations that models the velocity f\/ield of the particle f\/low. This class of
mathematical models for particle f\/low dynamics is inf\/inite and depends on
the form and parameters of the particle-particle force formulas. We also
show how our integro-dif\/ferential equation models can yield an inf\/initude of
partial dif\/ferential equation approximations to the governing equations when
the dynamical variables are approximated by Taylor series. A choice of
interparticle parameters and order of Taylor series expansion that leads to
a particularly simple system of partial dif\/ferential equations for the
particle velocities in a granular f\/low is also described in this section. We
compute, in Section~5, an exact solution of the simple model of Section 6
for a fully developed f\/low through a vertical pipe with a uniform circular
cross-section, and in so doing give our f\/irst illustration of how to append
relevant boundary conditions to our system of equations. The model of
Section 4 and the introduction of appropriate auxiliary conditions necessary
to model fully developed, two-dimensional granular f\/low down an inclined
plane is treated in Section~6, and we compare our results with those
obtained from other analytical and experimental studies of inclined plane
f\/lows. In Section~7 we develop the boundary conditions for f\/lows in a
vibrating bed and study numerically our model subject to these boundary
conditions. We discuss our results and compare them with experimental studies.
Finally, we conclude in Section~8 with a discussion of the
consequences of the work in this paper and possible directions for future
research involving the new class of models.
\section{Interparticle forces}
In this section we shall describe the particle-particle force models that
are the foundation upon which we construct our derivation of the governing
equations of motion for the granular f\/lows under consideration. We assume
that the f\/low system is comprised of a large number $N$ of identical
inelastic spherical particles distributed throughout some region in ${\bf R}
^3$ at points ${\bf x}^{(i)}$, $1\leq i\leq N.$ The common radius of all
the particles is a very small positive number that we denote by $r,$ and the
point ${\bf x}^{(i)}$ corresponding to the $i$th particle is located at
the center of the particle for all $1\leq i\leq N.$
We may select any particle, say the $i$th one, and suppose that the $j$th
particle at ${\bf x}^{(j)}$ is near ${\bf x}^{(i)}.$ For convenience, we
def\/ine
\begin{equation}
{{\bf r}}_i^j:={{\bf x}}^{(j)}-{{\bf x}}^{(i)}
\end{equation}
and ${\bf v}_i^j$ to be the velocity of the $j$th particle relative to
the $i$th particle; namely,
\begin{equation}
{{\bf v}}_i^j:={{\bf v}}\left({{\bf x}}^{(j)}\right)-{{\bf v}}\left({{\bf x}}^{(i)}\right).
\end{equation}
Taking our cue from Hertz-Mindlin theory as supported by numerous
experimental observations and granular f\/low simulations
(see~\cite{blackmore:Fan,blackmore:Jeni,blackmore:Ros4,blackmore:Sav}
and~\cite{blackmore:Walt}), we shall assume that the model for the force ${\bf P}_i^j$
exerted on the $i$th particle by the $j$th particle is described as follows:
${\bf P}_i^j$ is the sum of a (inelastic) {\it normal force} ${\cal N}
_i^j$ and a {\it tangential} {\it force} ${\cal T}_i^j$ due to
friction
\begin{equation}
{{\bf P}}_i^j={\cal N}_i^j+{\cal T}_i^j,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
{\cal N}_i^j:=\left[ -\chi \left(\left\| {{\bf r}}_i^j\right\| ^2\right)\left\|
{{\bf r}}_i^j\right\| ^{{}\alpha }+\eta \left(\left\| {{\bf r}}
_i^j\right\| ^2\right)\left\langle {{\bf v}}_i^j,{{\bf r}}
_i^j\right\rangle \left\| {{\bf r}}_i^j\right\| ^{{}\beta }\right]
{{\bf \hat{r}}}_i^j
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
{\cal T}_i^j:=\psi \left(\left\| {{\bf r}}_i^j\right\| ^2\right)\left\| {
{\bf r}}_i^j\right\| ^{{}\gamma }\left\| \vartheta ({\bf v}
_i^j)\right\| ^{{}\delta }\widehat{\vartheta ({\bf v}_i^j)}.
\end{equation}
Here $\langle \cdot , \cdot \rangle$ is the standard inner product with induced
norm $\|\cdot\|$ in
${\bf R}^3$ and
$\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$ and $\delta $ are positive exponents chosen
according to the particular properties of the material particles; among the
most often used values are $\alpha =1$ or $3/2$ (Hertzian), $\beta =1,$
$\gamma =0,1/3,2/3$ or $3/2$ and $\delta =1$ or $2.$ The functions $\chi$,
$\psi $ and $\eta $ are smooth ($=C^\infty $) on $[0,\infty )$ and have
the following properties:
\begin{equation}
\chi (\tau ),\psi (\tau ),\eta (\tau )\geq 0\qquad \mbox{for all }\quad \tau \geq 0;
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\chi ^{\prime }(\tau ),\psi ^{\prime }(\tau ),\eta ^{\prime }(\tau )\leq
0\qquad \mbox{for all }\quad \tau \geq 0\quad (^{\prime }=d/d\tau );
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\chi (\tau )=\psi (\tau )=\eta (\tau )=0\qquad \mbox{when }\quad \tau >4r^2;
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\chi ^{\prime }(\tau )=\psi ^{\prime }(\tau )=\eta ^{\prime }(\tau )=0\qquad
\mbox{for }\quad 0\leq \tau \leq q^2<4r^2;
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\eta (0)<\chi (0);
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\eta (\tau )\leq \chi (\tau )\qquad \mbox{for all }\quad \tau \geq 0.
\end{equation}
Graphs of these functions are shown in Figure~1.
As we are going to ignore the rotational motion of the particles in our
treatment, we shall assume that the tangential force is very small compared
to the normal force and, more specif\/ically, that $\psi(\tau)\ll \eta(\tau)$
for all $\tau$ such that $\psi(\tau) > 0$.
\strut\hfill
{\bf Figure 1:} Force functions: a) $y=\chi(x)$, b) $y=\eta(x)$, c) $y=\psi(x)$
\vspace{9cm}
The role of the function $\eta $ is to represent an energy loss due to
inelasticity in the restoring mode when the particles are separating after a
collision. A caret over a vector ${\bf u} $ indicates the unit vector in the
direction of ${\bf u}$; i.e., ${\bf \hat{u}}$:=${\bf u}/\left\| {
{\bf u}}\right\| .$ The vector $\vartheta \left({\bf v}_i^j\right)$ is the
component of the relative velocity at the point of contact of a pair of
particles obtained by projecting ${\bf v}_i^j$ onto the tangent plane of
the $i$th particle at the point of contact. This vector can be written in
the form
\begin{equation}
\vartheta \left({{\bf v}}_i^j\right):={{\bf v}}_i^j-\left\langle {
{\bf v}}_i^j,{{\bf \hat{r}}}_i^j\right\rangle {{\bf \hat{r}}}
_i^j.
\end{equation}
The normal and tangential interparticle forces are depicted in Figure~2.
\strut\hfill
{\bf Figure 2:}
Particle-particle forces: a) normal force, b) tangential force
\vspace{10cm}
Summing over all particles in the granular f\/low system, we f\/ind that the
total force exerted by all the particles on the $i$th particle is
\begin{equation}
{{\bf P}}_i:=\sum_{j=1,j\neq i}^N{{\bf P}}
_i^j=\sum_{j=1,j\neq i}^N\left( {\cal N}_i^j+{\cal T}_i^j\right) .
\end{equation}
Note that our assumed particle-particle force models account for the
geometry of the particles only with regard to the region where the force
vanishes (its {\it support)} and the manner in which the tangential
frictional component of force is def\/ined. We observe that~(13) can also be
obtained from a specif\/ic force density f\/ield surrounding the $i$th
particle with the force supplied by each grain equal to this specif\/ic
density multiplied by the volume $\frac 43\pi r^3$. We shall return to this
point in the sequel when we compute limiting forms of the particle dynamical
system.
\section{Newtonian equations of motion}
The motion of the particles in the granular f\/low f\/ield may be described by a
system of $3N$ second-order, ordinary dif\/ferential equations expressing
Newton's second law of motion; viz.
\begin{equation}
m{{\bf \ddot{x}}}^{(i)}={{\bf F}}_i:={{\bf P}}_i+{\bf T}_i+{
{\bf E}}_i+{{\bf B}}_i\qquad (1\leq i\leq N),
\end{equation}
where $\dot{}=d/dt,$ $m$ is the mass of each of the $N$
identical particles, {\bf P}$_i$ is the force exerted
on the $i$th particle by all particles in direct contact with it
as described in the preceding section,
${\bf T}_i$ is the {\it transmitted force} on the $i$th particle exerted by
connected arrays of particles in contact with one another that touch a
particle in direct contact with the $i$th particle,
{\bf E}$_i$ is the {\it external} or {\it body force} on the $i$th
particle which is usually just the gravitational force (but may sometimes
also include electromagnetic and other forces) and {\bf B}$_i$ is the
{\it boundary} {\it force }exerted on the $i$th particle
by f\/ixed or motile boundaries in direct contact with it
that delimit the
region in space in which the particles can move. Observe that the variables
on which each of the components of force depend can be described as follows:
\[
{{\bf P}}_i={{\bf P}}_i\left( {{\bf x}}^{(1)},\ldots,
{{\bf x}}^{(N)},{{\bf \dot {x}}}^{(1)},\ldots, {{\bf \dot {x}}}^{(N)}\right),
\]
\[
{{\bf T}}_i={{\bf T}}_i\left( {{\bf x}}^{(1)},\ldots,
{{\bf x}}^{(N)},{{\bf \dot {x}}}^{(1)},\ldots, {{\bf \dot {x}}}
^{(N)}\right),
\]
\[
\frac{{{\bf E}}_i}m\quad \mbox{is usually constant},
\]
\[
{{\bf B}}_i={{\bf B}}_i\left( {{\bf x}}^{(i)},{{\bf \dot {x}}}^{(i)},t\right) ,
\]
where the dependence on $t$ in ${\bf B}_i$ occurs when the material
boundary of the f\/low region moves with time such as in the case of particles
moving in a vibrating container.
We can write the Newtonian equations of motion in a more concise form by
introducing the following vector notation: Def\/ine the vector ${\bf X}$ in $
{\bf R}^{3N}$ to be
\[
{{\bf X}}:=\left( {{\bf x}}^{(1)},{{\bf x}}^{(2)},\ldots,{{\bf x}}^{(N)}\right) .
\]
Then (14) can be rewritten in vector form as
\begin{equation}
{{\bf \ddot{X}}}={\bf \Phi }({{\bf X}},{{\bf \dot {X}}}
,t):={\bf \Phi }_p({\bf X},{\bf \dot{X}})+{\bf \Phi }_T({\bf X},{\bf \dot{X}},t)+
{\bf \Phi }_e+{\bf \Phi }_b({\bf X},{\bf \dot{X}},t),
\end{equation}
where
\[
{\bf \Phi }_p:=m^{-1}\left( {{\bf P}}_1({{\bf X}},{
{\bf \dot {X}}}),\ldots,{{\bf P}}_N({{\bf X}},{{\bf
\dot {X}}})\right)
\]
is the {\it interparticle force per unit mass,}
\[
{\bf \Phi}_T:=m^{-1}({\bf T}_1({\bf X}, {\bf \dot X}, t),
\ldots, {\bf T}_N({\bf X}, {\bf \dot X}, t))
\]
is the {\it transmitted force per unit mass},
\[
{\bf \Phi }_e:=m^{-1}\left( {{\bf E}}_1,\ldots,{{\bf E}} _N\right)
\]
is the {\it external force per unit mass} and
\[
{\bf \Phi }_b:=m^{-1}\left( {{\bf B}}_1({{\bf x}}^{(1)},
{{\bf \dot {x}}}^{(1)},t),\ldots,{{\bf B}}_N({{\bf x}}
^{(N)},{{\bf \dot {x}}}^{(N)},t)\right)
\]
is the {\it boundary force per unit mass}. In theory, if initial values
of ${\bf X}$ and ${\bf \dot{X}}$ are specif\/ied, then~(15) uniquely
determines the ensuing motion of all the particles, at least for small
values of $\left| t\right| $ (see~\cite{blackmore:Tab} and~\cite{blackmore:Tem}). However, for
extremely
large values of $N$ the work required to integrate~(15)~-- analytically, when
in the rare cases that this is possible, or numerically otherwise~-- tends to
be prohibitive. Thus it is desirable to f\/ind an inf\/inite-dimensional limit
in some sense for~(15) as $N\rightarrow \infty ,$ presumably in the form of
a partial dif\/ferential equation, that may prove to be more amenable to
analysis. This is precisely what we shall do in the next section.
\section{Limiting models}
We shall demonstrate how new models for granular f\/low phenomena can be
obtained by applying a certain type of dynamical limit procedure to the
Newtonian equations~(15). The reader will no doubt notice at least a vague
similarity between our method and the continuum limit used in the
Fermi-Ulam-Pasta model to obtain the Korteweg-de Vries equation (cf.~\cite{blackmore:Tab}).
To begin with, we restrict our attention to points in the interior of the
granular f\/low region that are not directly af\/fected by interaction with the
boundary. Consequently, for the time being we ignore the boundary force
contribution in~(14) or~(15); the boundary ef\/fects shall be considered in
the sequel when we study specif\/ic boundary-value problems.
Referring to (14), we assume that the body forces are exclusively
gravitational and that the Cartesian coordinate system has been chosen so
that the gravitational force acting on each particle has the form
\begin{equation}
{\bf E}_i=-m g{\bf \hat{e}},
\end{equation}
where $g$ is the acceleration of gravity and ${\bf \hat{e}}$ is a unit
vector in the opposite direction to the gravitational f\/ield. Now we
select a point in the interior of the granular f\/low f\/ield corresponding to
the $i$th particle (at time~$t$) which is moving along a trajectory
determined by the vector f\/ield
\begin{equation}
{\bf \dot{x}}^{(i)}={\bf v}\left( {\bf x}^{(i)},t\right)
\end{equation}
and the location of this particle at time $t=0.$
The interparticle forces on the $i$th particle at the point ${\bf x}^{(i)}={\bf x}$
are given by~(13). Since we are going to take a limit as
the number of grains goes to inf\/inity, we need to average or distribute
these forces in a way that insures the existence of such a limit and is
conducive to its computation. This can be done by smearing the particles
into a continuum (assumed to be locally uniform)
and considering the interparticle force f\/ield to be
obtained from a specif\/ic force density f\/ield. To be more precise, we assume
that each particle is surrounded by a specif\/ic force density f\/ield of the
same form $c{\bf P}_{*}$. Whence, the interparticle
force on the $i$th particle can be written
\begin{equation}
{\bf P}_i:=c\sum_{j\neq i}{{\bf P}}_{*}\left({{\bf x}}^{(j)};{\bf v}_i^j\right)\Delta V_j,
\end{equation}
where $\Delta V_j$ is the volume increment occupied by the $j$th particle
and $c>0$ is a multiplicative factor with units {\it volume}$^{-1}$
(associated with the geometry of the particles). This can be rewritten in
the form
\begin{equation}
{\bf P}_i=(N-1)^{-1}cc_0\sum_{j\neq i}{\bf P}_{*}\left({\bf x} ^{(j)};{\bf v}_i^j\right),
\end{equation}
where $c_0$ is a positive constant equal to the volume of the (compact)
support of ${\bf P}_i$ and we have assumed that all the particles occupy
volume increments of the same size. In~(19) we plainly see the averaging
aspect of this approach. Taking the limit as $N\rightarrow \infty $ in~(19)
[or equivalently as $\Delta V_j$ $\rightarrow 0$ in~(18)] using standard
results from integration theory, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\lim_{N\rightarrow \infty }{\bf P}_i=c\int_{{\bf R}^3}{\bf P}
_{*}\, dy_1dy_2dy_3=c\int_{{\bf R}^3}{\bf P}_{*}\, d{\bf y},
\end{equation}
where it follows from (3), (4), (5) and (12) that
\begin{equation}
\hspace*{-5pt}\begin{array}{l}
{\bf P}_{*} :={\bf P}_{*}\left( {\bf y;v(x),v}({\bf x}+{\bf
y})\right)
\vspace{2mm}\\
\displaystyle \qquad = \left[ -\chi \left(\left\| {\bf y}\right\| ^2\right)\left\| {\bf y}
\right\| ^{\alpha -1}+\eta \left(\left\| {\bf y}\right\| ^2\right)\left\langle
{\bf v}({\bf x}+{\bf y})-{\bf v}({\bf x}),{\bf y}
\right\rangle \left\| {\bf y}\right\| ^{\beta -1}\right] {\bf y}
\vspace{2mm}\\
\displaystyle \qquad +\psi \left(\left\| {\bf y}\right\| ^2\right)\left\| {\bf y}\right\| ^{{}\gamma
}\left\| {\bf v}({\bf x}+{\bf y})-{\bf v}({\bf x}
)-\left\langle {\bf v}({\bf x}+{\bf y})-{\bf v}({\bf x}),
{\bf y}\right\rangle \frac{{\bf y}}{\left\| {\bf y}\right\| ^2}
\right\| ^{\delta -1}
\vspace{2mm}\\
\displaystyle \qquad \times \left[ {\bf v}({\bf x}+{\bf y})-{\bf v}({\bf x}
)-\left\langle {\bf v}({\bf x}+{\bf y})-{\bf v}({\bf x}),
{\bf y}\right\rangle \frac{{\bf y}}{\left\| {\bf y}\right\| ^2}
\right] ,
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where ${\bf y}=(y_1,y_2,y_3)$ represents the position vector measured
from the reference point~${\bf x}$ that has been introduced to simplify
the notation for ${\bf r}_i^j.$
As for the transmitted force in the Newtonian equation~(14), we make the
standard assumption that in the continuum limit it can be represented by
a gradient f\/ield, $\mbox{grad}\,p$, where the function $p=p({\bf x},t)$ is
naturally called the {\it pressure}. The particle at ${\bf x}^{(i)}$ is
represented by a {\it density field}, $\rho=\rho({\bf x},t)$, with compact support. Hence
the external force is
\[
\left(\int_{W_i}\rho g\,dV\right){\bf \hat e},
\]
where $W_i$ is a spherical (control) region centered at ${\bf x}^{(i)}$ with
(Lebesgue) measure $\Delta V_i$, and this converges to $\rho g{\bf \hat e}$ as
$N\to\infty$ ($\Leftrightarrow \Delta V_i\to 0$). In the same spirit, the right-hand side of~(14)
is replaced by
\[
\frac d{dt}\int_{W_i}\rho {\bf v}\,dV,
\]
which upon applying the usual continuum limit converges to the density times
the total (material) derivative of the velocity:
\[
\rho\frac{D{\bf v}}{ Dt}:=\rho\left(\frac {\partial{\bf v}}{\partial t}+
\sum^3_{k=1}\frac {\partial{\bf v}}{\partial x_k}v_k\right).
\]
Upon combining all of the above computations, we obtain the following system of
nonlinear integro-partial dif\/ferential equations for the momentum balance of
the particle f\/low in the interior of the region under consideration:
\begin{equation}
\frac{D {\bf v}}{Dt}=\frac {\partial {\bf v}}{\partial t}+v_k\frac {\partial {\bf v}}{\partial x_k}=
-g{\bf \hat e}+ \frac 1\rho\mbox{grad}\,p+\kappa\int_{{\bf R}^3}{\bf P}_*({\bf y};
{\bf v}({\bf x}), {\bf v}({\bf x}+{\bf y}))\, dy,
\end{equation}
where $\kappa:=c/\rho$ and we have employed the Einstein summation convention.
If $\rho$ is constant and $\mbox{grad}\,p$ is known a priori, then~(22) together
with appropriate initial and boundary data suf\/f\/ices to determine the
velocity f\/ield. When the granular f\/low is compressible and $\mbox{grad}\,p$ is
known a priori, we have to add the continuity equation
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial\rho}{\partial t}+\mbox{div}\,(\rho{\bf v})=0
\end{equation}
to (22), and then by imposing additional auxiliary data the velocity f\/ield and
density may be determined. Of course, in general, both~$p$ and~$\rho$ are unknown
variables, in which case~(22) and~(23) are insuf\/f\/icient to determine~$p$, $\rho$ and
${\bf v}$. One more equation must be added, and this may be accomplished by appending an
energy equation to~(22) and~(23). The easiest way to do this is to obtain an equation
of state of the granular f\/low medium that provides a relationship between the
pressure and the density. If we make the same assumption as above (in particular, that
the particles are uniformly and isotropically distributed locally), then by applying the same
type of limit as $N\to\infty$ to the equations representing the kinetic energy
of the Newtonian system~(14), we obtain the equation of state of an ideal gas; namely
\begin{equation}
p=A\,\rho^\omega,
\end{equation}
where $A>0$ and $\omega>1$ are constants that are obtained from the properties of
the granular f\/low medium. The same result can be derived by applying the standard
thermodynamic limit of statistical mechanics in conjunction with the virial theorem.
For certain purposes, including comparison with other continuum models for
particle f\/lows, it is useful to replace~(22) with an approximate partial dif\/ferential equation.
Although, it should be pointed out that, mathematically speaking,~(22) enjoys
certain inherent advantages over such partial dif\/ferential equation models. In
particular, as we shall demonstrate in a forthcoming paper, solutions of the system with~(22)
exhibit considerably more regularity than the pure dif\/ferential equation models
that we shall discuss in the sequel.
In order to approximate (22) by a system of $m$th order partial dif\/ferential
equations, we may use the following Taylor series expansion of order $m:$
\begin{equation}
{\bf v}({\bf x}+{\bf y})-{\bf v}({\bf x})\simeq
\sum_{k=1}^m\frac 1{k!}\frac{\partial ^k{\bf v}}{\partial {\bf
x}^k}({\bf x}){\bf y}^k.
\end{equation}
The positive integer $m$ is at our disposal, and it is plausible to assume
that the larger we choose~$m$, the more accurate the approximation.
Substituting~(25) in~(22), we obtain the system of $m$th order, nonlinear
partial dif\/ferential equations as an approximate model for the momentum balance
of the granular f\/low f\/ield given by
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial {\bf v}}{\partial t}+v_k\frac{\partial {\bf v}}{
\partial x_k}=-g{\bf \hat e}+\frac 1\rho \, \mbox{grad}\,p+{\bf \Gamma }\left( {\bf
v},\frac{\partial {\bf v}}{\partial {\bf x}},\ldots,\frac{\partial ^m{\bf v}}{\partial
{\bf x}^m}\right) ,
\end{equation}
where{\bf \ }${\bf \Gamma },$ a function that does not depend
explicitly on ${\bf x},$ is def\/ined by
\[
\hspace*{-5pt}\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle {\bf \Gamma } :=\kappa \left\{ \!\! -\int_{{\bf R}^3} \!\chi \left(\left\|
{\bf y}\right\| ^2\right)\left\| {\bf y}\right\| ^{\alpha -1}{\bf y}d
{\bf y}+ \! \sum_{k=1}^m\frac 1{k!}\int_{{\bf R} ^3} \! \left\langle \frac{\partial ^k{\bf v}}{\partial
{\bf x}^k}{\bf y}
^k,{\bf y}\right\rangle \left\| {\bf y}\right\| ^{\beta -1}\eta
\left(\left\| {\bf y}\right\| ^2\right){\bf y}d{\bf y}\right.
\vspace{3mm}\\
\displaystyle \qquad +\sum_{k=1}^m\frac 1{k!}\int_{{\bf R}^3}\psi \left(\left\|
{\bf y}\right\| ^2\right)\left\| {\bf y}\right\| ^{{}\gamma }\left\|
\sum_{k=1}^m\frac 1{k!}\left[ \frac{\partial ^k{\bf v}}{\partial
{\bf x}^k}{\bf y}^k-\left\langle \frac{\partial ^k{\bf v}}{\partial
{\bf x}^k}{\bf y}^k,{\bf y}\right\rangle \frac{{\bf y}}{\left\|
{\bf y}\right\| ^2}\right] \right\| ^{\delta -1}
\vspace{3mm}\\
\displaystyle \qquad \times \left. \left[ \frac{\partial ^k{\bf v}}{\partial {\bf x}^k}{\bf y}
^k-\left\langle \frac{\partial ^k{\bf v}}{\partial {\bf x}^k}{\bf y}
^k,{\bf y}\right\rangle \frac{{\bf y}}{\left\| {\bf y}\right\| ^2}
\right] d{\bf y}\right\} .
\end{array}
\]
Hence we have inf\/initely many possible partial dif\/ferential equation models
for granular f\/low corresponding to the choices of the functions $\chi$, $\eta $
and $\psi$, of parameters $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma $ and $\delta$, and the
order~$m$ of the Taylor series approximation.
This leads to a very natural question: What order of Taylor series
approximation in~(26) should be used for a given application? As we shall show in the sequel,
$m=2$ works rather well for tube, inclined plane and vibrating bed f\/lows.
However, it will probably be necessary to consider several choices in other
applications and determine an acceptable order of approximation on a
case-by-case basis, where an educated guess is made based upon known properties
of the f\/low.
\subsection*{A simple f\/low model}
Depending on the choice of parameters and the order, the equation~(26) can
range from relatively simple to quite complicated. In this section we make a
choice of parameters and order that leads to a rather simple yet ostensibly
realistic model for the velocity f\/ield of a granular f\/low. Specif\/ically, we
choose $\alpha =\beta =1,$ $\gamma =0$, $\delta =1$ and $m=2.$ Then~(26) takes
the form
\[
\hspace*{-5pt}\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle \frac{\partial {\bf v}}{\partial t}+v_k\frac{\partial {\bf v}}{
\partial x_k} =-g{\bf \hat e}+\frac1\rho \, \mbox{grad}\,p+\kappa \int_{{\bf
R}^3}\left\{ -\chi \left(\left\| {\bf y}\right\| ^2\right){\bf y}+\sum_{k=1}^2\frac
1{k!}\left[ \psi \left(\left\| {\bf y}\right\| ^2\right)\frac{\partial ^k{\bf v}}{
\partial {\bf x}^k}{\bf y}^k\right. \right.
\vspace{3mm}\\
\displaystyle \qquad \left. \left. +\left \langle \frac{\partial ^k{\bf v}}{\partial {\bf x}
^k}{\bf y}^k,{\bf y}\right\rangle \left( \eta \left(\left\| {\bf y}
\right\| ^2\right)-\psi \left(\left\| {\bf y}\right\| ^2\right)\left\| {\bf y}\right\|
^{-2}\right) {\bf y}\right] \right\} d{\bf y},
\end{array}
\]
which upon integration using spherical coordinates simplif\/ies to
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial {\bf v}}{\partial t}+v_k\frac{\partial {\bf v}}{
\partial x_k}=-g{\bf \hat e}+\frac 1\rho\, \mbox{grad}\,p+\nu \Delta {\bf v}+\lambda
\,\mbox{grad}\,(\mbox{div}\,
{\bf v}),
\end{equation}
where
\[
\nu :=\frac{2\pi \kappa }{15}\int_0^\infty \left[ \eta (s ^2)s
^2-4\psi (s ^2)\right] s ^4ds
\]
and
\[
\lambda :=\frac{4\pi \kappa }{15}\int_0^\infty \left[ \eta (s
^2)s ^2-\psi (s ^2)\right] s ^4ds
\]
depend only on the density and the
particle-particle force functions described in Section~2
and may be assumed to be constants in many applications.
Observe that (27) is essentially just the momentum part of the Navier-Stokes
equations (cf.~\cite{blackmore:Pey,blackmore:Tab} and~\cite{blackmore:Tem}). There are at least two interesting
inferences that may be drawn from this result: Firstly, it provides a partial conf\/irmation of
the validity of our integro-partial dif\/ferential equation model as a predictive tool for
granular f\/low. Secondly, it lends support to the contention that the Navier-Stokes equations
are a good model for granular f\/low behavior obtained from simulation of the Newtonian
equations of motion.
\section{Flow through a tube: an exact solution}
In this section we obtain an exact solution of the approximate model~(27),~(23),~(24)
subject to appropriate boundary conditions, for the case of fully developed
(steady-state) granular f\/low, under the action of gravity, through a
vertical circular cylindrical pipe illustrated in Figure~3.
We assume that the density and pressure are constant, hence it suf\/f\/ices to
solve~(26) subject to some boundary conditions.
\strut\hfill
{\bf Figure 3:} Flow through a tube
\vspace{12cm}
Under the circumstances, it is convenient to recast (27) in terms
of standard cylindrical coordinates $(r,\theta ,z)$ with corresponding
velocity components $(u,v,w),$ where $u$ is the radial, $v$ the azimuthal
and $w$ is the vertical(axial) component of the f\/low velocity. The system
assumes the following form with respect to cylindrical coordinates:
\begin{equation}
\hspace*{-5pt}\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle \frac{\partial u}{\partial t}+u\frac{\partial u}{\partial r}+\frac vr\frac{
\partial u}{\partial \theta }+w\frac{\partial u}{\partial z}-\frac{v^2}r
\vspace{3mm}\\
\displaystyle \qquad =\nu \left[ \frac 1r\frac \partial {\partial r}\left( r\frac{\partial u}{
\partial r}\right) +\frac 1{r^2}\frac{\partial ^2u}{\partial \theta ^2}+
\frac{\partial ^2u}{\partial z^2}\right] +
\lambda \frac \partial {\partial r}\left[ \frac 1r\frac{\partial (ru)}{
\partial r}+\frac 1r\frac{\partial v}{\partial \theta }+\frac{\partial w}{
\partial z}\right],
\vspace{3mm}\\
\displaystyle \frac{\partial v}{\partial t}+u\frac{\partial v}{\partial r}+\frac vr\frac{
\partial v}{\partial \theta }+w\frac{\partial v}{\partial z}+\frac{uv}r
\vspace{3mm}\\
\displaystyle \qquad =\nu \left[ \frac 1r\frac \partial {\partial r}\left( r\frac{\partial v}{
\partial r}\right) +\frac 1{r^2}\frac{\partial ^2v}{\partial \theta ^2}+
\frac{\partial ^2v}{\partial z^2}\right] +
\frac \lambda r\frac \partial {\partial \theta }\left[ \frac 1r\frac{
\partial (ru)}{\partial r}+\frac 1r\frac{\partial v}{\partial \theta }+\frac{
\partial w}{\partial z}\right],
\vspace{3mm}\\
\displaystyle \frac{\partial w}{\partial t}+u\frac{\partial w}{\partial r}+\frac vr\frac{
\partial w}{\partial \theta }+w\frac{\partial w}{\partial z}
\vspace{3mm}\\
\displaystyle \qquad =-g+\nu
\left[ \frac 1r\frac \partial {\partial r}\left( r\frac{\partial w}{\partial
r}\right) +\frac 1{r^2}\frac{\partial ^2w}{\partial \theta ^2}+\frac{
\partial ^2w}{\partial z^2}\right] +
\lambda \frac \partial {\partial z}\left[ \frac 1r\frac{\partial (ru)}{
\partial r}+\frac 1r\frac{\partial v}{\partial \theta }+\frac{\partial w}{
\partial z}\right] ,
\end{array} \hspace{-5.45pt}
\end{equation}
where $g$ is the acceleration of gravity.
We assume that the pipe has radius $R>0$ and that its length is so great
that the domain of the granular f\/low can be represented in idealized form as
\[
\Omega :=\left\{ (r,\theta ,z):0\leq r<R\right\} .
\]
Now we deal with the task of appending appropriate auxiliary data to~(28) on~$\Omega .$
As we are seeking a steady-state solution, we assume that the
velocity is independent of the time~$t.$ There remains the question of
realistic auxiliary data on the boundary $\partial \Omega .$ Of course,
$u\leq 0$ on $\partial \Omega $ is required by the geometry of the pipe
(assuming it is rigid and impenetrable). Over time, one may reasonably
expect the radial and azimuthal f\/luctuations in velocity along the inside
surface of the pipe to cease, so we shall assume that both~$u$ and~$v$
vanish on $\partial \Omega .$ As for the axial velocity along $\partial
\Omega $: the motion of a particle in contact with $\partial \Omega $ is
that of free fall with a resisting force due to friction. This suggests that
there is a constant limiting (or terminal) velocity along the wall of the
pipe (that is achieved in the long-term f\/low conf\/iguration), so it is
reasonable to assume that~$w$ is a negative constant along $\partial \Omega.$
In summary, we take the auxiliary data for (28) in $\Omega $ to be
\begin{equation}
\hspace*{-5pt}\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle \frac{\partial u}{\partial t} =\frac{\partial v}{\partial t}=\frac{
\partial w}{\partial t}\equiv 0\qquad \mbox{in }\quad \Omega,
\vspace{3mm}\\
\displaystyle u =v=0 \qquad \mbox{and }\quad w=-w_\infty \qquad \mbox{on }\quad
\partial \Omega,
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where $w_\infty $ is a positive constant.
In view of the boundary conditions, it makes sense to seek a solution of
(28)--(29) with $u=v=0$ and $w=\varphi (r).$ Then the f\/irst two equations of~(27)
are trivially satisf\/ied and the third equation yields
\begin{equation}
\frac \nu r\frac d{dr}\left( r\frac{d\varphi }{dr}\right) =g.
\end{equation}
Integrating (30), we obtain
\[
\varphi =\frac g{4\nu }r^2+c_1\log r+c_2,
\]
where $c_1$ and $c_2$ are constants of integration. The solution should be
regular at $r=0,$ so we must set $c_1=0.$ Then~(29) leads to the following
solution:
\begin{equation}
u=v=0 \qquad \mbox{and}\qquad w=\frac g{4\nu }\left( r^2-R^2\right) -w_\infty .
\end{equation}
It is easy to check that (31) satisf\/ies (28)--(29).
\section{Inclined plane f\/low model}
The fully developed f\/low of particles down a two-dimensional inclined plane
will be studied in this section using the governing equations~(27),~(23),~(24).
As inclined plane f\/low has been extensively investigated (see, for example~[2]
and~[10]), we shall have an opportunity to compare the predictions based
upon the simple approximate model with the results obtained by other
researchers, thereby further testing the ef\/fectiveness of our approach.
Figure~4 depicts the f\/low geometry for a plane inclined at an angle
of~$\theta $ to the horizontal.
\strut\hfill
{\bf Figure 4:} Inclined plane flow
\vspace{11cm}
It is convenient to use a Cartesian coordinate system with $x$
measured down along the surface of the inclined plane and $y$-axis normal to
the plane and pointing into the f\/lowing layer of granular material. Here $u$
represents the component of the f\/low velocity along the $x$-axis and $h$ the
depth of the f\/lowing layer.
We assume that the density is constant and that the pressure gradient exactly
balances the gravitational force normal to the inclined plane throughout the f\/lowing
layer. Therefore, it suf\/f\/ices to solve~(27) along with the necessary boundary
conditions. Of course, the f\/igure embodies the usual
assumption that the granular f\/low is essentially two-dimensional.
A clockwise rotation of $\theta $ of the coordinate system and a
balancing of the gravitational and reaction forces normal to the inclined
plane yields the following pair of equations for the granular f\/low:
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial u}{\partial t}+u\frac{\partial u}{\partial x}+v\frac{\partial
u}{\partial y}=g\sin \theta +\nu \left( \frac{\partial ^2u}{\partial x^2}+
\frac{\partial ^2u}{\partial y^2}\right) +\lambda \left( \frac{\partial ^2u}{
\partial x^2}+\frac{\partial ^2v}{\partial x\partial y}\right),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial v}{\partial t}+u\frac{\partial v}{\partial x}+v\frac{\partial
v}{\partial y}=\nu \left( \frac{\partial ^2v}{\partial x^2}+\frac{\partial
^2v}{\partial y^2}\right) +\lambda \left( \frac{\partial ^2u}{\partial
x\partial y}+\frac{\partial ^2v}{\partial y^2}\right) ,
\end{equation}
where $v$ is the $y$-component of the velocity of the granular f\/low. Since
the f\/low is taken to be fully developed (steady-state), it is reasonable to
assume that both $u$ and $v$ are independent of the time $t.$ It is also
sensible to presuppose that the $y$-component of the velocity vanishes
identically and that $u$ is a function of $y$ only. With these assumptions~(33)
reduces to the trivial equation $0=0$ and we are left only with the
simple ordinary dif\/ferential equation
\begin{equation}
\frac{d^2u}{dy^2}=-\frac g\nu \sin \theta
\end{equation}
representing (32).
Appropriate auxiliary data for (34) are the free-boundary condition along
the free surface representing the interface between the f\/lowing particles
and the air that def\/ines the depth of the f\/lowing layer~$h$ as the smallest
number satisfying
\begin{equation}
\frac{du}{dy}(h)=0\qquad (h>0),
\end{equation}
and a slip condition along the inclined plane granular material interface
\begin{equation}
\frac{du}{dy}(0)=ku_\infty ,
\end{equation}
where $u_\infty $ is a limiting velocity along the surface of the plane. The
component $u_\infty $ may be the result of a partial balance between the
frictional properties of the plane and the particles and the gravitational
component of the force in the $x$-direction or a combination of
gravitational and frictional ef\/fects and some constant mass f\/low rate
supplied to the system. Here~$k$ is some nonnegative constant connected with
the nature of the shearing stress in the f\/lowing layer adjacent to the plane
that is related to the frictional characteristics of the plane and particles
and the dynamical state of the system.
Integrating (34) twice using (36), we obtain the solution
\begin{equation}
u=u(y)=-\left( \frac{g\sin \theta }{2\nu }\right) y^2+u_\infty \left(
ky+1\right) .
\end{equation}
Whence we determine the depth of the f\/lowing layer by substitution of (35)
in~(37); namely,
\begin{equation}
h=\frac{k\nu u_\infty }{g\sin \theta },
\end{equation}
for $\theta >0.$ A typical velocity prof\/ile is shown in Figure~5.
\strut\hfill
{\bf Figure 5:} Velocity profiles for inclined plane flow
\vspace{10cm}
The extremely simple nature of the solution (37) obtained from the governing
equation~(27) notwithstanding, it compares rather well with observations
from experimental studies and the predictions from more complicated f\/low
models (cf.~\cite{blackmore:And} and~\cite{blackmore:John}). For example, the form of the velocity
prof\/iles illustrated in Fig.~5 is qualitatively similar to those measured in
experiments and derived from more comprehensive constitutive equations.
Moreover, unlike some fairly popular models,~(38) shows that our approach predicts a
decrease in the depth of the f\/lowing layer with increasing inclination angle
of the plane~-- a property that is consistent with experimental observations.
\section{Vibrating bed model}
In this section we shall apply our model (27), (23), (24) to the study of
granular f\/lows in
a two-dimensional vibrating bed. Namely,
we consider the motion of a very large number of particles in a rectangular
container in the plane with f\/ixed vertical side walls and a horizontal bottom that is
oscillating periodically in the vertical ($x_2$) direction. The only body force is a
gravitational force in the negative ($x_2$) direction and the interstitial and surrounding medium
is air which we assume has no ef\/fect on the granular f\/low.
At $t=0$ the particles are contained in the following region:
\begin{equation}
K_0:=\{(x_1,x_2)\in{\bf R}^2: |x_1|<\sigma, \, x_2>0\},
\end{equation}
where $\sigma >0$ is half of the width of the container. Then, the container
is subject to a vertical oscillation of the form $a\sin(\omega t)$ that is
illustrated in Figure~6.
\vfill
\pagebreak
{\bf Figure 6:} Granular material in a vibrating container
\vspace{12cm}
We shall use boundary conditions at the walls similar to those
employed in the previous section. Namely, we assume that the normal component of
the particle velocity near the wall is
equal to the normal component of the wall velocity. As for the tangential
direction, we use the equation~(36) in the following form
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial v_T}{\partial n}=-k v_T,
\end{equation}
where $v_T$ denotes the relative tangential component of velocity between the
particle and the wall, $\partial/\partial n$ is the partial derivative in the outer normal direction.
The equation~(40) as well as~(36) represents a type of balance law between the
interparticle and particle-wall friction forces which has been used by other reseachers.
The (constant) coef\/f\/icient $k >0$ is a
measure of the boundary friction that we shall call the {\it wall friction
coefficient}. It would be most natural to use the particle size as the characteristic length
for the non-dimensionalization of~$k$, but it tends to zero in the continuum model limit.
Therefore we use for this purpose the space step of the numerical integration scheme.
In summary then, we take the following as the governing equations plus the
initial and boundary conditions for the granular f\/low in the planar vibrating bed:
\begin{equation}
\hspace*{-5pt}\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle \frac {\partial v_1}{\partial t}+v_1\frac {\partial v_1}{\partial x_1}+v_2\frac {\partial v_1}{\partial
x_2}=\nu\left(\frac{\partial^2v_1}{\partial x_1^2}+
\frac {\partial^2v_1}{\partial x_2^2}\right)+\lambda\left(\frac {\partial^2v_1}{\partial x_1^2}+\frac {\partial^2v_2}{\partial
x_1\partial x_2}\right),
\vspace{3mm}\\
\displaystyle \frac{\partial v_2}{\partial t}+v_1\frac {\partial v_2}{\partial x_1}+v_2\frac {\partial v_2}{\partial
x_2}=\nu\left(\frac {\partial^2v_2}{\partial x_1^2}+
\frac {\partial^2v_2}{\partial x_2^2}\right)+\lambda\left(\frac {\partial^2v_1}{\partial x_1 \partial
x_2}+\frac {\partial^2v_2}{\partial x_2^2}\right)
\end{array}
\end{equation}
in $\Sigma:=\{(x,t): \,x\in\Omega_t, \, t>0\}$;
\begin{equation}
v_1(x_1, x_2, 0)=v_1^0(x_1,x_2), \qquad v_2(x_1, x_2, 0)=v_2^0(x_1,x_2) \qquad
\mbox{at} \quad t=0
\end{equation}
for all $x\in\Omega_0=\{x\in{\bf R}^2: \,|x_1|<\sigma, \,0<x_2<h\}$, where
the functions $v_1^0(x_1,x_2)$ and $v_2^0(x_1,x_2)$ determine the initial
velocity distribution;
\begin{equation}
\frac {\partial v_1}{\partial x_2}=-kv_1, \qquad v_2=a\omega \cos(\omega t)
\end{equation}
for all particles on the bottom, $\{(x_1, x_2):\, |x_1|<\sigma,
x_2=a\sin(\omega t)\}$, of the bed when $t>0$;
\begin{equation}
v_1=0, \qquad \frac {\partial v_2}{\partial x_1}=-kv_2
\end{equation}
for all particles on the left wall, $\{(x_1,x_2): \, x_1=-\sigma, \, x_2>a\sin(\omega t)\}$, of the
container when $t>0$;
\begin{equation}
v_1=0, \qquad \frac {\partial v_2}{\partial x_1}=-kv_2
\end{equation}
for all particles on the right wall, $\{(x_1,x_2): \, x_1=\sigma, \, x_2>a\sin(\omega t)\}$, of the
container when $t>0$; and
\begin{equation}
\frac {\partial {\bf v}}{\partial n}=0
\end{equation}
for all particles on the free-boundary, consisting of all points in
$\partial\Omega_t\backslash\partial K_t$, when $t>0$.
Now we shall consider some numerical solutions to the model~(41) subject to
the initial and the boundary conditions~(42)--(46). To simplify our analysis, we shall ignore the
ef\/fects of surface waves and free-boundary components at the bottom of the container.
In order to avoid dif\/f\/iculties with vibrating bed boundary conditions like
$v_2(x, a\sin(\omega t))$ $=a\omega\cos(\omega t)$ at the bottom of the bed,
we shall write our equations in the vibrating system of coordinates:
\begin{equation}
x=x^*, \qquad y=y^*+a\sin(\omega t), \qquad t=t^*.
\end{equation}
The operators of partial dif\/ferentiation in this frame are
\begin{equation}
\frac \partial{\partial x}=\frac \partial{\partial x^*}, \qquad \frac \partial{\partial y}=\frac \partial{\partial y^*}, \qquad \frac \partial{\partial
t}=\frac \partial{\partial t^*}-a\omega\cos(\omega t^*)
\frac \partial{\partial y^*}.
\end{equation}
We have to include also into the system (41) the inertial force term
proportional to $a\omega^2 \sin(\omega t)$ and directed along the $y$-axis.
The governing system of equations in the "starred" system takes the following
form (we have dropped the index `$*$')
\begin{equation}
\hspace*{-5pt}\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle v_{1,t}=\nu(v_{1,xx}+v_{1,yy})+a\omega\cos(\omega
t)v_{1,y}-\alpha(v_1v_{1,x}+v_2v_{1,y})+\lambda(v_{1,xx}+
v_{2,xy}),
\vspace{2mm}\\
\displaystyle v_{2,t}=a\omega^2 sin(\omega t)+\nu(v_{2,xx}+v_{2,yy})+a\omega\, cos(\omega
t)v_{2,y}-\alpha(v_1v_{2,x}+v_2v_{2,y})
\vspace{2mm}\\
\displaystyle \qquad +\lambda(v_{1,xy}+v_{2,yy}),
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where $0\le x\le 2$, $0\le y\le 2$, and the boundary conditions can be written as
\begin{equation}
\hspace*{-5pt}\begin{array}{l}
v_1(0,y,t)=0, \qquad v_1(2,y,t)=0, \qquad v_2(x,0,t)=0, \qquad v_2(x,2,t)=0,
\vspace{2mm}\\
\displaystyle \frac {\partial v_1}{\partial y}(x,0,t)+kv_1(x,0,t)=0, \qquad \frac {\partial v_1}{\partial y}(x,2,t)=0,
\vspace{3mm}\\
\displaystyle \frac {\partial v_2}{\partial x}(0,y,t)+kv_2(0,y,t)=0, \qquad
\frac {\partial v_2}{\partial x}(2,y,t)+kv_2(2,y,t)=0.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
We use an explicit f\/inite dif\/ference scheme for solving the system (49)--(50)
with the spatial step $\Delta x=\Delta y=0.001$ and the time step
$\Delta t=10^{-5}$. Estimates show that such a small time step is needed to
satisfy the stability condition for the explicit f\/inite-dif\/ference scheme.
We investigated the system (49)--(50) using both multi-vortex and random initial
conditions. For certain ranges of the parameters (corresponding to the particle-particle
forces) the motion of the system starting with a multi-vortex conf\/iguration changes
rapidly into a pair of vortices that persists for a long time (relative to the period of the
forced oscillations). The centers of this ``stable'' vortex pair oscillate
with small amplitude synchronistically with the forced oscillations.
In some cases this vortex pair evolved into a single vortex over a very large
time period. Increase of the constant $\nu$ results in a corresponding increase of the
particle-particle friction and leads to damping of the vorticity (see
Figure~7).
When the motion starts from a random initial velocity distribution we also
observed the ``stable'' vortex type of motion and
bifurcation between dif\/ferent types of relatively stable patterns (Figure~8).
Some of the values used for the control parameters were
$\omega=2$, $a=1$, $\nu=0.3$, $\lambda=1.0$
in the case of the vortex type of motion, and
$\omega=3$, $a=1$, $\nu=1.0$, $\lambda=0.5$
in the case of a mixing motion. These types of particle
dynamics are in agreement with experimental observations and computer
simulation results~\cite{blackmore:Lan,blackmore:Poesch}.
We note also that Hayakawa and Hong~\cite{blackmore:Hay} obtained similar results from
numerical solutions of their models but they assumed no-slip boundary conditions
at the walls which are not physically realistic for vibrating bed granular f\/lows.
Similar types of the f\/low behavior were obtained by Bourzutschky and
Miller~\cite{blackmore:Bourz}
for their Navier-Stokes models. By using negative slip boundary conditions in numerical
experiments corresponding to granular f\/lows with a high mobility boundary layer,
they obtained experimentally observable vortex type solutions.
Unlike us, they did not obtain convective f\/low behavior coinciding with
experimentally observed results for possible values of the wall friction coef\/f\/icient. A possible
explanation for this discrepancy between their f\/indings and ours may be the fact that we included
the gravity force directly in our model and they did not.
As mentioned above, we have suppressed the free-boundary conditions that occur
in an actual vibrating bed in our numerical experiments. This has been done to simplify
the numerical solution of the problem, since incorporation of the free-boundaries
signif\/icantly complicates the problem and for us is still
in the developmental stage. Preliminary results indicate that the addition of
free-boundaries will still result in the appearance of ``stable'' convective vortices,
and we plan to demonstrate this in a forthcoming
paper. Apparently, the frictional ef\/fects of the walls is the primary mechanism
in the generation of convective rolls. For now then, our analysis of the vortices must be
considered to be of a local rather than a global nature.
\strut\hfill
{\bf Figure 7:} Motion of particles starting with
four-vortex initial configuration (numerical solutions)
\vfill
\pagebreak
\strut\hfill
{\bf Figure 8:} Motion of particles starting with random
initial velocity distribution (numerical solutions)
\vfill
\pagebreak
\section{Concluding Remarks}
Starting with well-established representations for particle-particle normal
and tangential frictional forces (based on sound theoretical principles and
a large body of experimental observations), we derived a new class of
integro-partial dif\/ferential equations to describe the velocity f\/ield in the
granular f\/low of rough, inelastic particles. These granular f\/low models were
obtained by taking a dynamical limit as $N\rightarrow \infty $ of the
Newtonian system of dif\/ferential equations of motion of an $N$-particle
array using integral averages of an assumed uniform distribution of
particles comprising the f\/low f\/ield. Then by employing Taylor series
expansions of key variables of the f\/low f\/ield, we were able to obtain an
inf\/inite collection of approximations of the model equations in the form of
a system of three nonlinear partial dif\/ferential equations for the velocity
components of the granular f\/low. The simplest of these approximate models,
obtained by retaining only the f\/irst two terms in the Taylor expansions, is
a system of equations that is signif\/icantly less complicated than most of
the continuum models currently being used to investigate particle f\/low
dynamics.
Our models, and especially the simplest of the approximations, certainly do
not incorporate as much of the physics involved in granular f\/lows as do the
more comprehensive partial dif\/ferential equation models, yet they appear to
be quite promising instrumentalities for the prediction of particle f\/low
behavior. A good indication of this is the results of our application of the
simplest model to granular f\/low through a vertical tube, fully developed
f\/low down an inclined plane and f\/low in a vibrating bed
which produced relatively simple solutions that
compared remarkably well, in a qualitative sense, with experimental
observations and the predictions of more complete models. This suggests
that, in spite of the simplifying assumptions we used in the derivation,
these models may be capable of accurately predicting dynamical properties of
a wider range of granular f\/low conf\/igurations than one might imagine. And
that they certainly warrant further investigation and testing. Moreover, the
new models are far more amenable to analysis (particularly from the
viewpoint of inf\/inite-dimensional dynamical systems theory) than the
majority of governing equations in the literature. Therefore it is quite
possible that one may be able to apprehend important new insights into
several elusive granular f\/low phenomena from a more penetrating mathematical
investigation of the properties of the new equations.
In the near future we plan to undertake an intensive analytical and
computational study of the models introduced in this paper. For example, we
shall use dynamical systems theory to identify and analyze such phenomena as
inertial manifolds, bifurcations, strange attractors and regimes of
spatio-temporal chaos that will then be correlated to a variety of complex
granular f\/low behaviors. In addition, it should be useful to develop and
implement algorithms for the approximate numerical solution of the models,
and then compare the results obtained with those from
simulations,experimental studies and other governing equations. We shall
begin this program of investigation by conducting a more thorough
analysis of vibrating bed f\/lows and also studying granular f\/low
in hoppers.
\subsection*{Acknowledgments}
This work was partially supported by DOE Contract DE-FG22-95PC95203, NSF
Grant EEC-9420597 and a grant from the New Jersey Commission on Science and
Technology. The authors are indebted to a referee whose insightful comments
led to an improvement of the original version of this paper.
|
\section{Introduction}
Recently, the first results from parity--violating electron scattering
experiments, which allow to pin down the so--called strange form factors
of the nucleon, have become available. The SAMPLE collaboration has reported the
first measurement of the strange magnetic moment of the proton~\cite{SAMPLE}.
To be precise, they give the strange magnetic form factor in units of
nuclear magnetons at a small momentum transfer $Q_S^2=0.1~{\rm GeV}^2$
\begin{eqnarray}
G_{\rm SAMPLE}^{(s)}(Q_S^2)&=&G_M^{(s)} (Q_S^2)\nonumber \\
&=& +0.23\pm 0.37 \pm 0.15\pm 0.19\,.
\end{eqnarray}
The rather sizeable error bars document
the difficulty of such type of experiment. The HAPPEX collaboration
has chosen a different kinematics which is more sensitive to the
strange electric form factor~\cite{HAPPEX}. Their measurement implies
\begin{eqnarray}
G_{\rm HAPPEX}^{(s)}(Q_H^2)&=&G_E^{(s)}(Q_H^2) + 0.39\;G_M^{(s)}
(Q_H^2) \nonumber \\
&=& 0.023 \pm 0.034 \pm 0.022\pm 0.026\, ,
\end{eqnarray}
with $Q_H^2= 0.48~{\rm GeV}^2$.
There have been many theoretical speculations about the size of the
strange form factors, some of them clearly in conflict with the
data (for a review see ref.\cite{Metal}).
Here, we wish to analyze these data in the framework of
chiral perturbation theory. It was shown in~\cite{hms}
that to leading order in the momentum dependence one
can make a parameter--free prediction for the momentum dependence of
the nucleons' strange magnetic (Sachs) form factor based on the chiral symmetry
of QCD solely. The value of the strange magnetic moment, which contains
an unknown low--energy constant, can be deduced from the SAMPLE experiment
using the momentum--dependence derived in~\cite{hms}. Furthermore, the SU(3)
analysis of the octet electromagnetic form factors performed in~\cite{khm}
allows one to pin down the octet component of the strange vector
current. We demonstrate here that to one loop order
(more precisely: to third order in the chiral expansion) there is only
one new singlet counterterm, whose strength can be determined from
the value found by HAPPEX. This allows us to give a band for the
strange electric form factor and make a prediction for the MAMI A4
experiment~\cite{MAMI}, which intends to measure
\begin{eqnarray}
G_{\rm MAMI}^{(s)}(Q_M^2)=G_E^{(s)}(Q_M^2) + 0.22\;G_M^{(s)}
(Q_M^2)\; ,
\end{eqnarray}
with a four-momentum transfer (squared) $Q^2_M=0.23~{\rm GeV}^2$
of approximately half the HAPPEX value.
\medskip
\noindent
The strangeness vector current of the nucleon is defined as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{svc}
\langle N|\;\bar{s}\;\gamma_\mu\; s\;|N \rangle
&=& \langle N|\;\bar{q}\;\gamma_\mu\;
(\lambda^0/3-\lambda^8/\sqrt{3}) \; q\;| N \rangle \nonumber \\
&=&(1/3)J_{\mu}^0- (1/\sqrt{3})J_{\mu}^8 \; ,
\end{eqnarray}
with $q=(u,d,s)$ denoting the triplet of the light quark fields and
$\lambda^0 = I\; (\lambda^a)$
the unit (the $a=8$ Gell--Mann) SU(3) matrix. Chiral perturbation theory
(CHPT) is a precise tool to investigate such type of
low--energy properties of the nucleon~\cite{ect}.
In the past few years, however, it was believed
that due to the appearance of higher order local contact terms with
undetermined coefficients, CHPT can not be used to make any
prediction for the strange magnetic moment or the strange electric
form factor~\cite{mus}.
However, with the advent of the first SAMPLE and HAPPEX data and renewed theoretical
effort the situation has now changed. It could be shown that
to third order in small momenta and/or meson mass
insertions (we collectively denote these expansion parameters by $p$),
there appear only four low--energy constants (LECs)
in the octet (note that only two combinations of these are relevant here)
and two in the singlet current. While the former (two combinations)
can be fixed from the
isoscalar anomalous magnetic moment and charge radius of the nucleon,
the latter two can now be
deduced from the pioneering SAMPLE and HAPPEX results.\footnote{As a
cautionary remark we
mention already here that the momentum transfer in the HAPPEX
experiment might be too large to trust the third order CHPT treatment. However,
at the moment we consider the experimental uncertainties associated with the
SAMPLE and HAPPEX input into our calculation to be larger than the
theoretical uncertainty of truncating the calculation at ${\cal O}(p^3)$.
Ultimately, the situation can be improved by performing the calculation to next order,
smaller experimental error bars and utilizing new data at lower $q^2$, which should
become available within the next few years.}
\section{Theoretical framework}
In order to obtain the strange electric and magnetic (Sachs) form factors we are
calculating the singlet and the octet current matrix element
of the nucleon to ${\cal O}(p^3)$ in SU(3) HBCHPT, see eq.(\ref{svc}),
in the Breit frame (following refs.\cite{BKKM,BFHM})
\begin{eqnarray}{\label{current}}
J_\mu^{(0,8)}
&=& \frac{1}{{\cal N}_{i}{\cal N}_{f}} {\bar u(p')} \, P^{+}_{v}
\biggl[G_{E}^{(0,8)} (Q^{2}) v_\mu \nonumber \\
&& + \, \frac{1}{m} \, G_{M}^{(0,8)} (Q^{2})\, [ S_\mu,S_\nu ]
q^{\nu} \biggr] \, P^{+}_{v}\, u(p)~,
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{equation}
q_\mu = (p' -p)_\mu~, \quad Q^2 = -q^2~, \quad
{\cal N} =\sqrt{\frac{E+m}{2m}}~,
\end{equation}
$P_v^+$ being a positive--velocity projection operator and $m$
is the nucleon mass. For a
more detailed discussion of this expression and the relation
to the standard Dirac and Pauli form factors, see e.g.~\cite{BFHM}.
From Eq.(\ref{current}) one can then reconstruct the strangeness form factors
as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
G_{E/M}^{(s)}\left( Q^{2}\right) &=& \frac{1}{3} G_{E/M}^{(0)}\left( Q^{2}\right)
- \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}} G_{E/M}^{(8)}\left( Q^{2}\right) .
\end{eqnarray}
These form factors admit a Taylor expansion around $Q^2=0$,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{taylor}
G_{E/M}^{(s)}\left( Q^{2}\right) &=& G_{E/M}^{(s)} (0) - \frac{1}{6}
\langle r^2_{E/M,s} \rangle \, Q^2 + {\cal O}(Q^4)~,
\end{eqnarray}
in terms of the strange electric/magnetic radii
\begin{eqnarray}\label{defrad}
\langle r^2_{E/M,s} \rangle = -6 \frac{dG_{E/M}^{(s)} ( Q^{2})}{dQ^2}\biggl|_{Q^2=0}~.
\end{eqnarray}
Note that one does not divide through the normalization of the
respective form factor (even if it is non--vanishing) as it is usually
done in case of the standard electromagnetic Sachs form factors. For
that reason, one sometimes also introduces the slope parameters
$(\rho^{(s)}_{E/M})^2 = \langle r^2_{E/M,s} \rangle / 6$~\cite{mus}.
\medskip
\noindent
We give now the relevant HBCHPT Lagrangians needed for the
calculation. Throughout, we work in the isospim limit $m_u = m_d$.
We utilize the covariant derivative acting on the baryon field $B$ in the
fundamental representation
\begin{eqnarray}
D_\mu B&=& \partial_\mu B +[\Gamma_\mu,B] -i \langle v_{\mu}^{(0)}
\rangle B \nonumber \\
\Gamma_\mu&=&\frac{1}{2}\left[u^\dagger,\partial_\mu u\right]-\frac{i}{2}u^\dagger
v_{\mu}^{(8)} u-\frac{i}{2}u \,v_{\mu}^{(8)} u^\dagger +\dots \; ,
\end{eqnarray}
respectively the chiral vierbein
\begin{eqnarray}
u_\mu&=&i\;u^\dagger\left(\partial_\mu U-i v_{\mu}^{(8)} U+i U
v_{\mu}^{(8)}\right) u^\dagger +\dots \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where the quantity $v_{\mu}^{(8)}\,[v_{\mu}^{(0)}]$ corresponds to an external octet
[singlet] vector source and
$\langle \ldots \rangle$ denotes the trace in flavor space.
The relevant SU(3) HBCHPT Lagrangians then read (we do not show the
terms which are
only needed for wave function renormalization)
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal L}_{MB}^{(1)}&=&\langle \bar{B}\;i v\cdot D\;B\rangle
+ D\; \langle \bar{B}\;S^\mu\{u_\mu,B\} \rangle
\nonumber \\
& & +F \;\langle \bar{B}\;S^\mu[u_\mu,B]\rangle ,\\
{\cal L}_{MB}^{(2)}&=& -\frac{i (1+b^F)}{4 m}\; \langle \bar{B}
\left[S^\mu,S^\nu\right] [f_{+\mu\nu}^{(8)},B]\rangle
\nonumber \\
& &-\frac{i b^D}{4 m}
\;\langle \bar{B}\left[S^\mu,S^\nu\right] \{f_{+\mu\nu}^{(8)},B\}
\rangle \nonumber \\
& & -\frac{i (1+b_{0}) }{4 m}\;
\langle \bar{B}\left[S^\mu,S^\nu\right] B\rangle
\; 2 \langle v_{\mu\nu}^{(0)} \rangle \nonumber \\
& & -\frac{1}{2m} \;\langle \bar{B}
[D_\mu,[D^\mu,B]]\rangle \nonumber \\
& & +\frac{1}{2m} \;\langle \bar{B}
[v\cdot D,[v\cdot D,B]]\rangle~, \\
{\cal L}_{MB}^{(3)}&=&
-{d^{101} \over (4\pi F_\phi)^2}\langle
\bar{B} [[ v^\mu D^\nu, f_{+\mu\nu}^{(8)}], B] \rangle \nonumber \\
&&
-{d^{102} \over (4\pi F_\phi)^2} \langle
\bar{B} \{[ v^\mu D^\nu, f_{+\mu\nu}^{(8)}], B\} \rangle \nonumber \\
&& - {d^{102}_0 \over (4\pi F_\phi)^2}
\langle \bar{B} B \rangle \langle [ v^\mu \partial^\nu , 2
v_{\mu\nu}^{(0)}] \rangle \nonumber \\
&&+ \frac{1}{2m}\; \langle \bar{B} \bigl( \gamma_0 {\cal B}^{(2)\dagger}
\gamma_0 {\cal B}^{(1)} +\gamma_0 {\cal B}^{(1)\dagger}
\gamma_0 {\cal B}^{(2)} \bigr) B\rangle \nonumber
\\
&& -\frac{1}{4m^2}\langle \bar{B} \gamma_0 {\cal B}^{(1)\dagger}\gamma_0
(iv\cdot D) {\cal B}^{(1)} B \rangle + \ldots~,
\nonumber\\ &&
\label{eq:lag}
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{+\mu\nu}^{(8)}&=&u^\dagger\left(\partial_\mu v_{\nu}^{(8)}-
\partial_\nu v_{\mu}^{(8)}\right) u+u\left(\partial_\mu v_{\nu}^{(8)}-
\partial_\nu v_{\mu}^{(8)}\right) u^\dagger \nonumber \\
v_{\mu\nu}^{(0)}&=&\partial_\mu v_{\nu}^{(0)}-\partial_\nu
v_{\mu}^{(0)} \; ,
\end{eqnarray}
and the matrices ${\cal B}^{(1,2)}$ encode the information concerning
the $1/m$ corrections due to transitions between the light and heavy
components~\cite{BKKM}.
Their explicit form for the SU(3) case can be found in ref.\cite{guido}.
Furthermore, $F_\phi =(F_\pi+F_k)/2 \simeq 100\,$MeV is the average
pseudoscalar decay constant. We use
this value because the difference between the pion and the kaon decay
constants only shows up at higher order.
For the conventional axial meson--baryon couplings we will use $F =
0.5,\;D=0.75$.\footnote{Note that the symbol $D$ is used for the
covariant derivative and for one of the axial coupling constants. From the
context it is, however, always obvious which one is meant.}
The LECs $d^{101}$, $d^{102}$ have already been determined
in~\cite{khm} from the electric radii of the proton and the neutron.
In contrast to ref.\cite{hms,mus} we separate the anomalous and
non--anomalous contributions to the magnetic moments, utilizing the
path integral formalism of~\cite{BKKM}.
To make contact with the notation used in ref.\cite{hms}, we notice
that the corresponding dimension two LECs $b^{D/F}_{6b}$ and $b_{bc}$
are related to the ones given above in the following way:
\begin{equation}
b_{6b}^F := 1+ b^F~, \quad
b_{6b}^D := b^D~, \quad
b_{6c} := 3\,(1 +b_0)~.
\end{equation}
The first two of these are nothing but the two SU(3) parameters
originally introduced by Coleman and Glashow~\cite{CG} to derive
relations between the magnetic moments of the octet baryons.
The dimension two LECs are finite numbers since loop corrections only start
at third order.
\medskip
\noindent With these Lagrangians, we are now in the position to
evaluate the strange form factors. Consider first the singlet
contributions. To third order in the chiral expansion, these are given
entirely in terms of tree graphs and therefore take the very simple forms
\begin{eqnarray}\label{siff}
G_{E}^{(0)} (Q^2) &=& 3 \biggl(1 + \frac{1}{\left( 4 \pi F_\phi \right)^{2}} \,
2 \,d_{0}^{102}\, Q^2
-\frac{1}{4m^2}\,b_0\, Q^2\biggr)~,
\nonumber \\
G_{M}^{(0)} (Q^2) &=&3(1+ b_0) = G_{M}^{(0)} (0) := 3+ \kappa_N^{(0)}~,
\end{eqnarray}
with $\kappa_N^{(0)}$ the singlet nucleon anomalous magnetic moment.
Since there are no loop contributions to this order, the LEC
$d_{0}^{102}$ is finite and scale--independent. Furthermore,
the last term in the electric form factor is the singlet Foldy
term, i.e. we can rewrite the expression for $G_{E}^{(0)}$ as
\begin{equation}\label{rad0}
G_{E}^{(0)} (Q^2) = 3\,\biggl(1+ \biggl[\frac{2d_0^{102}}{(4\pi F_\phi)^2}
- \frac{\kappa_N^{(0)}}{12m^2} \biggr] \, Q^2\biggr) ~,
\end{equation}
where the term in the square brackets is (up to a factor) the singlet
electric radius squared, see eq.(\ref{taylor}).
Such a structure is of course familiar from the expression for the
neutron charge radius where the dominant contribution to the
radius comes indeed from the Foldy term. The precise splitting for the
strange electric radius will be discussed below.
The normalization of $G_{E,M}^{(0)}$ is related to our normalization of the
singlet current. It is defined as in~\cite{hms} with respect to the
(valence) quark number
and not the baryon number as often done, see e.g.~\cite{mus}.
There are no loop corrections to the singlet electric charge because
the baryon number current is conserved. There are also no loop
contributions to the strange
electric radius since $v_\mu^{(0)}$ does not couple to the meson
cloud and all graphs with couplings to the nucleon are
momentum--independent to third order. This will change at ${\cal O}(p^4)$.
The singlet magnetic form factor in eq.(\ref{siff}) behaves similarly to the
isoscalar magnetic form factor in SU(2), i.e. to third order it
is entirely given in terms of a dimension two contact term with no
momentum dependence.
\medskip
\noindent We now discuss $J_\mu^8$. The corresponding octet components
are of course implicitly contained in ref.\cite{khm} since the electromagnetic
current is an appropriate combination of triplet and octet components. Indeed,
to this order the octet form factor can be calculated from the sum of
the physical proton and neutron form factors and at this order happens to be equal
to the isoscalar electromagnetic form factor of the nucleon,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{octiso}
G_{E/M}^{(8)}\left( Q^{2}\right) &=& \sqrt{3} \;
\left[ G_{E/M}^{p}\left( Q^{2}\right) +G_{E/M}^{n}\left( Q^{2}\right)\right]
\nonumber \\
&=& \sqrt{3}\; G_{E/M}^{I=0}\left( Q^{2}\right) + {\cal O}(p^4)~.
\end{eqnarray}
After standard renormalization to take care of the divergences as
detailed in~\cite{guido}, the corresponding octet electric form factor can
thus be written as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{GEoct}
G_{E}^{(8)}\left( Q^{2}\right) &=&
\sqrt{3} +\frac{\sqrt{3}}{\left( 4\pi F_{ \phi}\right) ^{2}}
\nonumber \\
\times \biggl\{ \biggl[ && \!\!\!\!\!
\frac{1}{12}+\frac{85}{108}D^{2}-\frac{17}{18}DF+\frac{17}{12}F^{2}
\nonumber \\
+
\biggl( \frac{1}{2} &+& \!\!
\frac{5}{6}\biggl( \frac{5}{3} D^{2}- 2DF+3F^{2}\biggr) \biggr)
\ln \left( \frac{M_{K}}{ \mu}\right)
\biggr] Q^{2}
\nonumber \\
+\biggl[ \biggl( && \!\! \frac{5}{3}D^{2} -
2DF+3F^{2}\biggr) \left(2M_{K}^{2}+\frac{5}{4}Q^{2}\right) \nonumber \\
&+& 3 \left( M_{K}^{2}+\frac{1}{4}Q^{2}\right)
\biggr] I_{E}^{K}\left( Q^{2}\right)
\nonumber \\
&+& 2\left( d^{101} (\mu ) - \frac{1}{3}d^{102} (\mu ) \right) Q^{2}
\biggr\}\nonumber \\
&+& \frac{\sqrt{3}}{4m^{2}}\left(\frac{1}{3}b^{D} - b^{F} \right) Q^{2}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
I_{E}^{K}\left( Q^{2}\right) &=&\frac{1}{3} \int\limits_{0}^{1}dx
\ln \left( 1 + x ( 1-x) \frac{Q^2}{M_{K}^{2}}\right)~,
\end{eqnarray}
with $M_K = 494\,$MeV the kaon mass
and $\mu$ is the scale of dimensional regularization. Throughout, we
set $\mu =1\,$GeV and the scale--dependent LECs are also given at that
scale. They can be evaluated for any other scale making use of the
$\beta$--functions given in ref.\cite{guido}. The corresponding octet
radius can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{rad8}
\langle r_{8,E}^2 \rangle &=& -\frac{\sqrt{3} (b^D- 3b^F)}{2m^2}
- \frac{1}{32\sqrt{3}\pi^2 F_\phi^2} \nonumber\\
&\times& \biggl( 7(5D^2-6FD+9F^2) + 9 \nonumber\\
&+& 72 \, d^{102}(\mu ) -24 \, d^{101} (\mu
) \nonumber \\
&+& 2(5(D^2-6DF+9F^2)+9)\ln\frac{M_K}{\lambda} \biggr)~,
\end{eqnarray}
using
\begin{equation}
I_{E}^{K}\left( Q^{2}\right) = \frac{1}{18}\frac{Q^2}{M_K^2} +
{\cal O}\left(\frac{Q^4}{M_K^4}\right)~.
\end{equation}
Similarly, the magnetic octet form factor takes the form
\begin{eqnarray}\label{GM8}
G_{M}^{(8)}\left( Q^{2}\right) &=&
\sqrt{3} \biggl( 1-\frac{1}{3}b^{D}+b^{F} \biggr)
\nonumber \\
&-& \frac{\sqrt{3}m}{16\pi F_{ \phi}^{2}}
\biggl\{
\left( \frac{5}{3} D^{2}-2DF+3F^{2}\right) \nonumber \\
&\times& \left[
M_{K}+\left( M_{K}^{2}+\frac{1}{4}Q^{2}\right)
I_{M}^{K}\left( Q^{2}\right)
\right]\biggr\}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{equation}
I_{M}^{K}\left( Q^{2}\right) =\int\limits_{0}^{1}
\frac{dx}{\sqrt{M_K^2 + x\left( 1-x\right) Q^{2}}}~.
\end{equation}
To further disentangle the momentum dependence of this form factor,
we bring it into the following compact form,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{GEoct2}
G_M^{(8)} (Q^2) &=& \sqrt{3} + \kappa^{(8)} - \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{3} \frac{
\pi m M_K}{(4\pi F_\phi)^2} \nonumber\\
&\times& (5D^2 - 6DF + 9F^2) \, f(Q^2)~,
\end{eqnarray}
with the octet anomalous magnetic moment
\begin{eqnarray}
\kappa^{(8)} &=& \sqrt{3}\; \biggl( b_F -\frac{1}{3}b_D \nonumber \\
&& -\frac{m M_K}{ 24 \pi F_\phi^2}(5D^2 - 6DF + 9F^2)\biggr)~,
\end{eqnarray}
and the function $f(Q^2)$ given in ref.\cite{hms}. To this order,
we have $\kappa^{(8)} = \sqrt{3} (\kappa_p+\kappa_n)$ due to
eq.(\ref{octiso}). This relation
is trivially fulfilled if one fits the LECs $b_D$ and $b_F$ to the
neutron and proton magnetic moments using the third order
formula. In fact, the form of $G_M^{(8)}$ as given in eq.(\ref{GM8})
and eq.(\ref{GEoct2}) differs by the loop contribution to the
magnetic moments. This difference is, however, of higher order.
In what follows, we will work with the form of the octet form factor
given in eq.(\ref{GM8}). We remark that to this order in
the chiral expansion, the momentum dependence of the magnetic octet
form factor completely determines the one of the strange magnetic form
factor.
\medskip
\noindent
Putting pieces together, the strange electric form factor of the nucleon
takes the form
\begin{eqnarray}\label{GEs}
G_{E}^{(s)}\left( Q^{2}\right) &=& \frac{1}{\left( 4\pi F_{ \phi}\right) ^{2}}
\nonumber \\
\times \biggl\{ - \biggl[ && \!\!\!\!\!
\frac{1}{12}+\frac{85}{108}D^{2}-\frac{17}{18}DF+\frac{17}{12}F^{2}
\nonumber \\
+
\biggl( \frac{1}{2} &+& \!\!
\frac{5}{6}\biggl( \frac{5}{3} D^{2}- 2DF+3F^{2}\biggr) \biggr)
\ln \left( \frac{M_{K}}{ \mu}\right)
\biggr] Q^{2}
\nonumber \\
-\biggl[ \biggl( && \!\! \frac{5}{3}D^{2} -
2DF+3F^{2}\biggr) \left(2M_{K}^{2}+\frac{5}{4}Q^{2}\right) \nonumber \\
&+& 3 \left( M_{K}^{2}+\frac{1}{4}Q^{2}\right)
\biggr] I_{E}^{K}\left( Q^{2}\right)
\nonumber \\
&-& 2\left( d^{101}(\mu )-\frac{1}{3}d^{102}(\mu ) - d_{0}^{102} \right) Q^{2}
\biggr\}\nonumber \\
&-& \frac{1}{4m^{2}}\left(b_{0}+\frac{1}{3}b^{D} - b^{F}
\right) Q^{2}~.
\end{eqnarray}
The strange electric radius can readily be deduced from
eq.(\ref{GEs}), singlet and octet radi given before, see
eqs.(\ref{rad0},\ref{rad8}), via
\begin{equation}
\langle r_{E,s}^2 \rangle = \frac{1}{3} \, \langle r_{E,0}^2 \rangle
- \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}} \, \langle r_{E,8}^2 \rangle~
\end{equation}
In this formula, one could express the terms $\sim b^{D,F}$ by the
octet magnetic moment. This again differs from the expression one derives from
eq.(\ref{GEs}) by terms of higher order.
Given the rather sizeable
uncertainty of the present data, we refrain from discussing these
differences here. Clearly, the last term in eq.(\ref{GEs}) is nothing
but the (strange) Foldy term.
\medskip
\noindent
For completeness we also give the strange magnetic form factor found in~\cite{hms}
\begin{eqnarray}
G_{M}^{(s)}(Q^2)&=&\mu_{N}^{(s)}+\frac{\pi m M_K}{(4\pi
F_{\phi})^2}\;\frac{2}{3}\left(
5 D^2-6 D F+9 F^2 \right) \nonumber \\
& &\times\left[\frac{4 M_{K}^2+Q^2}{4 M_K\sqrt{Q^2}}
\arctan\left(\frac{\sqrt{Q^2}}{2 M_K}\right)-\frac{1}{2}
\right] , \label{eq:gms}
\end{eqnarray}
where we have introduced the strange magnetic moment of the nucleon
\begin{eqnarray}
\mu_{N}^{(s)}&=& b_0 +\frac{1}{3}b_{}^D - b_{}^F \nonumber \\
& &+ \frac{m M_K}{24\pi F_{\phi}^2}\left(5 D^2-6
D F+9 F^2 \right)~.
\label{eq:ks}
\end{eqnarray}
We remark that to the order we are working, the strange form factors
are identical for the proton and the neutron. This is expected since
symmetry breaking only sets in at second order and thus should only show up
in a complete fourth order calculation.
\medskip
\noindent To summarize this section, we have given explicit expressions
for the strange (Sachs) form factors of the nucleon comprising the
various contributions from tree and one--loop graphs. To third order in
small momenta, there appear four octet and two singlet LECs.
This has been observed before~\cite{mus}. The octet
LECs can be fixed from standard electromagnetic nucleon and hyperon
properties as detailed in ref.\cite{khm}. The two singlet LECs play
very different roles. One of them enters directly the strange electric
radius ($d_0^{102}$), the other one ($b_0$) can be fixed from the
strange magnetic moment of the nucleon. This is the reason why to this
order the $Q^2$--dependence of the strange magnetic form factor could
be predicted without unknown parameters in~\cite{hms}. It is obvious
that the two results from SAMPLE and HAPPEX are sufficient to pin down
the singlet LECs (within some ranges due to the presently large experimental
uncertainties).
\section{Results and discussion}
We are now in the position to determine the various LECs and consequently
the strange form factors of the nucleon. To deal with the systematic,
statistical and theoretical errors given by the SAMPLE and HAPPEX collaborations,
we add these in quadrature and thus use
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Sunc}
G_{\rm SAMPLE}^{(s)}(Q_S^2) &=& 0.23\pm 0.44~, \\
G_{\rm HAPPEX}^{(s)}(Q_H^2) &=& 0.023 \pm 0.048~.
\end{eqnarray}
Together with the LECs $b^{D,F}$ and $d^{101,102}$ fixed from the proton
and neutron magnetic moments and charge radii, respectively~\cite{khm},
\begin{eqnarray}
&& b^D = 3.92~, \quad b^F = 2.92~, \nonumber \\
&& d^{101}(1~{\rm GeV}) = -1.06~, \nonumber \\
&& d^{102}(1~{\rm GeV}) = 1.70~,
\end{eqnarray}
we can easily deduce the LECs $b_0$ and $d_0^{102}$ (assuming that
we can use the third order chiral expansion at the momentum of the HAPPEX
experiment, see the first footnote),
\begin{equation}\label{SLECs}
b_0 = 0.06 \pm 0.44~, \quad d_0^{102} = -2.20 \pm 0.20~,
\end{equation}
leading to the singlet magnetic moment and electric radius of
$\kappa_N^{(0)} = 0.16$ and $\langle r_{0,E}^2 \rangle =
1.96\,$fm$^2$.\footnote{Note that this value appears unnaturally large
due to our normalization of the singlet current. For the more
conventional normalization to the baryon number, it would have to be
divided by a factor of three.}
We remark that the value for $d_0^{102}$ is of natural size, i.e. of order one,
and that the uncertainty reflects only the experimental
errors. For $b_0$, the central value appears somewhat small but it can
be considered natural within its sizeable uncertainty. With these
numbers, we can now evaluate the strange form factors. In what follows,
we will always give a central value (cv) based on the central values
of $b_0$ and $d_0^{102}$ and a range, which are the lower and upper bounds
we can get from combining the uncertainties $\pm \delta b_0$ and
$\pm \delta d_0^{102}$ in all possible ways (for the electric form factor).
We consider this a conservative
estimate of the theoretical uncertainty within the accuracy of the calculation
presented here. It does in no way reflect an estimate about the possible
accuracy when one goes to higher order in the chiral expansion. Such an error
is difficult to estimate since at present only very few systematic studies
in three flavor baryon CHPT exist (in the sense that all possible terms at
a given order have been retained and that the counter terms can be fixed
without any modeling. For a recent review, see~\cite{ulfcd}).
\medskip
\noindent
Consider first the strange electric form factor. It is shown in fig.~\ref{fig:ges}
for the central values of the LECs (solid line) and the band displayed by the
dot--dashed lines gives the theoretical uncertainty as explained above.
We remark again that this band is presumably too wide, i.e. if one were to
perform an analysis based on correlated uncertainties, this band would
shrink.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centerline{\epsfig{file=GEstrange_paper.eps,width=3in}}
\vspace{0.3cm}
\caption[diag]{\protect \small
Electric strangeness form factor of the nucleon. The solid band gives the
prediction based on the central values of the LECs and the dot--dashed
lines reflect the possible (conservative) range due to the uncertainties.
\label{fig:ges}}
\end{figure}
\noindent
We remark that these uncertainties are dominated by the uncertainty in
$d_0^{102}$, whereas the error in $b_0$ leads only to moderate changes.
This means that the contribution from the Foldy term to the strange
electric form factor
is of much less importance as e.g. in the case of the neutron charge form
factor. From the form factor we readily deduce the strange electric
radius as defined in eq.(\ref{defrad}). We find
\begin{equation}
\langle r_{E,s}^2\rangle = (0.05 \pm 0.09)~{\rm fm}^2~,
\end{equation}
which is a fairly small and {\it positive} number, and even given the
sizeable uncertainty, is on the lower side
of predictions based on dispersive approaches including
maximal OZI violation~\cite{bob,hmd}. It is more compatible with models
that include $\pi \rho$~\cite{mmsvo} or $\bar{K}K$~\cite{hm} continuum
contributions in the isoscalar spectral functions besides the vector
meson poles ($\omega, \phi, \ldots$). Furthermore, we remark that the central value
for the strange electric radius agrees in size but not in sign with the
quark model calculation of ref.\cite{gi}. Note also that from the octet
current the strange electric radius inherits the chiral singularity
$\sim \ln(M_K)$, cf. eq.(\ref{GEs}). The corresponding octet radius is
$\langle r_{8,E}^2 \rangle = 1.04\,$fm$^2$. It is also worth to point
out that the momentum dependence of the strange electric form factor
is rather different from the one of the neutron charge form factor,
which also vanishes at zero momentum transfer.
\medskip
\noindent We now turn to the strange magnetic form factor. Its momentum
dependence was already discussed in ref.\cite{hms}, but having fixed the
LEC $b_0$ within a certain range here, we now have an absolute prediction
for $G_M^{(s)} (Q^2)$. This is shown in fig.\ref{fig:gms}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centerline{\epsfig{file=GMstr_paper.eps,width=3in}}
\vspace{0.3cm}
\caption[func]{\protect \small
The strange magnetic form factor. For notations, see figure~1.\label{fig:gms}}
\end{figure}
The rather wide band shown in fig.~2 reflects the sizeable uncertainty of
the SAMPLE result. The central value of the so determined strange magnetic moment
is, however, positive~\cite{hms}
\begin{equation}
\mu_N^{(s, {\rm cv})} = 0.18~,
\end{equation}
and is thus at odds with most model calculations (see
e.g. table~1 in~\cite{beise}).
If one uses the relation of ref.\cite{hms} that relates the momentum dependence
of the strange magnetic form factor to the one of the isoscalar magnetic
nucleon form factor, the deduced strange magnetic moment would still be positive
but very close to zero. This shows that there is still some room for
improving the theoretical description of the magnetic form factor.
The magnetic radius is uniquely fixed in terms of well--known low energy
parameters~\cite{hms},
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle r_{M,s}^2\rangle &=& -\frac{\pi m}{(4\pi F_\phi)^2 M_K}\frac{1}{3}
(5D^2-6DF+9F^2) \nonumber \\
&=& -0.14\,\mbox{fm}^2~. \label{eq:rho}
\end{eqnarray}
The slope is identical for a proton or a neutron target,
it is {\it negative} and to this order independent of the
strange magnetic moment $\mu_{N}^{(s)}$.
The radius has the very reasonable behavior that in the
limit of very heavy kaons $M_K\rightarrow\infty$ it goes to zero, whereas it
explodes in the chiral limit $M_K\rightarrow 0$.
\medskip
\noindent We now turn to the MAMI experiment, which attempts to measure
$G_{\rm MAMI}^{(s)} (Q_M^2) =G_E^{(s)}(Q_M^2) + 0.22\;G_M^{(s)}(Q_M^2)$
at a four-momentum transfer (squared) of $Q^2_M=0.23~{\rm GeV}^2$. This
value of $Q^2$ is much better suited for the chiral expansion. We find,
however, that at this value of the momentum transfer, there are sizeable
cancellations between the electric and the magnetic contributions.
The prediction for the various combinations of the singlet LECs are
given in table~\ref{tab1}.
\begin{table}[h]
\caption[tabmami]{Predictions for the combination of strange form
factors to be measured at MAMI by the A4 collaboration. The central
values of the singlet LECs are denoted by the ``*''.}\label{tab1}
\medskip
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{lcr}
$d_0^{102}$ & $b_0$ & $G_{\rm MAMI}^{(s)} (Q_M^2)$\\ \hline
-2.20$^*$ & 0.06$^*$ & $0.007$\\
-2.00 & 0.50 & $ 0.134$\\
-2.00 & $-$0.38 & $-0.002$\\
-2.40 & 0.50 & $0.017$\\
-2.40 & $-$0.38 & $-0.119$
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\noindent
The corresponding results for a small $Q^2$ interval
($0.20 \le Q^2 \le 0.24\,$GeV$^2$) are shown in
fig.\ref{fig:mami}. Here, the uncertainty band is
given by almost equal shares from the uncertainty in $b_0$ and the
one in $d_0^{102}$.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centerline{\epsfig{file=GMAMI.eps,width=3in}}
\caption[GMs]{\protect \small
$G_E^{(s)} (Q^2) + 0.22 G_M^{(s)}(Q^2)$ for momentum transfer
squared between 0.20 and 0.24~GeV$^2$. The solid line refers to the
central values of the LECs $b_0$, $d_0^{102}$ and the other
lines (dotted, dashed, $\ldots$) to the various combinations of the LECs
within their uncertainties as given in the inset (here, the first ``$\pm$''
refers to $\pm \delta d_0^{102}$ and the second to $\pm \delta b_0$, see
also table~I).
\label{fig:mami}}
\end{figure}
\section{Summary and conclusions}
We have calculated the form factors of the strange vector current of
the nucleon in the framework of chiral perturbation theory, updating
the analysis of ref.~\cite{mus}. To third
order in the chiral expansion, there appear six low--energy constants.
Four of these can be trivially deduced form the neutron and proton
charge radii and magnetic moments. The remaining two singlet couplings
can be determined from the recent SAMPLE and HAPPEX measurements of
combinations of the strange form factors. The crucial {\it assumption} here
is that we can apply the chiral expansion at a momentum transfer as
large as the one in the HAPPEX experiment, i.e. at $Q^2 =
0.48\,$GeV$^2$. With this cautionary remark in mind, the pertinent results of
our study can be summarized as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[$\circ$] The singlet LECs given in eq.(\ref{SLECs}) are of natural
size. The error given reflects the sizeable uncertainty of the
experimental values obtained by SAMPLE and HAPPEX. To obtain
theoretical uncertainties of the LECs, we have added the various
experimental errors in quadrature.
\item[$\circ$] For the central values of the LECs, the strange
electric form factor of the nucleon is negative,
cf. fig.~\ref{fig:ges}. The band given in the figure reflects the
worst case scenario of combining the uncertainties in the singlet
LECs (i.e. an analysis based on correlated errors would give a
smaller uncertainty).
To this order in the chiral expansion, the proton and neutron
strange electric form factor are equal with small and {\it positive}
radius, $\langle r^2_{E,s}\rangle = (0.05\pm 0.09)$~fm$^2$.
\item[$\circ$] The strange magnetic form factor was already discussed
in detail in ref.\cite{hms}. In fig.~\ref{fig:gms} we show the
absolute prediction based on input from the SAMPLE result. The
corresponding central value of the strange magnetic moment is
$\mu_N^{(s)} = 0.18$ with an uncertainty as given in
eq.(\ref{Sunc}). The corresponding strange magnetic radius is given
entirely in terms of well--known parameters, $\langle r^2_{M,s}\rangle =
-0.14$~fm$^2$.
\item[$\circ$] The predictions for the MAMI A4 experiment, which
intends to measure $G_E^{(s)} + 0.22G_M^{(s)}$ at $Q^2 =
0.23$~GeV$^2$, are collected in table~\ref{tab1}. For the central
values of the LECs, the resulting number is fairly small due to
cancellations between the electric and magnetic contributions.
Due to these cancellations, varying the LECs within their
uncertainties does not allow for a precise prediction.
\end{enumerate}
We have shown that heavy baryon chiral perturbation theory can indeed
be used to analyze the strange form factors of the nucleon. Our study
should be considered exploratory due to the fairly large momentum
transfer involved in the HAPPEX experiment. However, with the
on--going activities at BATES, Jefferson Lab and MAMI we should soon have
an improved data base which will allow to make better use of the chiral
symmetry constraints for the strangeness vector current matrix
elements in the nucleon. Higher order calculations (possibly involving
the decuplet) are also needed~\cite{mupu}.
\bigskip
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We thank Nathan Isgur for a useful conversation.
\vfill \eject
|
\section{Multistability. Motivations.}
That are three basic motivations to study multistable systems, that is
systems that possess a large number of coexisting attractors for a fixed set
of parameters. First there is ample evidence for such phenomena in the
natural sciences, with examples coming, among others, from neurosciences and
neural dynamics \cite{Schiff} \cite{Foss} \cite{Seung} \cite{Freeman} \cite
{Dente} \cite{MacKay} \cite{Bohr} , optics \cite{Hammel} \cite{Brambilla},
chemistry \cite{Marmillot} \cite{Laplante} \cite{Hunt}, condensed matter
\cite{Prengel} and geophysics \cite{Yoden}.
The second motivation to study multistable dynamical systems is the
mathematical challenge of identifying the universal mechanisms that lead to
multistability and to prove rigorously under what circumstances the
phenomenon ,may occur.
The third and last motivation arises from the field of control and
technological design. After the pioneering work of Ott,
Grebogi and Yorke \cite{Ott}, the field of control of chaos became a whole
industry (\cite{Control} and references therein). Control of chaos deals
with the local control of unstable orbits, either to achieve their
stabilization or, alternatively, to target a dynamical system to some
desired final state. Reliable stabilization of unstable periodic orbit
requires either the knowledge of a good model of the system or an accurate
local reconstruction of the dynamics. This is feasible in some
low-dimensional systems, but it seems rather problematic for
high-dimensional ones. The typical situation in control of chaos, is that of
a strange attractor with an infinite number of embedded periodic orbits, all
of them unstable. If, instead of an infinite number of unstable periodic
orbits, one has, for example, an infinite number of sinks, the controlling
situation would seem more promising. The sinks would of course have very
small basins of attraction. Nevertheless, the control need not be so
accurate, because it suffices to keep the system inside the desired basin of
attraction. This, in principle, makes for a more robust control.
In this paper I will concentrate mostly on the rigorous mathematical results
that concern multistable dynamical systems. Sects. 2 and 3 contain brief
reviews of the Newhouse phenomenon and of the creation of a large number of
periodic orbits by dissipative perturbations of conservative systems.
Finally, in Sects. 4 and 5, some new results are presented which, in Sect 3,
use the techniques of deformation stability and, in Sect. 5, prove the
existence of an infinite number of sinks for two coupled quadratic maps.
\section{Diffeomorphisms with homoclinic tangencies.The Newhouse phenomenon
and beyond}
Contrary to earlier conjectures that generic systems might have only
finitely many attractors, Newhouse \cite{Newhouse1} \cite{Newhouse2} \cite
{Newhouse3} proved that a class of diffeomorphisms in a two-dimensional
manifold has infinitely many attracting periodic orbits (sinks), a result
that was later extended to higher dimensions\cite{Palis}. Concretely, for
two-dimensional manifolds the result is:
\textbf{Theorem }(Newhouse, Robinson\cite{Robinson}) Let $f_{\mu }$ be a $%
C^{3}$ map in a 2-dimensional manifold with $C^{1}$ dependence on $\mu $ and
$\left| \det \left( T_{a}f_{\mu _{0}}^{n}\right) \right| <1$ and let the
non-degenerate homoclinic tangency be crossed at non-zero speed at $\mu =\mu
_{0}$. Then for $\forall \varepsilon >0$, $\exists (\mu _{1},\mu
_{2})\subset (\mu _{0},\mu _{0}+\varepsilon )$ and a residual subset $%
J\subset (\mu _{1},\mu _{2})$ such that for $\mu \in J$ , $f_{\mu }$ has
infinitely many sinks.
Models of such diffeomorphisms were constructed by Gambaudo and Tresser\cite
{Gambaudo} and Wang proved that the Newhouse set has positive Hausdorff
measure\cite{Wang}.
After these results, intense research followed on the unfolding of
homoclinic tangencies and an essential question was whether, in addition to
infinitely many sinks, there would also be infinitely many strange
attractors near the homoclinic tangencies. The question was positively
answered by Colli\cite{Colli}. The main result is:
\textbf{Theorem }(Colli) Let $f_{0}\in Diff^{\infty }(M)$ be such that $%
f_{0} $ has a homoclinic tangency between the stable and unstable manifolds
of a dissipative hyperbolic saddle $p_{0}$. Then, there is an open set $%
\Omega \subset Diff^{\infty }(M)$ such that
(a) $f_{0}\in \overline{\Omega }$
(b) there is a dense subset $D\subset \Omega $ such that for all $f\in D$ , $%
f$ exhibits infinitely many coexisting H\'{e}non-like strange attractors.
Having established the existence of infinitely many sinks and infinitely
many strange attractors near homoclinic tangencies, a question of practical
importance is the stability of the phenomenon under small random
perturbations of the deterministic dynamics. It turns out that the answer to
this question is negative. Therefore under small random perturbations only
finitely many physical measures will remain.
\textbf{Theorem }(Ara\'{u}jo\cite{Araujo}) Let $f:M\rightarrow M$ be a
diffeomorphism of class $C^{r},r>1$, of a compact connected boundaryless
manifold $M$ of finite dimension. If $f=f_{a}$ is a member of a parametric
family under parametric noise of level $\varepsilon >0$, that satisfies the
hypothesis:
There are $K\in N$ and $\xi _{0}>0$ such that, for all $k\geq K$ and $x\in M$
(A) $f^{k}(x,\Delta )\supset B^{k}(x),\xi _{0})$ ;
(B) $f^{k}(x,\nu ^{\infty })<<m$ ;
then there is a finite number of probability measures $\mu _{1},\cdots \mu
_{l}$ in $M$ with the properties
1. $\mu _{1},\cdots \mu _{l}$ are physical absolutely continuous probability
measures;
2. supp$\mu _{i}\cap $supp$\mu _{j}$ for all $1\leq i<j\leq l$ ;
3. for all $x\in M$ there are open sets $V_{1}=V_{1}(x),\cdots
,V_{l}=V_{l}(x)\subset \Delta $ such that
(a) $V_{i}\cap V_{j}=\emptyset $, $1\leq i<j\leq l$ ;
(b) $\nu ^{\infty }\left( \Delta \backslash \left( V_{1}\cup \cdots \cup
V_{l}\right) \right) =0$ ;
(c) for all $1\leq i\leq l$ and $\nu ^{\infty }-$ a.e. $t\in V_{i}$ we have
\[
\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty }\frac{1}{n}\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\phi \left(
f^{j}(x,t)\right) =\int \phi d\mu
\]
for every $\phi \in C\left( M,R\right) $. Moreover the sets $V_{1}(x),\cdots
,V_{l}(x)$ depend continuously on $x\in M$ with respect to the distance $%
d_{\nu }\left( A,B\right) =\nu ^{\infty }\left( A\triangle B\right) $
between $\nu ^{\infty }-\textnormal{mod}0$ subsets of $\Delta $.
\section{Small dissipative perturbations of conservative systems}
Conservative systems have a large number of coexisting invariant sets,
namely periodic orbits, invariant tori and cantori. By adding a small amount
of dissipation to a conservative system one finds that some of the invariant
sets become attractors. Of course, not all invariant sets of the
conservative system will survive when the dissipation is added. However, for
sufficiently small dissipation many attractors (mainly periodic orbits) have
been observed in typical systems. Poon, Grebogi, Feudel, Hunt and Yorke \cite
{Poon} \cite{Feudel1} \cite{Feudel2} have extensively studied these effects
in the single and double rotor, the H\'{e}non map and the optical cavity
map. They find a large number of attractors for a small amount of
dissipation, in particular in the double rotor map. The large number of
coexisting stable periodic orbits has a complex interwoven basin of
attraction structure, with the basin boundaries permeating most of the state
space. The chaotic component of the dynamics is in the chaotic saddles
embedded in the basin boundary. The systems are also found to be highly
sensitive to small amounts of noise. The authors have argued that the two
attributes, namely, accessibility to many different states and high
sensitivity, are an asset in the sense that they are suitable for an easy
control of the complex system. The transition between different stable
states, poses however delicate problems in view of the large chaotic
transients in the basin boundary. The problem of migration between
attractors and their stability in multiple-attractor systems has also been
studied by other authors\cite{Weigel} \cite{Kaneko}.
All this work is very interesting, however most of results are based on
numerical evidence. It would be desirable to have some control of the
effects by rigorous mathematical methods. The techniques of deformation
stability, to be discussed in the next section, might provide such a tool,
in some cases at least.
\section{Deformation stability}
The basic idea is that, when dissipation is added to a conservative system,
it is only a part of the total phase space that is related to the invariant
sets of the dissipative system. The question therefore is to find the
subsets in the conservative phase space that correspond to the stable sets
in the dissipative system. In a sense the situation is similar to KAM\
theory and to the role played by the constants of motion in this theory. In
KAM theory, the first integrals $I_{0}$ defined everywhere in phase space
for the integrable system, are deformed into a set of constants of motion $%
I_{\varepsilon }$ which are defined only over a subset of sufficiently
irrational tori. By analogy, a similar deformation stability may exist for
dissipative perturbations of conservative systems, the stable domain of the
constants of motion being, for example, the closure of a family of periodic
orbits. In the papers \cite{Vilela1} \cite{Vilela2} \cite{Lima} \cite
{Vilela3} where these ideas were developed, we were concerned with
permanence under deformation of invariant sets, not necessarily attracting
invariant sets. Most results may however be adapted to the search for
attractors. As an example a result will be proved which gives a rigorous
criterium for the existence of stable periodic orbits in a class of maps.
Let an $\varepsilon -$family of maps be
\[
\begin{array}{lll}
x^{^{\prime }} & = & bx+y+f(x,y,\varepsilon ) \\
y^{^{\prime }} & = & y+g(x,y,\varepsilon )
\end{array}
\]
with $f(x,y,0)=g(x,y,0)=0$ For $\varepsilon =0$ the map has marginally
stable periodic orbits of all periods. Under perturbation some of the orbits
become stable ones.
\textbf{Theorem }If $f$ and $g$ are jointly $C^{2}$ in $(x,y,\varepsilon )$
with $f(x,y,0)=g(x,y,0)=0$, there is an $\overline{\varepsilon }$ such that
for $\left| \varepsilon \right| <\left| \overline{\varepsilon }\right| $ an
interior orbit of period $p$ of the unperturbed map becomes a stable orbit
of the perturbed map if and only if:
(1) $\sum\limits_{n=0}^{p-1}\partial _{\varepsilon
}g(x_{n}^{(0)},y^{(0)},0)\mid _{\varepsilon =0}=0$
(2)
\[
\varepsilon \partial _{\varepsilon }\sum\limits_{n=0}^{p-1}\left\{ \partial
_{x}g(x_{n}^{(0)},y^{(0)},\varepsilon )+(1-b)\partial
_{y}g(x_{n}^{(0)},y^{(0)},\varepsilon )\right\} \mid _{\varepsilon =0}<0
\]
\textbf{Proof}:
Iterating the map $p$ times the orbit condition is:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lll}
(b^{p}-1)x+y\frac{1-b^{p}}{1-b}+u_{p}(x,y,\varepsilon )-\beta _{p}(b) & = & 0
\\
v_{p}(x,y,\varepsilon )=0 & &
\end{array}
\label{4.1}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lll}
u_{p}(x,y,\varepsilon ) & = & \sum\limits_{n=0}^{p-1}b^{p-k-1}f(x_{n},y_{n},%
\varepsilon ) \\
& & +(1-b)^{-1}\sum\limits_{n=0}^{p-2}(1-b^{p-k-1})g(x_{n},y_{n},%
\varepsilon ) \\
v_{p}(x,y,\varepsilon ) & = & \sum\limits_{n=0}^{p-1}g(x_{n},y_{n},%
\varepsilon )
\end{array}
\label{4.2}
\end{equation}
and $\beta _{p}(b)$ is a polynomial in $b$.
$b<1$ and the $C^{2}$ condition imply, by the implicit function theorem, the
existence of a solution $x=h(y,\varepsilon )$ of the first equation in (\ref
{4.1}). The second equation becomes
\begin{equation}
v_{p}(h(y,\varepsilon ),y,\varepsilon )=\varepsilon \overline{v_{p}}%
(x,y,\varepsilon )=0 \label{4.3}
\end{equation}
$\overline{v_{p}}$ being a $C^{1}$ function. Condition (1) in the theorem
follows from Eq.(\ref{4.3}) for $\varepsilon =0$ and the non-vanishing of
the expression in the condition is required by the application of the
implicit function theorem to (\ref{4.3}).
The eigenvalues of the $p$-iterated unperturbed map are $1$ and $b^{p}$. The
sign in condition (2) is required to perturb the first eigenvalue to a
smaller value. $\Box $
\section{Coupled quadratic maps}
A system as simple as one composed of two coupled quadratic maps, may have
an infinite number of stable periodic orbits. Let the system be
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{c}
x_{1}(t+1)=1-\mu _{*}\left( (1-c)x_{1}(t)+cx_{2}(t)\right) ^{2} \\
x_{2}(t+1)=1-\mu _{*}\left( cx_{1}(t)+(1-c)x_{2}(t)\right) ^{2}
\end{array}
\label{5.1}
\end{equation}
with $x\in [-1,1]$, and $\mu _{*}=1.401155...$ , which is the parameter
value of the period doubling accumulation point.
\textbf{Theorem} \cite{Carvalho} For sufficiently small $c$\ there is an $N$%
\ such that the system (\ref{5.1}) has stable periodic orbits of all periods
$2^{n}$\ for $n>N$.
\textbf{Proof}:
Two essential features in the proof are the permanence of the unstabilized
orbits in a flip bifurcation and the contraction effect introduced by the
convex coupling. Only a sketch of the proof will be presented. For more
details refer to Ref.\cite{Carvalho}.
The bifurcations leading to the Feigenbaum accumulation point at $\mu _{*}$
are flip bifurcations. This means that, after each bifurcation, the orbit
that looses stability remains as an unstable periodic orbit. Therefore, (for
$c=0$) at $\mu =\mu _{*}$ the system (\ref{5.1}) has an infinite number of
unstable periodic orbits of all periods $p=2^{n}$.
The proof has two basic steps. First one proves that, for sufficiently small
$c\neq 0$, these periodic orbits still exist in the system (\ref{5.1}).
Second, that for any such $c$, there is an $N$ such that there is at least
one stable orbit for all periods $p=2^{n}$ with $n>N$. For both steps an
important role is played by the instability factor, given by $\left(
f^{(p)}\right) ^{^{\prime }}(x_{p})$ at the fixed points $x_{p}$ of the $p-$%
iterated map. Using the properties of the Feigenbaum - Cvitanovic functional
equation one finds that the instability factor $\left( f^{(p)}\right)
^{^{\prime }}(x^{*})$ converges to a fixed non-zero uniformly bounded value
for all orbits. One now proceeds to the proof of the theorem.
\textit{First step}: Permanence of the periodic orbits for small $c$
Let $x_{p}^{*}\in [-1,1]\times [-1,1]$ be, for example, the coordinate of
the $p-$periodic orbit closest to zero. The sequence $\left\{ x^{*}\right\}
=\left\{ x_{p}^{*}:p=2,4,8,...\right\} $ is an element of a $\ell _{\infty }$
Banach space (sup norm). The collection of fixed point equations
\[
f_{\mu ^{*}}^{(p)}(x_{p}^{*},c)-x_{p}^{*}=0
\]
defines a $C^{\infty }-$mapping $F(x^{*},c)$ from $\ell _{\infty }\times
R\rightarrow \ell _{\infty }$ . Because $\left( f^{(p)}\right) ^{^{\prime
}}(x^{*})$ at $c=0$ is negative and bounded for all $p$, the derivative $%
D_{1}F$ of the mapping in the first argument is invertible. Therefore, by
the implicit function theorem for Banach spaces, there is a $c^{*}$ such
that for $c<c^{*}$ the function $x^{*}(c):R\rightarrow \ell _{\infty }$ is
defined, that is, there are $p-$periodic orbits for all periods $p=2^{n}$.
For the uncoupled case ($c=0$) the instability factor $\left( f^{(p)}\right)
^{^{\prime }}(x^{*})$ for each mapping is the product $\left( -2\mu
_{*}\right) ^{p}\prod_{k=1}^{p}x(k)$ over the orbit coordinates. For $%
c<c^{*} $, the orbit structure being preserved, their projections on the
axis are continuous deformations of the $c=0$ case which will preserve the
geometric relations of the Feigenbaum accumulation point. Hence the same
products for the projected coordinates suffer changes of order $a(c)p\lambda
^{p}$ and remain bounded.
\textit{Second step}: Stabilization of at least one orbit for all periods $%
p=2^n $ with $n>N(c)$
The stability of the periodic orbits is controlled by the eigenvalues of the
Jacobian $J_{p}=\frac{Df_{\mu _{*},c}^{(p)}}{Dx}$ in the fixed point of $%
f_{\mu _{*},c}^{(p)}$. The map (\ref{5.1}) is a composition of two maps $%
f_{1}\circ f_{2}$%
\[
f_{1}:\left(
\begin{array}{c}
x_{1} \\
x_{2}
\end{array}
\right) \rightarrow \left(
\begin{array}{c}
1-\mu _{*}x_{1}^{2} \\
1-\mu _{*}x_{2}^{2}
\end{array}
\right)
\]
\[
f_{2}:\left(
\begin{array}{c}
x_{1} \\
x_{2}
\end{array}
\right) \rightarrow \left(
\begin{array}{c}
(1-c)x_{1}+cx_{2} \\
cx_{1}+(1-c)x_{2}
\end{array}
\right)
\]
and by the chain rule the Jacobian has determinant
\begin{equation}
\det J_{p}=(1-2c)^{p}(-2\mu _{*})^{2p}\prod_{k=1}^{p}x_{1}(k)x_{2}(k)
\label{5.2}
\end{equation}
Because of the permanence of the periodic orbits, for small $c,$ in the
neighborhood of the original coordinates (those for $c=0$), the product of
the last two factors in (\ref{5.2}) is uniformly bounded for all $p$. Then
for all sufficiently large $p$, $\left| \det J_{p}\right| <1$. The question
is how this overall contraction is distributed among the two eigenvalues of $%
J_{p}$.
To discuss the nature of the eigenvalues we may use a first order
approximation in $c$. For a periodic orbit of period $p=2^{n}$ we define
\begin{equation}
X_{l,q}^{(i)}=\left\{
\begin{array}{lc}
(-2\mu _{*})^{q-l+1}\prod_{k=l}^{q}x_{i}(k) & \textnormal{if }q\geq l \\
1 & \textnormal{if }l>q
\end{array}
\right\} \label{5.3}
\end{equation}
For small $c$ consider the linear approximation to the Jacobian $J_{p}$%
\[
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
(1-pc)X_{1,p}^{(1)} & c\sum_{k=1}^{p}X_{1,k}^{(1)}X_{k+1,p}^{(2)} \\
c\sum_{k=1}^{p}X_{1,k}^{(2)}X_{k+1,p}^{(1)} & (1-pc)X_{1,p}^{(2)}
\end{array}
\right)
\]
The eigenvalues are
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ccl}
\lambda _{\pm } & = & \frac{1}{2}(1-pc)\left(
X_{1,p}^{(1)}+X_{1,p}^{(2)}\right) \\
& & \pm \frac{1}{2}\sqrt{(1-pc)^{2}\left(
X_{1,p}^{(1)}-X_{1,p}^{(2)}\right)
^{2}+4c^{2}\sum_{k=1}^{p}X_{1,k}^{(1)}X_{k+1,p}^{(2)}\sum_{k^{^{\prime
}}=1}^{p}X_{1,k^{^{\prime }}}^{(2)}X_{k^{^{\prime }}+1,p}^{(1)}}
\end{array}
\label{5.4}
\end{equation}
If the periodic orbit runs with the two coordinates $x_{1}$ and $x_{2}$
synchronized then
\[
\begin{array}{ccc}
\lambda _{+} & = & X_{1,p} \\
\lambda _{-} & = & \left( 1-2pc\right) X_{1,p}
\end{array}
\]
and the orbit being unstable for $c=0$ it remains unstable for $c\neq 0$.
However if the two coordinates are out of phase by $\frac{p}{2}$ steps the
radical in Eq.(\ref{5.4}) is
\[
\sqrt{\prod_{k=1}^{p}x(k)}\left| \sum_{i=1}^{p}x(i)x(i+1)\cdots x(i+\frac{p}{%
2}-1)\right|
\]
The existence of a superstable orbit for all periods $p=2^{n}$ implies that
at $\mu =\mu _{*}$ the product $\prod_{k=1}^{p}x(k)$ has an odd number of
negative-valued coordinates. Therefore the two eigenvalues are complex
conjugate and, for small $c$, the contraction implicit in (\ref{5.2}) is
equally distributed by the two eigenvalues. Therefore for sufficiently large
$N$ all orbits of this type with $p>2^{N}$ become stable periodic orbits. \
$\Box$
The attracting periodic orbits of the coupled system being associated to the
unstable periodic orbits of the Feigenbaum cascade, the basins of attraction
will be controlled by the neighborhoods of these orbits, in each coordinate.
Therefore a checkerboard-type structure is expected for the basins of
attraction.
|
\section{Introduction}
\begin{multicols}{2}
\narrowtext
In previous simulations of a xenon film sliding on a silver substrate,
using a periodic (i.e., defect-free)
substrate, a viscous force of friction
(i.e. one proportional to the sliding velocity) was found
\cite{robbins,tomassone}, in agreement with the
experimental results of Krim et. al. \cite{krim1,daly}. In contrast,
perturbation theory calculations give a velocity independent contribution to
the friction
(i.e., "dry friction") when there are point defects (i.e., a point defect
denotes a defect which is centered around a point in the lattice), such as
vacancies or substitutional impurities \cite {sokoloff,defect1,soko-toma}
in the substrate.
Since, real surfaces, even very smooth ones, always
contain defects, the viscous friction found in these
experiments\cite{krim1,daly}
is a surprising result. Perturbation theory results for straight line defects,
i.e., defects that extend along a line
such as steps or facet boundaries\cite {soko-toma}, however,
are consistent with
viscous friction. In this article,
we perform molecular
dynamics simulations for a film of Xe atoms sliding on a
Ag(111) substrate containing a step and also for a substrate with a random
array of point defects. The point defects are found to pin the film
for an applied force below a critical value, whereas a step generally does
not pin the film. The pinning force due to a 5 percent concentration of
point defects comparable in strength to the corrugation potential, however, is
still much lower than the effective inertial force per film atom in the
experiment done by krim.\cite{krim1,daly}
thIs force can be expressed as $m\omega^2 A$,
where m is the atomic mass and
$\omega$ and A are the frequency and amplitude, respectively, of the
quartz crystal microbalance used in the experiment. Lowest order
perturbation theory
in the substrate corrugation potential for the system treated
in the simulations is found to be consistent with the simulations.
The perturbation theory results are then used to try to give a physical
picture of what one would expect for real substrate surfaces, which contain
many defects.
\section{Simulations}
\subsection{The model used in the simulations}
The model Hamiltonian used in Ref. \cite{tomassone} for $N$ film atoms of mass $m$
at positions ${\bf r}_k$ $%
(k=1,..,N)$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{hamilton}H \equiv \sum_{k=1}^{N} \frac{{\bf p}_k^2}{2m}
+U({\bf r}_1,\cdots ,{\bf r}_N),
\end{equation}
where ${\bf p}_k$ is the momentum of the atom $k$, and the total potential $%
U({\bf r}_1,\cdots ,{\bf r}_N)$ is given by
\begin{equation}
U({\bf r}_1,\cdots ,{\bf r}_N)\equiv \sum_{k=1}^{N}U_s({\bf r}%
_k)+\sum_{j<k=1}^{ N}V(|{\bf r}_j-{\bf r}_k|).
\end{equation}
Here, $U_s({\bf r}_k)$ is a single particle potential describing the
interaction between the $k$-th film atom and the substrate, and $V(|{\bf r}%
_j-{\bf r}_k|)$ is the pair potential interaction between the $j$-th and $k$%
-th atoms in the film.
The interaction between two Xe atoms is given by a Lennard-Jones potential
\begin{equation}
V(r)=4\varepsilon \left[ \left( \frac \sigma r\right) ^{12}-\left( \frac
\sigma r\right) ^6\right] ,
\end{equation}
where $\varepsilon =19.83\,meV$, and $\sigma =4.055\,\AA.$ The
interaction between a Xe atom and the substrate can be described
by a substrate potential without internal degrees of freedom
given by \cite{steele}
\begin{equation}
\label{us}U_s({\bf r}_{\Vert },z)=U_0(z)+U_1(z)\sum_{\{{\bf G}\}}\cos ({\bf %
G\cdot r}_{\Vert }),
\end{equation}
where ${\bf r}_{\Vert }=(x,y)$ are the coordinates of the Xe atom parallel
to the substrate, and $\{{\bf G}\}$ is the set of the six shortest
reciprocal lattice vectors of the substrate. The first term in Eq. (\ref{us}%
) describes the mean interaction of the atoms with the substrate, and the
second term describes the periodic corrugation potential.
Expressions for $U_0(z)$ and $U_1(z)$ were derived by Steele \cite{steele}
assuming that the substrate potential $U_s({\bf r})$ is a sum of
Lennard-Jones potentials between one film atom and
all of the atoms in the substrate. However, a potential like $U_s({\bf r})$,
which is a sum of Lennard-Jones potentials is not a correct
description of the interaction of a metallic surface with a noble gas atom. The
corrugation potential is reduced (from the value found by summing
Lennard-Jones potentials) due to electronic screening. For this
reason we employ a weaker corrugation potential,
as did Cieplak {\it et al.} in Ref. \cite{robbins}.
The corrugation potential we use is
\begin{equation}
\label{pote2}U_1(z^{*})=\alpha e^{-g_1z^{*}}\sqrt{\frac \pi {2g_1z^{*}}}\left[
\frac{A^{*6}}{30}\left( \frac{g_1}{2z^{*}}\right) ^5-2\left( \frac{g_1}{2z^{*}}%
\right) ^2\right] ,
\end{equation}
where $\alpha =4\pi \varepsilon _{Xe/Ag}A^{*6}/\sqrt{3}$,
$z^{*}=z/a$, $a=2.892$ $\AA$
is the lattice constant of the substrate, $A^{*}=\sigma _{Xe/Ag}/a$,
$g_1=4 \pi/ \sqrt{3}$.
We calculate the Lennard-Jones parameters $\sigma _{Xe/Ag} $
and $\varepsilon _{Xe/Ag}$ by fitting
(i) the position of the minimum of $U_{0}(z)$
to the distance between a Xe atom in the first layer and the ion
cores of the substrate ($z_{0}$ ), and
(ii) the attractive
well depth to the binding energy of one $Xe$ atom to the $Ag$ substrate
$(U_{0}(z_{0})=-211$ $meV$, from \cite{cole}).
We find $\sigma _{Xe/Ag}=4.463\,\AA $ and
$\varepsilon _{Xe/Ag}=13.88\,\,meV$.
The corrugation potential $U_1(z)$ in Eq. (\ref{pote2}) falls off exponentially at large z. The above
parameters give $U_{1}(z_{0}^{*})\sum_{\{{\bf G}\}}\cos ({\bf %
G\cdot r}_{\Vert })=2.025$ $meV$ (for the maximum value of this sum)
in contrast to the corresponding
value of $10.13$ $meV$ for Steele's potential at $z_{0}$ \cite{steele}.
Our corrugation gives good agreement with the experimental value of the
slip time.
Our simulations are carried out at an equilibrium temperature of
$T=77.4\,^oK $, and the particles move in a three dimensional box of
size $ 20\,a \times $ $10\,a\sqrt{3}\times 10\,\sigma$.
The time scale for vibrations of the adsorbed film
atoms is $t_0=\sqrt{(m\sigma ^2/\varepsilon )}$ $=3.345$ $ps$ , with
$m=2.16$ $10^{-22}$ $g$. Periodic
boundary conditions in the $x$ and $y$ directions are employed along with a
hard wall boundary condition in the $z$ direction at the top of the box.
We change the coverage by changing the number of Xe atoms $N$.
We use $60\leq N\leq 370$.
All atoms are initially in the gas phase. The atoms condense in $250\,t_0$\ or
less, forming a triangular lattice incommensurate with the substrate
fcc(111) surface.
For the simulations done with a step present, the potential in equation
(\ref{us}) has the z-coordinate replaced by
$z-g(x)$. The use of this function guarantees that we have
the same corrugation as we used for a substrate free of defects
in Ref. \cite{tomassone}.
Here $g(x)= 0.58\sigma [f(x_1-x)-f(x-x_2)]$ where $f(x)$
is the Fermi function, $1/[e^{-x /\omega}+1]$. (See Fig. \ref{fermi}.)
We choose $\omega$ to be equal to
$1.1$ $\sigma$, AS THE width for the step edge, where $\sigma$ is the
distance parameter for the Lennard-Jones
potential between a film and substrate atom.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\vbox{ \hbox{\epsfxsize=4.5cm \epsfbox{fermi.eps}}
\vspace*{1.0cm}
}
}
\caption{A plot of $g(x)= 0.58\sigma [f(x_1-x)-f(x-x_2)]$, where $f(x)$
is the Fermi function.}
\label{fermi}
\end{figure}
\noindent
We take $x_1$ and $x_2$, the locations of the beginning
and end of the step, equal to $ L_{x}/3$ and $2L_{x}/3$, where $L_{x}$
is the length of the
box (along x) in which the simulations are done.
We thus assume a straight step in the substrate, (see Fig. \ref{position}
(a and b)),
which runs along the y-axis.
The height of the step is about 0.8 of an atomic distance. The use of a
function $g(x)$, which varies smoothly
with $x$, is a reasonable choice because the nonzero radius of a surface
atom makes the potential that acts on the atom vary smoothly
as the atom moves over the surface.
Most of our simulations were done with a coverage corresponding to the
uncompressed monolayer
(163 particles). Periodic
boundary conditions in the $x$ and $y$ directions are employed along
with a
hard wall boundary condition in the $z$ direction at the top of the box.
Because
of our use of periodic boundary conditions, we are technically
simulating a
periodic array of defects. We feel, however, that the cell length used in our
simulations of about 13 xenon atom spacings is sufficiently
long for the coherence from one cell to the next to be unimportant for most
values of the sliding velocity. This
is justified using perturbation theory\cite {sokoloff,defect1,soko-toma}
for reasonable values of the phonon damping constant in appendix A.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\vbox{ \hbox{\epsfxsize=4.5cm \epsfbox{uppermono.eps}
\hspace*{0.5cm} \epsfxsize= 4.5cm \epsfbox{step.eps} }
\vspace*{1.0cm}
}
}
\caption{a. Upper view of the position of the particles after 200,000
iterations of the program. The step
is located along the $y$ axis between $5$ and $10$ $\sigma$.
b. Side view of the same sets of positions.}
\label{position}
\end{figure}
In the present simulations, we use the same method as Cieplak, et. al.
\cite{robbins}, in
which a constant external force $F$ is applied to each atom in the plane
of sliding, and the
resulting steady-state velocity
is calculated (see Fig. \ref{velocity}). Throughout the simulation a
thermostat that rescales the three velocity components is used to maintain
constant temperature.
The rescaling is done in the center of mass reference frame so as not
to change the center of mass velocity
and thus introduce an
unphysical
force of friction
due to the thermostat. It renormalizes the
atomic velocities every time step, so that the total kinetic energy
per atom in the center of mass frame
is maintained at $(3/2)k_B T$, where $k_B$ is Boltzmann's constant and $T$
is the desired absolute temperature of the system ($T=77.4\,^oK $ in
our case). This method allows us to determine conveniently
the velocity dependence of the friction force.
The velocity of the film is affected by the inhomogeneities of the medium,
in this case the corrugation and the defects. In the absence of defects, the
film can move for an arbitrarily weak applied force, but when there
is a step
present, the film can be pinned for $F$ less than a critical value $F_c$,
if the force is applied perpendicular to the step.
In other words, there are the following two phases,
a {\bf pinned phase} when the external force $F$ is $F<F_{c}$, and a
{\bf moving phase}.
The {\bf depinning transition}
takes place at a critical
threshold force $F_{c}$.
In the vicinity of the depinning transition
the average velocity has the form $V \sim (F-F_{c})^{\beta}$ where
$\beta$ is the velocity exponent.
The potential for a substrate
containing point
defects is of the form:
\begin{equation}
\label{imppot}
V_i (\vec r-\vec r_d)=V_0 e^{-|\vec r-\vec r_d|^2/\ell^2}
\end{equation}
where $V_0$ and $\ell$ are the strength and range of the potential respectively
and $\vec r_d$ is the location of the defect. The defect positions
are chosen
to be potential minima of the corrugation potential chosen at random with
probability $c$, where $c$ is the defect concentration.
(The simulations done for
point defects were done with $U_1$ having the opposite sign than for the
$U_1$ used in the step simulations, because this sign of $U_1$ gives the
correct corrugation potential minima. For the step simulations it did not
really matter what sign we chose, but for the point defect problem it is
more important to place the point defects at the correct positions.
For example if we want $V_i$ to represent the potential due to a vacancy we
can choose $V_0$ positive and equal to the depth of the corrugation
potential minimum, so that that minimum, presumed to be due to a substrate
ion located at that position, is canceled out by $V_0$.)
Because of the use of periodic boundary conditions, it was necessary to
include the eight nearest neighbor cells to the cell containing the
film in which the simulations were done. Each of these neighboring cells
contained
the defect potentials reflected into these cells. The impurity positions and
the reflected impurity positions are shown in Fig. \ref{imp}. Only interactions
between a film atom and a defect (or an image of a defect) which is less than
$4\sigma$ away from the atom are included in the calculation of the force
or potential acting on the atom.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\vbox{ \hbox{\epsfxsize=4.5cm \epsfbox{imppos.ps}}
\vspace*{1.0cm}
}
}
\caption{The defect positions are shown. The central box is the cell in which
the simulations were performed, and the neighboring cells represent the
reflected defect positions.}
\label{imp}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Results of the Simulations for the Step}
In most of our simulations we have used a corrugation strength
(defined as 9 times the value of $fU_1 (z)$ evaluated at the value of
z at which $U_0(z)$ is minimum) of 2.025 meV ( f=1), the value that was
used in Ref. \cite {tomassone}. In order to examine the effect of using
a larger corrugation, we have, in addition, done some runs at a corrugation
of 3.56 meV (f=1.69).
We apply an external force to all the particles in the monolayer
at the following angles with respect to the $x$ axis (which is perpendicular
to the step):
$0 ^{o}$ (force perpendicular to the step),
$16 ^{o}$, $37 ^{o}$, $58 ^{o}$, $66 ^{o}$
and $90 ^{o}$ (force along the step).
The case in which the particles move on a substrate which is free of steps
( with the force along the x-axis) is also studied to make a comparison
with the simulations that were done with the step present.
In Fig. \ref{velocity}, the velocity is shown as a function of time
for the various values
of the applied force for the case of a no step present,
and in Fig. \ref{velostep} for the case of a step present.
The velocity at the top of the plateau is the steady-state velocity,
which we will later plot versus the applied force $F$.
In order to diminish thermal fluctuations of the velocity vs. time curves,
the curves shown in Figs. \ref{velocity} and \ref{velostep} are obtained by
making averages of several runs. The no-step case was
obtained averaging 5 runs and the step cases, by averaging 3 runs each.
The steady-state velocity is plotted as a function of
$F$ in Fig. \ref{depinning}. We see that
the magnitudes of the velocities depend on the orientation of $F$.
The velocity is smallest at 0$^o$
(i.e. when the particles move almost perpendicular to the step).
It gets larger when the angle increases, taking on its maximum
value for an angle of $90^{o}$ (when particles move along the step).
When the particles move perpendicular to the step (i.e., in the
$x$ direction), their motion in $x$ is pinned. For angles of incidence
$0<\theta<90$ the pinning transition appears to be ``softened''
or ``smeared out.'' It is thus of interest to plot the $x$ and $y$
components
of velocity vs. the applied force (i.e. $V_{x,y}^{cm}$ vs. $F$)
in order to gain insight into what the atoms do.
In Fig. \ref{sepa}, the $x$ and $y$ components of the velocity are
shown separately for $58^{o}$ for a 2.025 meV corrugation potential
strength. We see evidence of
pinning
in $x$ but not
in $y$. (The exponent $\beta$
in this case is $\beta=1.4.$)
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\vbox{ \hbox{\epsfxsize=4.5cm \epsfbox{velo.eps} }
\vspace*{1.0cm}
}
}
\caption{The velocity is shown as a function of time
for the various values of the applied force for the case of
no step present. The driving force is applied at $0^{o}$ with
the $x$ axis.}
\label{velocity}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\vbox{ \hbox{\epsfxsize=4.5cm \epsfbox{veloprofile_x_0.eps} }
\vspace*{1.0cm}
}
}
\caption{Velocity of the center of mass in the $x$ direction
as a function of time,
for various values of an applied force, for the case
of a step present. In this case the driving force is applied at $0^{o}$
with the $x$ axis.}
\label{velostep}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\epsfxsize=4.5cm
\epsfbox{cur.eps}}
\vspace{.5cm}
\caption{Variation of the velocity
with F at $77.4^{o}$ kelvin.}
\label{depinning}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\vbox{ \hbox{\epsfxsize=4.5cm \epsfbox{sepa.eps}}
}
}
\caption{Variation of $v_x$ and $v_y$
with F for $58^{o}$ for $2.025$ $meV$
of corrugation.}
\label{sepa}
\end{figure}
\noindent
We also made some runs with a corrugation strength of 3.56 meV.
The film
moves in the same fashion as for $2.025 meV$ corrugation, but of course
with much smaller velocities.
Two cases clearly show linearity between velocity and F: no step
and $90^{o}$ (along the step). In addition, for angles between 0$^o$
and 90$^o$
v shown in Fig. \ref{depinning} is linear in F to a good approximation
for v less than
0.1$\sigma/t_0$. This is one possible explanation for why such viscous
friction is found in experiment.
\subsection{Stick Slip and Creep}
The results reported in Fig. \ref{depinning}
are obtained by averaging
the $V_{cm}$ versus time data for a few different runs for each value
of the applied force. These averages are performed in
order to suppress the large fluctuations in the data found when a
step is present. In order to illustrate this, $V_{cm}$
is plotted as a function of time, without doing any
averaging, for one value of the applied force larger than the critical
force in Fig. \ref{compara_velo}.
For comparison, a plot of
$V_{cm}$ versus time for the case of no step present is also
made on the same graph
for an applied force chosen so that $V_{cm}$ has about the same
value at each time. In this graph the force, for the case in which
there is a step, has a value
$F=1.9$ $10^{-3}$ $\epsilon/\sigma$, slightly above threshold.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\vbox{ \hbox{\epsfxsize=4.5cm \epsfbox{compara_velo.eps}}
}
}
\caption{Comparison
of velocity profiles for the step and no step case. Fluctuations
in $V_{cm}$ are noticeably
larger when there is a step than in the absence of it.}
\label{compara_velo}
\end{figure}
\noindent
It is clear from this figure that the the fluctuations in $V_{cm}$
are noticeably
larger when there is a step than in the absence of a step. It is likely
that these large fluctuations are due to stick-slip motion, which occurs
for a system which would be pinned at smaller values of the applied \
critical force.
In Fig. \ref{velo8}, a typical plot of $V_{cm}$ is shown for $F$
normal to the step
below its threshold value. The $x$ component (normal to the step)
and the $y$-component of $V_{cm}$ are shown separately.
$V_{cm,x}$ becomes thermally activated for a short period
of time and
then becomes pinned again. Such behavior is not found in $V_{cm,y}$.
The behavior for values of the force slightly above
threshold is shown in Fig. \ref{velo10}.
In Fig. \ref{velo11_37} a similar plot is shown
for the applied
force at an angle of $37$ degrees with the normal
to the step. We can again see the thermally
activated behavior of $V_{cm,x}$ for a couple of short time intervals.
In contrast, $V_{cm,y}$ appears to saturate at a positive value
(because the
film is not pinned in the $y$-direction). Thermally activated motion
of the
type that we see here is the type of behavior that would lead to creep
of a macroscopic film.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\vbox{ \hbox{\epsfxsize=4.5cm \epsfbox{velo8.eps}}
}
}
\caption{Typical plot of $V_{cm}$ vs time for $F < F_{c}$
The $x$ component (perpendicular to the step)
and the $y$-component of $V_{cm}$ are shown separately.
$V_{cm,x}$ becomes thermally activated for a short period
of time and
then becomes pinned again. Such behavior is
not found in $V_{cm,y}$}
\label{velo8}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\vbox{ \hbox{\epsfxsize=4.5cm \epsfbox{velo10.eps}}
}
}
\caption{$V_{cm}$ vs. time for $F > F_{c}$ across the step.}
\label{velo10}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\vbox{ \hbox{\epsfxsize=4.5cm \epsfbox{velo11_37.eps}}
}
}
\caption{The applied
force is at an angle of $37$ degrees with the normal
to the step. We can see the thermally
activated behavior of $V_{cm,x}$ for a couple of short time intervals.
In contrast, $V_{cm,y}$ appears to saturate at a positive value
(because the
film is not pinned in the $y$-direction). Thermally activated motion
of the
type that we see here is the type of behavior that would lead to creep
of a macroscopic film.}
\label{velo11_37}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Film Rotated Relative to the Step}
In the runs discussed so far, the crystallographic axes of the film were
lined up with the step. This is not always true for this system.
For example, we also did a run for a 173 atom film (a more compressed
monolayer film) for the same substrate containing a step. In this case,
the film in equilibrium APPEARED rotated at an angle with respect
to the step,
as seen in Fig. \ref{rotated}. In this case,
the film attained a steady-state velocity of 0.2$\sigma/t_0$ when
F=0.0015$\epsilon/\sigma$ was applied normal to the step. As can be seen in
Fig. \ref{depinning}, the 163 atom film, which was not rotated with
respect to the step,
was pinned for F of that magnitude. As we shall see in the next section,
this is consistent with the predictions of lowest order perturbation theory.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\vbox{ \hbox{\epsfxsize=4.5cm \epsfbox{rotated.ps}}
}
}
\caption{The atomic positions (looking down on the substrate) are shown for
173 atoms (171 atoms adsorbed on the substrate and two remain above the
substrate). A side view of the step is also shown at the bottom of the
figure as a guide to the eye. This film is rotated slightly with respect to
the walls of the box, and hence with respect to the step.}
\label{rotated}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Results of the Simulations done with Point Defects Present}
In these simulations $V_0$ in Eq. \ref{imppot} was chosen to be equal to
0.1 $\epsilon$, for which each defect potential has a maximum value
approximately equal to the corrugation potential well depth, and the
concentration c was chosen to be equal to $0.05$. Again, the system was
first equilibrated for at least 600,000 iterations, and then an external
force was applied. Simulations were done with the external force making angles
of 33, 105 and 203 degrees with respect to the side $L_x$ of the box.
The results are shown in Fig. \ref{point1}. Each point represents the average
of the component of the center of mass velocity along the applied force
over a time interval equal to at least $10^4t_0$ (i.e. $2\times 10^6$
iterations or about $3\times 10^{-8}$ s.) in order to
average out the fluctuations.
An average of three runs is also shown for one of the cases. Since it did
not look qualitatively different than the single runs, it is clear that
single runs are adequate. For all three directions of the applied
force the film appeared to become pinned below a critical force of about
$2.10^{-4}$ $\epsilon/\sigma$, even though the detailed shape of the velocity
versus force curves might have differed slightly. A run was also done at
a temperature of $26$ $K$ in order to determine whether the motion of the film
might have been partly thermally activated. The results are shown in
Fig. \ref{point2}.
It is seen that the critical field is now about $4.10^{-4}$ $\epsilon/
\sigma$, and the curve appears to exhibit a sharp depinning transition,
whereas the runs done at $T=77.4\,^oK $ showed what looked more
like a rounded transition. These results imply that some thermal activation
of the atoms out of the impurity potential wells is taking place.
It is quite unlikely,
however, that such thermal activation, which is responsible for creep,
will give such a large contribution for a macroscopic film as it does
for the small films used in the simulations.
The pinning force of $2.10^{-4}$ $\epsilon/\sigma$ found at $T=77.4\,^oK$
is equal to about
$1.5\times 10^{-11}dyn$ per atom.
One might be tempted to think that the fact that point defects do not seem
to have much of an influence on QCM friction measurements can be explained
by relatively small value that we have found for the pinning force. We do
not believe that this is correct, however, because
this force is still much larger than the effective inertial force due to
the oscillations of the QCM's substrate which is equal to
$m\omega^2 A\approx 10^{-14}dyn$, where $m$ is a film atom mass ($\approx
10^{-22} dyn$, $\omega\approx 10^7 s^{-1}$ and the amplitude of the
substrate oscillations $A\approx 10^2 A^o$.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\vbox{ \hbox{\epsfxsize=4.5cm \epsfbox{vel.ps}
\hspace*{0.5cm} \epsfxsize= 4.5cm \epsfbox{vel3.ps} }
\vspace*{1.0cm}
}
}
\centerline{
\vbox{ \hbox{\epsfxsize=4.5cm \epsfbox{vel2.ps}
\hspace*{0.5cm} \epsfxsize= 4.5cm \epsfbox{vel2d.ps} }
\vspace*{1.0cm}
}
}
\caption{The velocity in units of $\sigma/t_0$ versus applied force f in
units of $\epsilon/\sigma$ is shown for a lattice containing a random array
of point defects with a 5 percent concentration, the force f applied at 33, 105
and 203 degrees with respect to $L_x$.} An average of three runs is also shown
for one case.
\label{point1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\epsfxsize=4.5cm \epsfbox{vel1.ps}}
\vspace*{1.0cm}
\caption{The velocity in units of $\sigma/t_0$ versus applied force f in
units of $\epsilon/\sigma$ is shown for a lattice containing a random array
of point defects with a 5 percent concentration, with the f making a 33 degree
angle with $L_x$. This run was done at a temperature of $T=26\,^oK$ .}
\label{point2}
\end{figure}
\section{Perturbation Theoretic Treatment}
The force of friction acting on a
thin film as it slides over a substrate containing defects was recently
studied using
lowest order perturbation theory in the substrate potential \cite{soko-toma}.
It was shown there that for most orientations of the film and most
directions of sliding
over the substrate, the force of friction is viscous (i.e., proportional
to the sliding velocity), in agreement with what has to date been
observed in QCM
friction experiments \cite{krim1}. The simulations that were
discussed in the last section of a xenon film sliding over
a silver (111) substrate containing a step show that the film is pinned
if we apply a force smaller than a critical value
in a direction normal to the step. When a force larger than
this critical value is applied, the resulting velocity is a nonlinear
function of the applied force.
In this case the film's axes are lined up with the step.
For many substrate-adsorbed film systems, the case considered in the
simulations,
in which the crystallographic axes of the film are lined up with the
step, is
an important case because one expects that it will be
energetically favorable for the film 's axes to line up with the step locally.
The reason for expecting this to occur is that adsorbate atoms can lower
their energies by lying along a step edge, because in this way each of
these adsorbate atoms will be surrounded on two sides by a substrate atom.
For the present system, our simulations seem to show, however, that the
film does not always line up with the step, and when it is not lined up
(for example, for the 173 atom system discussed at the end of the last
section),
the simulations show that the film is not pinned for forces for which
it would be pinned if it were. (For real surfaces, which have many steps,
it is expected that because of its stiffness the film in its solid phase
will typically
not be able to distort in such a way that its crystallographic axes line up
locally with each step.)
In this section we will try to interpret the results of the simulations
reported here using the perturbation theoretic methods of reference.\cite
{soko-toma}
In Ref. \cite{soko-toma},
it was shown using perturbation theory that
for a general
nonperiodic substrate force, the mean force of
friction acting on a thin film is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{3.1} F_{av}v=(mN)^{-1}\sum_{{\bf k},\sigma}
{\gamma\omega^2 |{\bf f}({\bf k})\cdot\hat
{\bf \epsilon}_{{\bf k},\sigma}|^2\over (\omega^2_{\sigma}({\bf k})
-\omega^2)^2+\gamma^2
\omega^2},
\end{equation}
where $\omega=v_x k_x+v_y k_y$, where ${\bf v}$ is the sliding velocity
of the
film, ${\bf f}({\bf k})$ is the Fourier transform of the force due to the
substrate, m is the mass of an atom, N is the number of atoms in the film
and $\gamma$ is the inverse phonon lifetime. This expression was obtained
by setting the rate at which the substrate force $\vec f(\vec r-\vec v t)$
does work on the film equal to the rate at which the average force of friction
$F_{av}$ does work on the film, i.e., $F_{av}v.$
It was also found in that reference that the
mean square vibrational displacement of an atom in the film (in the rest
frame of the film) is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{3.2} <u^2>=m^{-2}N^{-1}\sum_{{\bf k},\sigma}
{|{\bf f}({\bf k})\cdot\hat
{\bf \epsilon}_{{\bf k},\sigma}|^2\over (\omega^2_{\sigma}({\bf k})
-\omega^2)^2+\gamma^2
\omega^2}.
\end{equation}
In Ref. \cite{soko-toma}, it was found that in two or fewer dimensions
for a substrate
containing point defects (e.g., vacancies or substitutional impurities),
$<u^2>$ diverges
as ${\bf v}$ approaches zero. This signifies that in the zero velocity limit,
there will always be significant distortion of the film to conform to the
substrate, no matter how small the substrate force, which implies that
the film
will be pinned in place unless a strong enough external force is applied.
In the $\gamma$ approaches zero limit, Eq. (\ref{3.1}) becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{3.3} F_{av}=(\pi/m)(a/2\pi)^2\sum_{\sigma}
\int d^d k \omega |{\bf f}({\bf k})|^2
\delta (\omega^2_{\sigma}({\bf k})-\omega^2).
\end{equation}
In this limit, a nonzero contribution to $F_{av}$ occurs when the
argument of the delta function is zero, which occurs when the plane in the
d+1 dimensional space defined by $\omega$ and the d-components of
${\bf k}$ whose equation is
$\omega={\bf v}\cdot{\bf k}$ intersects the phonon dispersion surface
[whose equation is $\omega=\omega_{\sigma}({\bf k})$],
if ${\bf f}({\bf r})$ were aperiodic for all directions of ${\bf r}$.
This is the case when we
have point defects in the substrate. It was shown in Ref. \cite {soko-toma}
that in this
case in lowest order perturbation theory for a two dimensional (i.e.,
monolayer) film $F_{av}$ is independent
of velocity and $<u^2>$ diverges as 1/v as v approaches zero, implying
pinning of the film at low velocities. In contrast for a three
dimensional (i.e., thick) sliding film, $F_{av}$ was found to be
proportional to v and $<u^2>$
did not diverge as v became zero, which is consistent with the film not
being pinned. In appendix C, these ideas are expanded upon by considering
general order in perturbation theory. It is shown that d=2 is indeed a
critical dimension for this problem.
Let us now consider a line defect, such as a step or facet boundary.
If we choose the x and y axes (i.e., the coordinate axes in the plane
of the
film) so that the y-axis is along the defect (i.e., along a step or facet
boundary, which are taken in the present discussion to be straight lines)
${\bf f}({\bf k})$ will be non-zero
only if $k_y$ is a multiple of the y-component of one of the reciprocal
lattice
vectors of the substrate, since the substrate is periodic in that
direction if
the crystallographic axes of the substrate are lined up with the defect and
quasiperiodic otherwise. As a consequence, the plane whose equation is
$\omega=v_x k_x+v_y k_y$ gets fragmented into a series of parallel lines
at values of $k_y$ equal to $Q_y$, the y-component of one of the smaller
reciprocal lattice vectors of the substrate. For a facet boundary or
step, ${\bf f}
$ can be written as ${\bf f}({\bf r})=g(x){\bf F}({\bf r})$,
where ${\bf F}$ is periodic but g is not. (This
was illustrated for the model for the potential that was used in the
simulations presented in Ref. \cite {soko-toma}). A reasonable model
potential for other line defects, such as
facet boundaries, for example, will have a similar form. This is discussed
in appendix B. Since we can
write ${\bf F}$ as ${\bf F}({\bf r})=\sum_{\bf Q}{\bf F}_{\bf Q}e^{i{\bf Q}
\cdot{\bf r}}$, we find that
\begin{equation}
\label{3.4} {\bf f}({\bf k})=\int d^2 r e^{-i{\bf k}\cdot{\bf r}}
{\bf f}({\bf r})=\sum_{\bf Q}
\delta_{k_y,Q_y}g_{k_x-Q_x}{\bf F}_{\bf Q},
\end{equation}
where ${\bf Q}$ denotes a reciprocal lattice vector of the substrate.
It is only when one of these
lines in k-space intersects the phonon dispersion surface that Eq. (\ref{3.3})
gives a
nonzero contribution to $F_{av}$. If this does not occur, we must keep
$\gamma$
nonzero in Eq. (\ref{3.1}). We then find that $F_{av}$ is proportional to
v\cite{soko-toma}.
Let us now consider the case in which the crystallographic axes of the film
are not lined up with the direction of the defect but are close to being so.
Furthermore, let us keep $\gamma$ nonzero for this discussion, in order
to examine what happens if a line passes within a phonon linewidth of the
phonon dispersion surface Then taking the defect to be lined up with the
y-axis, if we convert the summation over wavevector in Eq. (\ref{3.2}) to an
integral along a line perpendicular to the step in the usual way, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{3.5a} <u^2>/a^2={a\over 2\pi m^2a^2}\sum_{\sigma}\int dk_x
F(k_x,k_y,G,v)
\end{equation}
where $F(k_x,k_y,G,v)$ is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{3.5b}
{|{\bf f}(k_x,k_{y0})\cdot\hat{\bf \epsilon}_{{\bf k},
\sigma}|^2 \over
[v_p^2 (k_x^2+k_{y0}^2)-\omega^2]^2
+\gamma^2 \omega^2},\nonumber\\
\end{eqnarray}
where $\omega=v_y k_{y0}+G_x v_x$ and
where $k_{y0}$ is the amount that the line, which would have passed
directly through the point in k-space denoted by the film reciprocal
lattice vector ${\bf G}$ if the film's
crystallographic axes were line up with the defect, misses going through
this point in reciprocal space. On doing the integral over $k_x$ by
contour integration we find that $<u^2>/a^2$ is equal to
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{3.6}
(ma)^{-2}v_p^{-1}({3a\over 2\pi}){\pi
|{\bf f}\cdot\hat{\bf \epsilon}|^2 \over 2sin (\theta_1/2)(v_p^4 k_{y0}^4
+\gamma^2 G_x^2 v_x^2)^{3/4}},\nonumber\\
\end{eqnarray}
where $|{\bf f}\cdot{\bf \epsilon}|$ is evaluated at the
wavevector corresponding
to the pole in the integrand of Eq. (\ref{3.5a}) and
where $\theta_1=arctan [\gamma v_x G_x/(v_x^2 G_x^2-v_p^2 k_{y0}^2)].$
(Note that $sin\theta_1/2$ becomes 1 rather than zero as $v_x$ approaches
zero, since $\theta_1$ approaches $\pi$ rather than zero.
>From these results, we see that if $k_{y0}\not=0,$ $<u^2>/a^2$ does not
diverge as $v_x$ approaches zero, which implies that the film is not pinned.
Furthermore, if $|{\bf f}\cdot\hat{\bf \epsilon}|$
is of the order of $10^{-7}dyn$, $m\approx 10^{-22}g$, $a\approx 10^{-8} cm$,
$G_y\approx 10^8 cm^{-1}$ and $k_{y0}\approx 10^7 cm^{-1}$ (or about 1/10 of
the Brillouin zone radius), we estimate that $<u^2>/a^2$ is of the
order of $10^{-3}.$ Thus, we conclude that for a reasonable value of the
mis-orientation parameter $k_{y0}$, lowest order perturbation theory
should be a correct description of the friction, even as v approaches zero.
It is easily seen from
Eqs. (\ref{3.1}) and (\ref{3.2}) that for this case, in which $<u^2>/a^2$
does not
diverge as the sliding velocity approaches zero, the force of friction will
be proportional to the velocity.
\section{\bf Speculations On the Behavior of Real Interfaces}
We propose the following physical
explanation for why a line defect,
such as a step, will pin the film if it is oriented along a crystallographic
axis of the film but will not pin it if it is not lined up: When the
line defect
is lined up with a crystal axis, a line of atoms running across the
width of
the film will pass over the defect all at the same time as the film
slides over
the defect. Consequently, the force exerted by the defect on the film will
be an extensive quantity, in the sense that it will scale with the width
of the film. In contrast, when the defect is not lined up with an axis,
atoms
in the film will pass over the defect one at a time. The defect will act on
one atom at a time with a force that does not scale with the width of the
film. Thus, if we consider a situation in which the velocity of the film
is studied as a function of a force applied to each atom in the film,
when the
film's axes and the defect are not lined up, it will clearly be much easier
for the applied force to overcome any nonextensive pinning force due to the
defect than an extensive one. A real substrate surface will contain a
finite density of line defects along a line drawn along the
sliding velocity. These defects will most likely not run across the width
of the film, and they certainly will not be straight over that distance.
Then,
although the pinning force due to one of these line defects will not be
extensive, the force due to a finite density of them will.
One way to understand the case of many finite length line defects, which
are not perfectly
straight, as occur on real surfaces using the calculation presented above
for a single straight line defect is that if the defect is not a straight
line over an infinitely
long distance, the Fourier transform of the substrate force in
Eq. (\ref{3.4})
will
no longer contain a $\delta_{k_y,Q_y}$ factor (since a kroniker delta only
occurs if ${\bf f}$ is periodic over an infinite distance). Rather the
Kroniker delta
will be replaced by a function of $k_y$ of finite width of the order of
$2\pi/\ell$, where $\ell$ is the length of a straight section of the
defect, peaked around
the values of $Q_y$. Consequently, we can now think of the lines in k-space,
defined by $k_y=Q_y$,
which must intersect the phonon dispersion surface in order for the delta
function in Eq. (\ref{3.3}) to be satisfied, as being broadened. For real
surfaces, which contain many finite length straight sections of line defects
separated by defect-free regions, ${\bf f}({\bf k})$ will consist of the
following contributions: defect-free regions which will give a peak in
${\bf f}$ at each
reciprocal lattice vector of the film, point defects, which will give a
contribution which is not peaked in k-space and
straight sections of line defects, which
will each give a contribution that is peaked at values of the component of
${\bf k}$ along the defect equal to
components of a reciprocal lattice vector of the substrate
if we move in k-space in a direction
parallel to the defect. How sharply it is peaked will depend on the
length of
the straight section of the defect. In the direction perpendicular to
the defect, the contribution to ${\bf f}({\bf k})$ will not be peaked. The
magnitude of each of these contributions to ${\bf f}({\bf k})$ will be
proportional to the number of lattice sites in each of the above elements.
Thus,
when we take the square of ${\bf f}({\bf k})$, which enters Eqs. (\ref{3.1})
and (\ref{3.2}), we will thus obtain the following contributions: 1. a Bragg
peak at each substrate reciprocal lattice vector, 2. a contribution which
is not peaked in k (from the point defects), and 3. a series of
"mountain ridges" in k-space directed in various directions. These are the
lines in k-space that we found for a single line defect except that each one
now has a width of the order of $2\pi$ divided by the length of the
straight section of the line defect that gives this contribution. If the
widths of the "mountain ridges"
are fairly narrow, the ridges will generally miss passing through a dip
in the phonon dispersion surface, which as discussed in the last section, is
the criterion for the delta function in Eq. (\ref{3.3}) being satisfied).
Then, these will give mainly a viscous contribution to the friction,
following
the discussion in the last section. On the other hand, if the straight
sections
of the line defects are relatively short, resulting in broad ridges, the
ridges will generally intersect the phonon dispersion surfaces, most likely
leading to "dry" (i.e., velocity independent) friction. The point defects
will always contribute "dry friction."We know from
the discussion in the last section that the Bragg peaks will give viscous
friction in perturbation theory, as long as their widths are not too large.
More numerical studies of this kind, which use perturbation theory to study
the effects of realistic models for defected surfaces will be presented in
future work.
\section{\bf Conclusions}
Simulations and perturbation theory calculations done for a monolayer
film sliding on a substrate
containing a step defect gave approximately viscous friction for all
sliding directions other than perpendicular to the step.
The point defects in the simulations were found to pin the film below a
critical applied force For defects of strength comparable to the strength
of the corrugation potential (which were used in the present simulations),
however, the pinning force was only about $10^{-11}dyn.$ This force is
still greater than the inertial effective force resulting from the oscillations
of the microbalance ($m\omega^2 A$, where $m\approx 10^{-22}g$ is the adsorbate
atom mass and $\omega\approx 10^7s^{-1}$ and $A\approx 10^{-6}cm$ are the
microbalance frequency and amplitude, respectively), which is about
$10^{-14}dyn$. The fact that the observed force of friction generally
seems to be viscous in these experiments seems to imply that either the defects
are much weaker or have a concentration much lower than the 5 percent
concentration used in the present simulations.
\acknowledgments
We wish to thank the United States Department of Energy's Office of Basic
Energy Sciences for their support in the form of Grant NO.
DE-FG02-96ER45585. This work benefited from the allocation of time at the
Northeastern University High-Performance Computing Center (NU-HPCC).
We would like to thank Professor H.E. Stanley for his aid. One of us (M.S.T)
would like to thank H. A. Makse for useful discussions.
|
\section{\bf INTRODUCTION}
\label{sec:intro}
The discovery of gamma-ray bursts (GRB) by the Vela military test-ban treaty
satellites was announced in 1973 \cite{kle73}, and was quickly confirmed by
Soviet Konus satellite measurements \cite{maz74}. Then, for 23 years GRB remained
essentially just that: brief outbursts of gamma-rays which pierced, for a brief
instant, an otherwise pitch-black gamma-ray sky. An intense debate festered for a
long time on whether they were objects in our galaxy or at cosmological distances.
The first major breakthrough came in 1992 with the launch of the Compton Gamma-Ray
Observatory, whose superb results are summarized in a review by
Fishman \& Meegan \cite{fm95}. In particular the all-sky survey from the BATSE
instrument showed that bursts were isotropically distributed, strongly
suggesting either a cosmological or an extended galactic halo distribution, with
essentially zero dipole and quadrupole components. The spectra are definitely
non-thermal, typically fitted in the MeV range by broken power-laws whose energy per
decade $\nuF_{\nu}$ peak is in the range 50-500 KeV \cite{band93}, the power law
sometimes extending to GeV energies \cite{hur94}. GRB appeared to leave no detectable
traces at other wavelengths, except in some cases briefly in X-rays
\cite{stro98,conhu98}.
The gamma-ray durations range from $10^{-3}$ s to about $10^3$ s, with a roughly
bimodal distribution of long bursts of $t_b \lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel > \over \sim$} 2$ s and short bursts of
$t_b \lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel < \over \sim$} 2$s \cite{kou93}, and substructure sometimes down to milliseconds.
The gamma-ray light curves range from smooth, fast-rise and quasi-exponential decay
(FREDs), through curves with several peaks, to highly variable curves with many
peaks \cite{fm95,kou98}. The pulse distribution is complex \cite{pen96,nor98}, and
the time histories can provide clues for the geometry of the emitting regions
\cite{fen96,fen98}.
Theoretically, it was clear from early on that if GRB are cosmological, enormous
energies are liberated in a small volume in a very short time, and an
$e^\pm -\gamma$ fireball must form \cite{pac86,goo86,sp90}, which would expand
relativistically. The main difficulty with this was that a smoothly expanding
fireball would convert most of its energy into kinetic energy of accelerated
baryons (rather than photons), and would produce a quasi-thermal spectrum, while
the typical timescales would not explain events much longer than milliseconds.
This problem was solved with the introduction of the ``fireball shock model"
\cite{rm92,mr93a}, based on the realization that shocks are likely to arise,
at the latest when the fireball runs into an external medium, which would
occur after the fireball is optically thin and would reconvert the kinetic energy
into nonthermal radiation. The complicated light curves can be understood in terms
of internal shocks \cite{rm94} in the outflow itself, before it runs into the
external medium, caused by velocity variations in the outflow from the source,
The next major breakthrough came in early 1997 when the Italian-Dutch satellite
Beppo-SAX succeeded in providing accurate X-ray measurements which, after a delay of
4-6 hours for processing, led to positions \cite{cos97},
allowing follow-ups at optical and other wavelengths, e.g. \cite{jvp97}. This paved
the way for the measurement of redshift distances, the identification of candidate
host galaxies, and the confirmation that they were indeed at cosmological distances
\cite{metz97,djo98_0703,kul98}. The detection of other GRB afterglows followed in
rapid succession, sometimes extending to radio \cite{fra97,fra98} and over timescales
of many months \cite{jvp98}, and in a number of cases resulted in the identification
of candidate host galaxies, e.g. \cite{sah97,bloo98_0508,ode98_1214}, etc. The study
of afterglows has provided strong confirmation for the generic fireball shock model of
GRB. This model in fact led to a correct prediction \cite{mr97a}, in advance of the
observations, of the quantitative nature of afterglows at wavelengths longer than
$\gamma$-rays, which were in substantial agreement with the data
\cite{vie97a,tav97,wax97a,rei97,wrm97}.
A major issue raised by the measurement of large redshifts, e.g. \cite{kul98,kul99},
is that the measured $\gamma$-ray fluences imply a total energy of order
$10^{54}(\Omega_\gamma /4\pi)$ ergs, where $\Delta \Omega_\gamma$ is the solid
angle into which the gamma-rays are beamed. A beamed jet would clearly alleviate
the energy requirements, but it is only recently that tentative evidence has been
reported for evidence of a jet \cite{kul99,fru99,cas99}. Whether a jet is present or
not, such energies are possible \cite{mr97b} in the context of compact mergers
involving neutron star-neutron star (NS-NS~) or black hole-neutron star
(BH-NS~) binaries, or in hypernova/collapsar models involving a massive stellar
progenitor \cite{pac98,pop99}. In both cases, one is led to rely on MHD
extraction of the spin energy of a disrupted torus and/or a central
fast spinning BH, which can power a relativistic fireball resulting in the
observed radiation.
While it is at present unclear which, if any, of these
progenitors is responsible for GRB, or whether perhaps different progenitors
represent different subclasses of GRB, there is general agreement that they
all would be expected to lead to the generic fireball shock scenario
mentioned above. Much of the current effort is dedicated to understanding
the progenitors more specifically, and trying to determine what effect, if any,
they have on the observable burst and afterglow.
\section{Black Hole/Debris systems as generic GRB energy sources}
\label{sec:progen}
It has become increasingly apparent in the last few years that {\it most}
plausible GRB progenitors suggested so far are expected to lead to a
system with a central BH plus a temporary debris torus around it. Scenarios
leading to this include, e.g. NS-NS or NS-BH mergers, Helium core - black hole
[He/BH] or white dwarf - black hole [WD-BH] mergers, and the wide category
labeled as hypernova or collapsars including failed supernova Ib [SNe Ib],
single or binary Wolf-Rayet [WR] collapse, etc. \cite{pac91,woo93,mr97b,pac98,pop99},
and accretion-induced collapse \cite{vs98,pfb99}. An important point is that the
overall energetics from these various progenitors do not differ by more than about
one order of magnitude \cite{mrw98b}. Another possibility is massive black holes
($\sim 10^3 - 10^5 M_\odot$) in the halos of galaxies.
Some related models involve a compact binary
or a temporarily rotationally stabilized neutron star, perhaps with a superstrong
field, e.g. \cite{us94,tho94,vs98,spr99}, which ultimately also should lead to a
BH plus debris torus.
Two large reservoirs of energy are available in these systems: the binding
energy of the orbiting debris, and the spin energy of the black hole
\cite{mr97b}. The first can provide up to 42\% of the rest mass energy of
the disk, for a maximally rotating black hole, while the second can provide
up to 29\% of the rest mass of the black hole itself. The question is how
to extract this energy.
One energy extraction mechanisms is the $\nu\bar\nu \to e^+ e^-$ process
\cite{eic89}, which can tap the thermal energy of the torus produced
by viscous dissipation. To be efficient, the neutrinos must escape before
being advected into the hole;
on the other hand, the efficiency of conversion into pairs (which scales with
the square of the neutrino density) is low if the neutrino production is too
gradual. Typical estimates suggest a fireball of $\lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel < \over \sim$} 10^{51}$ erg
\cite{ruf97,fw98,mcfw99}, except perhaps in the collapsar case where
\cite{pop99} estimate $10^{52.3}$ ergs for optimum parameters. If the fireball
is collimated into a solid angle $\Omega_j$ then of course the apparent
``isotropized" energy would be larger by a factor $(4\pi/\Omega_j)$ , but unless
$\Omega_j$ is $\lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel < \over \sim$} 10^{-3}-10^{-4}$ this would fail to satisfy the apparent
isotropized energy of $4\times 10^{54}$ ergs deduced for GRB 990123
\cite{kul99}.
An alternative, and more efficient mechanism for tapping the energy of the
torus may be through dissipation of magnetic fields generated by the
differential rotation in the torus \cite{pac91,napapi92,mr97b,ka97}.
Even before the BH forms, a NS-NS merging system might lead to winding up of the
fields and dissipation in the last stages before the merger \cite{mr92,vie97a}.
However, a larger energy source is available in the hole itself, especially
if formed from a coalescing compact binary, since then it is guaranteed to be
rapidly spinning. Being more massive, it could contain more energy than
the torus. The energy extractable in principle through MHD coupling to the
rotation of the hole by the B-Z (Blandford \& Znajek \cite{bz77}) effect could then
be even larger than that contained in the orbiting debris \cite{mr97b,pac98}.
Collectively, any such MHD outflows have been referred to as Poynting jets.
The various progenitors differ only slightly in the mass of the BH and
that of the debris torus they produce, but they may differ more markedly
in the amount of rotational energy contained in the BH. Strong magnetic
fields, of order $10^{15}$ G, are needed needed to carry away the rotational
or gravitational energy in a time scale of tens of seconds \cite{us94,tho94},
which may be generated on such timescales by a convective dynamo mechanism,
the conditions for which are satisfied in freshly collapsed neutron stars
or neutron star tori \cite{dt92,klurud98}.
If the magnetic fields do not thread the BH,
then a Poynting outflow can at most carry the gravitational binding energy
of the torus. For a maximally rotating and for a slow-rotating BH this is
\begin{equation}
E_{t} = \epsilon M_\odot c^2
\cases{ 0.42 (M_d/M_\odot)~\hbox{ergs}~,& (fast rot.);\cr
0.06 (M_d/M_\odot)~\hbox{ergs}~,& (slow rot.),\cr} ,
\label{eq:edisk}
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon$ is the efficiency in converting gravitational into MHD jet energy.
The torus or disk mass in a NS-NS merger is\cite{ruja98} $M_d\sim
10^{-1}-10^{-2}M_\odot$ , and for a NS-BH, a He-BH, WD-BH merger or a binary
WR collapse it may be estimated at \cite{pac98,fw98} $M_d \sim 1M_\odot$.
In the HeWD-BH merger and WR collapse the mass of the disk is uncertain due
to lack of calculations on continued accretion from the envelope, so $1M_\odot$
is just a rough estimate. The maximum torus-based MHD energy extraction is
then
\begin{eqnarray}
E_{max,t} \sim \cases{
8\times 10^{53} \epsilon (M_d/M_\odot)~\hbox{ergs}~,& ; \nonumber \cr
1.2\times 10^{53}\epsilon (M_d/M_\odot)~\hbox{ergs}~,& \cr
0.8\times 10^{53} \epsilon (M_d/0.1M_\odot)~\hbox{ergs}~,& . \nonumber }
\label{eq:ediskcases}
\end{eqnarray}
for the NS-BH, He/WD-BH or collapsar case; the (slow rotating) failed SN Ib
case; and NS-NS case, respectively.
If the magnetic fields in the torus thread the BH, the spin energy of the BH
can in principle be extracted via the \cite{bz77} (B-Z) mechanism
(\cite{mr97b}). The extractable energy is
\begin{equation}
E_{bh} \sim \epsilon f(a)M_{bh} c^2~,
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon$ is the MHD efficiency factor, $f(a)=1-([1+\sqrt{1-a^2}]/2 )^{1/2}
\leq 0.29$ is the rotational efficiency factor, and $a = Jc/G M^2$ is the rotation
parameter, which equals 1 for a maximally rotating black hole. The $f(a)$
rotational factor is is small unless $a$ is close to 1, where it rises sharply
to its maximum value $f(1)=0.29$, so the main requirement is a rapidly
rotating black hole, $a \lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel > \over \sim$} 0.5$. For a maximally rotating BH, the
extractable energy is therefore
\begin{equation}
E_{max,bh}\sim
0.29 \epsilonM_{bh} c^2 \sim 5\times 10^{53}\epsilon (M_{bh}/M_\odot)~\hbox{ergs}.
\end{equation}
Rapid rotation is guaranteed in a NS-NS merger, since the radius (especially
for a soft equation of state) is close to that of a black hole and the final
orbital spin period is close to the required maximal spin rotation period.
The central BH will have a mass \cite{ruf97,ruja98} of about $2.5 M_\odot$,
so the NS-NS system can power a jet of up to $E_{NS-NS~}\lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel < \over \sim$} 1.3 \times 10^{54}
\epsilon (M_{bh}/2.5M_\odot)$ ergs.
A maximal rotation rate may also be possible in a He-BH merger, depending
on what fraction of the He core gets accreted along the rotation axis as
opposed to along the equator \cite{fw98}, and the same should
apply to the binary fast-rotating WR scenario, which probably does not
differ much in its final details from the He-BH merger. For a fast rotating
BH of $2.5-3M_\odot$ threaded by the magnetic field, the maximal energy
carried out by the jet is then similar or somewhat larger than in the NS-NS case.
The scenarios less likely to produce a fast rotating BH are the NS-BH merger
(where the rotation parameter could be limited to $a \leq M_{ns}/M_{bh}$,
unless the BH is already fast-rotating) and the failed SNe Ib (where the
last material to fall in would have maximum angular momentum, but the
material that was initially close to the hole has less angular momentum).
The electromagnetic energy extraction from the BH in these could be limited
by the $f(a)$ factor, but a lower limit would be given by the energy
available from the gravitational energy of the disk, in the second line
of equation (\ref{eq:edisk}).
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\hspace*{-1cm}
\vspace*{-1cm}
\epsfig{figure=figmcfw_jet.eps, width=6cm, height=6cm}
\caption{Jet formation in a collapsar model leading to black hole from
collapse of a fast rotating He core \cite{mcfw99}}
\label{fig:mcfw_jet}
\end{figure}
The total energetics differ thus between the various models at most
by a factor 20 for a Poynting (MHD) jet powered by the torus binding energy,
whereas for Poynting jets powered by the BH spin energy they differ at most by
a factor of a few, depending on the
rotation parameter. For instance, allowing for a total efficiency of 50\%, a
NS-NS merger whose jet is powered by the torus binding energy would require
a beaming of the $\gamma$-rays by a factor $(4\pi/\Omega_j)\sim 100$, or beaming
by a factor $\sim 10$ if the jet is powered by the B-Z mechanism,
to produce the equivalent of an isotropic energy of $4\times 10^{54}$ ergs.
The beaming requirements of BH-NS and some of the collapsar scenarios are
even less constraining, either when tapping the torus or the BH. Thus, even
the most extreme energy requirements inferred observationally thus far can be
plausibly satisfied by scenarios leading to a BH plus torus system.
The major difference between the various models is expected to be in the
{\it location} where the burst occurs relative to the host galaxy
(see \S \ref{sec:env}). They are also likely to differ substantially in
the efficiency of producing a directly observable relativistic outflow, as well
as in the amount of collimation of the jet they produce. The conditions for the
efficient escape of a high-$\Gamma$ jet are less propitious if the ``engine" is
surrounded by an extensive envelope. In this case the jet has to ``punch
through" the envelope, and its ability to do so may be crucially dependent
on the level of viscosity achieved in the debris torus (e.g. \cite{mcfw99}),
higher viscosities leading to more powerful jets
(see Figure \ref{fig:mcfw_jet}).
The simulations, so far,
are nonrelativistic and one can only infer that high enough viscosities
can lead to jets capable of punching though a massive (several $M_\odot$)
envelope. This is facilitated, of course, if the envelope is fast-rotating,
as in this case there is a centrifugally induced column density minimum
along the spin axis, which might be small enough to allow punch-through
to occur. If they do, a very tightly collimated beam may arise.
``Cleaner" environments, such as NS-BH or NS-NS merger, or rotational
support loss/accretion induced collapse to BH would have much less
material to be pushed out of the way by a jet, while their energy is,
to order of magnitude, similar to that in massive stellar progenitor cases.
In these cases, on the other hand, there is no natural choke to collimate a
jet, which might therefore be somewhat wider than in massive progenitor cases.
\section{The Fireball Shock Scenario}
\label{sec:fball}
Irrespective of the details of the progenitor, the resulting fireball
is expected to be initially highly optically thick. From causality
considerations the initial dimensions must be of order $c t_{var} \lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel < \over \sim$} 10^7$
cm, where $t_{var}$ is the variability timescale,
and the luminosities must be much higher than a solar Eddington limit.
Since most of the spectral energy is observed above 0.5 MeV, the optical
depth against $\gamma\gamma \to e^\pm$ is large, and an $e^\pm,\gamma$
fireball is expected. Due to the highly super-Eddington luminosity, this
fireball must expand. Since in many bursts one observes a large fraction of
the total energy at photon energies $\epsilon_\gamma \lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel > \over \sim$} 1 GeV$, somehow the
flow must be able to avoid degrading these photons ($\gamma\gamma \to e^\pm$
would lead, in a stationary or slowly expanding flow, to photons just below
0.511 MeV\cite{hb94} ).
In order to avoid this, it seems inescapable that the flow must be expanding
with a very high Lorentz factor, since in this case the relative angle at which
the photons collide is less than $\Gamma^{-1}$ and the threshold for the pair
production is effectively diminished. The bulk Lorentz factor must be
\begin{equation}
\Gamma \lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel > \over \sim$} 10^2 (\epsilon_{\gamma,\rm 10 GeV} \epsilon_{t, \rm MeV} )^{1/2}~,
\end{equation}
in order for photons with energy $\epsilon_\gamma \lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel > \over \sim$} 10$ GeV to escape annihilation
against target photons of energy $\epsilon_t \sim 1$ MeV \cite{m95,hb94}.
Thus, simply from observations and general physical considerations,
a relativistically expanding fireball is expected.
>From general considerations \cite{mlr93}, one can see that an outflow arising
from an initial energy $E_o$ imparted to a mass $M_o << E_0/c^2$ within a
radius $r_l$ will lead to an expansion. Initially the bulk Lorentz $\Gamma
\propto r$, while comoving temperature drops $\propto r^{-1}$; however,
$\Gamma$ cannot increase beyond $\Gamma_{max} \sim \eta \sim E_o/M_o c^2$,
which is achieved at a radius $r/r_l \sim \eta$, beyond which the flow
continues to coast with $\Gamma \sim \eta \sim $ constant \cite{mlr93}.
\begin{equation}
\Gamma \sim \cases{ (r/r_l) ~,& for $r/r_l \lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel < \over \sim$} \eta$;\cr
\eta ~,& for $r/r_l \lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel > \over \sim$} \eta$.\cr} .
\end{equation}
However, the observed $\gamma$-ray spectrum
observed is generally a broken power law, i.e., highly nonthermal. The
optically thick $e^\pm \gamma$ fireball cannot, by itself, produce such a
spectrum (it would tend rather to produce a modified blackbody,
\cite{pac86,goo86}). In addition,
the expansion would lead to a conversion of internal energy into kinetic
energy of expansion, so even after the fireball becomes optically thin,
it would be highly inefficient, most of the energy being in the kinetic
energy of the associated protons, rather than in photons.
The most likely way to achieve a nonthermal spectrum in an energetically
efficient manner is if the kinetic energy of the flow is re-converted into
random energy via shocks, after the flow has become optically thin \cite{rm92}.
This is a plausible scenario, in which two cases can be distinguished. In the
first case (a) the expanding fireball runs into an external medium (the ISM, or a
pre-ejected stellar wind\cite{rm92,mr93a,ka94a,sapi95}. The second
possibility (b) is that \cite{rm94,px94}, even before external shocks occur,
internal shocks develop in the relativistic wind itself, faster portions of the
flow catching up with the slower portions.
This is a completely generic model, which is independent of the specific
nature of the progenitor, as long as it delivers the appropriate amount
of energy ($\lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel > \over \sim$} 10^{52}$ erg) in a small enough region ($\lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel < \over \sim$} 10^7$ cm).
This model has been successful in explaining the major observational
properties of the gamma-ray emission, and is the main paradigm used for
interpreting the GRB observations.
External shocks will occur in an impulsive outflow of total energy
$E_o$ in an external medium of average particle density $n_o$ at a radius
and on a timescale
\begin{eqnarray}
r_{dec} \sim & 10^{17} E_{53}^{1/3} n_o^{-1/3} \eta_2^{-2/3} ~{\rm cm}~,\nonumber \cr
t_{dec} \sim & r_{dec}/(c\Gamma^2) \sim 3\times 10^2 E_{53}^{1/3} n_o^{-1/3}\eta_2^{-8/3} ~{\rm s}~,\cr
\label{eq:rdec}
\end{eqnarray}
where the lab-frame energy of the swept-up external matter ($\Gamma^2 m_p c^2$
per proton) equals the initial energy $E_o$ of the fireball, and $\eta=\Gamma =
10^2\eta_2$ is the final bulk Lorentz factor of the ejecta.
The typical observer-frame dynamic time of the shock (assuming the cooling
time is shorter than this) is $t_{dec} \sim r_{dec}/c \Gamma^2 \sim$ seconds,
for typical parameters, and $t_b \sim t_{dec}$ would be the burst duration (the
impulsive assumption requires that the initial energy input occur in a time
shorter than $t_{dyn}$). Variability on timescales shorter than $t_{dec}$
may occur on the cooling timescale or on the dynamic timescale for
inhomogeneities in the external medium, but generally this is not ideal for
reproducing highly variable profiles\cite{sapi98}.
However, it can reproduce bursts with several peaks\cite{pm98a}
and may therefore be applicable to the class of long, smooth bursts.
The same behavior $\Gamma \propto r$ with comoving temperature $\propto
r^{-1}$, followed by saturation $\Gamma_{max} \sim \eta$ at the same radius
$r/r_l \sim \eta$ occurs in a wind scenario \cite{pac90}, if one assumes
that a lab-frame luminosity $L_o$ and mass outflow $\dot M_o$ are injected
at $r\sim r_l$ and continuously maintained over a time
$t_w$; here $\eta=L_o/ {\dot M_o c^2}$. In such wind model, internal shocks
will occur at a radius and over a timescale \cite{rm94}
\begin{eqnarray}
r_{dis} \sim & c t_{var} \eta^2 \sim 3\times 10^{14} t_{var} \eta_2^2 ~
{\rm cm},\nonumber\cr
t_w \gg & t_{var} \sim r_{dis}/(c\eta^2) ~{\rm s},\cr
\label{eq:rdis}
\end{eqnarray}
where shells of different energies $\Delta \eta \sim \eta$ initially separated
by $c t_v $ (where $t_v \leq t_w$ is the timescale of typical variations in
the energy at $r_l$) catch up with each other.
In order for internal shocks to occur above
the wind photosphere $r_{ph} \sim {\dot M} \sigma_T /(4\pi m_p c \Gamma^2)$
$=1.2\times 10^{14} L_{53}\eta_2^{-3}$ cm, but also at radii greater than the
saturation radius (so that most of the energy does not come out in the
photospheric quasi-thermal radiation component) one needs to have
$7.5\times 10^1 L_{51}^{1/5} t_{var}^{-1/5} \lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel < \over \sim$} \eta
3\times 10^2 L_{53}^{1/4} t_{var}^{-1/4}$.
This type of models have the advantage\cite{rm94} that they allow an
arbitrarily complicated light curve, the shortest variation timescale $t_{var}
\lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel > \over \sim$} 10^{-3}$ s being limited only by the dynamic timescale at $r_l$, where
the energy input may be expected to vary chaotically.
Such internal shocks have been shown explicitly to
reproduce (and be required by) some of the more complicated
light curves\cite{sapi98,kps98,pm99int} (see however \cite{dermit98}).
\section{The Simple Standard Afterglow Model}
\label{sec:staaft}
The dynamics of GRB and their afterglows can be understood in a fairly simple
manner, independently of any uncertainties about the progenitor systems, using
a generalization of the method used to model supernova remnants. The simplest
hypothesis is that the afterglow is due to a relativistic expanding blast wave,
which decelerates as time goes on \cite{mr97a}.
The complex time structure of some bursts suggests that the central trigger may
continue for up to 100 seconds, the $\gamma$-rays possibly being due to
internal shocks. However, at much later times all memory of the initial time
structure would be lost: essentially all that matters is how much energy and
momentum has been injected; the injection can be regarded as instantaneous in
the context of the much longer afterglow.
As pointed in the original fireball shock paper \cite{rm92}, the external shock
bolometric luminosity builds up and decays as
\begin{equation}
L \propto \cases{ t^2 & rise \nonumber \cr
t^{-(1+q)} & decay ~.\cr }
\label{eq:Lrise}
\end{equation}
The first line is obtained equating, in the contact discontinuity frame, the kinetic
flux $L/4\pi r^2 $ to the external ram pressure $\rho_{ext} \Gamma^2$ during the
initial phase where $\Gamma\sim$ constant, $r\propto t$, while the second
follows from energy conservation $L\propto E/t$ under adiabatic conditions
($q$ takes into account radiative effects or bolometric corrections; the flux
per unit frequency rises in the same way, and decays with $q\geq 1$ in
equ. (\ref{eq:Lrise})).
At the deceleration radius (\ref{eq:rdec}) the fireball energy and the bulk Lorentz
factor decrease by a factor $\sim 2$ over a timescale $t_{dec}\sim
r_{dec}/(c\Gamma^2)$, and thereafter the bulk Lorentz factor decreases as a
power law in radius. This is
\begin{equation}
\Gamma \propto r^{-g}\propto t^{-g/(1+2g)}~,~r\propto t^{1/(1+2g)},
\label{eq:Gamma}
\end{equation}
with $g=(3,3/2)$ for the radiative (adiabatic) regime, in which
$\rho r^3 \Gamma \sim$ constant ($\rho r^3 \Gamma^2 \sim$ constant).
At late times, a similarity solution \cite{bm76} solution with
$g=7/2$ may be reached.
The spectrum of radiation is likely to be due to synchrotron radiation, whose
peak frequency in the observer frame is $\nu_m \propto \Gamma B' \gamma^2$,
and both the comoving field $B'$ and electron Lorentz factor $\gamma$ are
likely to be proportional to $\Gamma$ \cite{mr93a}. This implies that as
$\Gamma$ decreases, so will $\nu_m$, and the radiation will move to longer
wavelengths. This led \cite{pacro93,ka94b} to early discussions, based on the
forward blast wave, of the possibility of detecting at late times a radio or
optical afterglow of the GRB. A more detailed treatment of the fireball dynamics
indicate that approximately equal amounts of energy are radiated by the forward
blast wave, moving with $\sim\Gamma$ into the surrounding medium, and by a
reverse shock propagating with $\Gamma_r -1 \sim 1$ back into the ejecta
\cite{mr93a}. The electrons are therefore shocked to much higher energies in
the forward shock than in the reverse shock, producing a two-step synchrotron
spectrum which during the deceleration time $t_{dec}$ peaks in the optical
(reverse) and in the $\gamma/X$ (forward) \cite{mr93b,mrp94}. The predicted
fluences in the optical for typical bursts at cosmological distances were
$\sim 10^{-7.5}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$, or about a 9th magnitude prompt
optical flash \cite{mr97a} of duration comparable to the $\gamma$-rays, in
agreement with a recent prompt optical detection in GRB 990123 \cite{ake99}.
Detailed calculations and predictions of the time evolution of such a
forward and reverse shock afterglow model (\cite{mr97a}) preceded the
observations of the first afterglow GRB970228 (\cite{cos97,jvp97}), which
was detected in $\gamma$-rays, X-rays and several optical bands, and was
followed up for a number of months.
The simplest spherical afterglow model generally concentrates only on the
properties of the forward blast wave radiation, for which the flux at a given
frequency and the synchrotron peak frequency decay at a rate \cite{mr97a,mr99}
\begin{equation}
F_{\nu}\propto t^{[3-2g(1-2\beta)]/(1+2g)}~~,~~\nu_m\propto t^{-4g/(1+2g)},
\label{eq:Fnu}
\end{equation}
where $g$ is the exponent of $\Gamma$ (equ. [\ref{eq:Gamma}]) and $\beta$ is
the photon spectral energy slope. The decay rate of the forward shock $F_{\nu}$
in equ.(\ref{eq:Fnu}) is typically slower than that of the reverse shock
\cite{mr97a}, and the reason why the "simplest" model was stripped down to
its forward shock component only is that, for the first two years 1997-1998,
afterglows were followed in more detail only after the several hours needed by
Beppo-SAX to acquire accurate positions, by which time both reverse external
shock and internal shock components are expected to have become unobservable.
This simple standard model has been remarkably successful at explaining
the gross features and light curves of GRB 970228, GRB 970508 (after 2 days; for
early rise, see \S \ref{sec:postaft})
e.g. \cite{wrm97,tav97,wax97a,rei97} (see Figure \ref{fig:0228_lightcurve}).
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\hspace*{-1cm}
\vspace*{-1cm}
\epsfig{figure=sel970228.eps, width=6cm, height=6cm}
\caption{GRB 970228 light-curves compared \cite{wrm97} to the blast
wave model predictions of \cite{mr97a} }
\label{fig:0228_lightcurve}
\end{figure}
This simplest afterglow model produces at any given time a three-segment power
law spectrum with two breaks. At low frequencies there is a steeply rising
synchrotron self-absorbed spectrum up to a self-absorption break $\nu_a$,
followed by a +1/3 energy index spectrum up to the synchrotron break $\nu_m$
corresponding to the minimum energy $\gamma_m$ of the power-law accelerated
electrons, and then a $-(p-1)/2$ energy spectrum above this break,
for electrons in the adiabatic regime (where $\gamma^{-p}$ is the electron
energy distribution above $\gamma_m$). A fourth segment and a third break is
expected at energies where the electron cooling time becomes short compared
to the expansion time, with a spectral slope $-p/2$ above that. With
this third ``cooling" break $\nu_b$, first calculated in \cite{mrw98} and
more explicitly detailed in \cite{spn98}, one has what has come to be called
the simple ``standard" model of GRB afterglows. One of the predictions of this
model \cite{mr97a} is that the relation between the temporal decay index $\alpha$,
for $g=3/2$ in $\Gamma\propto r^{-g}$, is related to the photon spectral energy
index $\beta$ through
through
\begin{equation}
F_{\nu} \propto t^\alpha \nu^\beta~~,\hbox{with}~~\alpha=(3/2)\beta~.
\label{eq:alphast}
\end{equation}
This relationship appears to be valid in many (although not all) cases, especially
after the first few days, and is compatible with an electron spectral index $p\sim
2.2-2.5$ which is typical of shock acceleration, e.g. \cite{wax97a,spn98,wiga98},
etc. As the remnant expands the photon spectrum moves to lower frequencies, and
the flux in a given band decays as a power law in time, whose index can change
as breaks move through it.
For the simple standard model, snapshot overall spectra have been deduced
by extrapolating spectra at different wavebands and times using assumed
simple time dependences \cite{wax97b,wiga98}. These can be used to derive rough
fits for the different physical parameters of the burst and
environment, e.g. the total energy $E$, the magnetic and electron-proton
coupling parameters ${\epsilon}_B$ and ${\epsilon}_e$ and the external density $n_o$
(see Figure \ref{fig:0508_spec}).
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\hspace*{-1cm}
\vspace*{-1cm}
\epsfig{figure=spec_0508.eps, width=6cm, height=5cm}
\caption{Snapshot spectrum of GRB 970508 at $t=12$ days and
standard afterglow model fit \cite{wiga98}}
\label{fig:0508_spec}
\end{figure}
Since the simple afterglow model has generally proved quite robust, it is worth
reviewing the assumptions made in it. The following apply both to the ``simple
standard" model using forward shocks only, and to the original \cite{mr97a}
version including both forward and reverse shocks:\\
a) A single value of $E_o$ and $\Gamma_o=\eta$ is used,\\
b) the external medium $n_{ext}$ is homogeneous,\\
c) the accelerated electron spectral index $p$, the magnetic field and electron
to proton equipartion ratios $\varepsilon_B$ and $\varepsilon_e$ do not change in time,\\
d) the expansion is relativistic and the dynamics are given by $\Gamma \propto
r^{-3/2}$ (adiabatic), \\
d) the outflow is spherical (or angle independent inside some jet solid angle
$\Omega_j$),\\
e) the observed radiation is characterized by the scaling relations along the
line of sight.\\
These assumptions, even if correct over some range, clearly would break down after
some time. Estimates for the time needed to reach the non-relativistic expansion
regime are typically $\lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel < \over \sim$}$ month(s) (\cite{vie97a}), or less if there is an initial
radiative regime $\Gamma\propto r^{-3}$. However, even when electron radiative times
are shorter than the expansion time, it is unclear whether a regime $\Gamma\propto
r^{-3}$ should occur, since it would require strong electron-proton coupling
\cite{mrw98}. As far as sphericity, the standard model can be straightforwardly
generalized to the case where the energy is assumed to be channeled initially into a
solid angle $\Omega_j < 4\pi$ \cite{mlr93}. In this case \cite{rho97,rho99} a change
occurs after $\Gamma$ drops below $\Omega_j^{-1/2}$, after which the side of the jet
becomes observable, and soon thereafter one expects a faster decay of $\Gamma$
if the jet starts to expands sideways, leading to a decrease in the brightness.
A calculation based on the sideways expansion, using the usual scaling laws for a
single central line of sight \cite{rho99} leads then to a steepening of
the light curve. Until recently, no evidence for a steepening could be found
in afterglows over several months. E.g., in GRB 971214 \cite{ram98}, a
snapshot standard model fit and the lack of a break in the late light curve
could be, in principle, interpreted as evidence for lack of a jet, leading
to an (isotropic) energy estimate of $10^{53.5}$ ergs. While such large energy
outputs are possible in {\it either} NS-NS, NS-BH mergers \cite{mr97b} or in
hypernova/collapsar models \cite{pac98,pop99} using MHD extraction of the
spin energy of a disrupted torus and/or a central fast spinning BH, it is worth
stressing that what these snapshot fits constrain is only the {\it energy per
solid angle} \cite{mrw98b}. Also, the expectation of a break after some weeks
or months (e.g., due to $\Gamma$ dropping either below a few, or below
$\Omega_j^{-1/2}$) is based upon the simple impulsive (angle-independent delta
or top-hat function) energy input approximation. The latter is useful, but
departures from it would be natural, and certainly not surprising. In fact,
as discussed below, tentative evidence for beaming in one obejct has recently
been reported \cite{kul99,fru99,cas99}, but it is difficulty to ascertain, and
could be masked by a number of commonly expected effects.
\section{``Post-standard" Afterglow Models}
\label{sec:postaft}
In a realistic situation, one could expect any of several fairly natural
departures from the simple standard model to occur. The first one is that
the emitting region seen by the observer resembles a ring
\cite{wax97b,pm98b,sari98} (see Figure \ref{fig:ring}). This effect may,
in fact, be important in giving rise to the radio scintillation
pattern seen in several afterglows, since this requires the emitting source
to be of small dimensions, which is aided if the emission is ring-like,
e.g. in the example of GRB 970508 \cite{wkf98} (Figure \ref{fig:scint}).
\begin{figure}
\vskip -0.3in
\hskip .1in \resizebox{\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics{ring.eps}}
\vskip -1.2in
\caption{Ring-like equal-arrival time $T$ surfaces of an afterglow, based
on \cite{pmring98}}
\label{fig:ring}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\hspace*{-1cm}
\vspace*{-1cm}
\epsfig{figure=radio_fig1a.eps, width=6cm, height=6cm}
\caption{Radio afterglow light-curves of GRB970508 at 4.86GHz
and 1.43GHz, compared with the predictions of \cite{wkf98}.}
\label{fig:scint}
\end{figure}
One expects afterglows to show a diversity in their decay rates, not only due to
different $\beta$ but also from the possibility of a non-standard relation between
the temporal decay index $\alpha$ and the spectral energy index $\beta$, different
from equ. (\ref{eq:alphast}). The most obvious departure from the simplest
standard model occurs if the external medium is inhomogeneous: for instance, for
$n_{ext} \propto r^{-d}$, the energy conservation condition is $\Gamma^2 r^{3-d}
\sim$ constant, which changes significantly the temporal decay rates \cite{mrw98}.
Such a power law dependence is expected if the external medium is a wind, say from
an evolved progenitor star as implied in the hypernova scenario (such winds are
generally used to fit supernova remnant models). Another obvious non-standard effect,
which it is reasonable to expect, is departures from a simple impulsive injection
approximation (i.e. from a delta or top hat function with a single value for
$E_o$ and $\Gamma_o$). An example is if the mass and energy injected during the
burst duration $t_w$ (say tens of seconds) obeys $M(>\Gamma) \propto
\Gamma^{-s}$, $E(>\Gamma)\propto \Gamma^{1-s}$, i.e. more energy emitted with
lower Lorentz factors at later times (but still shorter than the gamma-ray pulse
duration). This would drastically change the temporal decay rate and extend the
afterglow lifetime in the relativistic regime, providing a late ``energy refreshment"
to the blast wave on time scales comparable to the afterglow time scale
\cite{rm98}. These two cases lead to a decay rate
\begin{equation}
\Gamma \propto r^{-g} \propto \cases{
r^{-(3-d)/2} & ~; $n_{ext}\propto r^{-d}$;\cr
r^{-3/(2+s)} & ~; $E(>\Gamma)\propto \Gamma^{1-s}$.\cr }
\label{eq:Gammanonst}
\end{equation}
Expressions for the temporal decay index $\alpha (\beta,s,d)$ in $F_{\nu}\propto
t^\alpha$ are given by \cite{mrw98,rm98}, which now depend also on $s$ and/or $d$
(and not just on $\beta$ as in the simple standard relation of equ.(\ref{eq:alphast}).
The result is that the decay can be flatter (or steeper, depending on $s$ and $d$)
than the simple standard $\alpha= (3/2)\beta$.
A third non-standard effect, which is entirely natural, occurs when the energy
and/or the bulk Lorentz factor injected are some function of the angle. A simple case
is $E_o\propto \theta^{-j}$, $\Gamma_o\propto \theta^{-k}$ within a range of angles;
this leads to the outflow at different angles shocking at different radii and its
radiation arriving at the observed at different delayed times, and it has a marked
effect on the time dependence of the afterglow \cite{mrw98}, with $\alpha=\alpha
(\beta,j,k)$ flatter or steeper than the standard value, depending on $j,k$.
Thus in general, a temporal decay index which is a function of more than one
parameter
\begin{equation}
F_{\nu}\propto t^\alpha\nu^\beta~~,\hbox{with}~~\alpha=\alpha (\beta,d,s,j,k,\cdots )~,
\label{eq:alphanonst}
\end{equation}
is not surprising; what is more remarkable is that, in many cases, the simple
standard relation (\ref{eq:alphast}) is sufficient to describe the gross overall
behavior at late times.
Strong evidence for departures from the simple standard model is provided by,
e.g., sharp rises or humps in the light curves followed by a renewed decay,
as in GRB 970508 (\cite{ped98,pir98a}). Detailed time-dependent model fits
\cite{pmr98} to the X-ray, optical and radio light curves of GRB 970228 and
GRB 970508 show that, in order to explain the humps, a {\it non-uniform} injection
(Figure \ref{fig:injfit0508}) or an {\it anisotropic} outflow
is required.
\begin{figure}
\vskip .2 in
\hskip -.5in \resizebox{\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics{curve0508.eps}}
\caption{Optical light-curve of GRB 970508, fitted with a non-uniform
injection model (a similar fit can be obtained with an off-axis jet plus
a weaker isotropic component) \cite{pmr98}}
\label{fig:injfit0508}
\end{figure}
These fits indicate that
the shock physics may be a function of the shock strength (e.g. the electron
index $p$, injection fraction $\zeta$ and/or $\epsilon_b,~\epsilon_e$ change
in time), and also indicate that dust absorption is needed to simultaneously
fit the X-ray and optical fluxes. The effects of beaming (outflow within a
limited range of solid angles) can be significant \cite{pmjet99}, but are coupled
with other effects, and a careful analysis is needed to disentangle them.
One consequence of ``post-standard" decay laws (e.g. from density inhomogeneities,
non-uniform injection or anisotropic outflow) is that the transition to a
steeper jet regime $\Gamma < \theta_j^{-1} \sim$ few can occur as late as six
months to a year after the outburst, depending on details of the energy input.
This transition is made more difficult to detect by the fact that, as numerical
integration over angles of the ring-like emission \cite{pmring98} show, the
transition is very gradual and the effects of sideways expansion effects are not
so drastic as inferred \cite{rho99} from the scaling laws along the central line of
sight. This is because even though the flux from the head-on part of the remnant
decreases faster, this is more than compensated by the increased emission
measure from sweeping up external matter over a larger angle, and by the
fact that the extra radiation, arising at larger angles, arrives later and
re-fills the steeper light curve. The inference (e.g. \cite{ram98,rho99}) that
GRB 970508 and a few other bursts were isotropic due to the lack of an observable
break is predicated entirely on the validity of the {\it simplest standard} fireball
assumption. Since these assumptions are drastic simplifications, and physically
plausible generalizations lead to different conclusions, one can interpret the
results of \cite{ram98,rho99} as arguments indicating that {\it post-standard}
features are, in fact, necessary in some objects.
\section{Prompt multi-wavelength flashes, reverse shocks and jets}
\label{sec:promptjet}
Prompt optical, X-ray and GeV flashes from reverse and forward shocks, as well as
from internal shocks, have been calculated in theoretical fireball shock models
for a number of years \cite{mr93b,mrp94,pm96,mr97a,sp99a}, as have been jets (e.g.
\cite{mr92,mlr93,mrp94}, and in more detail \cite{rho97,pmr98,pmjet99,rho99}).
Thus, while in recent years they were not explicitly part of the ``simple standard"
model, they are not strictly ``post"-standard either, since they generally use
the ``standard" assumptions, and they have a long history.
However, observational evidence for these effects were largely lacking, until
the detection of a prompt (within 22 s) optical flash from GRB 990123 with
ROTSE by \cite{ake99}, together with X-ray, optical and radio follow-ups
cite{kul99,gal99,fru99,and99,cas99,hjo99}. GRB 990123 is so far unique not only
for its prompt optical detection, but also by the fact that if it were emitting
isotropically, based on its redshift $z=1.6$ \cite{kul99,and99} its energy would
be the largest of any GRB so far, $4\times 10^{54}$ ergs. It is, however, also
the first (tentative) case in which there is evidence for jet-like emission
\cite{kul99,fru99,cas99}. An additional, uncommon feature is that a radio afterglow
appeared after only one day, only to disappear the next \cite{gal99,kul99}.
The prompt optical light curve of GRB 990123 decays initially as $\propto t^{-2.5}$
to $\propto t^{-1.6}$ \cite{ake99}, much steeper than the typical $\propto
t^{-1.1}$ of previous optical afterglows detected after several hours.
However, after about 10 minutes its decay rate moderates, and appears to
join smoothly onto a slower decay rate $\propto t^{-1.1}$ measured with
large telescopes \cite{gal99,kul99,fru99,cas99} after hours and days. The prompt
optical flash peaked at 9-th magnitude after 55 s \cite{ake99}, and in fact a
9-th magnitude prompt flash with a steeper decay rate had been predicted more than
two years ago \cite{mr97a}, from the synchrotron radiation of the reverse shock
in GRB afterglows at cosmological redshifts (see also {\cite{sp99a}). An optical
flash contemporaneous with the $\gamma$-ray burst, coming from the reverse shock
and with fluence corresponding to that magnitude, had also been predicted earlier
\cite{mr93b,mrp94}. An origin of the optical prompt flash in internal shocks
\cite{mr97a,mr99} cannot be ruled out yet, but is less likely since the optical
light curve and the $\gamma$-rays appear not to correlate well \cite{sp99b,gal99}
(but the early optical light curve has only three points). The subsequent slower
decay agrees with the predictions for the forward component of the external shock
\cite{mr97a,sp99b,mr99}.
The evidence for a jet is possibly the most exciting, although must still
be considered tentative. It is based on an apparent steepening of the light curve
after about three days \cite{kul99,fru99,cas99}. This
is harder to establish than the decay of the two previous earlier portions of
the light curve, since by this time the flux has decreased to a level where
the detector noise and the light of the host galaxy become important. However,
after correcting for this, the r-band data appears to steepen significantly.
(In the K-band, where the noise level is higher, a steepening is not obvious,
but the issue should be settled with further Space Telescope observations).
If real, this steepening is probably due to the transition between early
relativistic expansion, when the light-cone is narrower than the jet opening,
and the late expansion, when the light-cone has become wider than the jet,
leading to a drop in the effective flux \cite{rho97,kul99,mr99,rho99}. A rough
estimate leads to a jet opening angle of 3-5 degrees, which would reduce the total
energy requirements to about $4\times 10^{52}$ ergs. This is about two order of
magnitude less than the binding energy of a few solar rest masses, which, even
allowing for substantial inefficiencies, is compatible with currently favored
scenarios (e.g. \cite{pop99,mcfw99}) based on a stellar collapse or a compact
binary merger.
\section{Location and Environmental Effects}
\label{sec:env}
The location of the afterglow relative to the host galaxy center can
provide clues both for the nature of the progenitor and for the external
density encountered by the fireball. A hypernova model would be expected
to occur inside a galaxy in a high density environment $n_o > 10^3-10^5$ cm$^{-3}$.
Most of the detected and well identified afterglows are inside the projected image
of the host galaxy \cite{bloo98rome}, and some also show evidence for a dense
medium at least in front of the afterglow (\cite{ow98}).
For a number of bursts there are constraints from the
lack of a detectable, even faint, host galaxy \cite{sch98}, but at least for
Beppo-SAX bursts (which is sensitive only to long bursts $t_b \lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel > \over \sim$} 20$ s) the
success rate in finding candidate hosts is high.
In NS-NS mergers one would expect a BH plus debris torus system and
roughly the same total energy as in a hypernova model, but the mean distance
traveled from birth is of order several Kpc \cite{bsp99}, leading to a burst
presumably in a less dense environment. The fits of \cite{wiga98} to the
observational data on GRB 970508 and GRB 971214 in fact suggest external densities
in the range of $n_o=$ 0.04--0.4 cm$^{-3}$, which would be more typical of a
tenuous interstellar medium. These could be within the volume of the galaxy,
but for NS-NS on average one would expect as many GRB inside as outside. This is
based on an estimate of the mean NS-NS merger time of $10^8$ years; other estimated
merger times (e.g. $10^7$ years, \cite{vdh92}) would give a burst much closer
to the birth site. BH-NS mergers would also occur in timescales $\lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel < \over \sim$} 10^7$
years, and would be expected to give bursts well inside the host galaxy
(\cite{bsp99}; see however \cite{fw98}). In at least one ``snapshot" standard
afterglow spectral fit for GRB 980329 \cite{reila98} the deduced external
density is $n_o\sim 10^3$ cm$^{-3}$. In some of the other detected afterglows
there is other evidence for a relatively dense gaseous environments, as
suggested, e.g. by evidence for dust \cite{rei98} in GRB970508,
the absence of an optical afterglow and presence of strong soft X-ray
absorption \cite{gro97,mur97} in GRB 970828, the lack an an optical
afterglow in the (radio-detected) afterglow (\cite{tay97}) of GRB980329, and
spectral fits to the low energy portion of the X-ray afterglow of several
bursts \cite{ow98}. The latter observations may be suggestive of hypernova
models \cite{pac98,fw98}, involving the collapse of a massive star or its
merger with a compact companion.
One important caveat is that all afterglows found so far are based on Beppo-SAX
positions, which is sensitive only to long bursts $t_b \lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel > \over \sim$} 20$ s \cite{hur98}.
This is significant, since it appears
likely that NS-NS mergers lead \cite{mcfw99} to short bursts with $t_b \lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel < \over \sim$} 10$ s.
To make sure that a population of short GRB afterglows is not being
missed will probably need to await results from HETE \cite{hetepage} and from the
planned Swift \cite{swiftpage} mission, which is designed to accurately locate
300 GRB/yr.
An interesting case is the apparent coincidence of GRB 980425 with the
unusual SN Ib/Ic 1998bw \cite{gal98_SN}, which may represent a new class of SN
\cite{iwa98,bloomSN98}. If true, this could imply that some or perhaps
all GRB could be associated with SN Ib/Ic \cite{wawe98}, differring only in
their viewing angles relative to a very narrow jet. Alternatively,
the GRB could be (e.g. \cite{wes98}) a new subclass of GRB with
lower energy $E_\gamma \sim 10^{48} (\Omega_j /4\pi )$ erg, only rarely observable,
while the great majority of the observed GRB would have the energies $E_\gamma
\sim 10^{54}(\Omega_j/4\pi)$ ergs as inferred from high redshift observations.
The difficulties are that it would require extreme collimations
by factors $10^{-3}-10^{-4}$, and the statistical association is so far not
significant \cite{kip98}.
The environment in which a GRB occurs should also influence the nature of the
afterglows in other ways. The blast wave and reverse shock that give rise to the
X-rays, optical, etc occur over timescales proportional to $t_{dec} \propto
n_{ext}^{-1/3}$ (equ.[\ref{eq:rdec}]) which is longer in lower density environments,
so for the same energy the flux is lower, roughly $F_{\nu} \propto E_o n_{ext}^{1/2}$,
contributing also to make afterglows in the intergalactic medium harder to detect.
However, in addition to affecting broad-band fluxes, one may also expect specific
spectral signatures from the external medium imprinted in the X-ray and optical
continuum, such as atomic edges and lines \cite{bkt97,pl98,mr98b}. These may be
used both to diagnose the chemical abundances and the ionization state (or local
separation from the burst), as well as serving as potential alternative redshift
indicators. (In addition, the outflowing ejecta itself may also contribute
blue-shifted edge and line features, especially if metal-rich blobs or filaments are
entrained in the flow from the disrupted progenitor debris \cite{mr98a}, which
could serve as diagnostic for the progenitor composition and outflow Lorentz factor).
To distinguish between progenitors (\S \ref{sec:progen}), an interesting prediction
(\cite{mr98b}; see also \cite{ghi98,bot98}) is that the presence of a measurable
Fe K-$\alpha$ X-ray {\it emission} line could be a diagnostic of a hypernova,
since in this case one may expect a massive envelope at a radius comparable to a
light-day where $\tau_T \lower4pt \hbox{$\buildrel < \over \sim$} 1$, capable of reprocessing the X-ray continuum by
recombination and fluorescence. Two groups \cite{piro98b,yosh98} have in fact
recently reported the possible detection of Fe emission lines in GRB 970508 and
GRB 970828.
\section{ Conclusions }
\label{sec:concl}
The fireball shock model of gamma-ray bursts has proved quite robust in
providing a consistent overall interpretation of the major features of these
objects at various frequencies and over timescales ranging from the short
initial burst to afterglows extending over many months. The standard internal
shock scenario is able to reproduce the properties of the $\gamma$-ray light
curves, while external shocks involving a forward blast wave and a reverse shock
are successful in reproducing the afterglows observed in X-rays, optical and radio.
The ``simple standard model" of afterglows, involving four spectral slopes and
three breaks is quite useful in understanding the `snapshot' multiwavelength
spectra of most afterglows. However, the effects associated with a jet-like
outflow and the possible differential beaming at various energies requires
further investigations, both theoretical and observational. Caution is required
in interpreting the observations on the basis of the simple standard model. For
instance, more detailed numerical models, as opposed to the more common analytical
scaling law models, show that the contributions of radiation from different angles
and the gradual transition between different dynamical and radiative regimes
lead to a considerable rounding-off of the spectral shoulders and light-curve
slope changes, so that breaks cannot be easily located unless the spectral
sampling is dense and continuous, both in frequency and in time.
Some of the observed light curves with humps, e.g. in GRB 970508, require
`post-standard' model features (i.e. beyond those assumed in the standard
model), such as either non-uniform injection episodes or anisotropic outflows.
Time-dependent multiwavelength fits \cite{pmr98} of some
bursts also indicate that the parameters characterizing the shock physics change
with time. Even without humps or slope changes, a non-standard relation between the
spectral and temporal decay slope is observed in several objects, e.g. in
GRB 990123 \cite{kul99}. These are, in our view \cite{mr99}, a strong indication
for ''post-standard" effects in such bursts.
Much progress has been made in understanding how gamma-rays can arise in
fireballs produced by brief events depositing a large amount of energy in a
small volume, and in deriving the generic properties of the long wavelength
afterglows that follow from this. There still remain a number of mysteries,
especially concerning the identity of their progenitors, the nature of the
triggering mechanism, the transport of the energy, the time scales involved,
and the nature and effects of beaming. However, even if we do not yet
understand the details of the gamma-ray burst central engine, it is clear that
these phenomena are among the most powerful transients in the Universe, and they
could serve as powerful beacons for probing the high redshift ($z > 5$)
universe. The modeling of the burst mechanism itself, as well as the resulting
outflows and radiation, will continue to be a formidable challenge to theorists
and to computational techniques. However, the theoretical understanding appears
to be converging, and with dedicated new and planned observational missions under
way, the prospects for significant progress are realistic.
I am grateful to Martin Rees for stimulating collaborations, as well as to Alin
Panaitescu, Hara Papathanassiou and Ralph Wijers.
|
\section{Introduction}
Early-type galaxies, both ellipticals and lenticulars, are usually
thought to be very old stellar systems (see the classic works of
\cite{t68,t72,t78,f73}). Their red integrated colors are consistent
with the mean stellar population age almost as large as that of the
Universe, $T \geq 15$ billion years. Meantime, early-type
galaxies with prominent Balmer absorption lines in their integrated
nuclear spectra indicating a mean age of a few billion years
were observed long ago. Historically, they were found in an
intermediate-redshift cluster and were firstly treated as strongly
evolving objects (\cite{drg83}). Later, the similar population of
galaxies was noted in the rather nearby Coma cluster, and therefore
the phenomenon of "E+A" or "K+A" galaxies was related to the
environment influence (\cite{caletal}). But Zabludoff et al.
(\cite{zetal}) have tested the latter hypothesis using a
homogeneous sample of nearby galaxies and have found that
"{\it $\sim 75$\%\ of nearby "E+A"s lie in the field, well outside
of clusters and rich groups of galaxies}". An overall fraction
of "E+A" galaxies selected by Zabludoff et al. (\cite{zetal})
in LCR Survey is low, only 0.2\%\ of the total list of galaxies;
but they have applied a very extreme selection criterion,
$<\mbox{H}>\,>\,5.5$~\AA. Meantime evolutionary synthesis models
(e. g. of Worthey \cite{worth94}) imply that even if having
$EW(H \beta)\, > \, 2$~\AA\ the stellar population may have
the mean (luminosity-weighted) age less than 5 billion years.
Zabludoff et al. (\cite{zetal}) noted that diminishing their
$<\mbox{H}>$ low limit only to 4.5~\AA\ increases the sample
of "E+A" galaxies by a factor of 3. So we must admit that
a substantial fraction of relatively young stellar
nuclei may be an intrinsic property of the population of present-day
early-type galaxies. Just this conclusion have we made several
years ago, when among $\sim 30$ very nearby lenticular galaxies
about 10 hosts of the nuclei of 5 billion years old or even
younger have been found (\cite{me93a}).
The next question is a question of discreteness. Fisher et al.
(\cite{fish96}) in their detailed investigation of a sample of
nearby lenticular galaxies have also made the conclusion that
the nuclei are on average younger by several billion years than
the bulges; but they prefer to discuss a smooth age increasing
outward, a kind of smooth radial gradient which is characteristic
for galaxy formation by a dissipative collapse. Meantime there
may exist another interpretation: a decoupled nucleus. Seifert \&\
Scorza (\cite{ss96}) have found separate circumnuclear stellar
disks in 7 lenticular galaxies -- in the half of all galaxies
considered by them. We (\cite{we92}) have found chemically decoupled,
metal-rich stellar cores in the lenticular galaxies NGC~1023
and NGC~7332. If the chemically decoupled nuclei are products
of secondary star formation bursts in the centers of early-type
galaxies, a difference of the mean stellar age between the nuclei
and the main galactic bodies must exist: the nuclei must be younger.
The present paper is just devoted to searching for the age
difference between the chemically decoupled nuclei and the surrounding
bulges in the nearby lenticular galaxies NGC~1023 and NGC~7332.
\begin{table}
\caption[ ] {Global parameters of the galaxies}
\begin{flushleft}
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
NGC & 1023 & 7332 \\
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Type (NED) & SB(rs)$0^-$ & S0pec \\
$R_{25}$, kpc (LEDA) & 13.0 & 10.2 \\
$B_T^0$ (LEDA) & 9.55 & 11.50 \\
$M_B$ (LEDA) & --20.46 & --19.93 \\
$B-V$ (RC3) & 0.93 & 0.87 \\
$U-B$ (RC3) & 0.50 & 0.38 \\
$V_r(radio) $ (LEDA) & 637 $km\cdot s^{-1}$ & 1300 $km\cdot s^{-1}$ \\
Distance, Mpc (LEDA, $H_0$=75 $km\cdot s^{-1}\cdot Mpc^{-1}$) & 11
& 19.3 \\
Inclination (LEDA) & $90^o$ & $90^o$ \\
{\it PA}$_{phot}$ (LEDA) & $87^\circ$ & $155^\circ$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{flushleft}
\end{table}
The global parameters of the galaxies under consideration are
given in Table~1. These galaxies possess some large-scale
peculiarities which may be connected to past merger events.
NGC~1023 is rich of neutral hydrogen, and its distribution and
velocities resemble those of an accreted material (\cite{sancisi}).
However, the global star formation is absent in this galaxy
(\cite{pe93}), and its integrated color is extremely red
(see Table~1), as red as that of a luminous elliptical galaxy.
A neutral hydrogen content of NGC~7332 is low enough, though
non-zero (\cite{knapp}); but it possesses a counter-rotating
disk of ionized gas (\cite{plboul,fish94}).
Otherwise the galaxies look quite normal, moderate-luminous
lenticulars, even non-LINERs. We report our observations and
other data which we use in Section~2. The radial variations of
stellar population age are analysed in Section~3, and the
appearance of inner disks probably related with the age- and chemically
decoupled cores is discussed in Section~4. In Section~5 the two-dimensional
stellar velocity fields obtained with the Multi-Pupil Field Spectrograph
at the 6m telescope are presented. Section~6 gives our conclusions.
\section{Observations}
We have observed NGC~1023 and NGC~7332 in 1996--1997 by using the
Multi-Pupil Field Spectrograph (MPFS, \cite{afetal90,afman}) of the 6m
telescope of the Special Astrophysical Observatory, Nizhnij Arkhyz,
Russia. The journal of the observations is given in Table~2.
\begin{table}
\caption[ ] {2D spectroscopy of NGC~1023 and NGC~7332}
\begin{flushleft}
\begin{tabular}{lllllcc}
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Date & Galaxy & Exposure & Configuration & Field
& PA of long side & Seeing \\
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
15/16.08.96 & NGC~7332 & 40 min & MPFS+CCD $520\times580$ &
$10\arcsec\times16\arcsec$ & $72\arcdeg$ & $2\farcs 4 $ \\
9/10.10.96 & NGC~1023 & 60 min & MPFS+CCD $1040\times1160$ &
$11\arcsec\times21\arcsec$ & $122\arcdeg$ & $1\farcs 6$ \\
31.10/1.11.97 & NGC~7332 & 60 min & MPFS+CCD $520\times580$ &
$10\arcsec\times16\arcsec$ & $167\arcdeg$ & $2\farcs 0$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{flushleft}
\end{table}
MPFS, being the second (after CFHT TIGER system, see \cite{bacetal})
realisation of G. Courtes' (\cite{courtes}) concept of spatial sampling
of extended sources by means of a microlens array, is
in active operation at the 6-meter telescope since 1989. Instruments of
this type are providing sufficient gain in investigations of nebulae and
galaxies with respect to a classical long-slit spectroscopy due to
complete coverage of studied area, independence of spectral
resolution on spatial resolution, absence of slit losses and of
the overall problem of object matching.
A set of enlargers, which project the object onto the lens array,
provide spatial sampling according to a
seeing value --- from $\approx$0.3\arcsec\ to $\approx$1.6\arcsec\
per lens. Sizes of the used array varied between 8$\times$11
and 8$\times$16 elements. For this study we have selected the size of
a spatial element $1\farcs 3 \times 1\farcs 3$. The configurations
used in 1996--1997 resulted in 128 spectra per one exposure
for NGC~1023 ($8\times 16$ elements) and in 95 spectra per one
exposure for NGC~7332 ($8 \times 12$ elements). The spectral
range was 4600--5450~\AA\ for NGC~1023 and 4800--5400~\AA\ for NGC~7332
under the spectral resolution of 4--6~\AA\ (dispersion of 1.6~\AA\
per pixel). It includes several strong absorption lines,
$\mbox{H}_\beta$, MgIb, FeI$\lambda$5270, and FeI$\lambda$5335,
which have been used for diagnostics of the stellar population
properties.
To account accurately for the night sky background we have separately
exposed the blank sky region at 1.5\arcmin -- 2\arcmin\ from the
galaxies with an exposure time of one half of that for the galaxies;
the sky was then (after spectrum extraction and linearization) smoothed
and subtracted.
The hollow-cathode lamps filled by He-Ne-Ar or Ne-Xe-Ar gas mixtures were
exposed before and after each exposure in order to provide
wavelength calibration of spectral data. Integrations of the twilight sky
were carried out for correcting system vignetting and
variations of the transmission by the individual lenses.
The primary reduction -- bias subtraction, flatfielding,
cosmic ray hit removing, extraction of one-dimensional spectra,
wavelength calibration, construction of surface brightness maps --
have been fulfiled by using the software developed in the Special
Astrophysical Observatory (\cite{vlas}). After that the
absorption-line indices $\mbox{H}\beta$, Mgb, Fe5270, and sometimes
Fe5335 have been calculated in the standard Lick system
(\cite{woretal}). We have checked our consistency with the Lick
measurements by observing stars from their list (\cite{woretal})
and by calculating the absorption-line indices for the stars in the same
manner as for the galaxies. The indices calculated for 9 stars are
coincident with the data tabulated in (\cite{woretal}) in average within
0.05~\AA. The exposures for the galaxies have been taken long enough
to provide a signal-to-noise ratios of $\sim$ 80--100 in the nuclei
and $\sim$ 30 near the edges of the frames; the corresponding random
error estimations made in the manner of Cardiel et al. (\cite{cgcg})
range from 0.1~\AA\ in the center to 0.5~\AA\ for the individual
spatial elements at the outermost points. To keep a constant level of
accuracy along the radius, we summed the spectra for the galaxies in
concentric rings centered onto the nuclei and studied the radial
dependencies of the absorption-line indices by comparing them to
synthetic models of old stellar populations of Worthey (\cite{worth94})
and Tantalo et al. (\cite{tantalo}). We estimate the mean accuracy of
our azimuthally-averaged indices as 0.1~\AA. To give an impression
on our data quality, the azimuthally-averaged spectra are displayed
in Fig.~1.
Besides our own spectral data, we have used results of the long-slit
observations of NGC~7332 taken from the La Palma Archive. The galaxy
has been observed with the ISIS, the blue arm, of the 4.2m William
Herschel Telescope on August 3, 1994; it was exposed during 30 minutes
in the spectral range 3900--5500 \AA\ with the grating R300B (the
dispersion of 1.54~\AA\ per pixel matched exactly the ours). A slit
with the width of $1\farcs 0$ was aligned with the minor axis of the
galaxy ($PA=65\arcdeg$). In this case also, the Lick indices
$\mbox{H}\beta$, Mgb, Fe5270, and Fe5335 have been calculated along
the slit with binning of 3 pixel ($1\arcsec$).
To study the morphology of the central part of NGC~1023, we have
used photometric data from the La Palma Archive and from the HST
Archive. The galaxy was observed at the 1m Jacobus Kapteyn Telescope
on La Palma through the BVRI filters with the CCD GEC ($0\farcs 3$
per pixel) on October 24, 1990, and on September 11, 1991, under
moderate seeing conditions, $FWHM_*=1\farcs 8 - 2\farcs 0$. Also it
was exposed with WFPC2 of the HST through the filters F555W and F814W
on January 27, 1996, under the spatial resolution of $0\farcs 1$
(Principal Investigator: S. M. Faber; Program ID: 6099). All the
data have been analysed with the program of V. V. Vlasyuk (SAO RAS)
FITELL.
\section{Ages of the Stellar Nuclei in NGC~1023 and NGC~7332}
To increase signal-to-noise ratios and to derive more precise radial
profiles of the absorption-line indices, we integrate our field
measurements in circular concentric rings centered onto the galactic
nuclei. But the galactic bulges are rather flattened: the isophote
ellipticities in the radius range $3\arcsec \div 8\arcsec$ are nearly
0.2 in NGC~1023 and 0.4 in NGC~7332. Besides, there may be
multicomponent photometric structure, perhaps, a noticeable disk
influence along the major axes in the edge-on lenticular galaxies
under consideration. We would like to be sure that by using the
azimuthally averaged radial profiles of the absorption-line indices
we compare the nuclei to their surrounding bulges and not to some
artificial unphysical units.
For NGC~7332 we can make our verification by comparing our
azimuthally averaged profiles to the linear cross-section along
the minor axis (so to the "pure" bulge). Figure~2 presents the
results of this comparison. First of all, we would like to note
a good agreement between both sets of measurements with the
MPFS: the differences inside $R \approx 5\arcsec$ do not exceed
0.2~\AA\ confirming our estimate of the index accuracy, 0.1~\AA.
Secondly, the long-slit measurements along the minor axis, being
less accurate than the azimuthally averaged data, however, follow
the MPFS profiles rather well; al least there is no systematic
difference between two kinds of profiles. We should only add that
in the external parts of the profiles, $R > 5\arcsec$, where our
data of 1996 and of 1997 are somewhat diverging, the long-slit
measurements confirm the 1997's version, particularly, of the
$\mbox{H}\beta$ and Fe5270 profiles.
For NGC~1023, with its high surface brightness in the center, we
have been able to calculate two-dimensional maps of the absorption-line
indices. The maps for Mgb and Fe5270 slightly smoothed at
$R \geq 2\arcsec$ (by a two-dimensional gaussian with
$\sigma = 1\farcs 0$) are presented in Fig.~3. Surprisingly, they
look different: if the isolines on the Fe5270 map are elongated
nearly as the isophotes and may be attributed to the effect of the
(probable) metal-rich circumnuclear stellar disk, the isolines on
the Mgb map are completely decoupled and may be described as
elongated too but prominently turned.
So the analysis of the two index maps prevents us from a selection
of any particular ellipsoidal trajectories of index averaging.
Taking into account the results of both considerations, for
NGC~7332 and for NGC~1023, we conclude that the use of the
circularly averaged absorption-line index profiles for comparison
of the nuclei to the underlying bulges is the most reliable
as well as the simplest way.
The next Figures are "index-index" diagrams where we compare the
nuclei of NGC~1023 and NGC~7332 to the surrounding bulges. To compare
our measurements to the stellar population models based on summation
(with some weights) of spectra of stars, we must made corrections
for the stellar velocity dispersion in galaxies which broaden absorption
lines and "degrade" a spectral resolution in such way. We have
calculated the corrections by smoothing the spectra of K0-K3 III giants
from the list of (\cite{woretal} which we have observed and by
measuring the absorption-line indices of the smoothed spectra.
We have found that the index H$\beta$ is quite insensitive to the
velocity dispersion when $\sigma_v$ remains to be less than 230 km/s;
as for metal-line indices, we have found that the corrections are:\\
0.1~\AA\ for $\sigma_v$=130 km/s (NGC~7332, \cite{sp97}),\\
0.3~\AA\ for $\sigma_v$=180 km/s (circumnuclear regions of
NGC~1023, \cite{sp97}), and\\
0.4~\AA\ for $\sigma_v$=215 km/s (the nucleus of NGC~1023, LEDA).\\
All the Figures beginning from Fig.~4 contains the corrected indices;
for comparison, the data from Trager et al. (\cite{trager}) for the
nuclei of NGC~1023 and NGC~7332 are plotted too -- thought they are
less accurate than ours, the agreement within their errors is good.
The diagrams (Fe5270, Mgb) are intended to check if the magnesium-to-iron
ratios are solar. We want to check it because the most age-metallicity
diagnostics are calculated for the solar elemental ratios; besides
that, the magnesium-to-iron ratio is important itself because it
characterizes a duration of the main star formation epoch. We know
that luminous elliptical galaxies are mostly magnesium-overabundant
(\cite{worth92}); but as for lenticulars, there were discordant
opinions: we (\cite{me93b}) found that spectroscopic observations
of bright S0 galaxies through a
$4\arcsec \times (1\arcsec \div 2\arcsec)$ aperture revealed mostly
solar magnesium-to-iron ratios while Fisher et al. (\cite{fish96})
found the brightest S0 galaxies to have magnesium-overabundant
nuclei, just as ellipticals. Fig.~4 allows to resolve this problem
with respect to NGC~1023 and NGC~7332. The former has an obviously
magnesium-overabundant nucleus; but starting from $R \approx 1\farcs 3$
all the bulge measurements follow tightly the model sequences for
[Mg/Fe]=0. So we conclude that in the nucleus of NGC~1023
[Mg/Fe]$\approx +0.3$ and in the bulge [Mg/Fe]$\leq +0.1$. As for
NGC~7332, we can surely state that it has a solar magnesium-to-solar
ratio in the nucleus, because we have measured the nuclear indices
very accurately. The bulge measurements follow the [Mg/Fe]=0 model
sequences up to $R\approx 4\arcsec$; after that two measurement sets
diverge: the data of 1996 continue to follow the model sequences
while the data of 1997 show a slight magnesium overabundance. Though
the long-slit measurements support rather the results of 1997 in
this radius range (see Fig.~2), we would prefer to conclude that
the bulge of NGC~7332 demonstrates nearly solar magnesium-to-iron
ratio, just as the nucleus.
It is known that both age and metallicity decreases result in
the bluer color and weaker metal absorption lines in the integrated
spectra of the stellar populations. However there are methods
to disentangle age and metallicity effects. Particularly, comparing
Balmer-line and metal-line indices, one can determine simultaneously
both parameters. The most popular present models which provide a lot
of various absorption-line indices for old stellar populations
($T > 1$ billion years) are the models of Worthey (\cite{worth94});
however they are calculated for [Mg/Fe]=0. Recently some advanced
models have been published; among them we take the results of
Tantalo et al. (\cite{tantalo}) which are expanded to [Mg/Fe]=--0.3
and [Mg/Fe]=+0.3. In NGC~1023 only the star-like nucleus has
[Mg/Fe]$\approx +0.3$, and the rest of the region under consideration
has [Mg/Fe]$\approx 0.0$. So we need both sets of calculations for
the age-metallicity diagnostics.
To determine an age of the star-like nucleus, we must use the Fig.~5a
where the models of Tantalo et al. (\cite{tantalo}) for [Mg/Fe]=+0.3
are plotted. We see that the nucleus itself is $\sim$ 7 billion years
old and has more than solar global metallicity. Fig.~5b which contains
the comparison with the models of Tantalo et al. (\cite{tantalo})
calculated for [Mg/Fe]=0.0 evidences that the ring at $R=1\farcs 3$
is young, nearly 5 billion years old, and has more than solar global
metallicity; the bulge is $\sim$ 15 billion years old and moderately
metal-poor. Fig.~5c presents a comparison to the Worthey's models,
so is valid for the measurements except the nucleus. One can see
once more that the point at $R=1\farcs 3$ confirms
rather young age of the stellar population in the nearest vicinity
of the nucleus, namely, $T\leq 5$ billion years; more outer bulge,
at $R > 2\arcsec$, is old, $T \sim 17$ billion years. So we conclude
that there exists a compact, marginally resolved stellar structure
in the center of NGC~1023, with the radius of $R \leq 1\farcs 5$,
which is significantly younger than the surrounding bulge. There is
also a modest metallicity difference between the two:
the nuclear+circumnuclear stellar population has [m/H]$\approx +0.3$,
while in the central bulge we see [m/H] from 0.0 to --0.3.
The work of Tantalo et al. (\cite{tantalo}) proposes also a possibility
to quantify differences of stellar population properties basing on
the index differences. A set of three linear equations, connecting
$\Delta$[Mg/Fe], $\Delta \log Z$, and $\Delta \log T$ to the
$\Delta \mbox{Mg}_2$, $\Delta <\mbox{Fe}>$, and $\Delta \mbox{H}\beta$,
is proposed. We apply these equations to the differences between the
nucleus and the bulge or between the nucleus and circumnuclear structure
(the ring at $R=1\farcs 3$) in NGC~1023; the bulge is taken by integrating
the rings at the following values of radius, $r=2\farcs 6$, $3\farcs 9$,
and $5\farcs 2$. Having performed the set of calculations,
we have obtained the following parameter differences:
for the difference "circumnuclear ring -- minus -- nucleus"
$\Delta$[Mg/Fe]=-0.20, $\Delta \log Z$=+0.09, and $\Delta \log T$=-0.19;
and for the difference "bulge -- minus -- nucleus"
$\Delta$[Mg/Fe]=-0.27, $\Delta \log Z$=-0.27, and $\Delta \log T$=+0.26.
It means that the bulge is twice older and twice metal-poorer
than the nucleus; the circumnuclear structure
is almost as metal-rich as the nucleus but is younger by a factor of 1.5.
Interestingly, the Mg/Fe ratios are almost equal in the circumnuclear
structure and in the bulge, but the nucleus is outstanding by its
magnesium overabundance. The bulge has a solar magnesium-to-solar
ratio as one can see from Fig.~4a; then the nucleus has
[Mg/Fe]$\approx +0.3$, and the age estimate for it obtained from the
diagram Fig.~5a is valid.
For NGC~7332 we can use the models with [Mg/Fe]=0 for the nucleus and
for the bulge as well. But there are some other restrictions: the
data of 1997 lack extended $< \mbox{Fe} >$ measurements though their
$\mbox{H}\beta$ indices are more accurate at $R \geq 4\arcsec$ (see
Fig.~2). So we give three variants of "$\mbox{H}\beta$, metal index"
diagrams to disentangle age and metallicity effects in NGC~7332.
Fig.~6a reveals a strong age gradient in the radius range
$0 -5\arcsec$; outside $R \approx 5\arcsec$ the age of the stellar
population remains constant and older than 17 billion years. Figs.~6b
and 6c confirm the age increase by a factor of 6 between $R=0\arcsec$
and $R=5\arcsec$. And all three diagrams show surely that the mean
age of the nuclear stellar population in NGC~7332 is less than 3
billion years. Moreover, as we have three independent high-quality
nucleus measurements (see Fig.~2), we can calculate the H$\beta$
index value very accurately: $\mbox{H}_{\beta}(nuc)=2.20\pm 0.05$~\AA;
(and the metal-line indices also: Mgb=$3.82\pm 0.04$~\AA\ and
$< \mbox{Fe} > = 2.95\pm 0.03$~\AA). It lets a very precise estimate
of the nuclear stellar population age: $T=2.5\pm 0.5$ billion years
with the [m/H]$\approx +0.3 - +0.4$. This age is unexpectedly low for
a regular gas-poor lenticular galaxy. A metallicity drop between the
nucleus and the bulge at $R \geq 5\arcsec$ is also very prominent:
from +0.3 to $-0.5 \div -0.7$, almost an order of magnitude. Therefore,
in NGC~7332 the age- and metallicity-decoupled circumnuclear structure
is extended, with the $R\approx 5\arcsec$ (it is somewhat overestimated
value due to our moderate seeing quality); outside it we see
an unusually metal-poor bulge with the old stellar population.
\section{Morphology of the Central Parts of NGC~1023 and NGC~7332}
There are several photometric studies of NGC~7332 which have been
made recently, with CCD detectors, under rather good seeing conditions
and followed by a sophistic mathematical analysis (\cite{fish94},
Seifert \&\ Scorza \cite{ss96}). The paper of Fisher et al. (1994)
is fully devoted to the dynamics and structure of NGC~7332. The
photometric data obtained with the 3m Lick Telescope have allowed
them to decompose the radial brightness profile into a bulge, an
extended exponential disk, and a third component, "something flat"
in the radius range of $14\arcsec - 24\arcsec$. The kinematical data
have revealed a presence of counterrotating ionized gas, but nothing
unusual in the rotation of the stellar component. Meantime, the
stellar velocity dispersion has a prominent minimum in the center
of the galaxy which cannot be consistent with the dominance of the
hot spheroidal bulge. Seifert \&\ Scorza (\cite{ss96}) have made
two-dimensional decomposition of the surface brightness map of
NGC~7332, together with other lenticular galaxies. They have found
two disks in this galaxy: the inner one has a maximum surface brightness
at $R\approx 3\farcs 5$ and the outer one -- at $R\approx 23\arcsec$.
Between two disks there is a gap: at $R\approx 10\arcsec$ only a
spheroidal component is detected. We would like to note that the
radius ranges for the inner disk photometric incidence and for the
region of the strong age gradient reported in the previous Section
are roughly the same.
NGC~1023 being brighter and larger than NGC~7332 was intensively studied
in the epoch of photographic photometry. Probably, a general impression
that Barbon \&\ Capaccioli (\cite{bc75}) and Gallagher \&\ Hudson
(\cite{gh76}) have made all the possible prevented an investigation of
NGC~1023 with digital detectors. Barbon \&\ Capaccioli (\cite{bc75})
have derived three-component structure of the radial surface brightness
profile: de Vaucouleurs' bulge at $R \leq 0\farcm 5$, an exponential
disk at $R \geq 1\arcmin$ and a lense between them -- a picture very
similar to the structure of NGC~7332 derived by Fisher et al. (1994).
But a two-dimensional analysis a la Seifert and Scorza (\cite{ss96})
was still needed. Figure~7 presents some results of such analysis
which we have undertaken by using the photometric data from the
archives of the HST and La Palma. One can see that the HST data are
more precise (though limited by a smaller radius range), but in
general the agreement between the different telescope and different
passband results exists. High spatial resolution of the HST observations
enables us to detect a very compact distinct structure in the center
of NGC~1023. It manifests itself as a local maximum of ellipticity
at $R\approx 1\arcsec$. Since the fourth cosine Fourier coefficient is
larger than +1\%\ inside $R=1\farcs 5$, we can conclude that this
distinct subsystem is a compact nuclear stellar disk. We have
subtracted pure elliptical surface brightness distribution from
the HST image of NGC~1023; the result is shown in Fig.~8. Even though
we have ascribed the ellipse parameters affected by the disk
presence to our model image, the residual map still demonstrates
a presence of the thin edge-on disk with a radius of $\sim 1\farcs 5$.
The orientation of the nuclear disk, $PA\approx 84\arcdeg - 85\arcdeg$,
is very close to the global line of nodes, $PA_0=86\arcdeg$ (Barbon
\&\ Capaccioli \cite{bc75}), though the bulge itself -- or rather
the lense if it dominates at $R=35\arcsec - 40\arcsec$ -- reveals some
misalignment, by $10\arcdeg - 12\arcdeg$, with respect to the outermost
disk. If we deal in this radius range with some triaxial subsystem
-- NGC~1023 is classified as SB0, -- this misalignment transforms in the
plane of the galaxy into a very prominent turn taking into account
that the galaxy is seen almost edge-on ($i=80\arcdeg$, Barbon \&\
Capaccioli \cite{bc75}). If this lense is a disk-like subsystem, which
is implied by high values of $a4$ between $R=20\arcsec$ and
$R=40\arcsec$, it demonstrates a strange local "warp" scarcely
explicable in the inner region of the early-type galaxy which is
dominated by an oblate spheroid. Detailed kinematical data are needed
to classify this subsystem intermediate between the bulge and the
main disk. But inside $R\approx 14\arcsec$ the structure seems to be
clear: the compact circumnuclear disk limited by $R\approx 1\farcs 5$
is embedded into the pure ellipsoidal bulge. This morphology is quite
consistent with the age trend detected in the previous Section:
the entity with more than solar metallicity and the age younger than 10
billion years appears to be a nuclear stellar disk. The bulge is old
and moderately metal-poor.
\section{Stellar Rotation in the Inner Parts of NGC~1023 and NGC~7332}
The spectral range which has been exposed with the MPFS contains a lot
of strong absorption lines. So it has been a possibility to calculate
a field of stellar velocities by cross-correlating elementary galactic
spectra with spectra of some K-giants which has been observed the same
nights as the galaxies. Two-dimensional line-of-sight velocity maps
obtained are presented in Fig.~9. Both galaxies are seen nearly edge-on.
The stellar velocity field of NGC~1023 (Fig.~9a) can be treated as
cylindric rotation; but the stellar velocity field of NGC~7332 (Fig.~9b)
is not so conventional: a sure local velocity extremum is clearly seen
to the north from the center which may be a sign of a dynamically
decoupled core. In any case, rotational velocities can be derived from
major-axis cross-sections which are simulated from the two-dimensional
maps and presented in Fig.~10. For comparison and to extend the
rotation curves, the long-slit data from \cite{sp97} are also plotted;
to compare them, we have reduced the profiles to the same systemic
velocities: in the case of NGC~1023 the difference of the systemic
velocity is 37 km/s, and in the case of NGC~7332 -- 28 km/s. But the
shapes of the central velocity gradients according to our observations
and to those of \cite{sp97} are very similar. For NGC~1023 (Fig.~10, top)
the agreement is perfect; the combination of the data presented lets
to conclude that the central part of the galaxy inside
$R\approx 3\arcsec$ (it is an upper limit due to finite spatial
resolution) rotates much more rapidly than the rest of the galaxy.
An analogous conclusion may be made with respect to NGC~7332 if
we believe in our MPFS cross-section: the velocity profile from
\cite{sp97} looks somewhat shallower than ours. Since our profile
is symmetric and the profile from \cite{sp97} is clearly asymmetric
and since during long-slit observations there may be difficulties
with slit positioning, perhaps, our data are more reliable. So we
may conclude that the central parts of NGC~1023 and NGC~7332 look
rotating faster than the surrounding bulges and are kinematically
decoupled.
\section{Conclusions}
We have found chemically distinct, in average relatively young stellar
cores in the lenticular galaxies NGC~1023 and NGC~7332. The morphological
analysis undertaken by Seifert \&\ Scorza (\cite{ss96}) for NGC~7332
and here by us for NGC~1023 has implied them to be related to the
separate circumnuclear stellar disks. The similar conclusion about the
secondary formation epoch has been made by de Jong and Davies (\cite{jd})
for embedded disks of some discy ellipticals, when they have found
correlation between H$\beta$ index and the fourth cosine Fourier
coefficient of isophotes. By considering stellar rotation
curves of NGC~1023 and NGC~7332, we see that the central (chemically
decoupled) regions are also distinguished by a fast solid-body rotation,
so they can be also described as dynamically decoupled. Interestingly,
the borders of the regions distinct by the metallicity, by the age, and
by the morphology are approximately the same --
that is, $R=1\farcs 5$, or 80 pc, for NGC~1023, and $R=4\arcsec$, or
400 pc, for NGC~7332. In the case of NGC~7332 we are sure to resolve
the decoupled region, and we can state rapid changes of stellar
characteristics, especially age, along the radius due to the circumnuclear
disk effect, the nucleus being the youngest point. The decoupled
substructure in NGC~1023 though very compact seems to be marginally
resolved too. The difference in magnesium-to-iron ratio between the
nucleus and the ring at $R=1\farcs 3$ looks convincingly: it is consistent
with the age difference of 2 billion years implying that the secondary star
formation burst was short in the nucleus and lasted for several (2--3)
billion years at the periphery of the circumnuclear disk. The
coincidence of chemically, morphologically and dynamically decoupled
central regions was also found in another lenticular galaxy, NGC~4816
(\cite{mehetal}); in this galaxy the circumnuclear disk is also
relatively young, $T \leq 8$ billion years, and very strongly
dynamically decoupled (being counter-rotating). Perhaps, in this relation
lenticular galaxies are similar to ellipticals where the coincidence
of chemically decoupled cores with fast-rotating circumnuclear stellar
disks is frequent (Bender \&\ Surma \cite{bs92},
\cite{sb95,scb95,ffi95}). In early-type spiral galaxies the situation
looks somewhat different: we have found that in M~31 (\cite{silbv98})
and in NGC~4216 and NGC~4501 (\cite{silbv99}) the chemically decoupled
young stellar cores are much more compact than the circumnuclear
stellar disks, although both are present.
\acknowledgements
I thank the astronomers of the Special Astrophysical Observatory
Drs. V. L. Afanasiev, A. N. Burenkov, S. N. Dodonov, V. V. Vlasyuk,
and Mr. Drabek for supporting the observations at the 6m telescope.
I am also grateful to the graduate student of the Moscow University
A. V. Moiseev for the help during the observations and in
preparing the manuscript.
The 6m telescope is operated under the financial support of
Science Department of Russia (registration number 01-43).
During the data analysis I have
used the Lyon-Meudon Extragalactic Database (LEDA) supplied by the
LEDA team at the CRAL-Observatoire de Lyon (France) and the NASA/IPAC
Extragalactic Database (NED) which is operated by the Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
This research has made use of the La Palma Archive. The telescopes
WHT and JKT are operated on the island of La Palma by the Royal
Greenwich Observatory in the Spanish Observatorio del Roque de los
Muchachos of the Instituto de Astrofisica de Canarias.
The work is partly based
on observations made with the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope, obtained
from the data archive at the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is
operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy,
Inc., under NASA contract NAS 5-2655. We have also used the software
ADHOC developped at the Marseille Observatory, France. The work
was supported by the grant of the Russian Foundation for Basic
Researches 98-02-16196, by the grant of the President of Russian
Federation for young Russian doctors of sciences 98-15-96029
and by the Russian State Scientific-Technical
Program "Astronomy. Basic Space Researches" (the section "Astronomy").
|
\section*{Introduction}
Consider an adjoint semisimple algebraic group $G$ and a Borel
subgroup $B$. The Schubert varieties are the images in $G/B$ of the
closures in $G$ of double classes $BwB$. These varieties are generally
singular, but all of them are normal and Cohen-Macaulay \cite{R1}. The
spaces of sections of line bundles over Schubert varieties play an
important r\^ole in representation theory, see for example \cite{J},
\cite{vdK2}.
\smallskip
The group $G$ has a canonical smooth $G\times G$-equivariant
completion ${\mathbf X}$, constructed by DeConcini and Procesi \cite{DP} in
characteristic zero, and by Strickland \cite{S} in arbitrary
characteristics. In this paper, we study the closures of double
classes $BwB$ in ${\mathbf X}$; we call them {\sl large Schubert varieties}.
\smallskip
These varieties are highly singular: by \cite[2.2]{B}, their singular
locus has codimension two, apart from trivial exceptions.
However, we show that large Schubert varieties are normal and
Cohen-Macaulay (Corollary \ref{sur} and Theorem \ref{cm1}). Further,
their Picard group is isomorphic to the weight lattice (Theorem
\ref{pic}).
\smallskip
Large Schubert varieties have an obvious relation to usual Schubert
varieties: the latter are quotients by $B$ of an open subset of the
former. A more hidden connexion arises by intersecting a large
Schubert variety $X$ with the unique closed $G\times G$-orbit $Y$ in
${\mathbf X}$. As $Y$ is isomorphic to $G/B\times G/B$ by \cite{S}, $X\cap Y$
is a union of Schubert varieties in $G/B\times G/B$.
\smallskip
The space $X\cap Y$ is generally reducible; its irreducible components
were described in \cite{B}, e.g. those of $\overline{B}\cap Y$ are
parametrized by the Weyl group. We show that the
scheme-theoretic intersection $X\cap Y$ is reduced and Cohen-Macaulay
(Corollaries \ref{reg}, \ref{cm2}). Together with a construction of
\cite{B}, this leads to a degeneration of the diagonal in
$G/B\times G/B$ into a union of Schubert varieties, and then to
formulae for the class of the diagonal in equivariant $K$-theory
(Theorem \ref{flat} and Corollary \ref{diag}).
\smallskip
Let ${\tilde B}$ be the preimage of $B$ in the simply-connected cover ${\tilde G}$
of $G$. Then the space of sections of each line bundle over a large
Schubert variety $X$ is a ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$-module, endowed with a
natural filtration by order of vanishing of sections along $Y$. We
decompose the associated graded into a direct sum of spaces of
sections of line bundles over $X\cap Y$; the latter
${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$-modules are indecomposable (Theorem \ref{fil}
and Corollary \ref{ind}). In the case where $X=\overline{B}$, these
modules can be seen as degenerations of induced ${\tilde G}$-modules, see
Corollary \ref{sep}.
\smallskip
As a consequence, we recover van der Kallen's filtration of the
affine algebra of ${\tilde B}$ \cite{vdK1} in a geometric way
(Theorem \ref{vdk}).
For this, consider regular functions on $B$ as rational functions on
its closure $\overline{B}$ with poles along the boundary. The factors of the
filtration by order of poles are spaces of sections of line bundles on
$\overline{B}\cap Y$. In particular, as a $B\times B$-module, the affine
algebra of $B$ admits a Schubert filtration in the sense of
\cite{P}. Filtering further by ordering the irreducible components of
$\overline{B}\cap Y$ gives back the filtration of \cite[1.13]{vdK1} for
$B$. This generalizes to regular functions over ${\tilde B}$, by decomposing
them into sums of sections of line bundles over $B$.
\smallskip
Our proofs rely on the method of Frobenius splitting:
following the approach of \cite{LT}, we show that ${\mathbf X}$ is
Frobenius split compatibly with all large Schubert varieties
(Theorem \ref{split}). The normality of large Schubert varieties
is a direct consequence of this fact: it is easy to see that they are
smooth in codimension one, and that their depth is at least two
(a regular sequence being provided by the ``boundary divisors'' of
${\mathbf X}$.)
\smallskip
The proof that large Schubert varieties are Cohen-Macaulay is
much more involved. As for usual Schubert varieties \cite{R1}, we
proceed by ascending induction on the dimension; but here the argument
begins with $\overline{B}$ (instead of the point) which is handled through its
intersection with $Y$. It would be interesting to obtain an
equivariant desingularization of $\overline{B}$; then the classical
construction of Bott-Samelson-Demazure would give equivariant
resolutions of all large Schubert varieties. The present work raises
many other questions, e.g. is there a standard monomial theory
for large Schubert varieties ?
\smallskip
One may also ask for extensions of our results to orbit closures of
Borel subgroups in complete symmetric varieties \cite{DP}, or, more
generally, in regular embeddings of spherical homogeneous spaces
\cite{B}. It turns out that closures of orbits of maximal rank are
normal, and that their intersection with any irreducible component of
the boundary is reduced; further, these intersections can be described
in terms of the Weyl group. But many orbit closures of smaller rank
are neither normal, nor Cohen-Macaulay (see \cite{K2} for the notion
of rank; all large Schubert varieties have maximal rank.) This will be
developed elsewhere.
\section{The canonical completion of a semisimple adjoint group}
We begin by introducing notation and recalling some properties
of group completions.
Let $G$ be a connected adjoint semisimple algebraic group over an
algebraically closed field $k$ of arbitrary characteristic. Let $B$
and $B^-$ be opposite Borel subgroups of $G$, with common torus
$T$. Let ${\mathcal X}$ be the character group of $T$; we identify
${\mathcal X}$ with the character groups of $B$ and $B^-$. Let $W$ be the
Weyl group of $T$, and let $\Phi$ be the root system of $(G,T)$ with
subsets of positive (resp. negative) roots $\Phi^+$, $\Phi^-$ defined
by $B$, $B^-$. Let $\Delta=\{\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_r\}$ be the set of
simple roots, where $r$ is the rank of $G$; let $s_1,\ldots, s_r\in W$
be the simple reflections. The corresponding length function on $W$ is
denoted by $\ell$. Let $w_0$ be the element of maximal length in
$W$. Set $N:=\ell(w_0)$, the number of positive roots.
We denote by ${\tilde G}$ the simply connected covering of $G$, and by
${\tilde B}$, ${\tilde T}$, $\ldots$ the preimages of $B$, $T$, $\ldots$
in ${\tilde G}$. The character group of ${\tilde T}$ is denoted by
$\tilde{\mathcal X}$; it is the weight lattice of $\Phi$ with basis the
set of fundamental weights $\omega_1,\ldots,\omega_r$.
The monoid generated by these weights is the set $\tilde{\mathcal X}^+$ of dominant
weights. Let $\leq$ denote the usual partial order on $\tilde{\mathcal X}$ defined by:
$\lambda\leq\mu$ if there exist non-negative integers $n_1,\ldots,n_r$
such that $\mu-\lambda= n_1\alpha_1+\cdots+n_r\alpha_r$.
\smallskip
By \cite{DP} and \cite{S}, $G$ admits a completion ${\mathbf X}$ satisfying
the following properties:
\noindent
(i) ${\mathbf X}$ is a smooth projective variety, and the action of
$G\times G$ on $G$ by left and right multiplication extends to
${\mathbf X}$.
\noindent
(ii) The boundary ${\mathbf X} - G$ is a union of $r$ smooth
irreducible divisors $D_1$, $\ldots$, $D_r$ with normal crossings.
\noindent
(iii) Each $G\times G$-orbit closure in ${\mathbf X}$ is the
transversal intersection of the boundary divisors which contain it.
\noindent
(iv) The intersection $D_1\cap\cdots\cap D_r := Y$ is the unique
closed $G\times G$-orbit in ${\mathbf X}$; it is isomorphic to
$G/B\times G/B$.
Further, any completion of $G$ satisfying (i), (ii) and (iii)
dominates ${\mathbf X}$, and any normal completion of $G$ with a unique closed
orbit is dominated by ${\mathbf X}$ (this follows from embedding theory of
homogeneous spaces, see \cite{K1}). We will call ${\mathbf X}$ the
{\it canonical completion} of $G$.
For $w\in W$, consider the double class $BwB$ in $G$, and its closure
in ${\mathbf X}$. We denote this closure by ${\mathbf X}(w)$, and we call it a
{\it large Schubert variety}. On the other hand, we denote by $S(w)$
the usual Schubert variety, that is, the closure in $G/B$ of $BwB/B$.
In other words, $S(w)$ is the image in $G/B$ of the intersection
${\mathbf X}(w)\cap G$.
The intersections of large Schubert varieties with
$G\times G$-orbits were studied in \cite[\S 2]{B}. In particular, we
have the following decomposition of
$$
Z(w):={\mathbf X}(w)\cap Y
$$
into irreducible components (which must be Schubert varieties in
$G/B\times G/B$):
$$
Z(w) = \bigcup_{\deuxind{x\in W}{\ell(wx)=\ell(w)+\ell(x)}}
S(wx)\times S(xw_0).
$$
For $w=1$ (the identity of $W$), we denote ${\mathbf X}(w)$ by $\overline{B}$, and
$Z(w)$ by $Z$. Then
$$
Z=\bigcup_{x\in W} S(x)\times S(xw_0).
$$
The large Schubert varieties of codimension one in ${\mathbf X}$ are
${\mathbf X}(w_0s_1),\ldots,{\mathbf X}(w_0s_r)$. They are the irreducible
$B\times B$-stable divisors in ${\mathbf X}$ which are not $G\times G$-stable,
or, equivalently, which do not contain $Y$. By
\cite[Proposition 4.4]{DS}, the divisor class group of ${\mathbf X}$ is freely
generated by the classes of ${\mathbf X}(w_0s_1),\ldots,{\mathbf X}(w_0s_r)$.
On the other hand, the line bundles on ${\mathbf X}$ are described in
\cite[\S 2]{S} (see also \cite[\S 4]{DS}). We now recall this
description; a generalization to large Schubert varieties will be
obtained in Section 3.
For $\lambda$ and $\mu$ in $\tilde{\mathcal X}$, let ${\mathcal L}_Y(\lambda,\mu)$ be the
corresponding homogeneous line bundle on $Y=G/B\times G/B$. The map
$(\lambda,\mu)\mapsto{\mathcal L}_Y(\lambda,\mu)$ identifies the Picard group
${\rm Pic}\;Y$ with $\tilde{\mathcal X}\times\tilde{\mathcal X}$. Now the
restriction $res_Y:{\rm Pic}\;{\mathbf X}\to{\rm Pic}\;Y$ is
injective, and its image consists of the ${\mathcal L}_Y(\lambda,-w_0\lambda)$,
for $\lambda\in\tilde{\mathcal X}$.
We denote by ${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda)$ the line bundle on ${\mathbf X}$ such that
$res_Y{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda)={\mathcal L}_Y(\lambda,-w_0\lambda)$. This identifies
${\rm Pic}\;{\mathbf X}$ with $\tilde{\mathcal X}$; we can index the boundary divisors
$D_1,\ldots, D_r$ so that the classes of the corresponding line
bundles are ${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\alpha_1),\ldots,{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\alpha_r)$. Then
each ${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\alpha_i)={\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}}(D_i)$ has a section $\sigma_i$ with
divisor $D_i$; this section is unique up to scalar multiplication.
Because ${\tilde G}$ is semisimple and simply connected, each line bundle
${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda)$ has a unique ${\tilde G}\times{\tilde G}$-linearization. Thus,
each space $H^0({\mathbf X},{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda))$ is a ${\tilde G}\times{\tilde G}$-module,
which we denote by $H^0({\mathbf X},\lambda)$. Similarly, we denote
$H^0(Y,{\mathcal L}_Y(\lambda,\mu))$ by $H^0(Y,\lambda,\mu)$. This
${\tilde G}\times{\tilde G}$-module
is isomorphic to $H^0(G/B,\lambda)\boxtimes H^0(G/B,\mu)$
where $\boxtimes$ denotes the external tensor product.
Observe that the section $\sigma_i$ of ${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\alpha_i)$ is
${\tilde G}\times{\tilde G}$-invariant. This is the starting point for an analysis
of the ${\tilde G}\times{\tilde G}$-module $H^0({\mathbf X},\lambda)$ for arbitrary
$\lambda$, see \cite[\S 2]{S}; the results will be generalized to
large Schubert varieties in Section 3. Here we will need the following
\begin{lemma}\label{div}
For any dominant weight $\lambda$, the line bundle
${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda)$ has a global section $\tau_{\lambda}$,
eigenvector of ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$ of weight $(-w_0\lambda,\lambda)$. This
section is unique up to scalar, and its divisor is
$$
\sum_{i=1}^r \langle\lambda,\alpha_i^{\vee}\rangle
{\mathbf X}(w_0s_i).
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By \cite[\S 4]{DS}, the line bundle on ${\mathbf X}$ associated with the
divisor ${\mathbf X}(w_0s_i)$ is ${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\omega_i)$. Let $\tau_i$ be the
canonical section of this line bundle; then $\tau_i$ is an
eigenvector of ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$, because its divisor ${\mathbf X}(w_0s_i)$ is
$B\times B$-stable. The closure in ${\tilde G}$ of ${\tilde B} w_0s_i{\tilde B}$ is the
divisor of a regular function on ${\tilde G}$, eigenvector of ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$ of
weight $(-w_0\omega_i,\omega_i)$, and unique up to scalar
multiplication. Thus, the weight of $\tau_i$ is
$(-w_0\omega_i,\omega_i)$. As the ${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\omega_i)$ generate the
Picard group of ${\mathbf X}$, the existence of $\tau_{\lambda}$ and the
formula for its divisor follow immediately. Finally, uniqueness of
$\tau_{\lambda}$ up to scalar is a consequence of the fact that
$B\times B$ has a dense orbit in ${\mathbf X}$.
\end{proof}
\section{Compatible Frobenius splitting and applications}
In the beginning of this section, we assume that $k$ has
characteristic $p>0$.
For a scheme $X$ over $k$, we denote by $F:X\to X$ the absolute
Frobenius morphism. Recall that $X$ is {\it Frobenius split} if the
map $F:{\mathcal O}_X\to F_*{\mathcal O}_X$ is split, that is, if there exists
$\sigma\in {\rm Hom}_{{\mathcal O}_X}(F_*{\mathcal O}_X,{\mathcal O}_X)$ such that
$\sigma\circ F$ is the identity. Let $Y\subseteq X$ be a closed
subscheme with ideal sheaf ${\mathcal I}_Y$; then a splitting $\sigma$ is
{\it compatible with} $Y$ if $\sigma(F_*{\mathcal I}_Y)$ is contained in ${\mathcal I}_Y$.
By \cite[\S 3]{S}, the canonical completion ${\mathbf X}$ is Frobenius split
compatibly with all $G\times G$-orbit closures. We will need the
following refinement of this result.
\begin{theorem}\label{split}
${\mathbf X}$ is Frobenius split compatibly with all $G\times G$-orbit
closures and all subvarieties ${\mathbf X}(w)$ and $(w_0,w_0){\mathbf X}(w)$, for $w\in W$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $St=H^0(G/B,(p-1)\rho)$ be the Steinberg module for ${\tilde G}$; it is a
simple, self-dual ${\tilde G}$-module \cite[II.2.5, II.3.18]{J}. On the other
hand, the line bundle ${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}((p-1)\rho)$ is
${\tilde G}\times{\tilde G}$-linearized by construction of ${\mathbf X}$, and the
${\tilde G}\times{\tilde G}$-module $H^0({\mathbf X},(p-1)\rho)$
contains an eigenvector of ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$ of weight $(p-1)(\rho,\rho)$,
unique up to scalar, by Lemma \ref{div}. Further, the image of this
eigenvector under restriction to $Y$ is non-zero, since no ${\mathbf X}(w_0s_i)$
contains $Y$. Using Frobenius reciprocity \cite[I.3.4]{J} and
self-duality of $St$, we obtain a ${\tilde G}\times{\tilde G}$-homomorphism
$$
f:St\boxtimes St \to H^0({\mathbf X},(p-1)\rho)
$$
such that the composition
$$
res_Y\circ f:St\boxtimes St\to H^0(Y,(p-1)(\rho,\rho))
$$
is non-zero. Since the ${\tilde G}\times{\tilde G}$-module
$H^0(Y,(p-1)(\rho,\rho))$ is isomorphic to $St\boxtimes St$, hence
simple, it follows that $res_Y\circ f$ is an isomorphism.
We thus obtain a ${\tilde G}\times {\tilde G}$-homomorphism
$$
f^2:(St\boxtimes St)^{\otimes 2}\to
H^0({\mathbf X},2(p-1)\rho),
$$
$$
x_1\boxtimes y_1\otimes x_2\boxtimes y_2\mapsto
f(x_1\boxtimes y_1)f(x_2\boxtimes y_2).
$$
Moreover, the composition
$$
res_Y\circ f^2:(St\boxtimes St)^{\otimes 2}\to
H^0(Y,2(p-1)(\rho,\rho))
$$
is surjective, because the product map
$$
H^0(Y,(p-1)(\rho,\rho))^{\otimes 2}\to H^0(Y,2(p-1)(\rho,\rho))
$$
is \cite[II.14.20]{J}. Now, by \cite[2.1,2.3]{LT}, there is a natural
${\tilde G}\times {\tilde G}$-isomorphism
$$
{\rm Hom}(F_*{\mathcal O}_Y,{\mathcal O}_Y) \buildrel\cong\over\longrightarrow
H^0(Y,2(p-1)(\rho,\rho))
$$
and there is a unique ${\tilde G}\times{\tilde G}$-homomorphism (up to a constant)
$$
\varphi:(St\boxtimes St)^{\otimes 2}\to
{\rm Hom}(F_*{\mathcal O}_Y,{\mathcal O}_Y).
$$
Further, for $a$ and $b$ in $St\boxtimes St$, the map
$\varphi(a\otimes b)$ is a splitting of $Y$ (up to a constant) if and
only if $\langle a,b\rangle\neq 0$ where
$\langle,\rangle$ is the ${\tilde G}\times{\tilde G}$-invariant bilinear form on
$St\boxtimes St$. Finally, if $a=s^{p-1}$ and $b=t^{p-1}$ for sections
$s$, $t$ of ${\mathcal L}_Y(\rho,\rho)$, then the zero subschemes $Z(s)$,
$Z(t)$ in $Y$ are compatibly $\varphi(a\otimes b)$-split.
Because $res_Y\circ f^2$ is a surjective
${\tilde G}\times {\tilde G}$-homomorphism, we can identify it with $\varphi$. Let
$v_+$ (resp. $v_-$) be a highest (resp. lowest) weight vector in
$H^0(G/B,\rho)$. Set $s:=v_+\boxtimes v_+$, $t:=v_-\boxtimes v_-$,
$a:=s^{p-1}$ and $b:=t^{p-1}$. Then $a$, $b$ are in $St\boxtimes St$
and they satisfy $\langle a,b\rangle\neq 0$. Thus,
$res_Y\circ f^2(a\otimes b)$ splits $Y$ compatibly with $Z(s)$
and $Z(t)$.
Set $\tau:=\varphi(a\otimes b)$ and consider
$$
\sigma:=\tau\prod_{i=1}^r \sigma_i^{p-1},
$$
a global section of
${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}((p-1)(2\rho+\sum_{i=1}^r\alpha_i))$. Recall from
\cite[\S3]{S} that the
canonical sheaf of ${\mathbf X}$ is
$$
\omega_{\mathbf X}={\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(-2\rho-\sum_{i=1}^r\alpha_i).
$$
Thus,
$\sigma\in\Gamma({\mathbf X},\omega_{\mathbf X}^{1-p})
\simeq{\rm Hom}_{{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}}}(F_*{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}},{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}})$.
By \cite[Th. 3.1]{S}, $\sigma$ splits ${\mathbf X}$
compatibly with $D_1,\ldots,D_r$.
Set $\tau_+=f(v_+^{p-1}\boxtimes v_+^{p-1})$ and
$\tau_-=f(v_-^{p-1}\boxtimes v_-^{p-1})$. Then $\tau_+$ and
$\tau_-$ are in $H^0({\mathbf X},(p-1)\rho)$, and $\tau_+$ (resp.
$\tau_-$) is an eigenvector of ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$
(resp. ${\tilde B}^-\times{\tilde B}^-$) of weight $(p-1)(\rho,\rho)$
(resp. $-(p-1)(\rho,\rho)$). By Lemma \ref{div}, we have
$$
{\rm div}(\tau_{\pm})=(p-1){\mathbf X}_{\pm}
$$
where ${\mathbf X}_+$ is the sum of the classes of the ${\mathbf X}(w_0s_i)$
over all simple reflections $s_i$, and
${\mathbf X}_-=(w_0,w_0){\mathbf X}_+$. Thus, $\sigma$ splits ${\mathbf X}$ compatibly with
${\mathbf X}_+$ and ${\mathbf X}_-$.
This implies the theorem, as in the proof of
\cite[Th. 3.5(i)]{R1}. Namely, one uses \cite[Lemma 1.11]{R1} and the
fact that each ${\mathbf X}(w)$ is an irreducible component of an iterated
intersection of irreducible components of ${\mathbf X}_+$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{sur} Let $char(k)$ be arbitrary.
\noindent (i) For any dominant weight $\lambda$ and for any
intersection $X$ of large Schubert varieties and of boundary divisors,
the restriction map
$$
res_X:H^0({\mathbf X},\lambda)\to H^0(X,\lambda)
$$
is surjective. Further, $H^i(X,\lambda)=0$ for $i\geq 1$.
\smallskip\noindent (ii) Any intersection of large
Schubert varieties and of boundary divisors is reduced.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Let us prove (i). Since the divisor ${\mathbf X}_+$ is ample,
this is a consequence of \cite[Proposition 1.13(ii)]{R2} when
$char(k) = p > 0$. Moreover, since $G$, $B$ are defined over ${\mathbb Z}$, it
follows from the construction of ${\mathbf X}$ (\cite{S}) that ${\mathbf X}$, the
boundary divisors $D_i$ and the large Schubert varieties ${\mathbf X}(w)$ are
all defined and flat over some open subset of
${\rm Spec}\;{\mathbb Z}$ (in fact, they are defined over ${\mathbb Z}[1/2]$ by
\cite{DS}.) Therefore, by the semicontinuity theorem, (i)
holds in characteristic zero as well.
Moreover, by the proof of \cite[Th. 3]{R1}, (ii) follows (in
arbitrary characteristic) from Theorem \ref{split}.
\end{proof}
For $1\leq i\leq r$, multiplication by $\sigma_i$ (a section of
${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\alpha_i)$ with divisor $D_i$) defines an exact sequence
$$
0\to{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}}(-D_i)\to{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}}\to{\mathcal O}_{D_i}\to 0.
$$
Because $Y$ is the transversal intersection of $D_1,\ldots, D_r$, the
image of the map
$$
(\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_r):\bigoplus_{i=1}^r{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}}(-D_i)\to{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}}
$$
is the ideal sheaf ${\mathcal I}_Y$.
\begin{corollary}\label{reg} Again, let $char(k)$ be arbitrary.
\noindent
(i) The ideal sheaf of the set-theoretic intersection
$Z(w)={\mathbf X}(w)\cap Y$ in ${\mathbf X}(w)$ is generated by the image of
$(\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_r)$.
\noindent
(ii) $\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_r$ form a regular sequence in ${\mathbf X}(w)$.
\noindent
(iii) ${\mathbf X}(w)$ is normal.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
By Corollary \ref{sur}, the scheme-theoretic intersection
${\mathbf X}(w)\cap Y$ is reduced; this is equivalent to (i).
For (ii), we have to check that the image of each $\sigma_j$ in
${\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}/(\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_{j-1})$ is not a
zero divisor. But the scheme-theoretic intersection
$$
{\mathbf X}(w)\cap\bigcap_{i=1}^{j-1} D_i:={\mathbf X}(w)_{<j}
$$
is reduced. Further, by \cite[Th. 2.1]{B}, each irreducible
component of ${\mathbf X}(w)_{<j}$ has codimension $j-1$ in ${\mathbf X}(w)$, and is
not contained in $D_j$. Thus, the restriction of $\sigma_j$ to
${\mathbf X}(w)_{<j}$ does not vanish on any such component. It follows that
$\sigma_j$ is not a zero divisor in
${\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}(w)_{<j}}={\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}/(\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_{j-1})$.
For (iii), observe that ${\mathbf X}(w)\cap G$ is smooth in codimension
one, as the preimage in $G$ of a Schubert variety in
$G/B$ (this goes back to Chevalley \cite[Cor., p. 10]{C}.)
Further, the intersection ${\mathbf X}(w)\cap D_i$ is reduced for
$1\leq i\leq r$, so that each irreducible component of this
intersection contains smooth points of ${\mathbf X}(w)$. Thus, ${\mathbf X}(w)$ is
smooth in codimension one (this also follows from
\cite[Cor. 2.1]{B}.) By Serre's criterion, it is enough to prove that
${\mathbf X}(w)$ has depth at least two.
Because $B\times B$ acts on ${\mathbf X}(w)$ with finitely many orbits and a
unique fixed point $y$ (the base point of $Y=G/B\times G/B$), it
suffices to prove that ${\bf X}(w)$ has depth at least two at
$y$. This is clear if $r\geq 2$, because the local equations of
$D_1,\ldots,D_r$ at $y$ form a regular sequence in the local ring
${\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}(w),y}$. On the other hand, if $r=1$ then each ${\mathbf X}(w)$ is
smooth. We have indeed ${\tilde G}={\rm SL}(2)$, $G={\rm PGL}(2)$, and $X$
is the projectivization of the space of $2\times 2$ matrices where $G$
acts by left and right multiplication. So ${\mathbf X}(w)$ is either ${\mathbf X}$ or
the projectivization of the subspace of upper triangular matrices.
\end{proof}
\section{Line bundles on large Schubert varieties}\label{section-pic}
In this section, we describe the Picard group of large Schubert
varieties, and the spaces of global sections of line bundles on these
varieties.
\begin{theorem}\label{pic}
For any $w\in W$, the restriction map
$$
res_{{\mathbf X}(w)}:{\rm Pic}\;{\mathbf X}\to{\rm Pic}\;{\mathbf X}(w)
$$
is bijective. Further, the line bundle
${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda)$ is generated by its global sections
$($resp. ample$)$ if and only if $\lambda$ is dominant
$($resp. dominant regular$)$.
\end{theorem}
\noindent
{\sc Remarks.} 1) We will see in Corollary \ref{effective} that
${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda)$ admits nontrivial global sections if and only
if $\lambda$ is in the monoid generated by all simple roots and
fundamental weights.
\noindent
2) It is proved in \cite[\S 2]{S} that ${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(2\lambda)$ is very
ample for any regular dominant $\lambda$. In fact, one can check that
${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda)$ is already very ample, using Corollary \ref{sur}.
\smallskip
\begin{proof}
We will use the duality between line bundles and curves:
each closed curve $C$ in ${\mathbf X}(w)$ defines an additive map
${\rm Pic}\;{\mathbf X}(w)\to{\mathbb Z}, L\mapsto (L\cdot C)$ where $(L\cdot C)$ is
the degree of the restriction of $L$ to $C$. In fact, $(L\cdot C)$
only depends on the classes of $L$ and $C$ up to rational
equivalence. Further, $C$ is rationally equivalent to a positive
integral combination of closed irreducible $B\times B$-stable curves
\cite{FMSS}.
Examples of such curves are the ``Schubert curves''
$C(\alpha_i):=S(s_i)\times S(1)$ and
$C'(\alpha_i):=S(1)\times S(s_i)$ in $G/B\times G/B$.
Note that
$$
({\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda)\cdot C(\alpha_i)) =
({\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda)\cdot C'(\alpha_i))=
\langle\lambda,\alpha_i^\vee\rangle
$$
for all $\lambda\in\tilde{\mathcal X}$. We first show the following
\begin{lemma}\label{curves}
The closed irreducible $B\times B$-stable curves in ${\mathbf X}$ are the
$C(\alpha_i)$ and $C'(\alpha_i)$ for $1\leq i\leq r$. They are
contained in $\overline{B}$. Further, each $C(\alpha_i)$ is rationally
equivalent in $\overline{B}$ to $C'(-w_0\alpha_i)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The first assertion follows from the description of all
$B\times B$-orbits in ${\mathbf X}$ given in \cite[2.1]{B}. And as
$\overline{B}\cap Y$ contains both $S(w_0)\times S(1)$ and
$S(1)\times S(w_0)$, it contains the $C(\alpha_i)$ and
$C'(\alpha_i)$.
For the latter assertion, we begin by the case where
$G={\rm PGL}(2)$. Then we saw that ${\mathbf X}={\mathbb P}^3$ and
$\overline{B}={\mathbb P}^2$. Further, $Y$ is a smooth quadric in ${\mathbb P}^3$, and
both $C(\alpha)$, $C'(-w_0\alpha)$ are embedded lines. Thus, they
are rationally equivalent in ${\mathbb P}^2$.
The general case reduces to the previous one, as follows. Set
$X_i:=\cap_{j\neq i}D_j$, then $X_i$ is the closure of a unique
$G\times G$-orbit $X_i^0$ in $X$. Let $P_i$ be the parabolic subgroup
generated by $B$ and $s_i$; let $Q_i$ be the opposite parabolic
subgroup containing $B^-$, and let $L_i$ be their common Levi
subgroup. Then the $G\times G$-variety $X_i$ fibers equivariantly over
$G/P_i\times G/Q_i$, with fiber the canonical completion of the
adjoint group $L_i/Z(L_i)$ (this follows e.g. from
\cite[Th. 3.16]{DS}). This group is isomorphic to ${\rm PGL}(2)$.
Set $w_0Q_iw_0:=P_j$, the parabolic subgroup generated by $B$ and
$w_0s_iw_0$. Now $X_i$ fibers equivariantly over $G/P_i\times G/P_j$
and the fiber over the base point is a closed $B\times B$-stable
subvariety $F_i$ of $X_i$, isomorphic to ${\mathbb P}^3$. Restricting this
fibration to $Y\subset X_i$, we obtain the canonical map
$G/B\times G/B\to G/P_i\times G/P_j$. Thus, $F_i$ contains both
$C(\alpha_i)=P_i/B \times B/B$ and $C(-w_0\alpha_i)=B/B\times P_j/B$.
Further, $B\times B$ has a unique closed orbit ${\mathcal O}_i$ in
$X_i^0$; and ${\mathcal O}_i$ is contained in $F_i\cap\overline{B}$ (because $\overline{B}$ meets
all $G\times G$-orbits). Thus, the closure of ${\mathcal O}_i$ in $X_i$ is
isomorphic to ${\mathbb P}^2$, and contains both $C(\alpha_i)$ and
$C'(-w_0\alpha_i)$ as embedded lines.
\end{proof}
We return to the proof of Theorem \ref{pic}.
For injectivity, let $\lambda$ be a weight such that the restriction of
${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda)$ to ${\mathbf X}(w)$ is trivial. Then the restriction of
${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda)$ to each $C(\alpha_i)$ is trivial. It follows that
$\langle\lambda,\alpha_i^\vee\rangle = 0$ for $1\leq i\leq r$,
and that $\lambda=0$.
For surjectivity, we first prove that the abelian group
${\rm Pic}\;{\mathbf X}(w)$ is free of finite rank. For this, we identify
${\rm Pic}\;{\mathbf X}(w)$ to the group of all Cartier divisors on ${\mathbf X}(w)$
up to rational equivalence (this holds because ${\mathbf X}(w)$ is normal.)
Let $y$ be the $B\times B$-fixed point of $Y$. Let ${\mathbf X}_y$ be the set
of all $x\in{\mathbf X}$ such that the orbit closure $\overline{(T\times T)x}$
contains $y$. Then ${\mathbf X}_y$ is an open affine $T\times T$-stable subset
of ${\mathbf X}$, containing $y$ as its unique closed $T\times T$-orbit (it is
the image under $(1,w_0)$ of the affine chart ${\mathcal V}$ defined in
\cite[\S 2]{S}.) Because $y\in{\mathbf X}(w)$, the intersection
${\mathbf X}(w)\cap{\mathbf X}_y:={\mathbf X}(w)_y$ is a non-empty open affine
$T\times T$-stable subset of ${\mathbf X}(w)$, containing $y$ as its unique
closed $T\times T$-orbit. It follows that the Picard group of
${\mathbf X}(w)_y$ is trivial (because ${\mathbf X}(w)$ is normal), and also that any
regular invertible function on ${\mathbf X}(w)_y$ is constant. Therefore, any
Cartier divisor on ${\mathbf X}(w)$ is rationally equivalent to a unique
Cartier divisor with support in the complement
${\mathbf X}(w)\setminus{\mathbf X}(w)_y$. Now the abelian group of Weil divisors with
support in ${\mathbf X}(w)\setminus{\mathbf X}(w)_y$ is free of finite rank.
We now prove that any Cartier divisor $D$ on ${\mathbf X}(w)$ which is
numerically equivalent to zero (that is, $(D\cdot C)=0$ for each
closed curve $C$ in ${\mathbf X}(w)$) is rationally equivalent to
zero. Indeed, by \cite[19.3.3]{F}, there exists a positive integer $m$
such that $mD$ is algebraically equivalent to zero. But algebraic and
rational equivalence coincide for Cartier divisors on ${\mathbf X}(w)$, by
freeness of ${\rm Pic}\;{\mathbf X}(w)$ and \cite[19.1.2]{F}. Thus, the class
of $mD$ in ${\rm Pic}\;{\mathbf X}(w)$ is zero, and we conclude by freeness of
${\rm Pic}\;{\mathbf X}(w)$ again.
For a line bundle $L$ on ${\mathbf X}(w)$, define a weight $\lambda$ by
$$
\lambda:=(L\cdot C(\alpha_1))\omega_1+\cdots+
(L\cdot C(\alpha_r))\omega_r,
$$
so that $(L\cdot C(\alpha_i))=({\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda)\cdot C(\alpha_i))$
for $1\leq i\leq r$. By Lemma \ref{curves}, it follows that
$(L\cdot C)=({\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda)\cdot C)$ for all closed curves $C$
in ${\mathbf X}(w)$. By the previous step, $L$ is isomorphic to
$res_{{\mathbf X}(w)}{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda)$. This proves
that ${\rm Pic}\;{\mathbf X} \cong {\rm Pic}\;{\mathbf X}(w)$.
For the remaining assertions of Theorem \ref{pic},
let $L={\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda)$ be a line bundle on ${\mathbf X}$ such
that $res_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(L)$ is generated by its global sections
(resp. ample). Then $(L\cdot C)\geq 0$ (resp. $>0$) for any closed
curve $C$ in ${\mathbf X}(w)$.
Applying this to the curves $C(\alpha_i)$, one obtains that
$\lambda$ is dominant (resp. dominant regular).
Conversely, for dominant $\lambda$, the line bundle
${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda)$ admits a global section $\sigma_{\lambda}$ which
does not vanish identically on $Y$, by Lemma \ref{div}. Thus, the
${\tilde G}\times{\tilde G}$-translates of $\sigma_{\lambda}$ generate
${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda)$.
If moreover $\lambda$ is regular, then ${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda)$ is ample
by \cite[\S 2]{S}.
\end{proof}
\medskip
For any weight $\lambda$, the space
$$
H^0({\mathbf X}(w),{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda)):=H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda)
$$
is a finite-dimensional ${\tilde B}\times {\tilde B}$-module. Its
${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$-submodules
$$
H^0({\mathbf X}(w),{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda)\otimes{\mathcal I}_{Z(w)}^n)
:=F_nH^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda)
$$
(where $n\in{\mathbb N}$) form a decreasing filtration, which we call the
{\it canonical filtration}.
Since $H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda)$ is finite dimensional and since
$\bigcap_{n\geq 0} F_nH^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda) = 0$, this filtration is
finite, that is, there exists an integer $n_0(\lambda)$ such that
$F_nH^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda) = 0$ for $n > n_0(\lambda)$.
Let ${\mathbf n}=(n_1,\ldots,n_r)\in{\mathbb N}^r$
and let $|{\mathbf n}| = n_1+\cdots+n_r$. Then
multiplication by the section $\sigma_1^{n_1}\cdots \sigma_r^{n_r}$
defines a map
$$
\sigma^{{\mathbf n}}:H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda-n_1\alpha_1-\cdots-n_r\alpha_r)\to
H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda).
$$
Because each $\sigma_i$ is ${\tilde G}\times {\tilde G}$-invariant and non identically
zero on ${\mathbf X}(w)$, this map is injective and
${\tilde B}\times {\tilde B}$-equivariant. Let $F_{{\mathbf n}}H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda)$ be
the image of $\sigma^{{\mathbf n}}$; it is a ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$-submodule of
$F_n H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda)$, where $n = |{\mathbf n}|$.
\begin{theorem}\label{fil}
With notation as above, we have
$$
F_n H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda)=
\sum_{ \deuxind{{\mathbf n}\in{\mathbb N}^r}{|{\mathbf n}| = n} }
F_{{\mathbf n}}H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda)
$$
Further, the $n$-th layer of the associated graded module satisfies
$$
gr_n H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda)=\bigoplus_{(n_1,\ldots,n_r)}
H^0(Z(w),\lambda-n_1\alpha_1-\cdots-n_r\alpha_r),
$$
the sum being taken
over all $(n_1,\ldots,n_r)\in{\mathbb N}^r$ such that $n_1+\cdots+n_r=n$
and that $\lambda-n_1\alpha_1-\cdots-n_r\alpha_r$ is dominant.
In particular,
$$
gr H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda)=
\bigoplus_{ \deuxind{\mu\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+}{\mu\leq\lambda} }
H^0(Z(w),\mu).
$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
{F}rom the exact sequence of sheaves on ${\mathbf X}(w)$:
$$
0\to {\mathcal I}_{Z(w)}^{n+1}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda)
\to{\mathcal I}_{Z(w)}^n\otimes{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda)
\to{\mathcal I}_{Z(w)}^n/{\mathcal I}_{Z(w)}^{n+1}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda)
\to 0,
$$
we see that $gr_n H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda)$ injects into
$H^0(Z(w),
{\mathcal I}_{Z(w)}^n/{\mathcal I}_{Z(w)}^{n+1}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda))$.
The latter is equal to
$$
\bigoplus_{n_1+\cdots+n_r=n}
H^0(Z(w),\lambda-n_1\alpha_1-\cdots-n_r\alpha_r).
$$
We have indeed
$$
{\mathcal I}_{Z(w)}^n/{\mathcal I}_{Z(w)}^{n+1} = \bigoplus_{n_1+\cdots+n_r=n}
{\mathcal L}_{Z(w)}(-n_1\alpha_1-\ldots-n_r\alpha_r)
\cdot \sigma_1^{n_1}\cdots \sigma_r^{n_r}
$$
because ${\mathcal I}_{Z(w)}$ is generated by the regular sequence
$(\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_r)$ by Corollary \ref{reg}. We now need the
following
\begin{lemma}\label{dom}
For a weight $\mu$, the following conditions are equivalent:
\noindent
(i) $\mu$ is dominant.
\noindent
(ii) $H^0(Z(w),\mu)$ is nonzero.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
(i)$\Rightarrow$(ii) If $\mu$ is dominant, then the restriction to $Y$
of ${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\mu)$ is generated by its global sections.
(ii)$\Rightarrow$(i) Recall that
$$
Z(w)=\bigcup_{ \deuxind{x\in W}{\ell(wx)=\ell(w)+\ell(x)} }
S(wx)\times S(xw_0),
$$
and that the restriction of ${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\mu)$ to $Y$ is equal to
${\mathcal L}_Y(\mu,-w_0\mu)$. Thus, there exists $w\in W$ such that both
$H^0(S(wx),\mu)$ and $H^0(S(xw_0),-w_0\mu)$ are non-zero. But
$H^0(S(wx),\mu)\neq 0$ implies that
$\langle\mu,\check\alpha\rangle\geq 0$ for each $\alpha\in\Delta$ such
that $wx\alpha\in\Phi^-$;
this follows from \cite[Cor. 2.3]{P}, see also \cite{Da}.
Similarly, $H^0(S(xw_0),-w_0\mu)\neq 0$ implies that
$\langle -w_0\mu,\check\beta\rangle\geq 0$ for each $\beta\in\Delta$
such that $xw_0\beta\in\Phi^-$.
Since $-w_0$ permutes the simple roots, the latter is equivalent to
$\langle\mu,\check\alpha\rangle\geq 0$ for each $\alpha\in\Delta$ such
that $x\alpha\in\Phi^+$.
Now, for each $\alpha\in\Delta$, we have either
$x\alpha\in\Phi^+$ or $wx\alpha\in\Phi^-$, because
$\ell(wx)=\ell(w)+\ell(x)$.
\end{proof}
Returning to the proof of Theorem \ref{fil},
let $\mu=\lambda-n_1\alpha_1-\cdots-n_r\alpha_r$ such that the space
$H^0(Z(w),\mu)$ is nonzero. Then $\mu$ is dominant by
Lemma \ref{dom}. By Corollary \ref{sur}, the restriction
$$
H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\mu)\to H^0(Z(w),\mu)
$$
is surjective; therefore, the restriction
$$
F_{{\mathbf n}} H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda)\to
H^0(Z(w),\lambda-n_1\alpha_1-\cdots-n_r\alpha_r)
$$
is surjective. It follows that, firstly,
$$
gr_n H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda) \cong \bigoplus_{(n_1,\ldots,n_r)}
H^0(Z(w),\lambda-n_1\alpha_1-\cdots-n_r\alpha_r),
$$
where the sum is taken
over all $(n_1,\ldots,n_r)\in{\mathbb N}^r$ such that $n_1+\cdots+n_r=n$
and that $\lambda-n_1\alpha_1-\cdots-n_r\alpha_r$ is dominant,
and, secondly, that $F_{{\mathbf n}} H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda)$ is equal to
$$
\sum_{n_1+\cdots+n_r=n}F_{(n_1,\ldots,n_r)}H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda)
+ F_{n+1}H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda).
$$
Since $F_{n+1}H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda) = 0$ for $n\gg 0$,
this implies our statements.
\end{proof}
In particular, one obtains the following
\begin{corollary}\label{effective}
${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda)$ admits a nonzero global section if and only if
$\lambda$ belongs to the monoid generated by $\Delta$ and $\tilde{\mathcal X}^+$.
\end{corollary}
Consider now the space
$$
R(w):=\bigoplus_{\lambda\in\tilde{\mathcal X}} H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda).
$$
Then $R(w)$ is a ring, with a grading by $\tilde{\mathcal X}$.
By Theorem \ref{pic}, $R(w)$ can be seen as the
multihomogeneous coordinate ring of ${\mathbf X}(w)$. Observe that
$\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_r$ are homogeneous elements of $R(w)$ of
degrees $\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_r$.
We define similarly
$$
A(w):=\bigoplus H^0(Z(w),\mu)
$$
(sum over all weights $\mu$, or, equivalently, over all dominant
weights by Lemma \ref{dom}). Then $A(w)$ is the multihomogeneous
coordinate ring over $Z(w)$, a union of Schubert varieties
in $G/B \times G/B$.
\begin{corollary}\label{ring}
The ring $R(w)$ is generated by its subspaces $H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\omega_i)$
$(1\leq i\leq r)$, together with $\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_r$. The
latter form a regular sequence in $R(w)$, and the quotient
$R(w)/(\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_r)$ is isomorphic to $A(w)$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
The canonical filtrations of the $H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda)$ fit
together into a filtration $(F_n R(w))$ of $R(w)$. Theorem \ref{fil}
implies that
$$
F_n R(w) = (\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_r)^n
$$
(the $n$-th power of the ideal generated by
$\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_r$) and that
$$
F_n R(w)/F_{n+1} R(w) =
\bigoplus_{ \deuxind{n_1+\ldots+n_r=n}{\mu\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+} }
\sigma_1^{n_1}\cdots\sigma_r^{n_r} H^0(Z(w),\mu)
$$
Thus, the associated graded ring is isomorphic to the polynomial
ring $A(w)[t_1,\ldots,t_r]$. By \cite[1.1.15]{BH}
$\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_r$ form a regular
sequence in $R(w)$. Further, by \cite[II.14.15, II.14.21]{J}, the graded
ring $A(w)$ is a quotient of $\bigoplus_{\mu} H^0(Y,\mu)$, and the
latter ring is generated by its subspaces $H^0(Y,\omega_i)$. So $R(w)$
is generated by $\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_r$ and the
$H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\omega_i)$ (which lift the $H^0(Z(w),\omega_i)$.)
\end{proof}
We will show in Section 7 that the rings $R(w)$ and $A(w)$ are
Cohen-Macaulay.
\section{The van der Kallen filtration}
In this section, we construct geometrically van der Kallen's
filtration of the ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$-module $k[{\tilde B}]$ (the ring of regular
functions on ${\tilde B}$), see \cite[Th. 1.13]{vdK1}. For this, we first
obtain a coarser filtration whose layers are spaces of global sections
of line bundles over $\overline{B}\cap Y=Z$. In particular, $k[{\tilde B}]$ admits a
Schubert filtration as defined in \cite[2.8]{P} (see also
\cite[6.3.4]{vdK2}).
For $\mu\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+$, we set
$$
H^0(Z,\mu):=M(\mu).
$$
Then $M(\mu)$ is a finite dimensional ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$-module. By
Theorem \ref{fil}, each ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$-module $H^0(\overline{B},\lambda)$
has a filtration with layers $M(\mu)$ where $\mu\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+$ and
$\mu\leq\lambda$.
We will need more notation on ${\tilde B}$-modules, taken from \cite{vdK1}.
Let $\nu$ be a weight; then there exist a unique $w=w_{min}\in W$
and a unique dominant weight $\mu$ such that $\nu=w\mu$ and that
the length of $w$ is minimal. Set
$$
P(\nu):=H^0(S(w_{min}),\mu) \text{ and }
Q(\nu):=H^0(S(w_{min}),{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w_{min})}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(\mu))
$$
where $\partial S(w)$ denotes the boundary of $S(w)$, that is, the
complement of its open $B$-orbit $BwB/B$. Then both $P(\nu)$ and
$Q(\nu)$ are finite dimensional ${\tilde B}$-modules.
\begin{theorem}\label{vdk}
(i) The ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$-module $k[{\tilde B}]$ has a canonical increasing
filtration by finite dimensional submodules, with associated graded
$$
\bigoplus_{\mu\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+} M(\mu).
$$
\noindent
(ii) For any $\mu\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+$, the ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$-module
$M(\mu)$ has a filtration with associated graded
$$
\bigoplus_{\nu\in W\mu} P(\nu)\boxtimes Q(-\nu).
$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Set $\Gamma = \tilde{\mathcal X}/{\mathcal X}$. For $\gamma\in\Gamma$, let
$k[{\tilde B}]_{\gamma}$ be the sum of ${\tilde T}$-weight spaces in $k[{\tilde B}]$ (for
the right ${\tilde T}$-action) over all weights in the coset $\gamma$. Then
each $k[{\tilde B}]_{\gamma}$ is a ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$-submodule of $k[{\tilde B}]$, and
we have
$$
k[{\tilde B}] = \bigoplus_{\gamma\in\Gamma} k[{\tilde B}]_{\gamma}.
$$
Further, the $k[B]$-module $k[{\tilde B}]_{\gamma}$ is freely generated by
any $B$-eigenvector.
Choose $\gamma\in\Gamma$ and a dominant weight $\lambda$ in the coset
$\gamma$. By Theorem \ref{fil}, $H^0(\overline{B},\lambda)$ contains a
submodule isomorphic to $M(\nu)$, for some
$\nu\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+ \cap \gamma$. Thus, $H^0(\overline{B},\lambda)$ contains a right
${\tilde B}$-eigenvector $v_\nu$ of weight $\nu$, and one deduces that
$$
H^0(B,{\mathcal L}_{\overline{B}}(\lambda)) \cong k[B]\, v_{\nu} = k[{\tilde B}]_{\gamma}.
$$
Now, let us filter $k[{\tilde B}]_{\gamma}$ by the order of pole along the
boundary of $\overline{B}$. Specifically, consider the section
$\sigma:=\sigma_1\cdots\sigma_r$ of ${\mathcal L}_{\overline{B}}(\beta)$, where
$\beta=\alpha_1+\cdots+\alpha_r$. Then $\sigma$ is invariant by
${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$, and its zero set is the boundary $\overline{B}-B$. Therefore,
the ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$-module $k[{\tilde B}]_{\gamma}=H^0(B,{\mathcal L}_{\overline{B}}(\lambda))$
is the increasing union of its finite dimensional submodules
$$
\sigma^{-n} H^0(\overline{B},\lambda+n\beta)
$$
for $n\geq 0$. The associated graded of this filtration satisfies
$$
gr^n k[{\tilde B}]_{\lambda} \cong
H^0(\overline{B},\lambda+n\beta)/\sigma H^0(\overline{B},\lambda+(n-1)\beta).
$$
Let $R$ be the multihomogeneous coordinate ring on $\overline{B}$, then
$\sigma\in R_{\beta}$ and
$$
gr^n k[{\tilde B}]_{\lambda} \cong
R_{\lambda+n\beta}/\sigma R_{\lambda+(n-1)\beta}=
(R/\sigma R)_{\lambda+n\beta}.
$$
Consider the decreasing filtration of $R/\sigma R$, image of
the filtration of $R$ by the ideals
$(\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_r)^m R$. As $\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_r$
form a homogeneous regular sequence in $R$, the associated graded of
$R/\sigma R$ satisfies
$$
gr_m R/\sigma R=
\bigoplus_{\deuxind{m_1+\cdots+m_r=m}{m_1\cdots m_r=0}}
\sigma_1^{m_1}\cdots \sigma_r^{m_r} A
$$
where $A$ is the multihomogeneous coordinate ring of $Z$. Taking
homogeneous components of degree $\lambda+n\beta$, we see that
each $gr^n k[{\tilde B}]_{\lambda}$ has a
finite decreasing filtration with associated graded
$$
\bigoplus_{\deuxind{(m_1,\ldots,m_r)\in{\mathbb N}^r}
{\lambda+n\beta-m_1\alpha_1-m_r\alpha_r\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+}}
M(\lambda+n\beta-m_1\alpha_1-m_r\alpha_r).
$$
Reordering the indices, we obtain a canonical increasing filtration of
$k[{\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}]$ satisfying the requirements of (i).
For (ii), recall that the irreducible components of $Z$ are exactly
the $S(w)\times S(ww_0)$ for $w\in W$. We first construct an
increasing filtration of $Z$ by partial unions of these components, as
follows. Choose an indexing
$W=\{w_1,\ldots,w_M\}$ which is compatible with the Bruhat-Chevalley
order, that is, $i\leq j$ if $w_i\leq w_j$. In particular, $w_1=1$ and
$w_M=w_0$. Set
$$
Z_i:=S(w_i)\times S(w_iw_0),~Z_{\geq i}:=\bigcup_{j\geq i}Z_j,~
Z_{>i}=\bigcup_{j>i} Z_j.
$$
Then we have the following
\begin{lemma}\label{int}
$Z_i\cap Z_{>i}=S(w_i)\times\partial S(w_iw_0)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $x$, $y$ in $W$ such that $S(x)\times S(yw_0)\subseteq Z_i$, that
is, $x\leq w_i\leq y$. If moreover
$S(x)\times S(yw_0)\subseteq Z_{>i}$, then $w_j\leq y$ for some
$j>i$. It follows that $y\neq w_i$, so that
$Z_i\cap Z_{>i}\subseteq S(w_i)\times \partial S(w_iw_0).$
For the opposite inclusion, let $y\in W$ such that
$S(yw_0)\subset\partial S(w_iw_0)$, that is, $y>w_i$. Then $y=w_j$ for
some $j>i$. Thus, $S(w_i)\times S(yw_0)\subseteq S(y)\times S(yw_0)$
is contained in $Z_i\cap Z_{>i}$.
\end{proof}
Returning to the proof of Theorem \ref{vdk}, let ${\mathcal I}_i$ be the ideal
sheaf of $Z_{>i}$ in $Z_{\geq i}$. Then ${\mathcal I}_i$ identifies to the
ideal sheaf of $Z_i\cap Z_{>i}$ in $Z_i$. By definition, we have an exact
sequence of sheaves of ${\mathcal O}_Z$-modules:
$0\to {\mathcal I}_i \to {\mathcal O}_{Z_{\geq i}} \to {\mathcal O}_{Z_{>i}} \to 0$. Thus, the
sequence
$$
0\to{\mathcal I}_i\otimes{\mathcal L}_Z(\mu)\to{\mathcal L}_{Z_{\geq i}}(\mu)\to{\mathcal L}_{Z_{>i}}(\mu)
\to 0
$$
is exact. Further, $H^1(Z_{\geq i},{\mathcal L}_Z(\mu))=0$ as $Z_{\geq i}$ is
a union of Schubert varieties in $Y$, and $\mu$ is dominant.
So we obtain an exact sequence
$$
0\to H^0(Z_{\geq i},{\mathcal I}_i\otimes{\mathcal L}_Z(\mu)) \to
H^0(Z_{\geq i},\mu) \to H^0(Z_{> i},\mu) \to 0.
$$
Now Lemma \ref{int} implies that
$$\displaylines{
H^0(Z_{\geq i},{\mathcal I}_i\otimes{\mathcal L}_Z(\mu))
=H^0(Z_i,{\mathcal I}_i\otimes{\mathcal L}_Z(\mu))
\hfill\cr\hfill
=H^0(S(w_i),\mu)\boxtimes
H^0(S(w_iw_0),{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w_iw_0)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(-w_0\mu)).
\cr}$$
By induction on $i$, we thus obtain a filtration of
$M(\mu)$ with associated graded
$$\bigoplus_{x\in W}
H^0(S(x),\mu)\boxtimes
H^0(S(w_0x), {\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w_0x)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(-w_0\mu)).
$$
Further, we have $H^0(S(x),\mu)=P(x\mu)$ by
\cite[Lemma 2.3.2]{vdK2}. And
$$
H^0(S(x),{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(x)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(\mu))=Q(x\mu)
$$
if $x$ is the element of minimal length in its coset $xW_{\mu}$ (where
$W_{\mu}$ is the isotropy group of $\mu$ in $W$.) Otherwise, we claim
that $H^0(S(x),{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(x)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(\mu))=0$. Indeed,
by [{\sl loc. cit.}], the restriction map
$H^0(S(x),\mu)\to H^0(S(x_{min}),\mu)$
is an isomorphism.
It follows that the ${\tilde B}$-module
$H^0(S(xw_0),{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(xw_0)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(-w_0\mu))$ equals
$Q(-x\mu)$ if $x$ has maximal length in its coset $xW_{\mu}$, and
equals $0$ otherwise. Thus, the ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$-module
$M(\mu)$ has a filtration with associated graded
$\oplus P(x\mu)\boxtimes Q(-x\mu)$, sum over all $x\in W$ such that
$x$ has maximal length in its $W_{\mu}$-coset. This implies (ii).
\end{proof}
\smallskip\noindent
{\sc Remark.} A similar argument shows that the
${\tilde G}\times{\tilde G}$-module $k[{\tilde G}]$ has an increasing filtration by finite
dimensional submodules with associated graded
$$
\bigoplus_{\mu\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+} H^0(G/B,\mu)\boxtimes H^0(G/B,-w_0\mu).
$$
This gives a geometric proof of a result of Donkin and Koppinen
\cite[II.4.20]{J}.
\medskip
For any dominant weight $\mu$, we denote by $c_{\mu}={\rm ch}\;M(\mu)$
the character of the finite-dimensional ${\tilde T}\times{\tilde T}$-module
$M(\mu)$. Then $c_{\mu}$ is a regular function on
${\tilde T}\times{\tilde T}$, and we have by Theorem \ref{fil}, for $t,u\in {\tilde T}$:
$$
c_{\mu}(t,u)=\sum_{\nu\in W\mu} ch\;P(\nu)(t)\; ch\;Q(-\nu)(u).
$$
Further, $ch\;P(\nu)$ is given by the Demazure character formula
\cite[II.14.18]{J}, and $ch\;Q(\nu)$ is given by a closely related
formula \cite[Th. 2.1]{M}.
By Corollary \ref{sur}, we have $H^i(Z,\mu)=0$ for
$i\geq 1$; thus, we can extend the map
$\mu\mapsto c_{\mu}$ to the group $\tilde{\mathcal X}$ by setting
$$
c_{\lambda}=\chi(Z,\lambda)
=\sum_{i\geq 0} (-1)^i {\rm ch}\;H^i(Z,\lambda)
$$
for arbitrary $\lambda\in\tilde{\mathcal X}$.
We now establish two symmetry properties of the resulting map
$\lambda\mapsto c_{\lambda}$; the second symmetry will be an essential
ingredient of the proof that $\overline{B}$ is Gorenstein. We will determine
the value of $c_{\lambda}$ at $(t,t^{-1})$ and, in particular, the
dimension of $M(\lambda)$ in Corollary \ref{sep} below.
\begin{theorem}\label{recip}
We have
$c_{-w_0\lambda}(t,u)=c_{\lambda}(u,t)$ and
$$
c_{-\lambda}(t^{-1},u^{-1})=(-1)^N\rho(t)\rho(u)
c_{\lambda-\rho}(t,u)
$$
for all $\lambda\in\tilde{\mathcal X}$ and $t,u\in{\tilde T}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
With notation as in Lemma \ref{int}, we have for any
$\lambda\in\tilde{\mathcal X}$ and any index $i$:
$$\displaylines{
\chi(Z_{\geq i},\lambda)=
\chi(Z_{>i},\lambda)+\chi(Z_{\geq i},{\mathcal I}_i\otimes{\mathcal L}_Z(\lambda))
\hfill\cr\hfill
=\chi(Z_{>i},\lambda)+\chi(S(w_i),\lambda)\,
\chi(S(w_iw_0),{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w_iw_0)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(-w_0\lambda))
\cr}$$
by Lemma \ref{int} and the argument thereafter.
Since $Z = Z_{\geq 1}$, it follows that
$$
\chi(Z,\lambda)=\sum_{x\in W}\chi(S(x),\lambda)\,
\chi(S(xw_0),{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(xw_0)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(-w_0\lambda)) \eqno (*)
$$
for all $\lambda\in\tilde{\mathcal X}$.
Recall now that each Schubert variety $S(x)$ is Cohen-Macaulay. Denote
by $\omega_{S(x)}$ its canonical sheaf, a $B$-linearized
sheaf. By \cite[A.4]{vdK2}, we have an isomorphism of $B$-linearized
sheaves
$$
\omega_{S(x)}\cong{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(xw_0)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(-\rho)[\rho]
$$
where $[\rho]$ denotes the shift by the character $\rho$ in the
$B$-linearization. Thus, we obtain by using Serre duality on each
$S(x)$ to pass from the first to the second line:
$$\displaylines{
c_{-\lambda}(t^{-1},u^{-1})=\sum_{x\in W}
\chi(S(x),-\lambda)(t^{-1})\;
\chi(S(xw_0),{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(xw_0)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(w_0\lambda))(u^{-1})
\cr
=(-1)^N\rho(t)\rho(u)\sum_{x\in W}
\chi(S(x),{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(x)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(-\rho+\lambda))(t)\;
\chi(S(xw_0),-\rho-w_0\lambda)(u)
\cr
=(-1)^N\rho(t)\rho(u)\sum_{y\in W}
\chi(S(y),-\rho-w_0\lambda)(u)\,
\chi(S(yw_0),{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(yw_0)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(-\rho+\lambda))(t)
\cr
=(-1)^N\rho(t)\rho(u)c_{-w_0\lambda-\rho}(u,t).
\cr}$$
On the other hand, set $Z^i:=S(w_i)\times S(w_iw_0)$ and define
similarly $Z^{\geq i}$, $Z^{>i}$. Then we obtain as in Lemma \ref{int} that
$Z^i\cap Z^{>i}=\partial S(w_iw_0)\times S(w_i)$. As above, it follows
that
$$
\chi(Z,\lambda)=\sum_{x\in W}
\chi(S(xw_0),{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(xw_0)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(\lambda))\;
\chi(S(x),-w_0\lambda)
$$
for any $\lambda$. Thus,
$\chi(Z,-w_0\lambda)(u,t)=\chi(Z,\lambda)(t,u)$ and the first identity
is proved. In particular,
$c_{-w_0\lambda-\rho}(u,t)=c_{\lambda-\rho}(t,u)$
which completes the proof of the second identity.
\end{proof}
\section{Closures of Borel subgroups are Gorenstein}
Let $R$ (resp. $A$) be the multihomogeneous coordinate ring of $\overline{B}$
(resp. $Z=\overline{B}\cap Y$) as defined in Section 2. We show that both $R$
and $A$ are Gorenstein; as a consequence, $\overline{B}$ and $Z$ are Gorenstein
as well.
It will be convenient to set
$$
\beta:=\alpha_1+\cdots+\alpha_r.
$$
Then the canonical sheaf of ${\mathbf X}$ is ${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(-2\rho-\beta)$
by \cite[\S3]{S}.
\begin{theorem}\label{gor} (i) $\overline{B}$ $($resp. $Z)$ is
Gorenstein with canonical sheaf ${\mathcal L}_{\overline{B}}(-\rho-\beta)[\rho,\rho]$
$($resp. ${\mathcal L}_Z(-\rho)[\rho,\rho])$ as a $B\times B$-linearized
sheaf.
\noindent
(ii) The graded ring $R$ $($resp. $A)$ is Gorenstein and its canonical
module is generated by a homogeneous element of degree $\rho+\beta$
$($resp. $\rho)$, eigenvector of $B\times B$ of weight $(\rho,\rho)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We begin by proving that $Z$ is Cohen-Macaulay. For this, we use the
notation introduced in the proof of Theorem \ref{vdk}. We check by
decreasing induction on $i$ that each $Z_{\geq i}$ is
Cohen-Macaulay. If $i=M$ then $Z_{\geq M}=S(w_0)\times S(1)\cong G/B$,
a non-singular variety. For arbitrary $i$, we have an exact sequence
$$
0\to{\mathcal O}_{Z_{\geq i}}\to{\mathcal O}_{Z_i}\oplus {\mathcal O}_{Z_{> i}}\to
{\mathcal O}_{Z_i\cap Z_{>i}}\to 0.
$$
Further, we know that $Z_i=S(w_i)\times S(w_iw_0)$ is Cohen-Macaulay;
and, by the induction hypothesis, the same holds for $Z_{>i}$. On the
other hand, $Z_i\cap Z_{>i}=S(w_i)\times \partial S(w_iw_0)$ by Lemma
\ref{int}. The canonical sheaf of $S(w_iw_0)$ is the tensor
product of the ideal sheaf of $\partial S(w_iw_0)$ with the invertible
sheaf ${\mathcal L}_{G/B}(-\rho)$. By \cite[Proposition 3.3.18]{BH}, it follows
that $\partial S(w_iw_0)$ is Cohen-Macaulay, of depth
$\ell(w_iw_0)-1$. Thus, the depth of $Z_i\cap Z_{>i}$ is
$\ell(w_i)+\ell(w_iw_0)-1=\ell(w_0)-1=\dim Z_{\geq i} -1$.
Together with the exact sequence above, this implies easily that
$Z_{\geq i}$ is Cohen-Macaulay, see \cite[Proposition 1.2.9]{BH}.
We now prove that the ring $A$ is Cohen-Macaulay. For this, let
$C={\rm Spec}\;A$ be the corresponding affine scheme. Then $C$ is the
multicone over $Z$ in the sense of \cite{KR}; we now recall some
constructions from that paper. Let $E$ be the total space of the
vector bundle over $Z$, equal to the direct sum of the line bundles
${\mathcal L}_Z(-\omega_1),\ldots,{\mathcal L}_Z(-\omega_r)$; let $q:E\to Z$ be
the projection. Then
$$
q_*{\mathcal O}_E=Sym_{{\mathcal O}_Z}\bigoplus_{i=1}^r{\mathcal L}_Z(\omega_i)
=\bigoplus_{\mu\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+}{\mathcal L}_Z(\mu).
$$
In particular, $H^0(E,{\mathcal O}_E)=A$
so that we have a morphism $p:E\to C$. The torus ${\tilde T}$ acts on
$E$ and on $C$ (because $A$ is graded by the character group of
${\tilde T}$), compatibly with the action of ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$.
Clearly, $p$ and $q$ are equivariant for the action of
${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}\times{\tilde T}$.
As the line bundles ${\mathcal L}_Z(\omega_1),\ldots,{\mathcal L}_Z(\omega_r)$ are
generated by their global sections, $p$ is proper. Further, we have
$p_*{\mathcal O}_E={\mathcal O}_C$ as $C$ is affine and $H^0(E,{\mathcal O}_E)=H^0(C,{\mathcal O}_C)$. In
particular, $p$ is surjective.
Let $E^0$ be the total space of $E$ minus the union of all sub-bundles
$\oplus_{j\neq i}{\mathcal L}_Z(\omega_j)$ for $1\leq i\leq r$; let
$p^0:E^0\to C$ and $q^0:E^0\to Z$ be the restrictions of $p$ and
$q$. Then $p^0$ is an isomorphism onto an open subset $C^0$ of $C$, and
$q^0$ is a principal ${\tilde T}$-bundle over $Z$. As a consequence,
the restriction of $p$ to each irreducible component of $E$ (that is,
to each $q^{-1}(S(w)\times S(ww_0))$ is birational. Thus,
$C$ is equidimensional of dimension $\dim(B)=N+r$.
We claim that $R^ip_*{\mathcal O}_E=0$ for $i\geq 1$. Indeed, as
$C$ and $q$ are affine, this amounts to:
$$
0=H^i(E,{\mathcal O}_E)=H^i(Z,q_*{\mathcal O}_E)=\bigoplus_{\mu\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+} H^i(Z,\mu),
$$
which follows from Corollary \ref{sur}.
Because $Z$ is Cohen-Macaulay, the same holds for $E$, and we have
$$
\omega_E=q^*\omega_Z\otimes\omega_{E/Z}=q^*(\omega_Z\otimes
{\mathcal L}_Z(\omega_1)[-\omega_1]\otimes\cdots
\otimes{\mathcal L}_Z(\omega_r)[-\omega_r])
=q^*(\omega_Z\otimes{\mathcal L}_Z(\rho))[-\rho]
$$
as a ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}\times{\tilde T}$-linearized sheaf; here $[\chi]$ denotes
the shift of the ${\tilde T}$-linearization by the character $\chi$.
We claim that $R^ip_*\omega_E=0$ for $i\geq 1$, that is,
$H^i(E,\omega_E)=0$ for $i\geq 1$. Indeed, we have
$$
H^i(E,\omega_E)= H^i(Z,q_*\omega_E)
=\bigoplus_{\mu\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+} H^i(Z,\omega_Z\otimes{\mathcal L}_Z(\rho+\mu))
=\bigoplus_{\mu\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+} H^{N-i}(Z,-\rho-\mu)^* ,
$$
as $Z$ is equidimensional of dimension $N$.
For $\mu\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+$, the line bundle ${\mathcal L}_Z(\rho+\mu)$ is
ample. Because $Z$ is Cohen-Macaulay, we have therefore
$$
H^j(Z,-n(\rho+\mu))=0
$$
for $j<N$ and large $n$. But $Z$, being an union of Schubert varieties
in $Y$, is Frobenius split. Thus, $H^j(Z,-\rho-\mu)=0$ for $j<N$ by
\cite[Proposition A.2.1]{vdK2}. This proves our claim.
We now recall a version of a result of Kempf, see e.g.
\cite[p. 49-51]{KKMS}.
\begin{lemma}\label{dual}
Let $p:\hat X\to X$ be a proper morphism of algebraic
schemes. Assume that $\hat X$ is Cohen-Macaulay,
$X$ is equidimensional of the same dimension as $\hat X$,
$p_*{\mathcal O}_{\hat X}={\mathcal O}_X$ and
$R^ip_*{\mathcal O}_{\hat X}=R^ip_*\omega_{\hat X}=0$ for $i\geq 1$. Then
$X$ is Cohen-Macaulay with dualizing sheaf $p_*\omega_{\hat X}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The statement is local in $X$, so that we may assume that $X$ is a
closed subscheme of a smooth affine scheme $S$. Denote by
$\iota:X\to S$ the inclusion and set $\pi:=\iota\circ p$. Then
$\pi_*{\mathcal O}_{\hat X}=\iota_*{\mathcal O}_X$ and $R^i\pi_*{\mathcal O}_{\hat X}=0$ for
$i\geq 1$. Applying the duality theorem to the proper morphism
$\pi:\hat X\to S$ and the sheaves ${\mathcal O}_{\hat X}$ and $\omega_S$,
we obtain
$$\displaylines{
RHom_S(\iota_*{\mathcal O}_X,\omega_S)=RHom_S(R\pi_*{\mathcal O}_{\hat X},\omega_S)=
R\pi_*RHom({\mathcal O}_{\hat X},\pi^!\omega_S)
\hfill\cr\hfill
=R\pi_*\pi^!\omega_S=R\pi_*\omega_{\hat X}[\dim X-\dim S]
=\pi_*\omega_{\hat X}[\dim X-\dim S],
\cr}$$
that is, $Ext^i_S(\iota_*{\mathcal O}_X,\omega_S)=0$ for $i\neq\dim S-\dim X$,
and
$$
Ext^{\dim X-\dim S}_S(\iota_*{\mathcal O}_X,\omega_S)=\pi_*\omega_{\hat X}.
$$
This means that $X$ is Cohen-Macaulay with canonical sheaf
$p_*\omega_{\hat X}$.
\end{proof}
Lemma \ref{dual} implies that the graded ring $A$ is Cohen-Macaulay
with canonical module
$$
\omega_A=H^0(C,p_*\omega_E)
=\bigoplus_{\mu\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+} H^0(Z,\omega_Z\otimes{\mathcal L}_Z(\mu+\rho))[-\rho]
=\bigoplus_{\mu\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+} H^N(Z,-\mu-\rho)^*[-\rho].
$$
Further, $H^j(Z,-\mu-\rho)=0$ for $j\neq N$.
The module $\omega_A$ is $\tilde{\mathcal X}$-graded and each homogeneous
component is a finite-dimensional ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$-module. Thus, we can
consider the Hilbert series
$$
H_{\omega_A}(t,u,z):=\sum_{\lambda\in\tilde{\mathcal X}}
ch\;\omega_{A,\lambda}(t,u)\;z^{\lambda}
$$
where $t$, $u$ are in ${\tilde T}$, and the $z^{\lambda}$ are the canonical
basis of the group algebra ${\mathbb Z}[\tilde{\mathcal X}]$. Now we have
$$\displaylines{
H_{\omega_A}(t,u,z)=\sum_{\mu\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+}
ch H^N(Z,-\mu-\rho)(t^{-1},u^{-1})\;z^{\mu+\rho}
\hfill\cr\hfill
=(-1)^N\sum_{\mu\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+}
c_{-\mu-\rho}(t^{-1},u^{-1})z^{\mu+\rho}.
\cr}$$
Together with Theorem \ref{recip}, it follows that
$$
H_{\omega_A}(t,u,z) = \rho(t) \rho(u) z^{\rho} H_A(t,u,z).
$$
Using \cite[Cor. 4.3.8.a)]{BH}, we have therefore
$$
H_A(t^{-1},u^{-1},z^{-1}) =
(-1)^{\dim(A)} \rho(t)\rho(u) z^{\rho} H_A(t,u,z).
$$
Now a result of Stanley \cite[Cor. 4.3.8.c)]{BH} would imply that
$A$ is Gorenstein if $A$ were a domain. This is not the case, but $A$
is the quotient of the domain $R$ by the ideal generated by the
regular sequence $(\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_r)$. It follows that $R$ is
Cohen-Macaulay with Hilbert series
$$
H_R(t,u,z)=\frac{H_A(t,u,z)}{\prod_{i=1}^r(1-z^{\alpha_i})}
$$
because each $\sigma_i$ is the restriction of a
${\tilde G}\times{\tilde G}$-invariant section. As a consequence, we obtain
$$
H_R(t^{-1},u^{-1},z^{-1})
=(-1)^{\dim(R)}\rho(t)\rho(u)z^{\rho+\beta}H_R(t,u,z).
$$
Thus, by the result of Stanley quoted above, $R$ is Gorenstein and its
canonical module is generated by a homogeneous element of degree
$\rho+\beta$, eigenvector of ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$ of weight
$(\rho,\rho)$. It follows that $A$ is Gorenstein as well and that its
canonical module is generated in degree $\rho$ and weight $(\rho,\rho)$.
It remains to prove that $\overline{B}$ and $Z$ are Gorenstein and to determine
their canonical sheaves. For this, consider the isomorphism
$p^0:E^0\to C^0$ where $C^0$ is an open subset of $C$, and the
principal ${\tilde T}$-bundle $q^0:E^0\to Z$. Then
$\omega_{E^0}={\mathcal O}_{E^0}[\rho,\rho]$
as a ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$-linearized sheaf, because the same holds for
$C$. Further, $\omega_{E^0}=q^{0*}(\omega_Z\otimes{\mathcal L}_Z(\rho))$
so that
$$
\omega_Z\otimes{\mathcal L}_Z(\rho)\otimes q_{0*}{\mathcal O}_{E^0}
=q_{0*}{\mathcal O}_{E^0}[\rho,\rho].
$$
Taking invariants of ${\tilde T}$, we obtain
$$
\omega_Z\otimes{\mathcal L}_Z(\rho)={\mathcal O}_Z[\rho,\rho],
$$
that is, $Z$ is Gorenstein with canonical sheaf
${\mathcal L}_Z(-\rho)[\rho,\rho]$. The argument for $\overline{B}$ is similar.
\end{proof}
\section{The class of the diagonal for flag varieties}
We will construct a degeneration of the diagonal in $G/B\times G/B$
into a union of Schubert varieties. For this, we recall a special case
of a construction of \cite[1.6]{B}.
Consider the action of $B\times B$ on $\overline{B}$ and the associated fiber
bundle
$$
p:G\times G\times_{B\times B}\overline{B}\to G/B\times G/B,
$$
a locally trivial fibration with fiber $\overline{B}$. The action map
$$G\times G\times\overline{B}\to{\mathbf X}=(G\times G)\overline{B}:~(g,h,x)\mapsto (g,h)x$$
defines a $G\times G$-equivariant map
$$
\pi: G\times G\times_{B\times B}\overline{B}\to {\mathbf X}.
$$
Observe that $\pi$ factors through the closed embedding
$$
G\times G\times_{B\times B}\overline{B}\to G/B\times G/B\times{\mathbf X}:
(g,h,x)(B\times B)\mapsto(gB,hB,(g,h)x)
$$
followed by the projection
$G/B\times G/B\times X\to G/B\times G/B$. Thus, $\pi$ is proper and
its scheme-theoretic fibers identify to closed subschemes of
$G/B\times G/B$ via $p_*$. Further, the fiber $\pi^{-1}(1)$ at the
identity is the diagonal $diag(G/B)$; and the reduced fiber
$\pi^{-1}(y)_{red}$ at the base point $y$ of $Y=G/B\times G/B$ is
$$
\bigcup_{x\in W} S(x)\times S(w_0x).
$$
Consider now the closure $\overline{T}$ of $T$ in ${\mathbf X}$, then $\overline{T}$ is a
$T\times T$-stable subvariety fixed pointwise by $diag(T)$. By
\cite{S}, $\overline{T}$ is smooth and meets $Y$ transversally at the points
$(w,ww_0)y$ for $w\in W$. Each of these points admits a
$T\times T$-stable neighborhood isomorphic to affine $r$-space where
$T\times T$ acts linearly. Therefore, we can find a smooth curve
$\gamma\subseteq\overline{T}$ isomorphic to affine line, containing $1$
(the identity element of $G$) and transversal to $Y$ at
$z:=(1,w_0)y$. In particular, $\gamma\setminus\{z\}$ is contained in
$T$. Further, $\pi^{-1}(\gamma)$ is a $diag(T)$-stable subvariety of
$G\times G\times_{B\times B}\overline{B}$ and we have a $diag(T)$-equivariant
isomorphism
$$
\pi^{-1}(\gamma)\simeq\{(gB,hB,x)\in G/B\times G/B\times\gamma
~\vert~ (g^{-1},h^{-1})x\in\overline{B}\}
$$
identifying $\pi^{-1}(\gamma)\to\gamma$ to the restriction of the
projection $G/B\times G/B\times \gamma\to\gamma$.
\begin{theorem}\label{flat}
The morphism $\pi:G\times G\times_{B\times B}\overline{B}\to{\mathbf X}$ is flat, with
reduced fibers. Its restriction $\pi^{-1}(\gamma)\to\gamma$ is flat
and $diag(T)$-invariant, with fibers over $\gamma\setminus\{z\}$
isomorphic to $diag(G/B)$, and with fiber at $z$ equal to
$$
\bigcup_{x\in W} S(x)\times w_0S(w_0x).
$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By \cite[Proposition 1.6]{B}, $\pi$ is equidimensional. Further,
$G\times G\times_{B\times B}\overline{B}$ is Cohen-Macaulay, as $\overline{B}$
is. Because ${\mathbf X}$ is smooth, it follows that $\pi$ is flat.
For $x\in {\mathbf X}$, the scheme-theoretic fiber $\pi^{-1}(x)$ identifies to
$$
\{(gB,hB)\in G/B\times G/B~\vert~ (g^{-1},h^{-1})x\in\overline{B}\}.
$$
Set $F:=\{(g,h)\in G\times G~\vert~ (g^{-1},h^{-1})x\in\overline{B}\}$.
Then $F$ is stable under right multiplication by
$B\times B$, and left multiplication by $(G\times G)_x$ (the isotropy
group of $x$ in $G\times G$). The quotient of $F$ by the right
$B\times B$-action is $\pi^{-1}(x)$, whereas the quotient by the left
$(G\times G)_x$-action is isomorphic to the scheme-theoretic
intersection of $\overline{B}$ with the orbit $(G\times G)\cdot x$. This
intersection is reduced by Corollary \ref{sur}; thus, $F$ and
$\pi^{-1}(x)$ are reduced, too.
The remaining asssertions are direct consequences of these facts.
\end{proof}
We now deduce from Theorem \ref{flat} a formula for the class in
equivariant $K$-theory of the diagonal of the flag variety.
Consider the diagonal action of $T$ on $G/B\times G/B$, and let
$K^T(G/B\times G/B)$ be the corresponding Grothendieck group of
$T$-linearized coherent sheaves. Then $K^T(G/B\times G/B)$ is a module
over the representation ring $R(T)$ of $T$; further, $W$ acts on
$K^T(G/B\times G/B)$ compatibly with its action on $R(T)$.
For a $T$-stable subvariety $S$ of $G/B\times G/B$, the class in
$K^T(G/B\times G/B)$ of the structure sheaf ${\mathcal O}_S$ will be denoted by
$[S]$. In particular, we have the classes of Schubert varieties and of
their translates by $W\times W$; we also have the class of the
diagonal $diag(G/B)$. We will express the latter in terms of the
former.
This will imply a formula for the class of the diagonal in the
Grothendieck group $K(G/B\times G/B)$ of coherent sheaves on that
space, by applying the forgetful map
$$
K^T(G/B\times G/B)\to K(G/B\times G/B).
$$
Observe that the action of $G\times G$ on $K(G/B\times G/B)$
is trivial, because $G$ is generated by subgroups isomorphic to the
additive group.
To simplify our statements, we set for $x\in W$:
$$
S^-(x):=\overline{B^-wB}/B=w_0S(w_0x)
$$
and
$$
[S^-(x)]^0:=[S^-(x)]-[\partial S^-(x)]
=w_0[S(w_0x)]-w_0[\partial S(w_0x)].
$$
\begin{corollary}\label{diag}
With notation as above, we have in $K^T(G/B\times G/B)$:
$$\displaylines{
[diag(G/B)]=[\bigcup_{x\in W} S(x)\times S^-(x)]
\hfill\cr\hfill
=\sum_{x\in W} [S(x)]\times [S^-(x)]^0
=\sum_{x,y\in W, \,x\leq y} (-1)^{\ell(y)-\ell(x)}
[S(x)]\times [S^-(y)].
\cr}$$
As a consequence, we have in $K(G/B\times G/B)$:
$$\displaylines{
[diag(G/B)]=[\bigcup_{x\in W} S(x)\times S(w_0x)]
\hfill\cr\hfill
=\sum_{x\in W} [S(x)]\times [S(w_0x)]^0
=\sum_{x,y\in W,\,x\leq y} (-1)^{\ell(y)-\ell(x)}
[S(x)]\times[S(w_0y)].
\cr}$$
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
As the map $\pi^{-1}(\gamma)\to\gamma$ is flat and
$diag(T)$-invariant, and $\gamma$ is isomorphic to affine line, the
fibers $\pi^{-1}(1)$ and $\pi^{-1}(z)$ have the same class in
$K^T(G\times G\times_{B\times B}\overline{B})$. Thus, the direct images of
these fibers under $p$ are equal in $K^T(G/B\times G/B)$.
This proves the first equality.
For the second one, we use the notation introduced in the proof of
Theorem \ref{vdk}. Set
$$
\Delta_i:=S(w_i)\times S^-(w_i),~
\Delta_{\geq i}:=\bigcup_{j\geq i}\;\Delta_i,~
\Delta_{> i}:=\bigcup_{j>i}\;\Delta_i.
$$
Then $\Delta_{\geq M}=S(w_0)\times w_0S(1)$,
$\Delta_{\geq 1}=\bigcup_{x\in W}S(x)\times S^-(x)$,
and we obtain as in Lemma \ref{int} that:
$$
\Delta_i\cap\Delta_{>i}=S(w_i)\times \partial S^-(w_i).
$$
As a consequence, we have an exact sequence of sheaves
$$
0\to I_i \to {\mathcal O}_{\Delta_{\geq i}}\to {\mathcal O}_{\Delta_{>i}}\to 0
$$
where $I_i$ fits into an exact sequence
$$
0\to I_i\to{\mathcal O}_{\Delta_i}\to{\mathcal O}_{S(w_i)\times \partial S^-(w_i)}
\to 0.
$$
It follows that
$$\displaylines{
[\Delta_{\geq i}]=[\Delta_{>i}]+[I_i]
=[\Delta_{>i}]+[S(w_i)\times S^-(w_i)]
-[S(w_i)\times \partial S^-(w_i)]
\hfill\cr\hfill
=[\Delta_{>i}]+[S(w_i)]\times [S^-(w_i)]^0.
\cr}$$
By decreasing induction on $i$, we thus have
$\Delta_{\geq i}=\sum_{j\geq i}\;[S(w_j)]\times [S^-(w_j)]^0$.
For the third equality, it suffices to prove that
$$
[S(x)]^0=\sum_{y\leq x} (-1)^{\ell(x)-\ell(y)} [S(y)]
$$
in $K^T(G/B)$. But the definition of $[S(x]^0$ implies that
$[S(x)]=\sum_{y\in W,\;y\leq x} [S(y)]^0$. Further, the M\"obius
function of the partially ordered set $(W,\leq)$ is given by
$\mu(y,x)=(-1)^{\ell(x)-\ell(y)}$ if $y\leq x$ and $\mu(y,x)=0$
otherwise, see \cite{D}.
\end{proof}
\smallskip
Consider now the Grothendieck group $K^T(G/B)$ of $T$-linearized
coherent sheaves on $G/B$. Because $G/B$ is smooth and projective,
$K^T(G/B)$ is isomorphic to the Grothendieck group of $T$-linearized
vector bundles; as a consequence, it has the structure of a
$R(T)$-algebra. Further, the $R(T)$-module $K^T(G/B)$ is free, with
basis the $[S(x)]$ ($x\in W$); and the $R(T)$-bilinear map
$$
K^T(G/B)\times K^T(G/B)\to R(T),~(u,v)\mapsto \chi(G/B,u\cdot v)
$$
is a perfect pairing, where $u\cdot v$ denotes the product in
$K^T(G/B)$, and $\chi(G/B,-)$ denotes the equivariant Euler
characteristic; see \cite[3.39, 4.9]{KK}.
\begin{corollary}
The classes
$$
[S^-(x)]^0=\sum_{y\in W,\;y\geq x}
(-1)^{\ell(y)-\ell(x)} [S^-(y)]\eqno(x\in W)
$$
form the dual basis of the basis of the $[S(x)]$ ($x\in W$).
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Observe that
$$\displaylines{
\chi(G/B,u\cdot v)=\chi(G/B\times G/B,[diag(G/B)]\cdot(u\times v))
\hfill\cr\hfill
=\sum_{x\in W}\chi(G/B,u\cdot [S(x)])\;
\chi(G/B,v \cdot [S^-(x)]^0)
\cr}$$
where the second equality follows from Corollary \ref{diag}. In
particular, we have for $y\in W$:
$$
\chi(G/B,u\cdot [S(y)])=\sum_{x\in W}\chi(G/B,u\cdot [S(x)])\;
\chi(G/B,[S(y)]\cdot [S^-(x)]^0).
$$
As the $R(T)$-linear forms $u\mapsto \chi(G/B,u\cdot [S(x)])$ are
linearly independent, we obtain
$$
\chi(G/B,[S(y)]\cdot [S^-(x)]^0)=\delta_{x,y}.
$$
\end{proof}
As another consequence of the determination of the class of the
diagonal, we recover a formula of Mathieu for the character of the
$G$-module $H^0(G/B,\lambda+\mu)$ as a function of the dominant
weights $\lambda$ and $\mu$ \cite[Cor. 7.7]{M}. Further, we
determine the dimension of the modules $M(\lambda)$ introduced in
Section 4.
\begin{corollary}\label{sep}
For any weights $\lambda$ and $\mu$, and for any $t\in T$, we have
$$
\chi(G/B,\lambda+\mu)(t)
=\sum_{x\in W}\chi(S(x),\lambda)(t)\;
\chi(S(xw_0),{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(xw_0)}\otimes {\mathcal L}_{G/B}(-w_0\mu))(t^{-1}).
$$
Therefore, $\chi(G/B,2\lambda)(t)=c_{\lambda}(t,t^{-1})$
for all $t\in T$. Further, for $\lambda\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+$, one has
$$
ch\;M(\lambda)(t,t^{-1})=ch\;H^0(G/B,2\lambda)(t) \text{ and }
\dim M(\lambda)=\prod_{\alpha\in\Phi^+}
\frac{\langle 2\lambda+\rho,\check\alpha\rangle}
{\langle\rho,\check\alpha\rangle}.
$$
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Let $[{\mathcal L}(\lambda,\mu)]$ be the class of the $T$-linearized line bundle
${\mathcal L}_{G/B}(\lambda)\boxtimes {\mathcal L}_{G/B}(\mu)$ in
$K^T(G/B\times G/B)$. As the restriction of this line bundle to the
diagonal is ${\mathcal L}_{G/B}(\lambda+\mu)$,
we have
$$
\chi(G/B,\lambda+\mu)=
\chi(G/B\times G/B,[diag(G/B)]\cdot[{\mathcal L}(\lambda,\mu)]).
$$
By Corollary \ref{diag}, the latter is equal to
$$
\sum_{w\in W}\chi(S(w),\lambda)\;
w_0\chi(S(w_0w),{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w_0w)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(\mu)).
$$
To complete the proof of the first equality, it suffices to check that
$$
\chi(S(w_0w),{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w_0w)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(\mu))(w_0t)=
\chi(S(ww_0),{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(ww_0)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(-w_0\mu))(t^{-1}).
$$
For this, using Serre duality as in the proof of Theorem
\ref{recip}, we obtain
$$
\chi(S(w_0w),{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w_0w)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(\mu))(w_0t)=
(-1)^{N-\ell(w)}\rho(t)\chi(S(w_0w),-\rho-\mu)(-w_0t).
$$
Further, the Demazure character formula implies that
$$
\chi(S(w_0w),\nu)(-w_0t)=\chi(S(ww_0),-w_0\nu)(t)
$$
for all weights $\nu$. It follows that
$$\displaylines{
\chi(S(w_0w),{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w_0w)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(\mu))(w_0t)=
(-1)^{N-\ell(w)}\rho(t)\chi(S(ww_0),-\rho+w_0\mu)(t)
\hfill\cr\hfill
=\chi(S(ww_0),{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(ww_0)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(-w_0\mu))(-t)
\cr}$$
by Serre duality once more.
Now the second equality follows from formula $(*)$ in the proof of
Theorem \ref{recip}. For $\lambda\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+$, the third equality
follows from the vanishing of the $H^i(Z,\lambda)$ (\cite[Th.2]{R1}),
and the fourth one from Weyl's dimension formula.
\end{proof}
\section{Large Schubert varieties are Cohen-Macaulay}
In this section, we prove the statement of the title and we give some
applications. We begin by constructing a partial desingularisation of
${\mathbf X}(w)$, by the total space of a fibration with fiber $\overline{B}$ over the
usual Schubert variety $S(w)$.
For this, consider the action of $B$ on $\overline{B}$ by left
multiplication, and the associated fiber bundle
$G\times_B\overline{B}$ over $G/B$. The map
$G\times\overline{B}\to{\mathbf X}:~(g,x)\mapsto gx$ defines a
birational, $G\times B$-equivariant morphism
$$
\varphi:G\times_B\overline{B}\to{\mathbf X}
$$
where the action of $G\times B$ on $G\times_B\overline{B}$ is defined by
$(g,b)(g',x)=(gg',xb^{-1})$. On the other hand, the projection
$$
\psi:G\times_B\overline{B}\to G/B
$$
is a locally trivial fibration with fiber $\overline{B}$. Observe that
$(\varphi,\psi)$, being the composition of
$$
G\times_B\overline{B} \hookrightarrow G\times_B {\mathbf X} \cong G/B \times {\mathbf X},
$$
is a closed embedding.
Let ${\mathbf X}'(w)$ be the preimage of $S(w)$ under $\psi$; then
${\mathbf X}'(w)$ is stable by the subgroup $B\times B$ of
$G\times B$. Observe that ${\mathbf X}'(w)$ is the closure of
$BwB\times_B B\simeq BwB$ in $G\times_B\overline{B}$. As a
consequence, $\varphi$ restricts to a $B\times B$-equivariant morphism
$$
f:{\mathbf X}'(w)\to{\mathbf X}(w)
$$
which is an isomorphism over $BwB$. Denote by $\partial{\mathbf X}(w)$ the
complement of $BwB$ in ${\mathbf X}(w)$, and by $\partial{\mathbf X}'(w)$ its
preimage under $f$. Finally, let
$$
g:{\mathbf X}'(w)\to S(w)
$$
be the restriction of $\psi$. Then $g$ is a locally trivial fibration
with fiber $\overline{B}$, too.
\begin{theorem}\label{cm1}
With notation as above, we have:
\noindent
(i) ${\mathbf X}'(w)$ is Cohen-Macaulay with canonical
sheaf ${\mathcal I}_{\partial{\mathbf X}'(w)}\otimes f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(-\rho)[\rho,\rho]$.
\noindent
(ii) $f_*{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}'(w)}={\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}$,
$f_*\omega_{{\mathbf X}'(w)}=\omega_{{\mathbf X}(w)}$ and the higher direct
images $R^i f_*{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}'(w)}$, $R^i f_*\omega_{{\mathbf X}'(w)}$
vanish for $i\geq 1$.
\noindent
(iii) ${\mathbf X}(w)$ is Cohen-Macaulay with canonical sheaf
${\mathcal I}_{\partial{\mathbf X}(w)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(-\rho)[\rho,\rho]$.
\noindent
(iv) The graded ring
$R(w)=\oplus_{\lambda\in\tilde{\mathcal X}}\;H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda)$
is Cohen-Macaulay.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Because $S(w)$ and $\overline{B}$ are Cohen-Macaulay, the same holds
for ${\mathbf X}'(w)$. And because $f$ is birational and ${\mathbf X}(w)$ is normal,
we have $f_*{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}'(w)}={\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}$.
We now show that $R^i f_*{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}'(w)}=0$ for $i\geq 1$.
For this, it suffices, by a lemma of Kempf (see
e.g. \cite[II.14.13]{J}), to show that
$H^i({\mathbf X}'(w),f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda))$ $=0$ for $i\geq 1$ and for any
regular dominant weight $\lambda$.
Consider the line bundle $\varphi^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda)$ and its higher
direct images $R^j\psi_*(\varphi^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda))$ for
$j\geq 0$. Then $R^j\psi_*(\varphi^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(\lambda))$ is the
${\tilde G}$-linearized sheaf on $G/B={\tilde G}/{\tilde B}$ associated with the
${\tilde B}$-module $H^j(\overline{B},\lambda)$, and
$R^j g_*(f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda))$ is the
restriction to $S(w)$ of this ${\tilde G}$-linearized sheaf. As
$H^j(\overline{B},\lambda)=0$ for all $j\geq 1$ by Corollary \ref{sur}, we have
$R^j g_*(f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda))=0$ for $j\geq 1$.
For a ${\tilde B}$-module $M$, denote by $\underline{M}$ the corresponding
homogeneous vector bundle on $G/B$. Then we obtain from the
Leray spectral sequence for $g$ that
$$
H^i({\mathbf X}'(w),f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda)) \cong
H^i(S(w),g_*f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda)) \cong
H^i(S(w),\underline{H^0(\overline{B},\lambda)}) .
$$
By Theorems \ref{fil} and \ref{vdk}, the left ${\tilde B}$-module
$H^0(\overline{B},\lambda)$ has a filtration with associated
graded a direct sum of $P(\mu)$'s for certain dominant weights
$\mu$. Further, we have for $i\geq 1$:
$$
H^i(S(w),\underline{P(\mu)})=0
$$
as follows from
\cite[Prop. 1.4.2]{P} or \cite[Lemma 3.1.12]{vdK2}. Thus,
$H^i({\mathbf X}'(w),f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda))$ $=0$
and, therefore, $R^i f_*{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}'(w)}=0$
for $i\geq 1$.
\smallskip
We now determine the canonical sheaf $\omega_{{\mathbf X}'(w)}$; we begin with
the relative canonical sheaf $\omega_g$ of $g:{\mathbf X}'(w)\to S(w)$.
Observe that the relative canonical sheaf of
$\psi:G\times_B\overline{B}\to G/B$ equals
$\varphi^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(-\beta-\rho)\otimes \psi^*{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(\rho)[\rho]$
as a ${\tilde G}\times {\tilde B}$-linearized sheaf, where $[\rho]$ denotes the shift by
$\rho$ of the ${\tilde B}$-linearization. Indeed, $\omega_{\psi}$ is the
$({\tilde G}\times {\tilde B})$-linearized sheaf on $G\times_B\overline{B}$ associated with the
$({\tilde B}\times {\tilde B})$-linearized sheaf $\omega_{\overline{B}}$ on $\overline{B}$. On the other
hand, the sheaf
$\varphi^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}}(-\beta-\rho)\otimes\psi^*{\mathcal L}_{G/B}(\rho)[\rho]$
is ${\tilde G}\times{\tilde B}$-linearized, and
the associated ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$-linearized sheaf on $\overline{B}$ is
$\omega_{\overline{B}}$ by Theorem \ref{gor}.
As $g:{\mathbf X}'(w)\to S(w)$ is the pull-back of $\psi$ under the
inclusion $S(w)\to G/B$, it follows that
$\omega_g=f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(-\beta-\rho)\otimes g^*{\mathcal L}_{S(w)}(\rho)[\rho]$.
In particular, $\omega_g$ is invertible. Thus,
$$
\omega_{{\mathbf X}'(w)}=g^*\omega_{S(w)}\otimes\omega_g=
g^*{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w)}\otimes f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(-\beta-\rho)[\rho,\rho].
$$
We now claim that
$$
g^*{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w)}\otimes f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(-\beta)
={\mathcal I}_{\partial{\mathbf X}'(w)}. \eqno (1)
$$
For this, observe that $\partial{\mathbf X}'(w)$ contains the preimage under
$f$ of ${\mathbf X}(w)\cap({\mathbf X}\setminus G)={\mathbf X}(w)\cap(D_1\cup\cdots\cup D_r)$,
a Cartier divisor. Further, the complement
$\partial{\mathbf X}'(w) \cap f^{-1}(G)$ of that divisor is
equal to $g^{-1}(\partial S(w))\cap f^{-1}(G)$. As the line bundle
associated with ${\mathbf X}(w)\cap(D_1\cup\cdots\cup D_r)$ is
${\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(-\beta)$, it follows that
$$
{\mathcal I}_{\partial{\mathbf X}'(w)}=
g^*{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w)}\otimes
f^*{\mathcal I}_{{\mathbf X}(w)\cap(D_1\cup\cdots\cup D_r)}=
g^*{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w)}\otimes f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(-\beta),
$$
which proves the claim.
We conclude that
$$
\omega_{{\mathbf X}'(w)} = {\mathcal I}_{\partial{\mathbf X}'(w)}\otimes f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(-\rho)[\rho,\rho]. \eqno (2)
$$
{F}urther, since $f_*{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}'(w)}={\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}$ and
$f(\partial{\mathbf X}'(w)) = \partial{\mathbf X}(w)$, then
$$
f_*{\mathcal I}_{\partial{\mathbf X}'(w)}={\mathcal I}_{\partial{\mathbf X}(w)}, \eqno (3)
$$
and, therefore,
$$
f_*\omega_{{\mathbf X}'(w)}=
{\mathcal I}_{\partial{\mathbf X}(w)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(-\rho)[\rho,\rho]. \eqno (4)
$$
We now prove that $R^if_*\omega_{{\mathbf X}'(w)}=0$ for
$i\geq 1$. Using Kempf's lemma, again, it suffices to prove that
$$
H^i({\mathbf X}'(w),g^*{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w)}\otimes
f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta))=0 \eqno (5)
$$
for $i\geq 1$ and for $\lambda\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+$ big enough
(we consider here $\omega_{{\mathbf X}'(w)}\otimes f^*{\mathcal L}(\lambda+\rho)$).
We argue by
induction over $\ell(w)$, the case where $\ell(w)=0$ being obvious.
In the general case, choose a decomposition $w=sx$ where $s$ is a
simple reflection, and $\ell(x)=\ell(w)-1$. Let $P_s$ be
the parabolic subgroup generated by $B$ and $s$. This defines the
variety
$$
\hat S(w):=P_s\times_B S(x)
$$
together with the map $\sigma : \hat S(w)\to S(w)$. Let
$$
\hat{\mathbf X}(w) = \hat S(w) \times_{S(w)} {\mathbf X}'(w) = P_s \times_B {\mathbf X}'(x)
$$
with projections $\tau : \hat{\mathbf X}(w)\to{\mathbf X}'(w)$ and
$q:\hat{\mathbf X}(w)\to\hat S(w)$. Let $p:\hat{\mathbf X}(w)\to{\mathbf X}(w)$ be the
composition of $f$ and $\tau$, then $p$ is an isomorphism above
$BwB$. Further, $q$ is a locally trivial fibration with fiber
$\overline{B}$. The $B\times B$-action on ${\mathbf X}'(w)$ lifts to $\hat{\mathbf X}(w)$,
where $1\times B$ acts trivially on $S(w)$ and $\hat S(w)$.
We claim that $\sigma_*{\mathcal O}_{\hat S(w)}={\mathcal O}_{S(w)}$,
$\sigma_*{\mathcal I}_{\partial\hat S(w)}={\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w)}$ and
$R^i \sigma_*{\mathcal I}_{\partial\hat S(w)}=0$ for $i\geq 1$.
This follows from \cite{R1}.
In more detail, consider a reduced expression for $x$ and let
$\phi : V(w) \to S(w)$ denote the Bott-Samelson resolution associated
to the corresponding reduced expression of $w = sx$. Observe that
$\phi$ factors through $\sigma$, say $\phi = \sigma\theta$.
Since $\phi$, $\theta$, $\sigma$ are proper and birational and $S(w)$,
$\hat S(w)$ are normal, then $\phi_*{\mathcal O}_{V(w)} = {\mathcal O}_{S(w)}$,
$\theta_*{\mathcal O}_{V(w)} = {\mathcal O}_{\hat S(w)}$ and
$\sigma_*{\mathcal O}_{\hat S(w)} = {\mathcal O}_{S(w)}$.
Let $\partial V(w)$ denote the complement of the open $B$-orbit in
$V(w)$, then $\theta(\partial V(w)) = \partial\hat S(w)$ and
$\sigma\theta(\partial V(w)) = \partial S(w)$, so that
$\sigma_*{\mathcal I}_{\partial\hat S(w)} = {\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w)}$.
Further, by \cite[Prop. 2, Th. 4]{R1}, one has
$$
\omega_{V(w)} \cong {\mathcal I}_{\partial V(w)}\otimes \phi^*{\mathcal L}_{S(w)}(-\rho),
\quad
\omega_{S(w)} \cong \phi_*\omega_{V(w)} \cong
{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w)}\otimes {\mathcal L}_{S(w)}(-\rho),
$$
and
$$
R^i \phi_*{\mathcal O}_{V(w)} = 0 = R^i \phi_*\omega_{V(w)}
$$
for $i\geq 1$.
Since $\sigma$ is proper with fibres being points or projective lines, then
$R^i \sigma_*{\mathcal I}_{\partial\hat S(w)} = 0$ for $i\geq 2$ and,
therefore, one obtains, by using the projection formula, that
$$
R^1 \sigma_*({\mathcal I}_{\partial\hat S(w)}) \otimes {\mathcal L}_{S(w)}(-\rho)) \cong
R^1\sigma_*(\theta_* \omega_{V(w)}) \hookrightarrow
R^1\phi_* \omega_{V(w)} = 0.
$$
This proves the claim.
\smallskip
Since $\tau$ is the pull-back of $\sigma$ under the locally trivial
fibration $g$ then, using again the projection formula, it follows that
$$
\displaylines{
R^i \tau_*(q^* {\mathcal I}_{\partial\hat S(w)} \otimes
p^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta) )
\cong \hfill\cr\hfill \cong
(R^i \tau_* q^* {\mathcal I}_{\partial\hat S(w)}) \otimes
f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta)
= \begin{cases} g^* {\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w)} \otimes
f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta) & \text{ if }
i = 0;\\ 0 & \text{ if } i \geq 1.\end{cases}
\cr}
$$
This yields
$$
H^i({\mathbf X}'(w),g^*{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w)}\otimes f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta))
\cong
H^i(\hat{\mathbf X}(w),q^*{\mathcal I}_{\partial\hat S(w)}\otimes
p^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta)), \eqno (6)
$$
and it suffices to prove that the right-hand side vanishes
for $i\geq 1$ and for $\lambda\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+$ big enough.
Embed $S(x)=B\times_B S(x)$ into $\hat S(w)$, as a Cartier divisor;
then ${\mathbf X}'(x)$ embeds into $\hat{\mathbf X}(w)$. Observe that $\partial\hat S(w)=
S(x)\cup(P_s\times_B\partial S(x))$ whereas
$S(x)\cap(P_s\times_B\partial S(x))=\partial S(x)$.
Thus, we have an exact sequence
$$
0\to{\mathcal I}_{\partial\hat S(w)}\to {\mathcal I}_{P_s\times_B\partial S(x)}\to
{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(x)}\otimes_{{\mathcal O}_{\hat S(w)}}{\mathcal O}_{S(x)}\to 0.
$$
Together with the induction hypothesis, it yields an exact sequence
$$
\hskip-20pt
\begin{array}{l}
H^0(\hat{\mathbf X}(w),q^*{\mathcal I}_{P_s\times_B\partial S(x)}\otimes
p^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta)) \to
H^0({\mathbf X}'(x),g^*{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(x)}\otimes f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta)) \to
\vspace{4pt} \\ \phantom{H}
\to
H^1(\hat{\mathbf X}(w),q^*{\mathcal I}_{\partial\hat S(w)}\otimes
p^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta))\to
H^1(\hat{\mathbf X}(w),q^*{\mathcal I}_{P_s\times_B\partial S(x)}\otimes
p^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta))
\end{array} \eqno (7)
$$
and isomorphisms for $i\geq 2$:
$$
H^i(\hat{\mathbf X}(w),q^*{\mathcal I}_{\partial\hat S(w)}\otimes
p^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta)) \cong
H^i(\hat{\mathbf X}(w),q^*{\mathcal I}_{P_s\times_B\partial S(x)}\otimes
p^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta)).
$$
Consider the projection
$$
\pi:\hat{\mathbf X}(w)=P_s\times_B {\mathbf X}'(x)\to P_s/B.
$$
Then the higher direct image sheaf
$R^j\pi_*(q^*{\mathcal I}_{P_s\times_B\partial S(x)}\otimes
p^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta))$
is the homogeneous vector bundle on $P_s/B$ associated with the
$B$-module
$$
H^j({\mathbf X}'(x),g^*{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(x)}\otimes f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta)).
$$
The latter vanishes for $j\geq 1$ and large $\lambda$, by the
induction hypothesis. As $P_s/B$ is a projective line, it follows that
$$
H^i(\hat{\mathbf X}(w),q^*{\mathcal I}_{P_s\times_B\partial\hat S(w)}\otimes
p^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta))=0
$$
for $i\geq 2$. And setting
$$
M:=H^0({\mathbf X}'(x),g^*{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(x)}\otimes
f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta)),
$$
then $(7)$ gives an exact sequence
$$
H^0(P_s/B,\underline{M})\to M\to
H^1(\hat{\mathbf X}(w),q^*{\mathcal I}_{\partial\hat S(w)}\otimes p^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta))
\to H^1(P_s/B,\underline{M}).
$$
To complete the proof, it remains to show that
$H^1(\hat{\mathbf X}(w),q^*{\mathcal I}_{\partial\hat S(w)}\otimes p^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta))=0$.
For this, it is enough to check that
$\underline{M}$ is generated by its global sections, that is, that
$M$ is the quotient of a $P_s$-module. Now, using $(1)$ and $(3)$, observe that
$$
M \cong H^0({\mathbf X}(x),{\mathcal I}_{\partial{\mathbf X}(x)}\otimes {\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda)).
$$
Further, $\partial{\mathbf X}(x)={\mathbf X}(x)\cap P_s\partial{\mathbf X}(x)$
(indeed, $\partial{\mathbf X}(x)$ is obviously contained in
$P_s\partial{\mathbf X}(x)\cap{\mathbf X}(x)$; and ${\mathbf X}(x)$ is not contained in
$P_s\partial{\mathbf X}(x)$, because ${\mathbf X}(x)$ is not stable by $P_s$),
and this intersection is reduced as large Schubert varieties are
compatibly split in ${\mathbf X}$. Therefore,
${\mathcal I}_{\partial{\mathbf X}(x)}=
{\mathcal I}_{P_s\partial{\mathbf X}(x)}\otimes_{{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}}{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}(x)}$,
and the restriction map
$$
H^0({\mathbf X}(w),{\mathcal I}_{P_s\partial{\mathbf X}(x)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta))\to
H^0({\mathbf X}(x),{\mathcal I}_{\partial{\mathbf X}(x)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda-\beta))=M
$$
is surjective for $\lambda$ big enough, by Serre's theorem. Thus, $M$
is a quotient of a $P_s$-module. This completes the proof of (ii).
Now the previous arguments and Lemma \ref{dual} imply that ${\mathbf X}(w)$ is
Cohen-Macaulay with canonical sheaf $f_*\omega_{{\mathbf X}'(w)}$, which
proves (iii). Then (iv) follows
by arguing as in the proof of Theorem \ref{gor}.
\end{proof}
In particular, the closure in ${\mathbf X}$ of any parabolic subgroup $P$ is
Cohen-Macaulay. As in Section 6, this leads to a degeneration of the
diagonal in $G/P$ into a union of Schubert varieties, and to formulae
for the class of the diagonal in $K^T(G/P\times G/P)$.
\medskip
Consider now the subvariety $Z(w)={\mathbf X}(w)\cap Y$ of ${\mathbf X}(w)$, and its
preimage $Z'(w)$ under $f:{\mathbf X}'(w)\to{\mathbf X}(w)$. We still denote by
$f:Z'(w)\to Z(w)$ and $g:Z'(w)\to S(w)$ the restrictions of $f$ and
$g$; then $g$ is a locally trivial fibration with fiber $Z$.
As $Z'(w)=(\overline{BwB}\cap G)\times_B Z$, one has
$g^{-1}\partial S(w)=\bigcup_{x<w}
(\overline{BxB}\cap G)\times_B Z$, and
$$
f(g^{-1}\partial S(w)) = \bigcup_{x<w} \overline{BxZ}
=\bigcup_{x<w} Z(x)
=\bigcup_{\deuxind{x,y\in W}{x<w,\,\ell(xy)=\ell(x)+\ell(y)}}
S(xy)\times S(yw_0).
$$
We shall denote this subvariety of $Z(w)$ by $\delta Z(w)$.
\begin{corollary}\label{cm2}
With notation as above, we have:
\noindent
(i) $Z'(w)$ is Cohen-Macaulay with canonical sheaf
$g^*{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w)}\otimes f^*{\mathcal L}_{Z(w)}(-\rho)[\rho,\rho]$.
\noindent
(ii) $f_*{\mathcal O}_{Z'(w)}={\mathcal O}_{Z(w)}$, $f_*\omega_{Z'(w)}=\omega_{Z(w)}$
and the higher direct images $R^i f_*{\mathcal O}_{Z'(w)}$,
$R^i f_*\omega_{Z'(w)}$ vanish for $i\geq 1$.
\noindent
(iii) $Z(w)$ is Cohen-Macaulay with canonical sheaf
${\mathcal I}_{\delta Z(w)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{Z(w)}(-\rho)[\rho,\rho]$.
\noindent
(iv) The graded ring $A(w)=\oplus_{\mu\in\tilde{\mathcal X}^+}\, H^0(Z(w),\mu)$ is
Cohen-Macaulay.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Since $Z(w)$ is the complete intersection in ${\mathbf X}(w)$
of the Cartier divisors ${\mathbf X}(w)\cap D_1,\ldots,{\mathbf X}(w)\cap D_r$,
by Corollary \ref{reg},
it follows that $Z(w)$ is Cohen-Macaulay. Similarly, $Z'(w)$ is
Cohen-Macaulay and its canonical sheaf is the restriction to
$Z'(w)$ of
$$
\omega_{{\mathbf X}'(w)}\otimes
f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\alpha_1)\otimes\cdots\otimes f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\alpha_r)=
\omega_{{\mathbf X}(w')}\otimes f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\beta).
$$
The latter is equal to
$g^*{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w)}\otimes f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(-\rho)[\rho,\rho]$, as
we saw in the proof of Theorem \ref{cm1}. This proves (i).
The multiplication by $\sigma_1$ defines exact sequences
$$
0\to {\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(-\alpha_1)\to {\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}\to
{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}(w)\cap D_1}\to 0
$$
and
$$
0\to f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(-\alpha_1)\to {\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}'(w)}\to
{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}'(w)\cap f^{-1}(D_1)}\to 0.
$$
By Theorem \ref{cm1}(ii), it follows that
$f_*{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}'(w)\cap f^{-1}(D_1)}={\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}(w)\cap D_1}$ and
$R^i f_*{\mathcal O}_{{\mathbf X}'(w)\cap D_1} =0$ for $i\geq 1$. Iterating this argument,
we obtain $f_*{\mathcal O}_{Z'(w)}={\mathcal O}_{Z(w)}$ and $R^i f_*{\mathcal O}_{Z'(w)}=0$ for
$i\geq 1$. The vanishing of $R^i f_* \omega_{Z'(w)}$ and the equality
$f_*\omega_{Z'(w)}=\omega_{Z(w)}$ follow similarly from the exact
sequences
$$
0\to \omega_{{\mathbf X}(w)}\to\omega_{{\mathbf X}(w)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\alpha_1)
\to \omega_{{\mathbf X}(w)\cap D_1}\to 0
$$
and
$$
0\to \omega_{{\mathbf X}'(w)}\to\omega_{{\mathbf X}'(w)}\otimes f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\alpha_1)
\to \omega_{{\mathbf X}'(w)\cap f^{-1}(D_1)}\to 0
$$
together with Theorem \ref{cm1}(ii). This proves (ii).
It also follows, using Lemma \ref{dual}, that
$$
\omega_{Z(w)}=f_*\omega_{Z'(w)}
=f_*g^*{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w)}\otimes{\mathcal L}_{Z(w)}(-\rho)[\rho,\rho].
$$
But $g^*{\mathcal I}_{\partial S(w)}={\mathcal I}_{g^{-1}(\partial S(w))}$ as $g$ is a
locally trivial fibration, and
$f_*{\mathcal I}_{g^{-1}(\partial S(w))}={\mathcal I}_{fg^{-1}(\partial S(w))}$ as
$f_*{\mathcal O}_{Z'(w)}={\mathcal O}_{Z(w)}$. This completes the proof of (iii).
Finally, (iv) is checked as in the proof of Theorem \ref{gor}.
\end{proof}
We now apply these geometric results to the structure of the
${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$-modules $H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda)$ and
$H^0(Z(w),\lambda)$. For this, we recall the definition of the Joseph
functors, see \cite[1.4]{P} and \cite[2.2]{vdK2}. Let $y,z\in W$ and
let $N$ (resp. $M$) be a ${\tilde B}$-module (resp. ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$-module),
then
$$
H_y N:=H^0(S(y),\underline{N}) \text{ \ and \ }
H_{y,z} M:=H^0(S(y)\times S(z),\underline{M}),
$$
where $\underline{N}$ (resp. $\underline{M}$) is the corresponding ${\tilde G}$
(resp. ${\tilde G}\times {\tilde G}$) linearized vector
bundle on $G/B$ (resp. $G/B \times G/B$). Observe that $H_y M$, where
$M$ is regarded as a ${\tilde B} \times 1$-module, has a natural structure of
${\tilde B}\times {\tilde B}$-module and, furthermore, there is an isomorphism of
${\tilde B}\times {\tilde B}$-modules $H_y M \cong H_{y,1} M$.
\begin{corollary}\label{ind}
For any weight $\lambda$, we have
$$
H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda) \cong H_{w,1} H^0(\overline{B},\lambda) \text{ \ and \ }
H^0(Z(w),\lambda) \cong H_{w,1} M(\lambda).
$$
Further, each endomorphism of the ${\tilde B}\times{\tilde B}$-module
$H^0(Z(w),\lambda)$ is scalar. In particular, this module is
indecomposable.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Recall that
$H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda)=H^0({\mathbf X}(w),{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda))$. By Theorem
\ref{cm1}, the latter is isomorphic to
$$\displaylines{
H^0({\mathbf X}'(w),f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda)) \cong
H^0(S(w),g_*f^*{\mathcal L}_{{\mathbf X}(w)}(\lambda))
\hfill\cr\hfill
\cong H^0(S(w),\underline{H^0(\overline{B},\lambda)}) \cong
H_{w,1} H^0(\overline{B},\lambda).
\cr}
$$
Using Corollary \ref{cm2}, we obtain similarly that
$H^0(Z(w),\lambda) \cong H_{w,1} M(\lambda)$.
We prove that ${\rm End}_{{\tilde B}\times {\tilde B}}\,H^0(Z(w),\lambda)=k$ by descending
induction on $\ell(w)$. If $w=w_0$ then $Z(w)=Y$ and
$H^0(Z(w),\lambda)= H^0(G/B,\lambda)\boxtimes H^0(G/B,-w_0\lambda)$. In
this case, the assertion follows from \cite[II.2.8, II.4.7]{J}.
In the general case, let $s$ be a simple reflection such that
$\ell(sw)=\ell(w)+1$; let $\tP_s$ be the parabolic subgroup of ${\tilde G}$
generated by ${\tilde B}$ and $s$. Then, using \cite[2.2.5]{vdK2}, we obtain
that
$$
H^0(Z(sw),\lambda) \cong H_{sw} M(\lambda) \cong
{\rm ind}_{{\tilde B}}^{\tP_s}H_w M(\lambda) \cong
{\rm ind}_{{\tilde B}}^{\tP_s} H^0(Z(w),\lambda).
$$
Further, the natural map
$$
{\rm ind}_{{\tilde B}}^{\tP_s}H^0(Z(w),\lambda)\to H^0(Z(w),\lambda)
$$
is surjective by Corollary \ref{sur}. Thus,
${\rm End}_{{\tilde B}\times {\tilde B}}\,H^0(Z(w),\lambda)$ embeds into
$$
{\rm Hom}_{{\tilde B}\times {\tilde B}}\,
({\rm ind}_{{\tilde B}}^{\tP_s} H^0(Z(w),\lambda),H^0(Z(w),\lambda)) \cong
{\rm End}_{\tP_s\times {\tilde B}}({\rm ind}_{{\tilde B}}^{\tP_s}\; H^0(Z(w),\lambda)).
$$
The latter equals ${\rm End}_{{\tilde B}\times {\tilde B}}\,H^0(Z(sw),\lambda)$ by
\cite[II.2.1.(7)]{J}, and we conclude by the induction hypothesis.
\end{proof}
\smallskip
\noindent
{\sc Remark.} By looking at right actions, one can also prove that
$$
H^0({\mathbf X}(w),\lambda) \cong H_{1,w^{-1}} H^0(\overline{B},\lambda)~{\rm and}~
H^0(Z(w),\lambda) \cong H_{1,w^{-1}} M(\lambda).
$$
|
\section{Introduction}
The basis for the work presented here is our set of chemically
consistent spiral galaxy models with a range of Star Formation
Histories ({\bf SFHs}) specifying the spectral types $Sa,~Sb,~Sc,~Sd$.
Our models are very simple 1-zone models without any dynamics
meant to describe global quantities of average galaxies of the
respective types. Our approach is to use the simplest models possible
with the smallest number of parameters in order to see how far we can
get and what kind of sophistications are required by a comparison with
observed galaxy properties.
Our unified spectrophotometric and chemical evolutionary synthesis
models allow to have a large number of observational constraints --
spectrophotometric properties including gaseous emission and stellar
absorption features as well as ISM abundances -- to restrict the small
number of model parameters, basically the IMF and the SFH.
While in the local Universe a 1--1 - correspondance between spectral
types and morphological types is a long-standing matter of fact it is
also clear that this correspondance has to break down at some yet
unknown stage when going back towards the earliest phases of galaxy
evolution and formation.
The choice of SFHs for the various spectral types is determined by a
number of observational constraints. These include type-averaged
luminosities, colours from UV through NIR for nearby galaxy samples,
emission and absorption line properties, template spectra, and HII
region abundances that our model galaxies have to match after a Hubble
time as well as a comparison with observed galaxy luminosities and
colours over a large redshift range (cf. M\"oller {\it et al.\ } 1999).
Here, we present the chemical evolution aspect of our spectroscopically
successful spiral galaxy models and compare to abundances for
a series of elements observed in Damped Ly$\alpha$ ({\bf
DLA}) Absorbers over the redshift range from ${\rm z \sim 0.4}$
through ${\rm z \stackrel{>}{\scriptstyle\sim} 4.4}$, which corresponds to lookback times of
more than 90 \% of the age of the Universe. Originally, DLA absorption
was thought to arise in intervening (proto-)galactic disks along the
lines of sight to distant QSOs (Wolfe 1988).
This view is supported by arguments
based on mass estimes from column densities and absorber sizes at
${\rm z \sim 2 - 3}$ as well as by kinematic features consistent with
rotation at velocities of order 200 ${\rm km~s^{-1}}$ (Prochaska \&
Wolfe 1997a, b, 1998). More recently, on the basis of [$\alpha$/Fe] and
[N/O] abundance ratios and
their large scatter, an origin of DLA absorption in dwarf or low
surface brightness galaxies is
also discussed (Matteucci {\it et al.\ } 1997, Vladilo 1998, Jimenez {\it et al.\ } 1999).
Our aim is to see, if and in how far very simple spiral galaxy models
are compatible with the observed DLA abundance evolution over the
large redshift range accessible. In this context it does not matter if
DLA galaxies at the highest redshifts are not yet fully assembled
massive disks but rather consist of galactic building blocks as
suggested by Haehnelt {\it et al.\ } (1998). Our SFHs in this case are meant to
describe SF in all the fragments bound to end up in one disk by z $=
0$.
In a second step, we then present the spectrophotometric properties of
those galaxy models that succesfully describe the DLA galaxy
population and discuss them in the context of the large campaigns
designed to optically identify DLA galaxies both at low and at high
redshift.
\section{A Chemically Consistent Chemical Evolution Model}
As opposed to star clusters which basically form their stars ``all at the
same time'', i.e. within $\sim 10^5$ yr, any stellar system with a SFH
more extended than this is expected to feature finite distributions
both in age and metallicity. Our spectrophotometric and chemical
evolutionary synthesis models are {\bf chemically consistent} in the
sense that we account for the increasing initial metallicity of
successive generations of stars. We keep track of the ISM abundance
at birth of each star and use various sets of input physics for
metallicities in the range ${\rm -2.5 \leq [Fe/H] \leq +0.3}$. In
particular, we use stellar evolutionary tracks and lifetimes from the
Padova group (Bressan {\it et al.\ } 1993, Fagotto {\it et al.\ } 1994 a, b, c
for 0.6 ${\rm \leq m_{\ast} \leq 120~M_{\odot}}$, and from
Chabrier \& Baraffe 1997 for ${\rm m _{\ast} \leq 0.5~M_{\odot}}$,
stellar yields and remnant masses from v. d. Hoek \& Groenewegen
(1997) for ${\rm m_{\ast} \leq 8~M_{\odot}}$ and from Woosley \&
Weaver (1995) for stars ${\rm 12 \leq m_{\ast} \leq 40~M_{\odot}}$,
and model atmosphere spectra and colour calibrations from
Lejeune {\it et al.\ } (1998). SNIa contributions are included as
described by Matteucci \& Greggio (1986) and Matteucci \& Tornamb\`e
(1987) with SNIa yields from Nomoto {\it et al.\ } (1997).
\noindent
We use a Salpeter IMF and SFHs for the various spiral types as
follows:
\begin{center} $Sa~ ...~ Sc$ \hspace{3.cm} $~~{\rm \Psi(t) \sim
\frac{G}{M}(t)}$ \\
$~~~Sd$ \hspace{3.4cm} ${\rm \Psi(t) \sim const.}$\end{center}
(G: gas mass, M: total mass).
Characteristic timescales for SF ${\rm t_{\ast}}$ as defined by
$\int_0^{t_{\ast}} \Psi \cdot dt = 0.63 \cdot G (t=0)$ are
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{rrc}
$~~t_{\ast}~ \sim~ $ &2 \ Gyr &$ ~~Sa~~$ \\
$~~t_{\ast}~ \sim~ $ &3 \ Gyr &$ ~~Sb~~$ \\
$~~t_{\ast}~ \sim~ $ &10 \ Gyr &$ ~~Sc~~$ \\
$~~t_{\ast}~ \sim~ $ &16 \ Gyr &$ ~~Sd~~$ \\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
Our models have a strong analytic power in the sense that they allow
to trace back the luminosity contributions to any wavelength band as
well as the enrichment contributions to any chemical element of
different stellar masses, spectral types, luminosity classes,
metallicity subpopulations, nucleosynthetic origins (PNe, SNI, SNII,
single stars, binaries, ...) as a function of time or redshift.
While for the spectro-cosmological evolution cosmological and
evolutionary corrections as well as the effect of attenuation have to
be considered, the chemo-cosmological evolution simply results from a
1-1-transformation of galaxy age into redshift (we use a standard
cosmology ${\rm (H_o,~\Omega_o,~\Lambda_o) =
(75,~1,~0)}$ and assume galaxy formation at ${\rm z_{form}
= 5}$).
The above SFHs were chosen as to give agreement after a Hubble time of
evolution with average colours for the galaxy types $Sa,~Sb,~Sc,$ $Sd$
from the RC3 and template spectra from Kennicutt (1992).
In most nearby spirals HII region abundances show negative gradients
with galactocentric radius and even at a given radius within a galaxy,
there may be considerable scatter among abundances of individual HII
regions. Geometrical considerations by Phillipps \& Edmunds (1996) and
Edmunds \& Phillipps (1997) show
that for an arbitrary sightline featuring DLA
absorption
the most probable galactocentric distance to pass through an
intervening galaxy disk is around ${\rm 1~R_e}$.
At the same time, ${\rm 1~R_e}$
seems to be a reasonable radius for HII region abundances to compare to our
global 1-zone models. The agreement of average HII region abundances
for various galaxy types at ${\rm 1~R_e}$ as measured by Zaritsky
{\it et al.\ } (1994), Oey \& Kennicutt (1993), van Zee {\it et al.\ } (1998), and Ferguson
(1998) with model ISM abundances after a Hubble time confirms our
choice of SFHs.
\section{Abundance Evolution of Spiral Galaxy Models and DLA Observations}
High resolution
spectra are required to fully resolve the velocity structure and
derive precise heavy element abundances in DLA absorption systems. In
recent years, a large number of precise abundances have been
determined for elements C, N, O, Al, Si, S, Cr, Mn, Fe, Ni, Zn, ... in
a large number of DLAs over the redshift range ${\rm z \sim 0.4}$
through
${\rm z \stackrel{>}{\scriptstyle\sim} 4.4}$ (Boiss\'e {\it et al.\ } 1998, Lu {\it et al.\ } 1993, 1996,
Pettini {\it et al.\ } 1994, 1999, Prochaska \& Wolfe 1997, de la
Varga \& Reimers 1999). For the comparison with the redshift
evolution of our models we
have carefully referred all published DLA abundances to one
homogeneous set of oscillator strengths and solar reference values
(see Lindner {\it et al.\ } 1999 for details).
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\epsfig{file=fig1a.eps,width=15pc}\epsfig{file=fig1b.eps,
width=15pc}}
\caption{Redshift evolution of [Zn/H] (1a) and [Fe/H] (1b) for models
Sa and Sd compared to observed DLA abundances.}
\end{figure}
Fig. 1 shows the redshift evolution of our ``slowest evolution'' $Sd$
and our ``fastest evolution'' $Sa$ models in comparison with the
available [Zn/H] (1a) and [Fe/H] (1b) abundances in DLAs. $Sb$ and
$Sc$ models are omitted to avoid confusion, their abundance evolution
runs in between those of the $Sa$ and $Sd$ models. Lindner {\it et al.\ }
(1999) present a more extensive comparison including all those 8 elements
for which abundances are measured in a reasonable number of DLAs.
As compared to models using solar metallicity input physics only (thin
lines), the
chemically consistent models (heavy lines) show significant
differences ranging up to 1.0 dex for some elements. Changes in the
explosion energy (Woosley \& Weaver's model C) are considerably less
important. It should be noted that no scaling or additional parameters are
introduced. Using SFHs, IMF, and yields, as desribed above, results in
absolute model abundances.
The conclusions we draw from this comparison (including all elements)
are the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item $Sa$ -- $Sd$ models bracket the redshift evolution of DLA abundances
from ${\rm z \geq 4.4}$ to ${\rm z \sim 0.4}$,
\item models bridge the gap from high-z DLAs to
nearby spiral HII region abundances,
\item the weak redshift evolution of DLA abundances is a natural result of the
long SF timescales for disks galaxies,
\item the range of SF timescales
$t_{\ast}$ for near-by spirals from $Sa$ through $Sd$ fully explains the abundance
scatter among DLAs at fixed redshift.
\end{itemize}
This means that from the point of view of abundance evolution over
more than 90\% of the age of the Universe normal spiral galaxies (or
their progenitors) are perfectly consistent with DLA
observations. This does not exclude the possibility that some
starbursting dwarfs or LSBs may also give rise to DLA absorption.
Moreover, as indicated by the heavy line in Fig. 1b, the early type
spirals that well seem to be present in high-z DLA samples seem to
drop out of low-z DLA samples.
At the same time as delimiting the region in abundance vs. redshift
space where DLA absorbers seem to occur, the heavy line in
Fig. 1b. corresponds to a gas-to-total mass ratio of 0.5 in our galaxy
models. Indeed, low-z DLAs are observed to generally have low N(HI)
(e.g. Lanzetta {\it et al.\ } 1997).
Our prediction from the comparison of models with data is that while
at high redshift (${\rm z \stackrel{>}{\scriptstyle\sim} 2}$) the DLA absorbing galaxy
population may well comprise early as well as late type (proto-)spirals, the
low redshift (${\rm z \stackrel{<}{\scriptstyle\sim} 1.5}$) DLA absorption systems seem to
have their origin in late-type gas-rich and metal-poor spirals.
A bias against high metallicity and/or dust content in low-z DLA
absorbing galaxies has been suspected e.g. by Steidel {\it et al.\ } (1997).
In our view, the
drop of the global gas content that clearly goes together with increasing
metallicity in nearby spirals may add yet another reason: at low gas
content the probability is significantly reduced that an arbitrary
sightline through the galaxy goes through a region with high enough
HI column density for
DLA absorption.
\section{The Spectrophotometric Aspect of DLA Galaxies}
If confirmed by a larger sample of low-z DLAs, this prediction has
important implications for the possibility of optical
identifications. Locally, early type spirals are brighter by $\sim
1.5$ mag in $B$ on average than late-type spirals despite the fact
that any spiral type shows a range in luminosity with considerable
overlap between different types (e.g. Sandage {\it et al.\ } 1985).
We can now use the spectro-cosmological aspect of our evolutionary models as
e.g. presented by M\"oller {\it et al.\ } ({\sl this volume}) to predict the
range of apparent magnitudes and colours expected for DLA absorbing
galaxies at various redshifts.
We find the intriguing result that in all three bands B, \R~, and K the
intrinsically brighter early-type spirals show
almost the same apparent luminosities at ${\rm z \sim 2 - 3}$ as the
intrinsically fainter average
late-type $Sd$ galaxies at ${\rm z \sim 0.5}$.
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|cc||cc|} \hline
& \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{\bf Sa} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{\bf Sd} \\ \hline
& ~~z$~\sim$ 0.5~~ & ~~z$~\sim$ 2 -- 3 ~~& ~~z$~\sim$ 0.5~~ & ~~z$~\sim$ 2 -- 3 ~~\\ \hline
~~B~~ & 22.5 & 24 -- 25 & 25.5 & 29 -- 30.5 \\
~~\R~ ~~& 21 & 24 & 24.5 & 29 \\
~~K~~ & 18.5 & 21.4 -- 22 & 22 & 26 -- 27 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
We thus would {\bf not} expect low-z DLA galaxies to be more easily
identified than at least the brighter ones among the high-z DLAs.
On the basis of these luminosities we understand the non-detection of
DLA galaxies at z $\sim 3$ down to \R~ $\sim 25.5$ (Steidel {\it et al.\ }
1998) and the small number of DLA candidates (2/10) at ${\rm 1.5 \leq z
\leq 2.5}$ to K $\sim 21$ by Aragon - Salamanca {\it et al.\ } (1996).
The galaxies identified by Steidel {\it et al.\ } (1994, 1995) as candidates
for DLA absorbers at ${\rm z_{abs} = 0.6922,~ 0.3950,~ 0.7568,~ and ~
0.8596}$ indeed have luminosities ${\rm -19.5 \stackrel{<}{\scriptstyle\sim} M_B \stackrel{<}{\scriptstyle\sim} -19.0}$
typical of late-type spirals. However, for their sample of 7 DLA
identifications in the range ${\rm 0.4 \stackrel{<}{\scriptstyle\sim} z \stackrel{<}{\scriptstyle\sim} 1}$ Le Brun {\it et al.\ } (1997)
find a variety of morphologies: spirals as well as compact and LSB
objects. At high redshift, Djorgovski {\it et al.\ } (1996) and Djorgovski (1998) report
identifications of a bright disk galaxy (${\rm M_B \sim -20.4}$) with
SFR ${\rm \stackrel{>}{\scriptstyle\sim} 8 M_{\odot}yr^{-1}}$ in agreement with our models at
${\rm z \sim 3.15}$, and of an ${\rm M_B \sim -19.5}$ galaxy with low
SFR at ${\rm z \sim 4.1}$. The two early-type DLA galaxies ($S0$)
put foreward by Lanzetta {\it et al.\ } (1997)
at ${\rm z = 0.16377}$ and by Miller {\it et al.\ } (1999) (NGC 4203 at ${\rm z
= 0}$) both show counterrotating gas disks. HI mapping shows NGC 4203
to be abnormally gas-rich (van Driel {\it et al.\ } 1988). These two cases
raise the issue that recent accretion or merging may provide
favourable conditions for DLA
absorption.
\section{Conclusions and Outlook}
We use very simple spiral galaxy models with standard IMF and SFHs
chosen as to agree with chemical and spectrophotmetric properties of
nearby galaxies as well as with the observed redshift evolution of
luminosities and colours. When combined with a chemically consistent
description of their chemical evolution and a standard cosmology,
we find good agreement with the observed redshift evolution of
DLA abundances over more than 90 \% of the Hubble time. We claim that
at ${\rm z \stackrel{>}{\scriptstyle\sim} 1.5}$ all spiral types can give rise to DLA absorption
while towards lower redshifts only the gas-rich metal-poor late spiral
types do so. The spectrophotometric properties given by our models for
average spiral types are consistent with the few optical
identifications of DLA galaxies both at low and high-z in large
observing programs.
Clearly, these simple models are a first approach only, a more
realistic treatment including infall and dynamical evolution has to
follow.
\begin{acknowledgements}
UFvA and CSM gratefully acknowledge partial financial support to
attend the Conference.
We warmly thank the organisers for a particularly fruitful and
inspiring Conference.
\end{acknowledgements}
|
\section{Introduction}
Angular momentum in accretion disks around black holes
must deviate from a Keplerian distribution, since the
presence of ion, radiation or inertial pressure gradient forces
become as significant as the gravitational and
centrifugal forces (see Chakrabarti 1996a; Chakrabarti
1996b and references therein). The inertial
pressure close to a black hole is high, because,
on the horizon, the inflow velocity must be
equal to the velocity of light. For causality, the
velocity of sound must be less than the velocity of light.
In fact, in the extreme equation of state of
$P=\frac{c^2}{3} \rho$ (where $c$ is the velocity of light
and $P$ and $\rho$ are the isotropic pressure and mass density
respectively), the sound speed is only $c/\sqrt{3}$. Thus, the flow must
pass through a sonic point and become supersonic before entering into the
horizon. A flow which must pass through a sonic point must also be
sub-Keplerian (Chakrabarti 1996b and references therein), and this causes the deviation.
If the accretion rate is low, the flow cools down only by
inefficient bremsstrahlung and Comptonization processes, unless the magnetic
field is very high (Shvartsman 1971; Rees 1984; Bisnovatyi-Kogan 1998).
This hot flow can undergo significant nucleosynthesis
depending on the inflow parameters. Earlier, in the context of
thick accretion disks calculations of changes in composition inside
an accretion disk were carried out
(Chakrabarti et al. 1987; Hogan \& Applegate 1987;
Arai \& Hashimoto 1992; Hashimoto et al. 1993), but
the disk models used were not completely self-consistent, in that neither
the radial motion, nor the cooling and heating processes were included
fully self-consistently. Secondly, only high accretion rates were used.
As a result, the viscosity parameter required for a significant nuclear burning
was extremely low ($\alpha_{vis} < 10^{-4}$).
In the present paper, we do the computation after including the radial
velocity in the disk and the heating and cooling processes. We largely follow
the solutions of Chakrabarti (1996b) to obtain the thermodynamic conditions
along a flow.
Close to a black hole horizon, the viscous time scale is so large compared
to the infall time scale that the specific angular momentum $\lambda$
of matter remains almost constant and sub-Keplerian independent of viscosity
(Chakrabarti 1996a,b; Chakrabarti 1989).
Because of this, as matter accretes, the centrifugal force $\lambda^2/x^3$
increases much
faster compared to the gravitational force $GM/x^2$ (where $G$ and $M$ are the
gravitational constant and the mass of the black hole respectively,
$\lambda$ and $x$ are the dimensionless angular momentum and the
radial distance from the black hole).
As a result, close to the black hole (at $x \sim \lambda^2/GM$)
matter may even virtually stop to form standing shocks (Chakrabarti 1989).
Shock or no-shock, as the flow slows down,
the kinetic energy of matter is converted
into thermal energy in the region where the centrifugal force dominates.
Hard X-rays and $\gamma$-rays are expected from here
(Chakrabarti \& Titarchuk, 1995). In this centrifugal
pressure supported hot `boundary layer' (CENBOL) of the black hole
(Chakrabarti et al. 1996) we find that
for low accretion rates, $^4He$ of the infalling
matter is completely photo-dissociated and no $^7Li$ could be produced.
In this region, about ten to twelve percent of matter is found to be made
up of pure neutrons. These neutrons should not accrete very fast because
of very low magnetic viscosity associated with neutral particles
(Rees et al. 1982) while protons are dragged towards the
central black hole along with the field lines. Of course, both
the neutrons and protons would have `normal' ionic viscosity,
and some slow accretion of protons (including
those produced after neutron decay) would still be possible.
In contrast to neutron stars, the {\it neutron disks} which we
find are not dense. Nevertheless, they can participate in the formation of
neutron rich isotopes and some amount of deuterium. They can
be eventually dispersed into the galaxy through jets and outflows,
which come out of CENBOL (Chakrabarti 1998; Das \& Chakrabarti 1998)
thereby possibly influencing the metallicity of the galaxy.
On the equatorial plane, where the viscosity is the highest,
a Keplerian disk deviates to become sub-Keplerian {\it very close}
to the black hole (Chakrabarti \& Titarchuk 1995; Wiita 1982).
Away from the equatorial plane, viscosity is lower and the flow deviates
from a Keplerian disk farther out. This is because the angular
momentum transport is achieved by viscous stresses. Weaker the
viscosity, longer is the distance through which angular momentum
goes to match with a Keplerian disk. When the viscosity of the disk
is decreased on the whole, the Keplerian disk recedes
from the black hole forming quiescence states
when the objects become very faint in X-rays (Ebisawa et al. 1996). Soft photons from the Keplerian disk are
intercepted by this sub-Keplerian boundary layer (CENBOL) and photons
are energized through Compton scattering process.
For higher Keplerian rates, electrons and protons cool
down completely and the black hole is in a {\it soft state}
(Tanaka \& Lewin 1995). Here, bulk motion Comptonization
produces the power-law tail of slope $\alpha
\sim 1.5$ (Chakrabarti \& Titarchuk 1995; Titarchuk et al. 1997). For lower Keplerian rates,
the Compton cooling is incomplete and the
temperature of the boundary layer remains close to the virial value,
$$
T_p \sim \frac{1}{2 k} m_p c^2 \frac{x_g}{x} = 5.2 \times 10^{11} \left( \frac{10}{x/x_g}
\right) \ \ {\rm ^o K}.
\eqno{(1)}
$$
In this case, bremsstrahlung is also important and the black hole is said
to be in a {\it hard state} with energy spectral index $\alpha$
($F_\nu \sim \nu^{-\alpha}$, where $\nu$ is the
frequency of the photon) close to $0.5$. In Eq. (1), $m_p$ is the mass of
the proton, $x_g=2GM/c^2$ is the Schwarzschild radius of the
black hole, and $c$ is the velocity of light. (In future, we
measure the distances and velocities in units of $x_g$ and $c$.)
In this low Keplerian rate, electrons are cooler typically by a factor
of $(m_p/m_e)^{1/2}$ unless the magnetic field is very high.
Present high energy observations seem to support the
apparently intriguing aspects of black hole accretion mentioned
above. For instance, the constancy of (separate) spectral slopes in soft and
hard states has been observed by many (Ebisawa et al. 1994; Miyamoto et al. 1991; Ramos
et al. 1997;
Grove et al. 1998; Vargas et al. 1997). ASCA observations of Cygnus X-1 seem to indicate
that the
inner edge of the Keplerian component is located at around $15R_g$ (instead of $3R_g$)
(Gilfanov et al. 1997). HST FOS observations of the black hole
candidate A0620-00 in quiescent state seems to have very faint Keplerian features
(McClintock et al. 1995) indicating the Keplerian component to be farther out at low accretion
rates.
Bulk motion Comptonization close to the
horizon has been considered to be a possible cause of the power-law tail in
very soft states (Crary et al., 1996; Ling et al. 1997; Cui et al. 1997).
However, some alternative modes may not be ruled out to explain some of these features.
This observed and predicted dichotomy of states of black hole spectra
motivated us to investigate the nuclear reactions thoroughly for both
the states, but we report here the results obtained in the more important
case, namely, when the flow is hotter, i.e., for hard states.
We use $255$ nuclear elements in the thermo-nuclear network starting
from protons, neutrons, deuterium etc. till $^{72}Ge$ and the nuclear
reaction rates valid for high temperatures. We assume that
accretion on the galactic black hole is taking place from a disk where
matter is supplied from a normal main sequence star. That is,
we choose the abundance of the injected matter to be that of the sun. Because
of very high temperature, the result is nearly independent of the
initial composition, as long as reasonable choices are made. When
accretion rates are higher, the advective region becomes cooler
and very little nucleosynthesis takes place, the results are
presented elsewhere (Mukhopadhyay 1998; Mukhopadhyay \& Chakrabarti
1998).
As hot matter approaches a black hole, photons originated by the bremsstrahlung
process, as well as those intercepted from the Keplerian disk,
start to photo-dissociate deuterium and helium in the advective
region. There are two challenging issues at this stage which
we address first: (a) Thermodynamic
quantities such as density and temperature inside a disk are
computed using a {\it thin disk} approximation, i.e., the
vertical height $h(x)$ at a radial distance $x$ very small
compared to $x$ ($h(x) <<x$), and assuming
the flow to be instantaneously in vertical equilibrium.
However, at a low rate, it is easy to show that the disk is
optically thin in the vertical direction $\int_0^{h(x)}
{\rho \sigma dh} <1$ ($\sigma$ is the Thomson scattering
cross-section). However, soft photons from the Keplerian
disk enter radially and $\int_1^{x_s} \rho \sigma dx >1$, generally.
In fact, this latter possibility changes the soft photons
of a few keV from a Keplerian disk to energies up to $ \sim 1$MeV
by repeated Compton scattering (Sunyaev \& Titarchuk 1980;
Chakrabarti \& Titarchuk 1995) while keeping the photon number
strictly constant. The spectrum of the resultant photons
emitted to distant observers becomes a power law $F_\nu \sim \nu^{-\alpha}$
instead of a blackbody, where $\alpha \sim 0.5$ for hard state
and $\alpha \sim 1.5$ for soft states of a black hole. (b) Now that
the spectrum is not a blackbody, strictly speaking, the
computation of photo-disintegration rate that is standard in the
literature (which utilizes a Planckian spectrum) cannot be followed.
Fortunately, this may not pose a major problem. As we shall
show, the standard photo-disintegration rate yields
a lower limit of the actual rate that takes place in the presence
of power-law photon spectra. Thus, usage of the correct
rate obtainable from a power-law spectrum would,
if anything, strengthen our assertion
about the photo-disintegration around a black hole.
After photo-disintegration by these hard photons,
all that are left are protons and neutrons. The exact location where
the dissociation actually starts may depend on the detailed photon spectrum,
i.e., optical depth of this boundary layer and the electron temperature.
The plan of the present paper is the following: in the next section, we
present briefly the hydrodynamical model using which the thermodynamic
quantities such as the density and temperature inside the inner accretion
disk are computed. We also present the model parameters we employ.
In Sect. 3, we present results of nucleosynthesis inside a disk.
Finally, in Sect. 4, we present out concluding remarks.
\section{Model Determining the Thermodynamic Conditions}
We chose the units of distance, time and mass to be $2GM/c^2$, $2GM/c^3$ and $M$
where, $G$ is the gravitational constant, $M$ is the mass of the black hole,
and $c$ is the velocity of light. To keep the problem tractable without
sacrificing the salient features, we use a well understood model of the
accretion flow close to the black hole. We solve the following equations
(Chakrabarti 1996a,b) to obtain the thermodynamic quantities:
\noindent (a) The radial momentum equation:
$$
\vartheta \frac{d\vartheta}{dx} +\frac{1}{\rho}\frac{dP}{dx}
+\frac {\lambda_{Kep}^2-\lambda^2}{x^3}=0,
\eqno{(2a)}
$$
\noindent (b) The continuity equation:
$$
\frac{d}{dx} (\Sigma x \vartheta) =0 ,
\eqno{(2b)}
$$
\noindent (c) The azimuthal momentum equation:
$$
\vartheta\frac{d \lambda(x)}{dx} -\frac {1}{\Sigma x}\frac{d}{dx}
(x^2 W_{x\phi}) =0 ,
\eqno{(2c)}
$$
\noindent (d) The entropy equation:
$$
\Sigma v T \frac{ds}{dx} = \frac{h(x) \vartheta}{\Gamma_3 - 1}(\frac{dp}{dx} -
\Gamma_1 \frac{p}{\rho}) = Q^+_{mag}+Q^+_{nuc}+Q^+_{vis}-Q^-
= Q^+ - g(x, {\dot m}) Q^+ = f(\alpha, x, {\dot m}) Q^+ .
\eqno{(2d)}
$$
Here, $Q^+$ and $Q^-$ are the heat gained and lost by the flow, and ${\dot m}$
is the mass accretion rate in units of the Eddington rate. Here, we have
included the possibility of magnetic heating $Q^+_{mag}$
(due to stochastic fields; Shvartsman 1971; Shapiro, 1973; Bisnovatyi-Kogan, 1998)
and nuclear energy release $Q^+_{nuc}$ as well (cf. Taam \& Fryxall 1985)
while the cooling is provided by bremsstrahlung,
Comptonization, and endothermic reactions and neutrino emissions.
A strong magnetic heating might equalize ion and electron
temperatures (e.g. Bisnovatyi-Kogan 1998) but this would not
affect our conclusions. On the right hand side, we wrote $Q^+$ collectively
proportional to the cooling term for simplicity (purely on
dimensional grounds). We use the standard definitions
of $\Gamma$ (Cox \& Giuli 1968),
$$
\Gamma_3=1+\frac{\Gamma_1-\beta}{4-3\beta},
$$
$$
\Gamma_1=\beta + \frac{(4-3\beta)^2 (\gamma -1 )}{\beta + 12 (\gamma -1)(1-\beta)}
$$
and $\beta (x) $ is the ratio of gas pressure to total pressure,
$$
\beta(x) = \frac {\rho k T/\mu m_p}{\rho k T/\mu m_p + {\bar a} T^4/3 + B(x)^2/4\pi}
$$
Here, ${\bar a}$ is the Stefan constant, $k$ is the Boltzman constant, $m_p$
is the mass of the proton, $\mu$ is the mean molecular weight.
Using the above definitions, Eq. (2d) becomes,
$$
\frac{4-3\beta}{\Gamma_1-\beta} [\frac{1}{T}\frac{dT}{dx}
-\frac{1}{\beta}\frac{ d \beta}{dx} -
\frac{\Gamma_1 - 1}{\rho}\frac{d\rho}{dx} ]
= f(\alpha, x, {\dot m}) Q^+.
\eqno{(2e)}
$$
In this paper, we shall concentrate on solutions with constant $\beta$.
Actually, we study in detail only the special cases,
$\beta=0$ and $\beta=1$, so we shall liberally use $\Gamma_1=\gamma=\Gamma_3$.
We note here that unlike {\it self-gravitating} stars where $\beta=0$
causes instability, here this is not a problem. Similarly,
we shall consider the case for $f(\alpha, x, {\dot m})$ = constant, though
as is clear, $f\sim 0$ in the Keplerian disk region and
probably much greater than $0$ near the black hole depending on the efficiency of
cooling (governed by ${\dot m}$, for instance).
We use the Paczy\'nski-Wiita (1980) potential to describe the
black hole geometry. Thus, $\lambda_{Kep}$, the Keplerian angular
momentum is given by, $\lambda_{Kep}^2=x^3/2(x-1)^2$,
exactly same as in general relativity.
$W_{x\phi}$ is the vertically integrated viscous stress,
$h(x)$ is the half-thickness of the disk at radial
distance $x$ (both measured in units of $2GM/c^2$)
obtained from vertical equilibrium assumption (Chakrabarti 1989)
$\lambda(x)$ is the specific angular momentum,
$\vartheta$ is the radial velocity, $s$ is the entropy density
of the flow. The constant $\alpha$ above is the Shakura-Sunyaev (1973)
viscosity parameter modified to include the pressure due to radial motion
($\Pi=W+\Sigma \vartheta^2$,
where $W$ and $\Sigma$ are the integrated pressure and density
respectively; see Chakrabarti \& Molteni (1995) in the viscous stress.
With this choice, $W_{x\phi}$ keeps the specific angular
momentum continuous across of the shock.
For a complete run, we supply the basic parameters, namely, the location of
the sonic point through which flow must pass just outside the horizon
$X_{out}$, the specific angular momentum at the inner edge of the
flow $\lambda_{in}$, the polytropic index $\gamma$, the ratio $f$ of advected
heat flux $Q_+-Q_-$ to heat generation rate $Q^+$, the viscosity parameter
$\alpha_{vis}$ and the accretion rate ${\dot m}$. The derived quantities
are: $x_{tr}$ where the Keplerian flow deviates to become sub-Keplerian,
the ion temperature $T_p$, the flow density $\rho$, the radial velocity
$v_r$ and the azimuthal
velocity $\lambda/x$ of the entire flow from $x_{tr}$ to the
horizon. Temperature of the ions obtained from above equations
is further corrected using a cooling factor $F_{Comp}$
obtained from the results of radiative transfer of
Chakrabarti \& Titarchuk (1995).
Electrons cool due to Comptonization, but they cause the ion
cooling also since ions and electrons are coupled by Coulomb interaction.
$F_{Comp}$, chosen here to be constant in the advective region,
is the ratio of the ion temperature computed from hydrodynamic
(Chakrabarti 1996b) and radiation-hydrodynamic (Chakrabarti \&
Titarchuk 1995) considerations.
\section{Results of Nucleosynthesis Calculations}
In the first example, we start with a relativistic flow (polytropic
index $\gamma=4/3$) with the accretion rate ${\dot M}=0.01 {\dot M}_{Edd}$,
where, ${\dot M}_{Edd}$
is the Eddington accretion rate. We use the mass of the central black hole
to be $M=10M_\odot$ throughout. We choose a very high viscosity and the
corresponding $\alpha$ parameter (Shakura \& Sunyaev 1973) is $0.2$ in the
sub-Keplerian regime. The cooling is not as efficient as in a Keplerian disk:
$Q^- \sim 0.9 Q^+$, where, $Q^+$ and $Q^-$ are the heat generation and heat
loss rates respectively. The specific angular momentum at the inner edge
is $\lambda_{in}=1.65$ (in units of $2GM/c$). The flow deviates from
a Keplerian disk at $4.15$ Schwarzschild radii. It is to be noted
that $Q^-$ includes {\it all possible} types of cooling, such
as bremsstrahlung, Comptonization as well as cooling due to neutrino
emissions. We assume that the flow is magnetized so that only ions have
larger viscosity. Due to poor supply of the soft photons from
Keplerian disks, the Comptonization in the boundary layer is
not complete: we assume a standard value (Chakrabarti, \& Titarchuk 1995)
in this regime: $F_{Comp} \sim 0.1$, i.e., ions (in te radiation-hydrodynamic
solution) are one-tenth as hot as obtained from the hydrodynamic solutions.
[For high accretion rate, ${\dot m}\mathrel{\copy\simgreatbox} 0.3$,
$F_{Comp} \sim 0.001$ and ions and electrons both
cool to a few KeV ($\sim 10^7$ $^o$K)].
The typical density and temperature near the marginally stable orbit are
$\rho_{x=3} \sim 8.5 \times 10^{-8}$ gm cm$^{-3}$ and $7.5 \times 10^9$ $^o$K
respectively where the thermonuclear depletion rates $N_A <\sigma v>$ for the
$D \rightarrow p + n$, $^4He \rightarrow D + D$ and $^4He +^4He = ^7Li +p$
reactions are given by $ 1.6 \times 10^{14}$ gm$^{-1}$ s$^{-1}$, $4 \times 10^{-3}$
gm$^{-1}$ s$^{-1}$
and $ 1.9 \times 10^{-12}$ gm$^{-1}$ s$^{-1}$ respectively.
Here, $N_A$ is the element abundance on the
left, $\sigma$ is the reaction cross-section, $v$
is the Maxwellian average velocity of the reactants. At these
rates, the time scales of these reactions are given by,
$4 \times 10^5$s, $5 \times 10^{11}$s and $4 \times 10^{20}$s respectively
indicating that the deuterium burning is the fastest of the reactions.
In fact, it would take about a second to burn initial deuterium
with $Y_D=10^{-5}$. The $^7Li$ does not form at all because
the $^4He$ dissociates to $D$ much faster.
The above depletion rates have been computed assuming Planckian photon distribution
corresponding to ion temperature $T_p$. The wavelength $\lambda_{Planck}$ at which
the brightness is highest at $T=T_p$ is shown in Fig. 1 in
the dashed curve (in units of $10^{-11}$ cm). Also shown is the {\it average}
wavelength of the photon $\lambda_{Compton}$ (solid curve) obtained from the
spectrum $F_\nu \sim \nu^{-\alpha}$. The average has been performed over the
region $2$ to $50$keV of the photon energy in which the hard component is
usually observed
$$
< F_\nu > =\frac{\int_{\nu_{min}}^{\nu_{max}} F_\nu d\nu}{\int_{\nu_{min}}^{\nu^{max}}
d\nu} = \nu_{Compton}^{-\alpha}
\eqno{(3)}
$$
where, $\nu_{min}$ and $\nu_{max}$ are computed from $2$ and $50$keV respectively.
The average becomes a function of the energy spectral index $\alpha$
($F_\nu \propto \nu^{-\alpha}$), which in turn depends on the ion and
electron temperatures of the medium. We follow Chakrabarti
\& Titarchuk (1995) to compute these relations. We note that
$\lambda_{Compton}$ is {\it lower} compared to $\lambda_{Planck}$ for all ion
temperatures we are interested in. Thus, the disintegration
rate with Planckian distribution that we employed in this
paper is clearly a lower limit. Our assertion of the formation of
a neutron disk should be strengthened when Comptonization
is included.
Figure 2 shows the result of the numerical simulation for the disk model
mentioned above. Logarithmic abundance of neutron $Y_n$ is plotted against the
logarithmic distance from the black hole. First simulation produced the
dash-dotted curve for the neutron distribution,
forming a miniature neutron torus. As fresh matter is added to the existing
neutron disk, neutron abundance is increased as neutrons do not fall in
rapidly. Thus the simulation is
repeated several times in order to achieve a converging steady
pattern of the neutron disk. Although fresh neutrons are
deposited, the stability of the distribution is achieved through neutron
decay and neutron capture reactions. Results after every ten iterations
are plotted. The equilibrium neutron torus remains around the black
hole indefinitely. The neutron abundance is clearly very significant
(more than ten per cent!).
We study yet another case where the accretion rate is smaller (${\dot m}=0.001$) and
the viscosity is so small ($\alpha=0.01$) and the disk so hot that the sub-Keplerian
flow deviates from a Keplerian disk farther away at $x=85.1$. The polytropic index is
that of a mono-atomic (ionized) hot gas $\gamma=5/3$. The Compton cooling factor
is as above since it is independent of the accretion rates as long as the rate is
low (Sunyaev \& Titarchuk 1980; Chakrabarti \& Titarchuk 1995).
The cooling is assumed to be very inefficient because of
lower density: $Q^- \sim 0.4 Q^+$. The specific angular
momentum at the inner edge of the disk is $\lambda_{in}=1.55$.
In Fig. 3, we show the logarithmic abundances of proton (p), helium ($^4He$)
and neutron (n) as functions of the logarithmic distance from the black hole.
Note that $^4He$ dissociates completely at a distance of around $x=30$ where
the density and temperatures are $\rho = 2.29 \times 10^{-11}$ gm cm$^{-3}$
and $T=6.3 \times 10^9$ $^o$K. Maximum temperature attained in this case
is $T_{max} = 3.7 \times 10^{10}$ $^o$K. Both the neutrons and protons are
enhanced for $x\mathrel{\copy\simlessbox} 30$, the boundary layer of the black hole.
This neutron disk also remains stable despite neutron decay,
since new matter moves in to maintain equilibrium. The $^7Li$ abundance is
insignificant.
\section {Concluding Remarks}
In this paper, we have shown that hot flows may produce neutron disks
around black holes, where neutron abundance is
significant. However, unlike neutron
stars, the formation of which is accompanied by the production of neutron rich
isotopes, neutron disks do not produce significant neutron rich elements.
Some fragile elements, such as deuterium, could be produced in the cooler
outflows as follows:
Neutrons and protons may be released in space through winds which are produced
in the centrifugal barrier. These winds are common in black hole
sources and earlier they have been attributed to the dispersal of magnetic
fields to the galactic medium (Daly \& Loeb 1990; Chakrabarti et al. 1994). Recently, Chakrabarti (1998) and Das \& Chakrabarti (1998),
through a first ever self-consistent calculation of outflows out of accretion,
found that significant winds can be produced and for low enough
accretion rates, disks may even be almost evacuated causing the formation of
quiescence and inactive states such as what is observed in V404 Cyg and our
Galactic centre. If the temperature of the wind falls
off as $1/z$ and density as $z^{-3/2}$ (as is expected from an outflow of
insignificant rotation), the deuterium synthesis rate $n + p \rightarrow D$,
increases much faster very rapidly than the reverse ($D \rightarrow n+p$)
process. For instance, with density and
temperature mentioned as in the earlier section, at $z=30 x_g$,
the forward rate ($N_A <\sigma v>$) is $0.12\times 10^{-5}$ while the reverse
rate is much higher: $6.7 \times 10^{13}$. This results in the dissociation of
deuterium. However, at $z=300 x_g$, the above rates are $1.8 \times 10^{-8}$ and
$9.6 \times 10^{-6}$ respectively and at $z=3000 x_g$, the above rates are $1.3 \times
10^{-8}$ and
$\sim 10^{-165}$ respectively. Thus a significant deuterium could be produced
farther out, say, starting from a distance of $\sim 10^3 x_g$.
Ramadurai \& Rees (1985) suggested deuterium formation on
the surface of ion tori. As we establish here, this process may be
feasible, only if these tori are vertically {\it very thick}:
$z(x) \sim 10^3 x_g$. In any case, deuterium would be expected to form
in winds and disperse.
\begin {figure}
\noindent {\small {\bf Fig. 1.} Comparison of wavelength $\lambda_{Planck}$ at peak
blackbody intensity
(dotted) with the mean (taken between $2$ and $50$keV) wavelength of the Comptonized power
law spectrum
(solid) of the emitted X-rays. Wavelengths are measured in units of $10^{-11}$cm.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\noindent {\small {\bf Fig. 2.} Formation of a steady {\it neutron torus} in a hot inflow.
Intermediate iteration results (from bottom to top: 1st, 11th, 21st, 31st and 41st
iterations respectively) of
the logarithmic neutron abundance $Y_n$ in the flow as a function of the logarithmic radial
distance ($x$ in units of Schwarzschild radius) are shown. }
\end{figure}
\begin {figure}
\noindent {\small {\bf Fig. 3.} Variation of matter abundance $Y_i$ in
logarithmic scale in a hot flow around a galactic black hole. Entire $^4He$ is
photodissociated at around $x=30x_g$ and the steady neutron disk is produced for $x<30$
which is not accreted.}
\end{figure}
In a typical case of a disk with an accretion rate of ${\dot M} \sim {\dot M}_{Edd}$,
the temperature is lower, but the density is higher. In that case, the photo-dissociation
of $^4He$ is insignificant and typically the change in abundances of some of
the elements, such as $^{16}O$, $^{20}Ne$ etc. could be around $\Delta Y \sim
10^{-3}$ not as high as that of the neutron as in above cases where $\Delta
Y_n \sim 0.1$. One could estimate the contamination of the galactic metalicity
due to nuclear reactions as we do for realistic models. Assume that, on an average,
all the $N$ stellar black holes of equal mass $M$ have a non-dimensional
accretion rate of around ${\dot m} \sim 1$ (${\dot m}={\dot M}/{\dot M}_{Edd}$).
Let $\Delta Y_i$ be the typical change in composition of this matter
during the run and let $f_w$ be the fraction of the incoming flow that goes out as winds
and outflows, then in the lifetime of a galaxy (say, $10^{10}$yrs), the total `change'
in abundance of a particular species deposited to the surroundings by all the stellar
black holes is given by:
$$
<\Delta Y_i> \cong 10^{-9} (\frac{\dot m}{1}) (\frac{N}{10^6}) (\frac{\Delta Y_i}{10^{-3}})
(\frac{f_w}{0.1} ) (\frac {M}{10 M_\odot}) (\frac{T_{gal}}{10^{10}}) (\frac{M_{gal}}{10^{13} M_\odot})^{-1} .
\eqno{(4)}
$$
We here assume a conservative estimate that there are $10^6$ such stellar black holes
(there number varies from $10^8$ (van den Heuvel 1992, 1998) to several thousands (Romani, 1998)
depending on assumptions made) and the mass of the host galaxy is around $10^{13}M_\odot$
and the lifetime of
the galaxy during which such reactions are going on is about
$10^{10}$Yrs. We believe that $<\Delta Y_i> \sim 10^{-9}$ is quite
reasonable for a typical case when $\Delta Y_i \sim 10^{-3}$
and a fraction of ten percent of matter is blown off as winds.
When $\Delta Y_i \sim 0.1$ or the outflow rate is higher
(particularly in presence of strong centrifugal barrier) the
contamination would be even higher.
It is to be noted that our assertion of formation of neutron disks
around a black hole for very low accretion rate ${\dot M} \sim
0.001-0.01 {\dot M}_{Edd}$ is different from that of the earlier
results (Hogan, \& Applegate, 1987) where ${\dot M} \sim 10 {\dot M}_{Edd}$ was believed
to be the more favourable accretion rate. This is because in last
decades the emphasis was on super-Eddington thick accretion tori.
More recent computations suggest that advective regions are not as hot
when the rates are very high. Another assertion of our work is
that $^7Li$ should not be produced in accretion disks at all.
This is not in line with earlier suggestions (Jin 1990)
also. That is because unlike earlier case where the spallation reaction
$^4He$ +$^4He$ was dealt with in isolation, we study this in
relation to other reactions prevalent in the disk. We find
that $^4He$ could be dissociated much before it can contribute to
spallation. However, our work supports Ramadurai \&
Rees' (1985) conjecture that deuterium may be produced in the
outer regions of the disk provided the disk is at least as thick as $10^3 x_g$.
In the process of performing the simulation we were faced with a
challenge which was never addressed earlier in the literature. The problem
arises because the inflow under consideration is optically thin vertically,
but optically thick horizontally. As a result, photons emitted form a power-law
spectrum. Question naturally arises, whether these power-law photons are
capable of photo-disintegration. We find that the answer is yes and that the
calculation of usual photo-disintegration gives a lower limit of the changes in the
composition. In the extreme conditions close to the black hole, such
processes are sufficiently effective to produce neutron disks around black holes.
We thank Mr. A. Ray for carefully reading the manuscript.
|
\section{The Problem}
The 1997--1998 El Ni\~{n}o was one of the strongest on record.
Unfortunately, its onset was not predicted as well as had been hoped
\citep{NSSneakyElNino}. In spite of claims that an El Ni\~{n}o could be
predicted a year in advance, most predictions
\citep{AndersonNature,NCEPNinoModel,COLACoupled,KleemanSubsurface}
only started to indicate a weak event six months ahead of time.
There have therefore been suggestions that El Ni\~no depends not only
on internal factors, but also on external noise in the form of
weather events in the western Pacific.
The classical picture of El Ni\~{n}o \citep{BjerknesENSO,PhilanderBook}
is that the usual temperature difference between the warm water near
Indonesia and the `cold tongue' in the eastern equatorial Pacific
causes an intensification of the trade winds. These keep the eastern
region cool by drawing cold water to the surface. This positive
feedback loop is kept in check by nonlinear effects. During an El
Ni\~{n}o the loop is broken: a decreased temperature difference causes a
slackening or reversal of the trade winds over large parts of the
Pacific. This prevents cold water from reaching the surface, keeping
the surface waters warm and sustaining the El Ni\~{n}o.
This picture leaves open the question how an El Ni\~{n}o event is
triggered and terminated. A variety of mechanisms has been proposed.
On long time scales an unstable mode of the nonlinear coupled
ocean-atmosphere system may be responsible \citep{NeelinSlow}, either
oscillatory or chaotic. Other authors stress the importance of a
`recharge' mechanism \citep{Wyrtki75,JinRecharge}, with a built-up of
warm water in the western Pacific preceding an El Ni\~no. Another
description on shorter time scales is in terms of reflections of
equatorial Rossby and Kelvin waves in the thermocline (the interface
between warm surface water and the cold water below at about 100 m
depth). These would provide the negative feedback that sustains
oscillations
\citep{SuarezSchopfDelayed,BattistiHirstDelayed,Kessler9193}.
However, short-scale atmospheric `noise' in the form of westerly wind
events in the western Pacific may also be essential in triggering an
El Ni\~{n}o \citep{Wyrtki85,KesslerForcing}.
Here we trace the causes of the onset of last year's El Ni\~{n}o in
May 1997 over the six months from 1 December 1996. This is the time
scale over which predictions are currently skillful. Although El
Ni\~no is an oscillation of the coupled ocean-atmosphere system, the
analysis can be simplified by first studying the response of the ocean
to forcing with observed wind stress and heat flux fields. This
response contains all time delays. The other part of the loop, the
dependence of the wind stress and heat flux on the ocean surface
temperature will be discussed separately.
The ocean model used is the Hamburg Ocean Primitive
Equation Model, \textsc{hope} \citep{Frey97,HOPE97} version
2.3, which is very similar to the ocean component of the European
Centre for Medium-range Weather Forecasts (\textsc{ecmwf}) seasonal
prediction system \citep{AndersonNature}, but restricted to the
Pacific Ocean. It is a general circulation model with a horizontal
resolution of 2.8\dg, increased to 0.5\dg\ along the equator, and a
vertical resolution of 25 m in the upper ocean. It traces the
evolution of temperature $T$, salinity $S$, horizontal velocities
$u,v$ and sea level $\zeta$.
This ocean model is forced with daily wind stress $(\tau_x,\tau_y)$
and heat flux $Q$ from the \textsc{ecmwf} analysis, which in turn uses
the excellent system of buoys \citep{TOGA1998} that observed this El
Ni\~{n}o. Evaporation and precipitation are only implemented as a
relaxation to climatological surface salinity. The initial state
conditions are \textsc{ecmwf} analysed ocean states. To suppress
systematic model errors we subtract a run starting from an average
1 December ocean state forced with average wind and heat fluxes (both
1979--1996 averages \citep{era1}).
\setlength{\unitlength}{0.1bp}
\ifx\undefined
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\else
\begin{figure}[b]
\fi
\begin{center}
\begin{picture}(3500,1800)(100,250)
\put(0,0){\psfig{file=nino3_onset.eps}}
\put(650,1949){\makebox(0,0){1996--1997}}
\put(650,580){\makebox(0,0){1995--1996}}
\put(3370,150){\makebox(0,0){J}}
\put(3008,150){\makebox(0,0){J}}
\put(2647,150){\makebox(0,0){M}}
\put(2286,150){\makebox(0,0){A}}
\put(1925,150){\makebox(0,0){M}}
\put(1564,150){\makebox(0,0){F}}
\put(1203,150){\makebox(0,0){J}}
\put(842,150){\makebox(0,0){D}}
\put(481,150){\makebox(0,0){N}}
\put(250,661){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{0}$}}
\put(250,456){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{-1}$}}
\put(250,250){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{-2}$}}
\put(000,2150){\makebox(0,0)[l]{\textsc{nino3} [K]}}
\put(250,1849){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{3}$}}
\put(250,1637){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{2}$}}
\put(250,1426){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{1}$}}
\put(250,1215){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{0}$}}
\put(250,1004){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{-1}$}}
\end{picture}
\end{center}
\caption{The \textsc{nino3} index observed (solid line) and simulated by
the six-month forced model runs (dashed lines).}
\label{fig:ENSOonset}
\end{figure}
The model simulates the onset of the 1997--1998 El
Ni\~{n}o quite well. We use the \textsc{nino3} index $N_3$, which is a common
measure of the strength of El Ni\~{n}o (the anomalous sea surface
temperature in the area 5\dg S--5\dg N, 90\dg W--150\dg W{}). In
Fig.~\ref{fig:ENSOonset} the weekly observed \textsc{nino3} index
\citep{ReynoldsAnalyses} is shown together with the index in the model run,
compared to the same period one year earlier. The model
overreacts somewhat to the forcing and simulates a \textsc{nino3}
index of 2.3~K at 1 June 1997, whereas in reality the index reached
this value one month later. In 1995--1996 the simulation follows reality very
well.
\section{The Adjoint Model}
The value of the \textsc{nino3} index at the end of a model run can be
traced back to the model input (initial state, forcing) with an
\emph{adjoint model}. The normal ocean model is a (complicated)
function $\mathcal{M}$ that takes as input the state of the ocean at
some time $t_0$ (temperature $T_0$, salinity $S_0$, etc.). Using the
wind stress $\vec{\tau}_i$ and heat flux $Q_i$ for each day $i$ for
six months it then produces a final state temperature $T_n$. The
adjoint model (or backward derivative model) is
the related function that takes as input derivatives to a scalar function
of the final state, here the \textsc{nino3} index, $\partial
N_3/\partial T_n$. It goes backward in time and uses the chain rule of
differentiation \citep{GieringRecipes} to compute from these
(and the forward trajectory) the derivatives
$\partial N_3/\partial T_0$, $\partial
N_3/\partial S_0$, $\partial N_3/\partial\vec{\tau}_i$ and $\partial
N_3/\partial Q_i$. These derivatives can be interpreted as
\emph{sensitivity fields},
giving the effect of a perturbation in the initial state or forcing fields.
We can use them to make a Taylor expansion of the
\textsc{nino3} index to all the input variables:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:dN3}
N_3 & \approx & \frac{\partial N_3}{\partial T_0}\cdot\delta T_0
+ \frac{\partial N_3}{\partial S_0}\cdot\delta S_0
\nonumber\\ && \mbox{}
+ \sum_{\mathrm{days}~i} \left(
\frac{\partial N_3}{\partial\vec{\tau}_i}\cdot\delta\vec{\tau}_i
+ \frac{\partial N_3}{\partial Q_i}\cdot\delta Q_i
\right)
\end{eqnarray}
This means that the value of the index is explained as a sum of the
influences of initial state temperature and salinity, and the wind and
heat forcing during the six months of the run. These influences are
each a dot product of the sensitivity to this variable (computed with
the adjoint model) multiplied by its deviation from the normal state
(extracted from the \textsc{ecmwf} analyses). To minimize higher
order terms we take the average derivative from the simulation and the
climatology run. We have checked with actual perturbations that the
accuracy of the linear approximation Eq.~\ref{eq:dN3} is usually
better than about 30\% (within the model). Details can be found in
\citet{OldenborghTracking}.
\section{The 1997--1998 El Ni\~{n}o}
For the value of the \textsc{nino3} index on 1 June 1997 the
linearization Eq.~\ref{eq:dN3} gives a value of 1.8~K, compared with
the 2.3~K simulated (and 1.3~K observed), this is within the expected
error. The high value is mainly due to the influence of the westerly
wind anomalies (1.0~K) and the initial state temperature on 1 December
1996 (1.1~K){}. The salinity contributes $-$0.3~K, with a large
uncertainty.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\figwidth=0.4\textwidth
\makebox[0cm][r]{\Large a}\raisebox{3ex}%
{\psfig{file=thano_eqc.eps,angle=-90,width=\figwidth}}\\[2mm]
\hspace*{\figwidth}\makebox[0cm][r]{$\delta T_0\:[\mathrm{K}]$}\\%[-2mm]
\makebox[0cm][r]{\Large b}\raisebox{3ex}%
{\psfig{file=dtave_eqc.eps,angle=-90,width=\figwidth}}\\[2mm]
\hspace*{\figwidth}\makebox[0cm][r]{$\partial N_3/\partial T_0\:[\mathrm{K/K/sr/m}]$}\\%[-2mm]
\makebox[0cm][r]{\Large c}\raisebox{3ex}%
{\psfig{file=dtave_thano_eqc.eps,angle=-90,width=\figwidth}}\\[2mm]
\hspace*{\figwidth}\makebox[0cm][r]{$\partial N_3/\partial T_0\cdot\delta T_0\:[\mathrm{K/sr/m}]$
\end{center}
\caption{Depth-longitude plots of the effect of the initial state
temperature on the \textsc{nino3} index in early June. At the top the
analyzed temperature anomalies (averaged over 5\dg S--5\dg N) are
shown at the beginning of December 1996; the second frame depicts the
sensitivity of the ocean to these temperature anomalies and the third
the product of these two, which gives the rise in the \textsc{nino3}
index on June 1 due to the thermal structure six months earlier.}
\label{fig:Tini}
\end{figure}
The spatial structure of the influence of the initial state
temperature is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Tini}. The top panel gives the
temperature anomaly $\delta T_0$ along the equator at the
beginning of the run (Dec 1996), showing an unusually deep
thermocline in the western Pacific and a shallower thermocline in the
eastern Pacific. The second frame depicts the sensitivity of the June
\textsc{nino3} index to temperature anomalies six months earlier,
$\partial N_3/\partial T_0$. The third frame is just the product of
the previous two; the integral of this over the whole ocean gives the
1.1~K contribution to the \textsc{nino3} index mentioned before. The
contribution is concentrated in the deeper layer of warm water along
the equator in the western Pacific, in agreement with a `recharge'
mechanism.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\begin{picture}(3800,1250)(100,750)
\put(0,0){\psfig{file=influences_onset_tx.eps}}
\put(3291,800){\makebox(0,0){M}}
\put(2775,800){\makebox(0,0){A}}
\put(2258,800){\makebox(0,0){M}}
\put(1741,800){\makebox(0,0){F}}
\put(1225,800){\makebox(0,0){J}}
\put(1225,650){\makebox(0,0){1997}}
\put(708,800){\makebox(0,0){D}}
\put(708,650){\makebox(0,0){1996}}
\put(863,1731){\makebox(0,0)[l]{$\partial N_3/\partial\tau_x\cdot\delta\tau_x$}}
\put(100,1950){\makebox(0,0)[l]{[K/week]}}
\put(400,1749){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{0.3}$}}
\put(400,1560){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{0.2}$}}
\put(400,1371){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{0.1}$}}
\put(400,1182){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{0}$}}
\put(400,993){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{-0.1}$}}
\put(863,1581){\makebox(0,0)[l]{$\delta\tau_x$}}
\put(3900,1950){\makebox(0,0)[r]{[$\mathrm{Nm^{-2}}$]}}
\put(3900,1749){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{0.06}$}}
\put(3900,1560){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{0.04}$}}
\put(3900,1371){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{0.02}$}}
\put(3900,1182){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{0}$}}
\put(3900,993){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{-0.02}$}}
\end{picture}
\end{center}
\caption{The influence of the zonal wind stress $\tau_x$ on the
\textsc{nino3} index at 1 June 1997 during the previous six months
(solid line), the average anomalous wind stress over the area 130\dg E to
160\dg W, 5\dg S to 5\dg N.}
\label{fig:influences_onset}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig:influences_onset} shows the time structure of the
influence of the zonal wind stress. The area under the solid graph
gives the total influence, 1.0~K. The main causes of warming are the
three peaks in zonal wind stress (dashed line) at the beginning of
March, the end of March and the beginning of April, contributing about
0.6~K, 0.3~K and 0.5~K respectively. The peaks correspond with (very)
strong westerly wind events in the western Pacific. These generated
downwelling Kelvin waves in the thermocline that travelled east and
deepened the layer of warm water in the eastern Pacific 2--3 months
later, increasing the surface temperature. There was also a strong
wind event in December, contributing about 0.4~K over a negative
baseline. From Fig.~\ref{fig:influences_onset} it seems likely that
it increased the strength of the later wind events by heating the
eastern Pacific in March. The heating effect of the March wind event
also gave rise to an increase of the wind stress $\delta\tau_x$ in
May, but this reversal of the trade winds does not yet influence the
\textsc{nino3} index $\partial N_3/\partial\tau_x\cdot\delta\tau_x$,
justifying the uncoupled analysis.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\figwidth=0.8\textwidth
\makebox[0cm][r]{\Large a}\raisebox{3ex}%
{\psfig{file=txjr97bwk20c.eps,angle=-90,width=\figwidth}}\\[-4mm]
\psfig{file=txbarc.eps,angle=-90,width=\figwidth}\\[0mm]
\hspace*{\figwidth}\makebox[0cm][r]{$\delta\tau_x\:[\mathrm{Nm^{-2}}]$}\\[-2mm]
\makebox[0cm][r]{\Large b}\raisebox{3ex}%
{\psfig{file=dtxjr97bwk20c.eps,angle=-90,width=\figwidth}}\\[-4mm]
\psfig{file=adtxbarc.eps,angle=-90,width=\figwidth}\\[0mm]
\hspace*{\figwidth}\makebox[0cm][r]{$\partial N_3/\partial \tau_x\:[\mathrm{K/Nm^{-2}/sr/day}]$}\\[-2mm]
\makebox[0cm][r]{\Large c}\raisebox{3ex}%
{\psfig{file=dtx_txjr97bwk20c.eps,angle=-90,width=\figwidth}}\\[-4mm]
\psfig{file=dtx_txbarc.eps,angle=-90,width=\figwidth}\\[0mm]
\hspace*{\figwidth}\makebox[0cm][r]{$\partial N_3/\partial \tau_x\cdot\delta\tau_x\:[\mathrm{K/sr/day}]$}\\[-2mm]
\end{center}
\caption{The effect of the March westerly windburst on the
\textsc{nino3} index in early June. At the top the averaged westerly
wind stress anomaly for the week centered on 11 March 1997 is shown,
the second frame depicts the sensitivity of the ocean to zonal
wind stress and the third the product of these two which gives the
rise in the \textsc{nino3} index on June 1 due to this wind event.}
\label{fig:march}
\end{figure}
The structure of the peaks in Fig.~\ref{fig:influences_onset} can be
seen more clearly in spatial views. In Fig.~\ref{fig:march}a the
zonal wind stress anomaly $\delta\tau_x$ is plotted for the second
week of March. The westerly wind event corresponds to the large
localized westerly anomaly around 150\dg E{}. Fig.~\ref{fig:march}b
shows the sensitivity of the \textsc{nino3} index in June to the zonal
wind stress during this week, $\partial N_3/\partial\tau_x$. This
sensitivity consists of two main parts, both equatorally confined. In
the western and central Pacific extra westerly wind stress would
excite a downwelling Kelvin wave, raising the \textsc{nino3} index
three months later. In the eastern Pacific the response would be in
the form of a Rossby wave. The product of the anomaly and sensitivity
fields is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:march}c. This gives the influence of
zonal wind stress during this week on the \textsc{nino3} index, the
integral of this field gives the corresponding value (0.22~K) in
Fig.~\ref{fig:influences_onset}. The influence is contained in the
intersection of the westerly wind event and the equatorial wave guide,
and very localized in time and space. The effects of the other wind
events are similar.
The question remains whether the big influence of these wind events
was due to their strength $\delta\tau_x$ or to an increased
sensitivity of the ocean $\partial N_3/\partial\tau_x$. We therefore
repeated the analysis for the same months one year earlier, when the
temperature in the eastern Pacific stayed below normal
(Fig.~\ref{fig:ENSOonset}). The adjoint model gives a \textsc{nino3}
index of $\mathrm{-0.6}$~K, equal to the simulated index (the observed
index was $\mathrm{-0.7}$~K). This index is built up by a large
negative influence of the wind stress, $\mathrm{-1.5}$~K, and a
positive influence of the heat flux, $\mathrm{+0.9}$~K. The influence
of the initial state temperature is also positive, but weaker than in
the 1996--1997 $\mathrm{+0.6}$~K, and the salinity contributes
$\mathrm{-0.5}$~K.
Although the built-up of warm water is also less pronounced,
the largest difference is in the influence of the zonal
wind stress. The sensitivity to zonal wind stress $\partial
N_3/\partial\tau_x$ (over the area where its variability is largest)
is compared for these two years in Fig.~\ref{fig:avedflux}. During
the time of the strong early March windevent the sensitivity was not
very different bewteen the two years, but it was a factor two higher
in April 1997 than in April 1996, and lower during the first two
months. In all, these differences cannot explain more than a few
tenths of a degree difference in the \textsc{nino3} index on 1 June.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\begin{picture}(3600,1250)(0,200)
\put(0,0){\psfig{file=dtxave_onset.eps}}
\put(713,958){\makebox(0,0)[l]{1996--1997}}
\put(713,1108){\makebox(0,0)[l]{1995--1996}}
\put(3279,150){\makebox(0,0){M}}
\put(2738,150){\makebox(0,0){A}}
\put(2196,150){\makebox(0,0){M}}
\put(1654,150){\makebox(0,0){F}}
\put(1113,150){\makebox(0,0){J}}
\put(571,150){\makebox(0,0){D}}
\put(000,1350){\makebox(0,0)[l]{$\partial N_3/\partial\tau_x$
[$\mathrm{K/Nm^{-2}/sr/day}$]}}
\put(250,1196){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{10}$}}
\put(250,723){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{5}$}}
\put(250,250){\makebox(0,0)[r]{$\mathrm{0}$}}
\end{picture}
\end{center}
\caption{The average sensitivity of the \textsc{nino3} index on 1 June
to westerly winds in the area defined in
Fig.~\ref{fig:influences_onset}.}
\label{fig:avedflux}
\end{figure}
The difference between an El Ni\~{n}o in 1997 and no El Ni\~no in 1996
can be attributed for about 30\% to an even stronger built-up of warm
water in the western Pacific, and for about 90\% to the the absence of
strong westerly wind events in the western Pacific in the 1995--1996
rain season. A successful prediction scheme will have to predict the
intensity of the westerly wind events correctly. However, the
year-to-year variability of these wind events does not seem to depend
on the state of the Pacific ocean \citep{Slingo98}, and at the moment
is not predictable.
\section{Conclusions}
Using an adjoint ocean model we have shown that a successful
prediction of the strong onset of the 1997--1998 El Ni\~{n}o, required
a successful prediction of strong westerly wind events in
March--April, which in our model contributed about 90\% to the strength of
the El Ni\~no on 1 June 1997 compared to the situation one year earlier.
The sensitivity to these wind events was not significantly different
from the year before. The built-up of warm water contributed about
30\% of the difference. The strong dependence on the westerly wind
events would explain the relatively short lead time for correct
predictions of the strong onset of this El Ni\~{n}o.
\paragraph{Acknowledgments} I would like to thank the \textsc{ecmwf} seasonal
prediction group for their help and support and Gerrit Burgers for his
part in the construction of the adjoint model. This research was
supported by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research
(NWO).
|
\section*{1.Introduction}
~~~The asymptotically free property of Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) has been
widely applied to analyze the scaling behaviors of high energy processes and
attracted much attention to investigate the QCD renormalization$^{1-23}$.
This property was at first discovered in Refs.(1) and (2) from studying the
one-loop renormalization and the solution of renormalization group equation
(RGE)$^{24-29}$satisfied by the coupling constant. The anomalous dimension (
or the $\beta $-function) appearing in the equation was computed from the
renormalization constants which are ordinarily given by mass-independent
subtractions such as the minimal subtraction (MS)$^6$, the modified minimal
subtraction$^7$and the momentum space subtraction(MOM)$^8$ . However, there
appears a serious ambiguity problem$^{11}$ that different subtraction
schemes give different results for a renormalized quantity in a finite order
perturbative calculation. In the $MS$ schemes which is carried out in the
dimensional regularization procedure, only the divergent terms proportional
to the factor $\frac 1\varepsilon $ (where $\varepsilon =2-\frac n2$) are
subtracted. The $MS$ scheme was demonstrated to give the perturbative
expansion in the coupling constant for a physical quantity which is of worse
convergence. To improve the convergence, the $\overline{MS}$ scheme was
proposed to subtract the divergent part of a Feynman diagram which contains
the factor $\frac 1{\widehat{\varepsilon }}=\frac 1\varepsilon +\ln 4\pi
-\gamma $ where the unphysical terms $\ln 4\pi -\gamma $ arise from a
special way of analytical continuation of the dimension from n to 4$^9$. The
$MS$ and $\overline{MS}$ schemes are simple and respect the Ward identity,
but considered to be nonphysical$^8$. In the MOM scheme, the divergence in a
Feynman integral is subtracted at an Euclidean momentum, $p_i^2=-\mu ^2$.
This subtraction was viewed as physical and shown to give the perturbative
series of better convergence. Nevertheless, the renormalization constants
obtained in this scheme do not automatically satisfy the Ward identity. To
solve the ambiguity problem, several prescriptions were proposed in the past$%
^{10-14}.$ In our preceding paper on the QED renormalization$^{33}$, we
treated the ambiguity problem from a different angle. It was argued that a
subtraction scheme must respect necessary physical and mathematical
principles shcu as the gauge-symmetry (the Ward identity), the
Lorentz-invariance( the energy-momentum conservation) and the mathematical
convergence. In addition, it was proved that the solution of the
renormalization group equation (RGE) for a renormalized quantity (for
example, a wave function, a propagator or a vertex) can be uniquely
determined by applying the renormalization boudary condition without any
ambiguity. As a result, an exact S-matrix element can be expressed in the
form as given in the tree-diagram approximation except that the coupling
constant, the fermion mass and the gauge parameter become effective
(running )ones. Therefore the tesk of renormalization is reduced to find
these effective quantities.
In the mass-independent subtractions mentioned before, the fermion mass is
set to be zero, or say, only the massless fermion propagator $\frac 1{\not p}
$ is used in the calculation of divergent Feynman diagrams. The rationality
of the mass-independent subtraction was argued as follows$^{6,29}$. In the
conventional perturbation series which is expanded in coupling constant, the
massive fermion propagator can be expanded as such a series
\begin{equation}
\frac 1{\not p-m}=\frac 1{\not p}+\frac 1{\not p}m\frac 1{\not p}+\frac 1{%
\not p}m\frac 1{\not p}m\frac 1{\not p}+\cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot
\end{equation}
Substitution of this series into the coventional perturbation series leads
to a new perturbation series in which the fermion propagator becomes
massless and the fermion mass, like the coupling constant, can be treated as
another expansion parameter. Working with this kind of perturbation series,
one may perform the mass-independent subtraction. It is obvious that in
order to obtain a quantity which is of a certain order of coupling constant
in the sense of the conventional perturbation theory, according to Eq.(1.1),
one has to compute an infinite set of perturbative terms in the new
perturbation theory. In the large momentum limit, the massive propagator is
reduced to the massless one. In this case, there will be no difference
between the both perturbation theories mentioned above. However, for a
process whose energy is not too high, particularly, in the energy region
near the meson production threshold, the mass in the fermion propagator can
not be negligible. In this case, to see the effect of fermion mass on the
renormalization , it is convenient to carry out a mass-dependent
renormalization in the framework of the conventional perturbation theory as
was done in the previous literature$^{3,10}$. Obviously, the MOM scheme is
suitable for this kind of renormalization. In Ref.(3), the subtraction was
carried out at an arbitrary Euclidean point, $p_i^2=-\mu ^2$ and in the
Landau gauge. while, in Ref.(10), the renormalization was done at an off
mass shell point, $p_i^2-m_i^2=-\mu ^2$ and in the Feynman gauge. Both of
the subtractions give the same one-loop anomalous dimension of the coupling
constant, but different anomalous dimensions of the quark mass.
In this paper, we wish to restudy the QCD mass-dependent renormalization in
the MOM\ scheme along the line as described in our preceding paper. The new
features of this study are: (1) The subtraction exactly respects necessary
physical and mathematical principles. Owing to the restriction of these
principles, the renormalization will be put on the faithful basis and have
no ambiguity. For example, by the convergence principle, we are not allowed
to employ the divergent form of renormalization constants to do a meaningful
calculation because a divergent quantity is not well-defined mathematically
and therefore can not be unambiguously evaluated by any computational rule.
The correct procedure of computing the anomalous dimension in a RGE is usage
of regularized froms of the renormalization constants. By this procedure, a
renormalized quantity given by solving its RGE will be uniquely determined
by its anomalous dimension and boundary condition; (2) the renormalization
point is taken to be a time-like (Minkowski) momentum. The subtraction with
this renormalization point will be called generalized mass-shell scheme(GMS)
because this scheme can naturally lead to the results given in the
mass-shell subtraction scheme. It will be shown that the behavior of a
renormalized quantity derived in the GMS scheme is different from the ones
obtained in other subtraction schemes; (3) The QCD one-loop effective
coupling constant and effective quark masses derived in the GMS scheme and
in general gauges are given rigorous and explicit expressions. These
expressions will go over to the results given in the MS scheme in the large
momentum limit.
The remainder of this paper is arranged as follows. In Sect.2, we will
describe the derivation of the renormalization constant of coupling
constant. This renormalization constant is chosen to be determined by the
renormalization constants of the gluon propagator, the ghost particle
propagator and the ghost vertices. The renormalization constant of gluon
propagator is given based on the Ward identity. It will be shown that the
other two renormalization constants for the ghost particle propagator and
the ghost vertex will give their anomalous dimensions which are
renormalization-scheme-independent. In Sect.3, we will derive an explicit
expression of the effective coupling constant by solving its RGE and show
its asymptotic behavior. In Sect.4, we will give a derivation of the Ward
identity satisfied by the quark-gluon vertex and prove that in the
approximation of order $g^2$, this identity is reduced to the form as found
in QED and thus the subtraction version of the quark self-energy is similar
to that for the electron self-energy. In Sect.5, an explicit expression of
effective quark masses will be given by solving its RGE. We will end this
paper with some comments and discussions.
\setcounter{section}{2}
\section*{2. The Renomalization Constant of Coupling Constant}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
The renormalization constant of coupling constant $Z_g$ is defined by
\begin{equation}
g=Z_gg_R
\end{equation}
where $g_R$ and $g$ denote the renormalized and unrenormalized coupling
constants respectively. According to the Ward identity$^{30}$, the $Z_g$ can
be expressed in different ways. In this section, we prefer to use the
following expression
\begin{equation}
Z_g=\frac{\widetilde{Z}_1}{\widetilde{Z}_3Z_3^{\frac 12}}
\end{equation}
where $Z_3,\widetilde{Z}_3$ and $\widetilde{Z}_1$ are the renormalization
constants for the gluon propagator, the ghost particle propagator and ghost
vertex respectively. In the following, we will describe how they are
determined by the subtractions of the gluon self-energy, the ghost particle
self-energy and the ghost vertex correction in the GMS scheme. The one-loop
diagrams for the gluon self-energy, the ghost particle self-energy and the
ghost vertex correction have already been calculated in the literature$%
^{8,31,32}$ by the dimensional regularization . So, we may directly quote
the results and put some emphases on essential points of the subtraction
procedure in the GMS scheme.
~~The renormalization constant $Z_3$ is, in the GMS scheme, defined by
\begin{equation}
Z_3^{-1}=1+\Pi (\mu ^2)
\end{equation}
where $\Pi (k^2)$ is the gluon self-energy appearing in the transverse part
of gluon propagator
\begin{equation}
iD_{\mu \nu }^{ab}(k)=\frac{-i\delta ^{ab}}{k^2+i\varepsilon }[(g_{\mu \nu }-%
\frac{k_\mu k_\nu }{k^2})\frac 1{1+\Pi (k^2)}+\xi \frac{k_\mu k_\nu }{k^2}]
\end{equation}
A correct way of calculating the function $\Pi (k^2)$ is to use the relation
\begin{equation}
\Pi (k^2)=\frac 1{3k^2}g^{\mu \nu }\Pi _{\mu \nu }(k)
\end{equation}
where $\Pi _{\mu \nu }(k)$ is the radiative correction tensor which is
transverse, $\Pi _{\mu \nu }(k)=(k^2g_{\mu \nu }-k_\mu k_\nu )\Pi (k^2)$, as
implied by the Ward identity $k^\mu \Pi _{\mu \nu }(k)=0$. For the one-loop
gluon self-energy diagrams as depicted in Figs.(1a)-(1c), after computing
the $\Pi (k^2)$ by the dimensional regularization procedure and then setting
$k^2=\mu ^2$, one can get the regularized form of the $Z_3$ as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
Z_3 &=&1+\frac{g^2}{(4\pi )^2}(4\pi M^2)^\varepsilon \Gamma (1+\varepsilon
)\int_0^1dx\{\frac 1{[\mu ^2x(x-1)]^\varepsilon } \nonumber \\
&&\times [\frac 1\varepsilon J_1(x)+J_2(x)]+\frac 1\varepsilon
\sum_{i=1}^{N_f}\frac{J_3(x)}{[\mu ^2x(x-1)+m_i^2]^\varepsilon }\}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
J_1(x) &=&2(n-1)x(x-1)\{\frac 1{n-2}[3n-4+2(1-\xi )(x-1)] \nonumber \\
&&+\frac 3{2x(x-1)}+2(1-\xi )[2(1+\frac 1n)x-(3+\frac 4n)+\frac 3{nx}]\}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
J_2(x) &=&-(1-\xi )(n-1)[4(1+\frac 1n)x(x-1)(x-2)+(1+\frac 6n)x \nonumber \\
&&-\frac 6n-\frac 14(1-\xi )]
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{equation}
J_3(x)=\frac 13n(n-1)x(x-1)
\end{equation}
and $m_i$ is the mass of i-th quark, while, M is an arbitrary mass
introduced to make the coupling constant g dimensionless in the
n-dimensional space.
~~The constant $\widetilde{Z}_3$ is, in the GMS scheme, defined as
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{Z}_3^{-1}=1+\omega (\mu ^2)
\end{equation}
where $\omega (q^2)$ is the self-energy of ghost particle which appears in
the ghost particle propagator
\begin{equation}
i\Delta ^{ab}(q)=\frac{-i\delta ^{ab}}{q^2[1+\omega (q^2)]+i\varepsilon }
\end{equation}
For the one-loop diagram shown in Fig.(1e), the regularized form of the $%
\widetilde{Z}_3$ is easily obtained by the dimensional regularization as
shown in the following
\begin{eqnarray}
\widetilde{Z}_3 &=&1+\frac{g^2}{(4\pi )^2}(4\pi M^2)^\varepsilon \Gamma
(1+\varepsilon )\int_0^1dx3(1-x)\{{\frac 1{\varepsilon [\mu
^2x(x-1)]^\varepsilon }} \nonumber \\
{}{} &&{\times [\frac 12(1+\xi )+3(1-\xi )x]+\frac 14(1-\xi )(1-10x)\}}
\end{eqnarray}
Now, let us turn to discuss the subtraction of the ghost vertex. The vertex
is generally represented as
\begin{equation}
\Gamma _\mu ^{abc}(p,q)=gf^{abc}[p_\mu +\Lambda _\mu (p,q)]
\end{equation}
where $\Lambda _\mu (p,q)$ denotes the higher order corrections. According
to the Lorentz covariance, it may be written in the form
\begin{equation}
\Lambda _\mu (p,q)=A(p^2,q^2,p\cdot q)p_\mu +B(p^2,q^2,p\cdot q)q_\mu
\end{equation}
where A and B are the scalar functions. Suppose only the function A is
divergent in the limit $\varepsilon \rightarrow 0$, while the B is finite as
we encountered in the one-loop approximation. In this case, we may only
subtract the divergent part in the A at the point $p^2=q^2=\mu ^2$.
Alternatively, it is more convenient to choose the renormalization point
such that p=q and $p^2=\mu ^2$ which implies $r^2=(p-q)^2=0$. This choice is
compatible with the energy-momentum conservation and yields
\begin{equation}
\Lambda _\mu (p,q)\mid _{p=q,p^2=\mu ^2}=\widetilde{L}p_\mu
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{L}=A(\mu ^2)+B(\mu ^2)
\end{equation}
With the subtraction in Eq.(2.15) and the definition
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{Z}_1^{-1}=1+\widetilde{L}
\end{equation}
The vertex in Eq.(2.13) may be renormalized as
\begin{equation}
\Gamma _\mu ^{abc}(p,q)=\widetilde{Z}_1^{-1}\Gamma _{R\mu }^{abc}(p,q)
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\Gamma _{R\mu }^{abc}(p,q)=gf^{abc}[p_\mu +\Lambda _{R\mu }(p,q)]
\end{equation}
which is the renormalized vertex. The latter vertex satisfies the boundary
condition
\begin{equation}
\Gamma _{R\mu }^{abc}(p,q)\mid _{p=q,p^2=\mu ^2}=gf^{abc}p_\mu
\end{equation}
which is the bare vertex, showing the advantage of the subtraction chosen.
For the one-loop diagrams depicted in Figs.(1f) and (1g), according to the
definition in Eqs.(2.15) and (2.16) and through tedious calculations, we
find in the n-dimensional space
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{L}=\widetilde{L}_1+\widetilde{L}_2
\end{equation}
where $\widetilde{L}_1$ and $\widetilde{L}_2$ are given by diagrams in
Figs.(1h) and (1i) respectively.
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{L}_1=\frac{g^2}{(4\pi )^2}(4\pi M^2)^\varepsilon \Gamma
(1+\varepsilon )\int_0^1dy{\frac{3y}{\varepsilon [\mu ^2y(y-1)]^\varepsilon }%
\frac 1n[3\xi -2+3(1-\xi )y]+fts}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\widetilde{L}_2 &=&\frac{g^2}{(4\pi )^2}(4\pi M^2)^\varepsilon \Gamma
(1+\varepsilon )\int_0^1dy{\frac{3y}{\varepsilon [\mu ^2y(y-1)]^\varepsilon }%
\frac{(n-1)}n[1-\frac 32(1-\xi )y]} \nonumber \\
&&{+fts}
\end{eqnarray}
where the symbol''fts'' represents the terms which are finite in the limit $%
\varepsilon \to 0$. These terms are not necessary to be written explicitly
for our purpose because they are independent of the renormalization point $%
\mu $ and therefore give no contributions to the anomalous dimension. In the
approximation of order $g^2$, considering Eq.(2.21), the $\widetilde{Z}_1$
defined in Eq.(2.17) can be written as
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{Z}_1=1-\widetilde{L}_1-\widetilde{L}_2
\end{equation}
\setcounter{section}{3}
\section*{3.Effective Coupling Constant}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
~~~The effective coupling constant is determined by the following RGE
\begin{equation}
\mu \frac d{d\mu }g_R(\mu )+\gamma _g(\mu )g_R(\mu )=0
\end{equation}
which is obtained by differentiating Eq.(2.1) with respect to $\mu $.
According to the definition in Eq.(2.2), the anomalous dimension $\gamma
_g(\mu )$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\gamma _g=\lim_{\varepsilon \to 0}\mu \frac d{d\mu }\ln Z_g=\widetilde{%
\gamma }_1-\widetilde{\gamma }_3-\frac 12\gamma _3
\end{equation}
The anomalous dimensions $\gamma _3,\widetilde{\gamma }_3$ and $\widetilde{%
\gamma }_1$ in the approximation of order $g^2$ are easily calculated from
the corresponding renormalization constants. From Eqs.(2.6)-(2.9), we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
\gamma _3 &=&\lim_{n\rightarrow 4}\mu \frac d{d\mu }\ln Z_3(\mu ,n)
\nonumber \\
\ &=&\frac{g^2}{(4\pi )^2}\{3\xi -13+\frac 43\sum_{i=1}^{N_f}[1+6\sigma _i^2+%
\frac{12\sigma _i^4}{\sqrt{1-4\sigma _i^2}} \nonumber \\
&&\ \times \ln \frac{1+\sqrt{1-4\sigma _i^2}}{1-\sqrt{1-4\sigma _i^2}}]\}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\sigma _i=\frac{m_R^i}\mu $. From Eq.(2.12), it follows
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{\gamma }_3=\lim_{n\rightarrow 4}\mu \frac d{d\mu }\ln \widetilde{Z%
}_3(\mu ,n)=\frac{g^2}{(4\pi )^2}(\frac 32\xi -\frac 92)
\end{equation}
By using the expressions given in Eqs.(2.21)-(2.24), it is easy to find
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{\gamma }_1=\lim_{n\rightarrow 4}\mu \frac d{d\mu }\ln \widetilde{Z%
}_1(\mu ,n)=\frac{g^2}{(4\pi )^2}3\xi
\end{equation}
There are three points we would like to stress here. (1) The results given
in Eqs.(3.4) and (3.5) are exactly identical to those obtained in the MS
scheme. This is because in the one-loop diagrams of the ghost particle
self-energy and the ghost vertex, only the massless particles are involved.
So, the $\widetilde{\gamma }_1$ and $\widetilde{\gamma }_3$ given above are
scheme-independent. This is why we like to choose the ghost particle
self-energy and the ghost vertex to define the renormalization constant $Z_g$
. As for the $\gamma _3$, it is noted that the term related to the $J_2(x)$
in Eq.(2.6) which is finite in the limit$\varepsilon \rightarrow 0$ gives no
contribution to the anomalous dimension owing to its independence of the
fermion mass. When the quark mass is set to be zero, the result in Eq.(3.3)
will be reduced to that given in the MS scheme. In this case, the $\gamma _3$
is only given by the terms in Eq.(2.6) which contain the $\varepsilon $%
-pole. (2) Each of the quark bare masses in Eq.(3.3) has been replaced by
its renormalized one which is taken to be a constant and identified with the
pole of the quark propagator. The replacement is suitable only in the lowest
order approximation. At one-loop level, we concern the anomalous dimension
of the order of $g^2$, therefore, the quark mass in Eq.(3.3) is only needed
to be given in the lowest order. (3) The renormalization point may be
parametrized by a scale variable $\lambda ,\mu =\mu _0\lambda $ where $\mu
_0 $ is a fixed scale parameter which may be chosen from physical
consideration. The $\lambda $ can also be chosen to be the scale variable
for momenta, $p=\lambda p_0$. With the $\lambda $ introduced, we may write $%
\sigma _i=\frac{C_i}\lambda $ where $c_i=\frac{m_R^i}{\mu _0}$. Noticing
this relation, on inserting Eqs.(3.3)-(3.5) into Eq.(3.2), the anomalous
dimension $\gamma _g$ will be represented in the following
\begin{equation}
\gamma _g(\lambda )=\frac{g_R^2}{(4\pi )^2}F_g(\lambda )
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
F_g(\lambda )=11-\frac 23\sum_{i=1}^{N_f}[1+\frac{6c_i^2}{\lambda ^2}+\frac{%
12c_i^4}{\lambda ^3}f_i(\lambda )]
\end{equation}
in which
\begin{eqnarray}
f_i(\lambda ) &=&\frac 1{\sqrt{\lambda ^2-4c_i^2}}\ln \frac{\lambda +\sqrt{%
\lambda ^2-4c_i^2}}{\lambda -\sqrt{\lambda ^2-4c_i^2}} \nonumber \\
\ &=&\cases{ \frac 2{\sqrt{4c_i^2-\lambda ^2}}\cot ^{-1}\frac \lambda
{\sqrt{4c_i^2-\lambda ^2}},&if $ \lambda \leq 2c_i$ \cr \frac
2{\sqrt{\lambda ^2-4c_i^2}}\coth ^{-1}\frac \lambda {\sqrt{\lambda
^2-4c_i^2}},&if $\lambda \geq 2c_i$ \cr}
\end{eqnarray}
Substituting Eq.(3.6) into Eq.(3.1) and noticing $\mu \frac d{d\mu }=\lambda
\frac d{d\lambda }$, the equation may be written as
\begin{equation}
\frac{dg_R}{g_R^3}=-\frac 1{(4\pi )^2}F_g(\lambda )\frac{d\lambda }\lambda
\end{equation}
On integrating the above equation by applying the familiar integration
formulas, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\alpha _R(\lambda )=\frac{\alpha _R^0}{1+\frac{\alpha _R^0}{2\pi }G(\lambda )%
}
\end{equation}
where $\alpha _R=\frac{g_R^2}{4\pi }$ and
\begin{equation}
G(\lambda )=\int_1^\lambda \frac{d\lambda }\lambda F_g(\lambda )=11\ln
\lambda -\frac 23[a-\frac{2b}{\lambda ^2}+\varphi (\lambda )]
\end{equation}
in which
\begin{equation}
a=\sum_{i=1}^{N_f}[2c_i^2-(1+2c_i^2)\chi _i]
\end{equation}
here
\begin{eqnarray}
\chi _i &=&\sqrt{1-4c_i^2}\ln \frac 1{2c_i}(1+\sqrt{1-4c_i^2}) \nonumber \\
\ &=&\cases{ -\sqrt{4c_i^2-1}\cos ^{-1}\frac 1{2c_i},&if $ 2c_{i\geq 1}$\cr
\sqrt{1-4c_i^2}\cosh ^{-1}\frac 1{2c_i},&if $ 2c_{i\leq 1}$\cr}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{equation}
b=\sum_{i=1}^{N_f}c_i^2
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\varphi (\lambda )=\sum_{i=1}^{N_f}(1+\frac{2c_i^2}{\lambda ^2})\frac
1\lambda \eta _i(\lambda )
\end{equation}
here
\begin{eqnarray}
\eta _i(\lambda ) &=&\sqrt{\lambda ^2-4c_i^2}\ln \frac 1{2c_i}(\lambda +%
\sqrt{\lambda ^2-4c_i^2}) \nonumber \\
\ &=&\cases{ -\sqrt{4c_i^2-\lambda ^2}\cos ^{-1}\frac \lambda {2c_i},&if $
\lambda \leq 2c_i$ \cr \sqrt{\lambda ^2-4c_i^2}\cosh ^{-1}\frac \lambda
{2c_i},&if $ \lambda \geq 2c_i$\cr}
\end{eqnarray}
If we set all the quark masses to be equal and choose $\mu _0=m_R$,
Eqs.(3.7) and (3.11) will be respectively reduced to
\begin{equation}
F_g(\lambda )=11-\frac 23N_f[1+\frac 6{\lambda ^2}+\frac{12}{\lambda ^3\sqrt{%
\lambda ^2-4}}\ln \frac{\lambda +\sqrt{\lambda ^2-4}}{\lambda -\sqrt{\lambda
^2-4}}]
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
G(\lambda )=11\ln \lambda -\frac 23N_f[2+\sqrt{3}\pi -\frac 2{\lambda
^2}+(1+\frac 2{\lambda ^2})\frac 1\lambda \eta (\lambda )]
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\eta (\lambda ) &=&\sqrt{\lambda ^2-4}\ln \frac 12(\lambda +\sqrt{\lambda
^2-4}) \nonumber \\
\ &=&\cases{ -\sqrt{4-\lambda ^2}\cos ^{-1}\frac \lambda 2,&if $\lambda \leq
2$ \cr \sqrt{\lambda ^2-4}\cosh ^{-1}\frac \lambda 2,&if $ \lambda \geq
2$\cr}
\end{eqnarray}
In the above formulas, the $\lambda $ may be defined by $\lambda =\left|
q^2/m_R^2\right| ^{\frac 12}$. When $\lambda =1$, due to G(1)=0, Eq.(3.10)
becomes $\alpha _R(1)=\alpha _R^0$. This gives the result on the fermion
mass shell. When $\lambda \rightarrow \infty $, i.e. in the large momentum
limit. it is easy to see from Eqs.(3.18) and (3.19) that $G(\lambda
)\rightarrow (11-\frac 23N_f)\ln \lambda $. Thus, Eq.(3.10) is reduced to
\begin{equation}
\alpha _R(\lambda )=\frac{\alpha _R^0}{1+\frac{\alpha _R^0}{6\pi }%
(33-2N_f)\ln \lambda }
\end{equation}
This just is the result obtained previously in the MS scheme$^{1,2}$. The
behavior of the effective coupling constants are represented in Figs.(2) and
(3). The coupling constants in Fig.(2) are given by taking all the quark
masses to be equal and $N_f=4$. The solid curve represents the coupling
constant evaluated by using Eqs.(3.10), (3.18) and (3.19). Fig.(3) shows
some coupling constants for different numbers of flavor and unequal masses.
In the figure, the constituent quark masses are taken to be $%
m_u=m_d=0.3GeV,m_s=0.45GeV,m_c=1.5GeV,m_b=5.0GeV$ and $m_t=175GeV$, and the
scale $\mu _0$ is taken to be equal to the $N_f$-th quark mass. From
Figs.(2) and (3), one can see that all the $\alpha _R(\lambda )$ decrease
with the increase of $\lambda $ and tend to zero when $\lambda \rightarrow
\infty $, exhibiting the well-known asymptotically free property. In the
region near $\lambda =1$, there is a maximum for each curve. The height and
the position of the maximum weakly depend on the number of flavor(see
Fig.(3)). In comparison with the result given in the MS scheme, as we see
from Fig.(2), the quark mass gives a considerable improvement on the
effective interaction, particularly, in the region near the heavier meson
threshold. However, as shown in Figs.(2) and (3). When $\lambda \rightarrow
0 $, all the $\alpha _R(\lambda )$ drastically fall down to zero from their
maxima. This unreasonable result indicates that the QCD perturbation theory
is inapplicable in the very small momentum domain.
\setcounter{section}{4}
\section*{4.The Ward Identity for Quark-Gluon Vertex}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
~~~The aim of this section is to sketch the derivation of the Ward identity
satisfied by the quark-gluon vertex and to show how we should do for the
subtraction of the quark self-energy. The Ward identity is not difficult to
derive from the QCD generating functional. Firstly, we write the Ward
identity obeyed by the quark-gluon three point Green function$^{32}$
\begin{eqnarray}
\partial _z^\mu &<&0^{+}\mid T[\widehat{\psi }(x)\widehat{\overline{\psi }}%
(y)\widehat{A}_\mu ^a(z)]\mid 0^{-}> \nonumber \\
&=&i\xi g\{<0^{+}\mid T[\widehat{\psi }(x)\overline{\psi }(y)\widehat{C}^b(y)%
\widehat{\overline{C}}^a(z)]\mid 0^{-}>T^b \nonumber \\
-T^b &<&0^{+}\mid T[\widehat{\psi }(x)\widehat{\overline{\psi }}(y)\widehat{C%
}^b(x)\widehat{\overline{C}}^a(z)]\mid 0^{-}>\}
\end{eqnarray}
where $T^b$ denote the generators of SU(3) group, $\widehat{\psi }(x),%
\widehat{A}_\mu ^a(x)$ and $\widehat{C}^a(x)$ represent the field operators
for quark, gluon and ghost particle respectively. The Green's functions in
Eq.(4.1) have the following irreducible decompositions$^{31,32}$
\begin{eqnarray}
&<&0^{+}\mid T[\widehat{\psi }(x)\widehat{\overline{\psi }}(y)\widehat{A}%
_\mu ^a(z)]\mid 0^{-}> \nonumber \\
&=&\int d^4x^{\prime }d^4y^{\prime }d^4z^{\prime }S_F(x-x^{\prime })\Gamma
^{b\nu }(x^{\prime },y^{\prime },z^{\prime })S_F(y^{\prime }-y)D_{\nu \mu
}^{ba}(z^{\prime }-z)
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
&<&0^{+}\mid T[\widehat{\psi }(x)\widehat{\overline{\psi }}(y))\widehat{C}%
^b(y)\widehat{\overline{C}}^a(z)]\mid 0^{-}> \nonumber \\
&=&\int d^4x^{\prime }d^4z^{\prime }S_F(x-x^{\prime })\gamma ^{ba^{\prime
}}(x^{\prime },y,z^{\prime })\Delta ^{aa^{\prime }}(z-z^{\prime })
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{equation}
\gamma ^{ba^{\prime }}(x^{\prime },y,z^{\prime })=\int d^4y^{\prime
}d^4u^{\prime }\Gamma ^{b^{\prime }a^{\prime }}(x^{\prime },y^{\prime
},u^{\prime },z^{\prime })S_F(y^{\prime }-y)\Delta ^{b^{\prime }b}(u^{\prime
}-y)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
&<&0^{+}\mid T[\widehat{\psi }(x)\widehat{\overline{\psi }}(y)\widehat{C}%
^b(x)\widehat{\overline{C}}^a(z)]\mid 0^{-}> \nonumber \\
&=&\int d^4y^{\prime }d^4z^{\prime }\gamma ^{ba^{\prime }}(x,y^{\prime
},z^{\prime })S_F(y^{\prime }-y)\Delta ^{a^{\prime }a}(z^{\prime }-z)
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{equation}
\gamma ^{ba^{\prime }}(x,y,z^{\prime })=\int d^4x^{\prime }d^4u^{\prime
}S_F(x-x^{\prime })\Gamma ^{b^{\prime }a^{\prime }}(x^{\prime },y,u^{\prime
},z^{\prime })\Delta ^{b^{\prime }b}(u^{\prime }-x)
\end{equation}
In the above, $S_F(x-x^{\prime }),D_{\mu \nu }^{ab}(x-x^{\prime })$ and $%
\Delta ^{ab}(x-x^{\prime })$ are the quark, gluon and ghost particle
propagators respectively, $\Gamma ^{a\mu }(x,y,z)$ denotes the three-line
quark-gluon proper vertex and $\Gamma ^{ab}(x,y,z,u)$ designates the
four-line quark-ghost vertex. Upon substituting Eqs.(4.2), (4.3) and (4.5)
in Eq.(4.1) and transforming Eq.(4.1) to the momentum space, the Ward
identity will be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
&&S_F(p)\Gamma ^{b\nu }(p,q,k)S_F(q)k^\mu D_{\mu \nu }^{ab}(k) \nonumber \\
&=&\xi g[\gamma ^b(p,q,k)S_F(q)-S_F(p)\overline{\gamma }^b(p,q,k)]\Delta
^{ab}(k)
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{equation}
\gamma ^b(p,q,k)=T^c\gamma ^{bc}(p,q,k)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\overline{\gamma }^b(p,q,k)=\gamma ^{bc}(p,q,k)T^c
\end{equation}
Employing the expressions denoted in Eqs.(2.4) and (2.11) and operating on
the both sides of Eq.(4.7) by $S_F^{-1}(p)$ from the left and by $%
S_F^{-1}(q) $ from the right. we arrive at $^{}$
\begin{eqnarray}
k^\mu \Gamma _\mu ^a(p,q,k) &=&g[1+\omega (k^2)]^{-1}[S_F^{-1}(p)\gamma
^a(p,q,k) \nonumber \\
&&-\overline{\gamma }^a(p,q,k)S_F^{-1}(q)]
\end{eqnarray}
This just is the Ward identity satisfied by the quark-gluon vertex$^{32}$.
Considering the energy-momentum conservation and introducing new vertex
functions $\Lambda _\mu ^a(p,q)$ and $\chi ^a(p,q)$ which are defined by
\begin{equation}
\Gamma _\mu ^a(p,q,k)=(2\pi )^4\delta ^4(p-q-k)g\Lambda _\mu ^a(p,q)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\gamma ^a(p,q,k)=(2\pi )^4\delta ^4(p-q-k)[1+\omega (k^2)]\chi ^a(p,q)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\overline{\gamma }^a(p,q,k)=(2\pi )^4\delta ^4(p-q-k)[1+\omega (k^2)]%
\overline{\chi }^a(p,q)
\end{equation}
the identity in Eq.(4.10) can be represented in the form
\begin{equation}
(p-q)^\mu \Lambda _\mu ^a(p,q)=S_F^{-1}(p)\chi ^a(p,q)-\overline{\chi }%
^a(p,q)S_F^{-1}(q)
\end{equation}
In the lowest order approximation, the above identity is clearly satisfied
as long as we notice
\begin{eqnarray}
\Lambda _\mu ^{(0)a}(p,q) &=&i\gamma _\mu T^a \\
\chi ^{(0)a}(p,q) &=&\overline{\chi }^{(0)a}(p,q)=iT^a
\end{eqnarray}
The latter result may easily be derived from the definitions given in
Eqs.(4.4), (4.6), (4.8), (4.9), (4.12) and (4.13) by using the lowest order
expression
\begin{eqnarray}
\Gamma ^{ab}(x,y,z,u)\approx iS_F^0(x-y)^{-1}\Delta _{ab}^0(z-u)^{-1}
\end{eqnarray}
Now, we are interested in the one-loop approximation of order $g^2$. In this
approximation, the quark-gluon vertex denoted by $\Lambda _\mu ^{(1)a}(p,q)$
is contributed from the two diagrams in Figs.(1h) and (1i) whose expressions
are well known. The quark-ghost vertex functions $\chi ^a(p,q)$ and $%
\overline{\chi }^a(p,q)$ evaluated from Figs.(1j) and (1k) are shown in the
following.
\begin{equation}
\chi ^{(1)a}(p,q)=iT^aI(p,q)
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
I(p,q)=-\frac 32g^2\int \frac{d^4l}{(2\pi )^4}S_F(l)\gamma ^\mu D_{\mu \nu
}(q-l)(l-p)^\nu \Delta (l-p)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\overline{\chi }^{(1)a}(p,q)=iT^a\overline{I}(p,q)
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\overline{I}(p,q) &=&-\frac 32g^2\int \frac{d^4l}{(2\pi )^4}\gamma ^\mu
S_F(l)(l-q)^\nu \nonumber \\
&&\times D_{\mu \nu }(l-p)\Delta (l-q)
\end{eqnarray}
It is clear that the above functions are logarithmically divergent. Thus, up
to the order $g^2$, we can write
\begin{equation}
\Lambda _\mu ^{(1)a}(p,q)=iT^a[\gamma _\mu +\Lambda _\mu ^{(1)}(p,q)]
\end{equation}
where we have set $\Lambda _\mu ^a(p,q)=iT^a\Lambda _\mu ^{(1)}(p,q)$,
\begin{equation}
\chi ^a(p,q)=iT^a[1+I(p,q)]
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\overline{\chi }^a(p,q)=iT^a[1+\overline{I}(p,q)]
\end{equation}
~~Upon differentiating the both sides of Eq.(4.14) with respect to $p^\mu $,
setting q=p and substituting the expression of the inverse of quark
propagator
\begin{equation}
S_F^{-1}(p)={\not p}-m-\Sigma (p)
\end{equation}
in the order of $g^2$, we get
\begin{equation}
\overline{\Lambda }_\mu (p,p)=-\frac{\partial \Sigma (p)}{\partial p^\mu }
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\overline{\Lambda }_\mu (p,p) &=&\Lambda _\mu ^{(1)}(p,p)-\gamma _\mu
I(p,p)-({\not p}-m)\frac{\partial I(p,q)}{\partial p^\mu }\mid _{q=p}
\nonumber \\
+\frac{\partial \overline{I}(p,q)}{\partial p^\mu } &\mid &_{q=p}({\not p}-m)
\end{eqnarray}
It is emphasized that at one-loop level, the both sides of Eq.(4.26) are of
the order of $g^2$. In the derivation of Eq.(4.26) from Eq.(4.14), the terms
higher than the order $g^2$ have been neglected. The identity in Eq.(4.26)
formally is the same as we met in QED. The vertex $\stackrel{}{\overline{%
\Lambda }_\mu (p,p)}$ may be expressed in the form
\begin{equation}
\stackrel{}{\overline{\Lambda }_\mu (p,p)}=L\gamma _\mu +\Lambda _\mu ^c(p)
\end{equation}
where L is a divergent constant defined by
\begin{equation}
\stackrel{}{L=\overline{\Lambda }_\mu (p,p)}\mid _{\not p=\mu }
\end{equation}
and $\Lambda _\mu ^c(p)$ is the finite part of $\overline{\Lambda }_\mu
(p,p) $ satisfying the boundary condition
\begin{equation}
\Lambda _\mu ^c(p)\mid _{\not p=\mu }=0
\end{equation}
Integrating the identity in Eq.(4.26) over the momentum $p_{\mu \text{ }}$%
and considering the expression in Eq.(4.28), we have
\begin{equation}
\Sigma (p)=A+({\not p}-\mu )[B-C(p^2)]
\end{equation}
where A and B are the divergent constants depending on the renormalization
point $\mu $ which are defined as
\begin{equation}
A=\Sigma (\mu )
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
B=-L
\end{equation}
and $C(p^2)$ is a finite function defined by
\begin{equation}
\int_{p_{0^{}}^\mu }^{p^\mu }dp^\mu \Lambda _\mu ^c(p)=(\not p-\mu )C(p^2)
\end{equation}
with boundary condition
\begin{equation}
C(p^2)=0
\end{equation}
Clearly, the expression in Eq.(4.31) gives a subtraction version for the
fermion self-energy which is required by the Ward identity and correct at
least in the approximation of the order g$^2$. With this subtraction, the
quark propagator will be renormalized as follows
\begin{equation}
S_F(p)=\frac{Z_2}{\not p-m_R-\Sigma _R(p)}
\end{equation}
where Z$_{2,}$ m$_R$ and $\Sigma _R(p)$ are the quark propagator
renormalization constant, the renormalized quark mass and the finite
correction of the self-energy respectively. The Z$_2$ and the m$_{R\text{ }}$%
are respectively defined as
\begin{equation}
Z_2^{-1}=1-B
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
m_R=Z_m^{-1}m
\end{equation}
where Z$_m$ is the quark mass renormalization constant which is defined by
the following expression
\begin{equation}
Z_m^{-1}=1+Z_2[Am^{-1}+(1-\mu m^{-1})B]
\end{equation}
\[
\]
\setcounter{section}{5}
\section*{5.Effective Quark Mass}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
~~~Taking the derivative of Eq.(4.38) with respect to $\mu $ and noticing $%
\mu \frac d{d\mu }=\lambda \frac d{d\lambda }$, we get a RGE for the
renormalized quark mass as follows
\begin{equation}
\lambda \frac d{d\lambda }m_R(\lambda )+\gamma _m(\lambda )m_R(\lambda )=0
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\gamma _m(\lambda )=\lim_{\varepsilon \to 0}\mu \frac d{d\mu }\ln Z_m
\end{equation}
is the mass anomalous dimension. Let us concentrate our attention on the
one-loop approximation. The fermion self-energy of the one-loop diagram
shown in Fig.(1l) is of the following regularized form in the n-dimensional
space$^{31,32}$
\begin{eqnarray}
\Sigma (p) &=&-\frac{g^2}{12\pi ^2}(4\pi M^2)^\varepsilon \Gamma
(1+\varepsilon )\int_0^1dx\{\frac 1{\varepsilon \Delta (p^2)^\varepsilon }%
\stackrel{}{_{}} \nonumber \\
&&\ \ \times [2(1-\varepsilon )(1-x)\not p{}-2(2-\varepsilon )m+(1-\xi
)(m-2xp)] \nonumber \\
&&\ \ -2(1-\xi )(1-x)x^2\frac{p^2{\not p}}{\Delta (p^2)^{1+\varepsilon }}\}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{equation}
\Delta (p^2)=p^2x(x-1)+m^2x
\end{equation}
Substituting the above expression in Eq.(4.31), one may find
\begin{eqnarray}
A=\Sigma (p)|_{{\not p}=\mu }= &&-\frac{g^2}{12\pi ^2}(4\pi M^2)^\varepsilon
\Gamma (1+\varepsilon )\int_0^1dx\{\frac 1{\varepsilon \Delta (\mu
^2)\varepsilon } \nonumber \\
&&\ \ \times [2\mu [1+(\xi -2)x-\varepsilon (1-x)]-(3+\xi -2\varepsilon )m]
\nonumber \\
&&\ \ -2(1-\xi )(1-x)x^2\frac{\mu ^3}{\Delta (\mu ^2)^{1+\varepsilon }}\}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
B &=&[\Sigma (p)-A]({p}-\mu )^{-1}|_{{\not p}=\mu } \nonumber \\
\ &=&-\frac{g^2}{12\pi ^2}(4\pi M^2)^\varepsilon \Gamma (1+\varepsilon
)\int_0^1dx\{\frac 1{\varepsilon \Delta (\mu ^2)\varepsilon } \nonumber \\
&&\ \ \times [2(1-\varepsilon )(1-x)-2(1-\xi )x]+\frac{2\mu ^2}{\Delta (\mu
^2)^{1+\varepsilon }}x(x-1) \nonumber \\
&&\ \ \times [2(1-\varepsilon )(x-1)+5(1-\xi )x+\frac m\mu (3+\xi
-2\varepsilon )] \nonumber \\
&&\ \ -\frac{4\mu ^4}{\Delta (\mu ^2)^{2+\varepsilon }}(1-\xi
)(1+\varepsilon )(x-1)^2x^3\}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{equation}
\Delta (\mu ^2)=x[(x-1)\mu ^2+m^2]
\end{equation}
By making use of the renormalization constants defined in Eqs.(4.39) and
(4.37) and the constants given in Eqs.(5.5) and (5.6), in the order of $g^2$%
, it is not difficult to derive the anomalous dimension defined in Eq.(5.2)
for i-th quark as shown in the following
\begin{equation}
\gamma _m^{(i)}(\lambda )=\frac{\alpha _R(\lambda )}\pi F_m^{(i)}(\lambda )
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
F_m^{(i)}(\lambda ) &=&\frac{2\xi }{3c_i}\lambda +2[3+2\xi -3(1+\xi )\frac{%
c_i}\lambda \nonumber \\
&&\ \ +\frac{2\xi c_i^2}{\lambda ^2}]-\frac{4(1+\xi )\lambda }{c_i+\lambda }-%
\frac{2c_i^2}{\lambda ^2}[3+\xi \nonumber \\
&&\ \ -3(1+\xi )\frac{c_i}\lambda +\frac{2\xi c_i^2}{\lambda ^2}]\ln \left|
\frac{c_i^2}{c_i^2-\lambda ^2}\right|
\end{eqnarray}
in which $c_i=\frac{m_R^i}{\mu _0}$. The $\mu _0$ may be chosen as stated in
Sect.3. As seen from Eq.(5.9), the anomalous dimension and hence the
effective mass are gauge-dependent at one-loop level. In the following. we
are only interested in the result given in the Landau gauge which was
regarded as preferred gauge in the previous literature$^{14}$. In this
gauge,
\begin{eqnarray}
F_m^{(i)}(\lambda ) &=&6-\frac{6c_i}\lambda -\frac{4\lambda }{\lambda +c_i}+%
\frac{6c_i^2}{\lambda ^2}(1-\frac{c_i}\lambda ) \nonumber \\
&&\ \ \times \ln \left| 1-\frac{\lambda ^2}{c_i^2}\right|
\end{eqnarray}
Substituting Eqs.(5.8) and (5.9) in Eq.(5.1) and solving the equation, the
effective mass is found to be
\begin{equation}
m_R^{(i)}(\lambda )=m_R^{(i)}e^{-S^{(i)}(\lambda )}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
S^{(i)}(\lambda )=\frac 1\pi \int_1^\lambda \frac{d\lambda }\lambda \alpha
_R(\lambda )F_m^{(i)}(\lambda )
\end{equation}
here the $\alpha _R(\lambda )$ was shown in Eq.(3.10). If we take $\alpha
_R(\lambda )\approx \alpha _R^0$ and work in the Landau gauge, we get
\begin{eqnarray}
S^{(i)}(\lambda ) &=&\frac{\alpha _R^0}\pi \{2c_i(\frac 1\lambda -1)+(\frac{%
2c_i^3}{\lambda ^3}-\frac{3c_i^2}{\lambda ^2}+1] \nonumber \\
&&\ \times \ln \left| 1-\frac{\lambda ^2}{c_i^2}\right|
-(2c_i^3-3c_i^2+1)\ln \left| 1-\frac 1{c_i^2}\right| \}
\end{eqnarray}
If we take $c_i=1$, namely, set all masses to be equal and choose $\mu
_0=m_R^i$, Eq.(5.13) will be reduced to
\begin{equation}
S^{(i)}(\lambda )=\frac{\alpha _R^0}\pi \frac{(1-\lambda )}\lambda
\{2+[\frac 2{\lambda ^2}-\frac{1+\lambda }\lambda ]\ln \left| 1-\lambda
^2\right| \}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\ln \left| 1-\lambda ^2\right| =\cases{ 2[\ln (1+\lambda )-\tanh^{-1}\lambda
],&if$ \lambda <1;$ \cr 2[\ln (1+\lambda )-\coth^{-1}\lambda ],&if$ \lambda
>1$\cr}
\end{equation}
The behavior of effective masses is illustrated in Fig.(4). The results in
Fig.(4) are given by taking $N_f=4$ and all the quark masses to be equal.
The solid curve and the dashed one represent the effective masses calculated
respectively by taking the coupling constant to be the running one and a
fixed value $\alpha _R=0.2$. The common feature of these effective masses is
as follows. For each curve, there is a maximum at $\lambda \approx 1.54$.
When $\lambda $ tends to infinity, the masses fall down to zero, exhibiting
the well-known asymptotically free behavior. For the $\lambda $ lying in the
region [0,1), the mass is less than the maximum and behaves almost as a
constant. However, in the region of $\lambda $ near zero, as pointed out in
Sect.3, the QCD perturbative results are no longer valid.
\setcounter{section}{6}
\section*{6.Comments and Conclusions}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
~~~In this paper, the QCD one-loop renormalization has been restudied in the
GMS scheme. It was shown that the GMS scheme allows us not only to consider
the mass effect on the renormalization, but also to directly relate the
renormalization scale $\mu $ to the momentum p. The effective coupling
constant and the effective quark masses obtained in this scheme get a
noteworthy improvement near the heavy quark threshold in comparison with
those given previously in the MS scheme. The effective coupling constant and
the effective quark mass presented in the MS scheme now appear as
approximate results given in the large momentum limit. It is noted here that
even in this limit, the effective coupling constant and the effective mass
can only have unique forms. It is impossible to result in a difference
between the $MS$ and $\overline{MS}$ schemes$^{7,8,16}$ because an effective
quantity should be the solution of its RGE whose form is uniquely determined
by the anomalous dimension and the boundary condition. As emphasized before,
the correct procedure of evaluating the anomalous dimension is the use of
the regularized renormalization constant and the limit $\varepsilon
\rightarrow 0$ should be taken after differentiation with respect to the
renormalization point. By this procedure, the factor $(4\pi M)^\varepsilon
\Gamma (1+\varepsilon )$ appearing in the n-dimensional Feynman integrals
can only come to unity. It is not possible to yield the unphysical terms $%
\ln 4\pi -\gamma $ in a renormalized quantity.
In this paper, the effective coupling constant given in the one-loop
approximation is calculated by employing the renormalization constants given
by the subtractions of the gluon and ghost particle self-energies and the
ghost vertex correction. It is emphasized that the renormalization constant $%
Z_2$ is obtained on the basis of the Ward identity obeyed by the gluon
self-energy and therefore is faithful. The renormalization constants $%
\widetilde{Z}_1$ and $\widetilde{Z}_3$ derived respectively from the
subtractions of the ghost vertex correction and the ghost particle
self-energy, as mentioned in Sect.4, give the anomalous dimensions which are
scheme-independent due to that there is no quark mass to appear in the
vertex and the self-energy. Therefore, the anomalous dimension $\gamma _g$
computed from these renormalization constants is definite, no any
uncertainty. Particularly, the correctness of the anomalous dimension shown
in Eqs.(3.6)-(3.8) is confirmed by the previous result presented in Refs.(9)
and (16) where the $\gamma _g$ was determined by the subtraction of the
quark and gluon self-energies and the quark-gluon vertex at a space-like
point. The expression of the $\beta $-function given in the space-like point
is $^{3,10}$%
\begin{eqnarray}
\beta &=&-g\gamma _g=-\frac{g^3}{16\pi ^2}\{11-\frac 23\sum_{i=1}^{N_f}[1-%
\frac{6c_i^2}{\lambda ^2} \nonumber \\
&&\ +\frac{12c_i^4}{\lambda ^3(\lambda ^2+4c_i^2)^{\frac 12}}\ln \frac{%
(\lambda ^2+4c_i^2)^{\frac 12}+\lambda }{(\lambda ^2+4c_i^2)^{\frac
12}-\lambda }]\}
\end{eqnarray}
where we have set $\mu =\mu _0\lambda $ and $c_i=\frac{m_R}{\mu _0}$. The
above expression may be directly written out from Eqs.(3.6)- (3.8) by the
transformation $c_i^2\to -c_i^2$, corresponding to $\mu ^2\to -\mu ^2$. The
effective coupling constant given by the $\beta $-function in Eq.(6.1) still
exhibits the property of asymptotic freedom when $\lambda \to \infty $; but,
it has a Landau singularity in the region of large distance, different from
the result given in the GMS scheme. In Fig.(2), the Landau singularity
occurs at $\lambda \approx 0.4$.
It is stressed again that the effective quark masses shown in Sect.5 are
obtained based on the subtraction written in Eq.(4.31) which is derived from
the Ward identity respected by the quark one-loop self-energy. These
effective masses are different from those given in the previous works$%
^{3,10} $. For example, in Ref.(3), the mass anomalous dimensions derived in
the Landau gauge is of the form
\begin{equation}
\gamma _m^{(i)}=\frac{g^2}{2\pi ^2}[1-\frac{m_i^2}{\mu ^2}\ln (1+\frac{\mu ^2%
}{m_i^2})]
\end{equation}
which is manifestly different from that formulated in Eqs.(5.8) and (5.10).
The result shown above , actually, was obtained from another subtraction. If
we start from the expression for the quark self-energy$^{29}$
\begin{equation}
\Sigma (p)=A(p^2)P+B(p^2)m
\end{equation}
and subtract at the space-like point $p^2=-\mu ^2$, the quark propagator and
mass renormalization constants will be defined by
\begin{equation}
Z_2^{-1}=1-A(-\mu ^2)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
Z_m^{-1}=Z_2[1+B(-\mu ^2)]
\end{equation}
In the approximation of order $g^2$ for the one-loop diagram, the constant $%
Z_m$ defined in Eq.(6.5) will give rise to the result in Eq.(6.2). Since the
subtraction above is not compatible with the Ward identity, the effective
quark masses obtained in this subtraction can not be viewed as reasonable
results. The correct result of the effective quark mass given by the
subtraction at space-like may be obtained from Eqs.(5.11)-(5.15) through the
transformation $\lambda \to i\lambda $. In this case, as we see, the
effective mass becomes complex. If we require the effective mass to be real,
the subtraction at space-like point should be excluded. However, this does
not mean that the space-like momentum subtraction is useless. The
subtractions at time-like point and at space-like point probably suit to
different processes in which the interactions are of different behaviors.
For example, for the t- channel fermion-antifermion scattering, the momentum
on the intermediate boson line is space-like; while, for the s-channel
scattering, the corresponding momentum is time-like. It seems that the boson
self-energy should be subtracted at the space-like point for the former
process and at time-like point for the latter process. This problem is, we
think, worthy to pursue in future investigations.
\section{Acknowledgment}
The authors would like to thank Professor Shi-Shu Wu for useful discussions.
This work was supported in part by National Natural Science Foundation of
China.
|
\section*{Introduction}
As we reconstruct the past history of the universe, we learn that the
universe as we see it today must have evolved from a special state
that was extremely flat and homogeneous. Such a state is highly
unstable toward both the formation of inhomogeneities and evolution away
from flatness, because the influence of gravity tends to drive matter
away from a flat homogeneous state. Until the advent of inflation,
cosmologists had no way of explaining how the universe could have
started out so precisely balanced in a state of such high instability.
Inflation addresses this issue by changing the story at very early
times. During an early period of inflation, the matter is placed in a
peculiar potential dominated state where the effects of gravity are
very different. During inflation, flatness is an attractor, and the
deviations (or perturbations) from homogeneity destined for our
observable universe can be calculated. With a suitable tuning of
model parameters, the perturbations can be given a sufficiently small
amplitude and even naturally acquire a spectrum which gives good
agreement with observations.
The theory of cosmic perturbations has for some time now benefited
from the existence of alternative models. The presence of alternatives
has made it possible to systematically evaluate each alternative, and
has even helped us to discover the most fundamental way in which inflationary
theory could be falsified\cite{aadi}. So far, things are looking very
good for an inflationary origin for the cosmic perturbations.
But inflation offers us much more than a theory of perturbations. It
also is supposed to explain the origin of the flatness and overall
smoothness of the universe. In this role, inflation theory has faced
no serious competition. While this fact in itself might be seen as a
success, it would certainly be much more gratifying if the significant
place in the theoretical landscape currently occupied by inflation
could be earned by doing better than some serious contenders. After
all, inflation is just the first idea we have had to explain these
cosmic puzzles.
The above reasoning has motivated me to search for alternatives for
some time now. So far everything that I have tried has ended up being
just another version of standard inflation, once it was forced into a
workable form. This experience encourages the view that
inflation might be {\em the} unique mechanism by which the initial condition
problems can be addressed, and also explains the extreme nature of the
idea I outline below.
The idea I present here starts with a very simple observation. A
statement of the unusual nature of the initial conditions in standard
cosmology usually carries with it a description of the ``horizon
problem''. Basically, in the standard big bang model any mechanism
which operates in the early universe and attempts to ``set up'' the
correct initial conditions would have to act acausally, because what
we observe today is composed of many causally disconnected regions in
the early universe (see Figure \ref{fig1}). Inflation solves this
problem because a period of
superluminal expansion radically changes the causality structure of the
universe. Another way of changing the causality structure is to have
light travel faster in the early universe (Figure \ref{fig2}).
\begin{figure}[b!]
\centerline{\epsfig{file=fig1.eps,height=3.5in,width=3.5in,angle=-90}}
\vspace{10pt}
\caption{The horizon problem in standard cosmology.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[b!]
\centerline{\epsfig{file=fig2.eps,height=3.5in,width=3.5in,angle=-90}}
\vspace{10pt}
\caption{The horizon problem solved by a time-varying speed of light.}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
Joao Magueijo and I have pursued this idea, to the extent of setting
up a phenomenological model of how physics might look with a time
varying speed of light (VSL)\cite{am}. Interestingly, we have found that our
model exhibits energy non-conservation of just the sort that can fill in
energy deficits and pull down energy peaks to produce a flat
homogeneous universe from a wide range of initial conditions.
Of course our model also breaks Lorentz invariance, which may seem
unreasonable to may physicists. In defense of choosing this radical
direction, let me comment that many theorists are prejudiced {\em
against} the idea that the spacetime continuum is really a continuum
down to arbitrarily small scales. Any deviation from a true continuum
would necessarily break Lorentz invariance. In particular many ideas
about our 3+1 dimensional world that are coming from superstring
theory (and its offspring) suggest that properties of this (3+1D) manifold
are emergent as a low-energy limit of something quite different. If
the VSL picture really takes root, the picture I describe below could
well be a phenomenology of the dynamics of the universe as the 3+1
manifold we inhabit emerges from very different physics governing high
energies. In this picture the speed of light varies in the early
universe and then holds constant, so that the standard cosmology can
proceed. This much is in the same spirit as inflation, where a period
of unusual physics is placed in the early universe, without changing
the standard physical picture which does an excellent job of
explaining many aspects of the universe.
I should mention that the idea of using a varying speed of light to
explain initial conditions first appears in print in a paper by
Moffat\cite{mof}. His paper takes the idea in a
somewhat different direction than we have. Also, subsequent work by
Barrow and Magueijo has taken VSL in a variety of different
directions. I will mention this briefly in the final section.
\section*{Our prescription}
To pursue the idea of VSL, Magueijo and I have used the following
simple prescription: VSL models necessarily have preferred frame,
because Lorentz invariance is broken. We assume that in that special
frame, the Lagrangian is the same as usual, with the substitution $c
\rightarrow c(t)$. We also assume that the dynamics of $c$ do not
affect the curvature, so that the Riemann tensor and the Ricci scalar
are to be computed (in the preferred frame) with $c$ held fixed.
This scheme is spelled out in \cite{am}. There we carefully
discuss the question of why this scheme is {\em not} simply ordinary
physics under a strange reparameterization, and thus why what I
describe below can not be viewed as simply an unusual way of
describing inflation.
\section*{Cosmological Equations}
Under our VSL scheme energy is not conserved when $c$ is varying. In
a cosmology which is Robertson-Walker in the preferred frame we get
\begin{equation}\label{cons1}
\dot\rho+3{\dot a\over a}{\left(\rho+{p\over c^2}\right)}=
-\rho{\dot G\over G}+{3Kc^2\over 4\pi G a^2}{\dot c\over c}.
\end{equation}
This equation is the usual equation for energy
conservation when $c$ and $G$ are constant, and I have included the
term in $\dot G$ for future reference. To observe the effect on the
flatness of the universe, we look at the evolution of $\epsilon \equiv
\Omega - 1$ ($\Omega \equiv \rho/\rho_c$):
\begin{equation}\label{epsiloneq}
\dot\epsilon=(1+\epsilon)\epsilon {\dot a\over a}
{\left(1+3w\right)}+2{\dot c\over c}\epsilon
\label{edot}
\end{equation}
where we have taken $p=w\rho c^2$ with constant $w$. Here we can see
how in standard big bang cosmology ($w > -1/3$, $\dot c = 0$)
$\epsilon = 0$ is an unstable fixed point, leading to the need to tune
$\epsilon$ to extremely small values at the beginning, in order to
match a value of $\epsilon$ which is not large even today. Eqn. \ref{edot}
also shows how inflation makes $\epsilon = 0$ an attractor, and how
$\dot G$ drops out of the equation, making at least this version of a
varying $G$ ineffective at producing the desired effect. One can also
see how negative values of $\dot c/ c$ will make $\epsilon = 0$
an attractor.
There is also an interesting effect on the cosmological constant. In
order to discuss this, we must be careful about which constant we are
talking about.
\begin{equation}
S=\int dx^4 \sqrt{-g}{\left( {c^4 (R+2\Lambda_1)\over 16\pi G}
+{\cal L}_M + {\cal L}_{\Lambda_2}\right)}
\label{act}
\end{equation}
Equation \ref{act} shows the action in the preferred frame,
where ${\cal L}_M$ is the matter fields Lagrangian.
The term in $\Lambda_1$ is a geometrical cosmological constant,
as first introduced by Einstein. The term in $\Lambda_2$ represents
the vacuum energy density of the quantum fields \cite{steve}. VSL is
only able to affect $\Lambda_1$, and we simply call this $\Lambda$ in
what follows.
If we define $\epsilon_\Lambda=\rho_\Lambda/\rho_m$ where
$\rho_\Lambda={\Lambda c^2\over 8\pi G}$
we find
\begin{equation}\label{epslab}
\dot \epsilon_\Lambda =\epsilon_\Lambda{\left(
3{\dot a\over a}(1+w)+2{\dot c\over c}{1+\epsilon_\Lambda
\over 1+\epsilon}\right)}.
\end{equation}
Ordinary cosmology has a $\Lambda$ problem in the sense that $\Lambda$ rapidly
comes to dominate, and must be tuned initially in order not to be
super-dominant today. Here we can see that inflation, with $-1 \leq w
\leq -1/3$, cannot provide the necessary tuning, while VSL
($\dot c < 0$) can have that effect. This, by the way also helps
illustrate how VSL is not physically equivalent to inflation.
We have also considered the evolution of perturbations. We have found
that for a sudden change in $c$, the density contrast $\Delta$ obeys
\begin{equation}
{\Delta^+\over\Delta^-}={c^+\over c^-}.
\end{equation}
For the large variation in $c$ required to produce a flat universe, we
have found that the universe has all perturbations reduced to
unobservable levels. This leave a blank slate which requires
something like the defect models of cosmic structure formation to
provide perturbations\cite{vs,bra}.
\section*{Scenario Building}
So far I have discussed the machinery of VSL, but how can this be
turned into a cosmological scenario? One can start the discussion by
considering a sudden transition between $c^{-}$ and $c^{+}$. Let us
assume for a moment that before the transition we have a flat FRW
universe. We find under these circumstances the temperature obeys
\begin{equation}
T^+/T^-= c^{-}/c^{+}.
\end{equation}
If we want $T^+ \approx T_{Planck}$ and require $c^{-}/c^{+} > 10^{60}$
to solve the flatness problem, on is starting with a very cold
$T^{-}$. Immediately, one can see that fine tuning is required to have
a cold flat universe before the transition, and this scenario does not
make much sense. Interestingly, unlike inflation Equation \ref{edot}
shows that VSL can create energy even in a empty open ($\epsilon =
-1$) universe. It might be more interesting to build scenarios based
on that starting point. Just as inflation has seen the
scenario-building change radially over the years, we feel there is a
lot to be learned about how to implement VSL before we understand the
best scheme to use. What we have so far is a very interesting
mechanism that can move the universe toward a flat homogeneous state.
\section*{Discussion and Conclusions}
Since our paper there have been a number of other
publications on VSL. One new direction pursued by Barrow and
Magueijo\cite{b1,bm1} looks at a possible power-law $c(t)$ that could
have $c$ varying even today. They have found interesting attractor
solutions which keeps $\Omega_{\Lambda}$ at a constant fraction of the
total $\Omega$, but they have their work cut out for them understanding
primordial nucleosynthesis in that model.
Also, Moffat has further explored the idea of spontaneous breaking of
Lorentz symmetry\cite{m2}.
Probably the greatest problem with the VSL idea is that we have no
fundamental picture of what makes $c$ vary. The phenomenological
treatment in \cite{am} does not address this question. What we can
say is our work shows that there are interesting cosmological rewards
for considering a time varying speed of light, and with that
motivation it may be possible to make some interesting discoveries.
Despite this problem, it is already possible to falsify at least the
fast-transition version of VSL. Since the perturbations turn out
to be infinitesimal after the transition, structure formation must be left
to active models which have their own characteristic signatures that
differentiate them from inflation\cite{acfm}. If the microwave
background comes out with characteristic inflationary features, these
VSL models will be ruled out.
This work was supported in part by UC Davis. I would like to thank
Joao Magueijo for a fruitful collaboration, and Richard Garavuso for
his comments on this manuscript.
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}
\pagestyle{plain}
Recent discoveries of slow-moving objects beyond the orbit of Neptune
have radically changed our understanding of the outer solar system.
These observations have revealed a large population of Kuiper Belt
objects (KBOs) in orbits with semi-major axes of 39--45 AU (\cite{jew93},
1995; \cite{ir95}; \cite{wil95}; \cite{jew96}; \cite{luu97};
\cite{gla97}; \cite{gla98}). KBOs with reliable orbits have a
cumulative size distribution that follows $N_C \propto r^{-q}$,
with $q = 3 \pm 0.5$ (\cite{jew98}; \cite{luu98}). The estimated
population of $\sim 10^5$ KBOs with radii $r \gtrsim$ 50 km
indicates a total mass, $M_{KBO} \approx 0.1 M_E$\footnote{1 $M_E
= 6 \times 10^{27}$ g}, for reasonable assumptions about the albedo
and distance distribution.
The small mass in KBOs is a problem for current planet formation
theories. In most theories, small planetesimals in the solar nebula
grow by collisional accumulation (e.g., \cite{saf69};
\cite{gre78}, 1984; \cite{wet89}, 1993; \cite{spa91}). This growth
eventually produces one or more `cores' that accumulate most, if not
all, of the solid mass in an annular `feeding zone' defined by balancing
the gravity of the growing planetesimal with the gravity of the Sun and
the rest of the disk. Large cores with masses of 1--10 $M_E$ can
also accrete gas from the feeding zone (\cite{pol84}). Applied to
the inner solar system, this model generally accounts for the masses
of the terrestrial and gas giant planets (e.g., \cite{pol96}, \cite{we97b};
but see \cite{bos97}). At 30--50 AU, however, the timescale to produce
planet-sized, $\sim$ 1000~km, objects exceeds the disk lifetime,
$\mathrel{\copy\simlessbox}$ 100 Myr, unless the mass of the outer disk is
$\sim 10^2$--$10^3~M_{KBO}$ (e.g., \cite{fer81}, 1984; \cite{ip89};
\cite{ste95}, 1996; \cite{st97a}). The presence of large KBOs in a
small mass Kuiper Belt is thus a mystery.
In Kenyon \& Luu (1998, hereafter KL98), we began to address this issue
by considering planetesimal growth in a single annulus at 35 AU. We
showed that calculations including accretion and velocity evolution
naturally produce several ``Plutos'' with radii exceeding 1000 km and
numerous 50 km radius KBOs on timescales of $\tau \sim$ 20--200 Myr for
a wide range of initial conditions in plausible solar nebulae. These
timescales indicate that Pluto can form in the outer solar system
in parallel with the condensation of the outermost large planets.
In this paper, we extend KL98 by adding fragmentation to our
planetesimal evolution code. The code generally matches published
calculations at 1 AU (Wetherill \& Stewart 1993, hereafter WS93)
and at 40 AU (Davis \& Farinella 1997). Our numerical results
demonstrate that fragmentation and velocity evolution damp
runaway growth to provide a self-limiting mechanism for the
formation of KBOs and Pluto in the Kuiper Belt.
These calculations produce several Plutos and at least $10^5$
50 km radius KBOs on timescales of 2--100 Myr in annuli with modest
surface densities, 2.0--0.14 g cm$^{-2}$, of solid material at 35 AU.
Our analysis sets a lower limit on the intrinsic strength of KBOs,
$\sim$ 300 erg g$^{-1}$, and indicates that the initial size distribution,
the initial eccentricity of the planetesimal swarm, and the details of
the fragmentation algorithm have little impact on the resulting size
distribution of KBOs.
Our results appear to resolve the mystery of large KBOs in a small mass
Kuiper Belt. Planetesimal evolution at 35--50 AU in a Minimum Mass
Solar Nebula (\cite{hay81}) naturally produces large KBOs in numbers close
to those currently observed. Most of the disk mass ends up in smaller
objects, 0.1--10 km, that can be collisionally depleted over the age of
the solar system. This depletion rate depends on the intrinsic strength
and eccentricity distribution of KBOs (\cite{ste96}; \cite{dav97};
\cite{st97a}, 1997b). Future observations can place better constraints
on these physical parameters and provide additional tests of our
interpretation of KBO formation.
We outline the fragmentation model and tests in Sec. 2,
describe calculations for the Kuiper Belt in Sec. 3, and
conclude with a discussion and summary in Sec. 4.
The Appendix contains a complete description of the
fragmentation algorithms and updates of the coagulation
code from KL98.
\section{The Model}
As in KL98, we adopt Safronov's (1969) particle-in-a-box method, where
planetesimals are treated as a statistical ensemble of masses with a
distribution of horizontal and vertical velocities about a Keplerian orbit.
Our calculations begin with a differential mass distribution $n(m_i$)
in a single accumulation zone centered at a heliocentric distance
$a$ with an inner radius at $a - \Delta a/2$ and an outer radius
at $a + \Delta a/2$. The horizontal and vertical velocity dispersions
of these bodies are $h_i(t)$ and $v_i(t)$. We approximate the continuous
distribution of particle masses with discrete batches having particle
populations $n_i(t)$ and total masses $M_i(t)$ (WS93). The average mass
of a batch, $m_i(t)$ = $M_i(t) / n_i(t)$, changes with time as collisions
add and remove bodies from the batch. This procedure naturally
conserves mass and allows a coarser grid than calculations with
fixed mass bins (\cite{wet90}; \cite{ws93}).
To evolve the mass and velocity distributions in time, we solve the
coagulation and energy conservation equations for an ensemble of
objects with masses ranging from $\sim 10^{7}$~g to $\sim 10^{26}$ g.
The Appendix of KL98 describes our treatment of accretion and
velocity evolution, and compares numerical results with analytic
solutions for standard test cases. In this paper, we add fragmentation
to the problem. We adopt a simple treatment of collision outcomes,
following Greenberg {\it et al}. (1978; see also \cite{dav85}, 1994; WS93):
\vskip 4ex
\noindent
1. Mergers -- two bodies collide and merge into a single object
with no debris;
\noindent
2. Cratering -- two bodies merge into a single object but produce
debris with a mass much smaller than the mass of the merged object;
\noindent
3. Rebounds -- two bodies collide and produce some debris but do
not merge into a single object; and
\noindent
4. Disruption -- two bodies collide and produce debris with a mass
comparable to the mass of the two initial bodies.
\vskip 4ex
We consider two algorithms for treating the cratering and disruption
of planetesimals. Both the WS93 and the Davis {\it et al}. (1984) algorithms
estimate the amount of debris $m_{f,ij}$ produced from impacts with
velocities exceeding a threshold velocity $V_f$. In general, $m_{f,ij}$
scales with the impact energy. WS93 assume that the debris has the same
relative velocity $V_{ij}$ of the colliding bodies;
Davis {\it et al}. (1984) assume that the debris receives a fixed fraction
$f_{KE}$ of the impact kinetic energy. In both cases, we adopt a
coefficient of restitution $c_R$ to allow for rebound collisions that
produce debris but no single merged body. We follow Greenberg {\it et al}.
(1978) and adopt separate values of $c_R$ for collisions with ($c_2$)
and without ($c_1$) cratering. The Appendix describes these algorithms
in more detail.
To test our fragmentation procedures, we attempt to duplicate WS93's
calculations of planetary embryo formation at 1 AU. Their model
begins with 8.33 $\times~10^8$ planetesimals having radii of 8 km and
a velocity dispersion of 4.7 m s$^{-1}$ relative to a Keplerian orbit
(Table 1; see also Table 1 of \cite{ws93}). Table 2 summarizes our
results using the WS93 initial conditions with mass spacing factors
of $\delta \equiv m_{i+1}/m_i$ = 1.12, 1.25, 1.4, and 2.0 between
successive mass batches. We adopt the analytic cross-sections of
Spaute {\it et al}. (1991), which yield results identical to the numerical
cross-sections of WS93 (\cite{kl98}). Figure 1 shows our reproduction
of WS93 for $\delta = 1.25$. This model produces twelve 3--7
$\times~10^{25}$ g objects with velocity dispersions of 60--100 m s$^{-1}$
in 1.15 $\times~10^5$ yr. In contrast, WS93 produce seven 1--3
$\times~10^{26}$ g objects (see Figures 1--3 in WS93). Despite this
factor of two difference in the total mass contained in the most
massive bodies, our calculation has the same broad ``plateau'' in
the cumulative number distribution $N_C$ at log $m_i$ = 24--26 and
a similar power law dependence, $N_C \propto m_i^{-1}$, at log $m_i$
= 21--23. Our ``fragmentation tail'' at log $m_i$ = 7--18 has the
standard power law dependence, $N_C \propto m_i^{-0.8}$ (\cite{doh69}),
at large masses but flattens out more than the WS93 result at small masses.
The evolution of particle velocities in our calculations generally
agrees with WS93 (Figure 2; see Figures 2--3 of WS93).
All velocities increase monotonically with time due to viscous stirring.
The velocities of large bodies grow very slowly, because
dynamical friction transfers their kinetic energy to small bodies.
The model maintains a nearly constant ratio of vertical to
horizontal velocity, $v_i/h_i \approx$ 0.53, for all but the most
massive bodies, which have $v_i/h_i < 0.5$ (Figure 2, right panel).
This result agrees with previous calculations (Barge \& Pellat
1990, 1991; \cite{hor85}). At late times, our velocities for
small bodies, $h_i \approx$ 200 m s$^{-1}$ at $m_i \sim 10^{7}$ g,
are roughly a factor of two larger than those of WS93.
Velocities for large bodies, $h_i \approx$ 100 m s$^{-1}$
at $m_i \sim 10^{25}$ g, roughly equal those of WS93.
The higher velocities of our calculation lead to additional mass
loss from gas drag and fragmentation. Gas drag removes material
from the annulus; fragmentation produces bodies with masses less
than the minimum mass, $\sim 10^7$ g, of our numerical grid. We
typically lose $\sim$ 25\% of the initial mass to cratering and
catastrophic fragmentation and another 20\%--25\% to gas drag.
WS93 lost a comparable amount of mass to fragmentation but only
$\sim$ 5\% to gas drag.
The agreement between our results and those of WS93 depends on
the mass spacing factor $\delta$. For $\tau \lesssim$ 30,000 yr,
large $\delta$ models take longer to produce 1000--2000 km
objects than small $\delta$ models. The `lag' relative to our
$\delta$ = 1.12 model increases from 1\%--2\% for $\delta$ = 1.25
up to $\sim$ 10\% for $\delta$ = 2 (see also \cite{oht88};
\cite{oht90}; \cite{wet90}; \cite{kol92}; KL98).
The poor resolution of $\delta \ge 1.4$ models delays the production of
massive bodies that `runaway' from the rest of the mass distribution.
In WS93, most runaway bodies are also `isolated' bodies that do not
interact with one another but do interact with the rest of the mass
distribution (see WS93 and the Appendix). Delays in the production
of isolated, runaway bodies lead to 10\%--20\% increases in the
velocity dispersion of all bodies. Larger velocities reduce
gravitational focusing factors and slow the growth of the largest
bodies. The mass of the largest object thus increases from
7--8 $ \times~10^{25}$ g for $\delta$ = 1.25--1.4 to
$9.5 \times 10^{25}$ g for $\delta$ = 1.12. This trend suggests
that calculations with $\delta$ = 1.01--1.10, as in WS93, would
improve the agreement between our results and those of WS93.
The coagulation results also depend on the treatment of low velocity
collisions. Our standard expressions for long-range gravitational
interactions fail when the velocity dispersion is close to the
Hill velocity, $v_H$ (\cite{ida90}; \cite{bar91}). We use Ida's
(1990) $n$-body calculations and adopt his simple expressions to
derive the velocity evolution for collisions in the low velocity
limit, $V_{ij} < V_{lv} v_H$, where $V_{lv}$ = 2--5 is a constant
(see the Appendix).
This change slows down the velocity evolution, because it introduces
a lower limit to the timescales for dynamical friction and the
inclination component of viscous stirring (\cite{ida90}). We adopt
$V_{lv}$ = 2, following WS93, for 1 AU calculations. Unlike WS93,
however, the small bodies in our calculation do not quite reach the
low velocity limit and increase in velocity throughout the evolution.
A modest increase in our low velocity limit, $V_{lv}$ = 3.5, leads
to better agreement between the velocity behavior of our models and
that of WS93.
To test our procedures further, we repeat the 1 AU calculations using
the Davis {\it et al}. (1984) fragmentation algorithm. Table 3 lists our
results for $f_{KE}$ = 0.1 and $\delta$ = 1.25, 1.4, and 2.0. These
calculations yield solutions similar to our WS93 models. Calculations
with smaller $\delta$ produce larger bodies at earlier times than
models with large $\delta$ (Table 3). The mass of the largest
object increases from $m_i \approx 7 \times 10^{25}$ g for $\delta$ =
2.0 to $m_i \approx 1.2 \times 10^{26}$ g for $\delta$ = 1.4 to
$m_i \approx 1.8 \times 10^{26}$ g for $\delta$ = 1.25. The velocity
dispersions of the small bodies are a factor of 2--3 larger at $\tau
\lesssim$ 30,000 yr because they receive a larger fraction of the
fragmentation energy than in the WS93 algorithm. This trend reverses
for $\tau \gtrsim$ 50,000 yr, because the Davis {\it et al}. algorithm produces
more debris for collisions between large objects than the WS93 algorithm.
These large objects have small velocity dispersions, so the velocity
dispersions of the small bodies increase more slowly than in the WS93
model. The mass lost from fragmentation, $\sim$ 5\% of the initial mass,
and gas drag, $\sim$ 20\% of the initial mass, is also smaller.
We conclude that our coagulation code with fragmentation and velocity
evolution reproduces `standard' calculations. The results in Tables
2--3 generally agree with published results, despite some differences
in the evolution of the velocity dispersion and the radius of the
largest object. These discrepancies probably result from subtle
differences in the implementation of the algorithms. None seem
significant, because the major results do not depend on the input
parameters (see also WS93): all calculations produce several objects
with $m_i \sim 10^{26}$ g that contain most of the remaining mass
in the annulus.
\vfill
\eject
\section{Kuiper Belt Calculations}
\subsection{Starting Conditions}
As in KL98, we rely on observations of other stellar systems and
solar nebula models to choose appropriate initial conditions for our
Kuiper Belt calculations. Recent observations indicate lifetimes of $\sim$
5--10 Myr for typical gaseous disks surrounding nearby
pre--main-sequence stars and for the solar nebula (\cite{sar93};
\cite{rus96}; \cite{har98}). In our solar system, Neptune formation
places another constraint on the KBO growth time, because Neptune excites
KBOs through gravitational perturbations. Recent calculations suggest
Neptune can form in 5--100 Myr (\cite{ip89}; \cite{lis96}; \cite{pol96}).
Once formed, Neptune inhibits KBO formation at 30--40 AU by increasing
particle random velocities on timescales of 20--100 Myr (\cite{hol93};
\cite{dun95}; \cite{mor97}). We thus adopt 100 Myr as an upper limit
to the KBO formation timescale at 30--40 AU.
Our starting conditions for KBO calculations are similar to KL98.
We consider an annulus centered at 35 AU with a width of 6 AU.
This annulus can accommodate at least 10--100 isolated bodies with
$m_i \mathrel{\copy\simgreatbox} 10^{24}$ g for $e \le 0.01$. Instead of the single
starting radius used in KL98, the present calculations begin with $N_0$
bodies in a size distribution with radii, $r_i$ = 1--80 m. This
initial population has a power law cumulative size distribution,
$N_C \propto r_i^{-q_0}$. We usually adopt $q_0 = 3$; the final size
distribution appears to depend very little on $q_0$, as discussed below.
The planetesimals have a small initial eccentricity (\cite{mal95})
that is independent of size and an equilibrium ratio of inclination
to eccentricity, $\beta_0 = \langle i_0 \rangle/\langle e_0 \rangle$ = 0.6
(\cite{bar90}). The mass density of each body is 1.5 g cm$^{-3}$.
To set the initial mass of the annulus, $M_0$, we extend the Minimum
Mass Solar Nebula to the Kuiper Belt and integrate the surface density
distribution for solid particles, $\Sigma = \Sigma_0 (a/a_0)^{-3/2}$,
across the 6 AU annulus. The dust mass is then $M_{min} \approx
0.25~\Sigma_0~M_E$ at 32--38 AU for $a_0$ = 1~AU. Most Minimum Mass
Solar Nebula models have $\Sigma_0$ = 30--60 g cm$^{-2}$ (\cite{wei77};
\cite{hay81}; \cite{bai94}), which sets $M_{min} \approx$ 7--15 $M_E$.
We consider models with $M_0$ = 1--100 $M_E$ to allow for
additional uncertainty in $\Sigma_0$. Table 1 compares input
parameters for Kuiper Belt models with initial conditions
at 1 AU (see also \cite{ws93}).
Our success criteria are based on available observations of KBOs.
The present day Kuiper Belt contains
(a) at least one object (Pluto) with radius $\gtrsim$ 1000 km and
(b) $\sim$ 70,000 objects with radii exceeding 50 km
(\cite{jew95}; \cite{jew96}, 1998). A successful KBO calculation
must satisfy both observed properties in $\mathrel{\copy\simlessbox}$ 100 Myr.
We quantify these criteria by defining $r_{max}$ as the radius of
the largest object and $r_5$ as the radius where the cumulative
number of objects is $N_C \ge 10^5$: a successful simulation has
$r_{max} \gtrsim$ 1000 km and $r_5 \mathrel{\copy\simgreatbox}$ 50 km at
$\tau \lesssim$ 100 Myr. To provide another characteristic
of these models, we define $r_{95\%}$ such that 95\% of the
mass is contained in objects with $r_i < r_{95\%}$.
In models with a long runaway growth phase, the largest objects contain
most of the mass and $r_{95\%} \approx r_5$. Models with a limited
runaway growth phase leave most of the mass in small objects, so
$r_{95\%} \ll r_5$. We end calculations with velocity evolution
when $r_{max}$ exceeds $\sim$ 1000 km. To evaluate the dependence
of runaway growth on fragmentation, we extend calculations without
velocity evolution to 5000 Myr or to when $r_{max}$ exceeds $\sim$
2000--3000 km.
\subsection{Models Without Velocity Evolution}
To isolate how fragmentation changes the growth of KBOs,
we begin with constant velocity calculations of accretion.
The initial size distribution has $q_0 = 3$, $\delta$ = 1.4,
and a maximum initial radius of $r_0$ = 80 m.
The initial velocities of $h_i$ = 4 m s$^{-1}$ and $v_i$ =
2.1 m s$^{-1}$ correspond to an equilibrium model with $e_0
= 10^{-3}$ (\cite{hor85}). We use the Davis {\it et al}. (1985)
fragmentation algorithm and assume that the collision fragments
receive a kinetic energy per unit mass equal to one-half of
the square of the relative velocity of the colliding bodies,
$V_{ij}$. The bodies are strong, with a tensile strength
$S_0 = 2 \times 10^6$ erg g$^{-1}$.
Tables 1 and 4 summarize the initial conditions and results for models
with $M_0$ = 1--100 $M_E$, $e_0$ = $10^{-3}$, and the coefficients
of restitution, ($c_1$,$c_2$) = ($10^{-5}$,$10^{-5}$) and
($10^{-2}$,$10^{-3}$).
Figure 3 shows how $N_C$ evolves with time for $M_0$ = 10 $M_E$,
$e_0 = 10^{-3}$, and ($c_1$,$c_2$) = ($10^{-5}$,$10^{-5}$).
The low coefficients of restitution eliminate rebound collisions.
Roughly half of the most massive objects experiences at least one
collision by $\tau \approx$ 16~Myr, when the 18 largest bodies have
$r_i \approx $ 1~km. These bodies reach $r_i \sim$ 10 km at
$\tau \approx$ 135 Myr and grow to 100~km sizes at 255 Myr.
The growth rate then increases considerably due to gravitational
focusing. Runaway growth ensues. The largest planetesimals
reach $r_{max} \approx$ 200~km at $\tau \approx$ 265~Myr;
$r_{max}$ exceeds 1000~km only 11~Myr later. At $\tau \approx$ 280~Myr,
a single runaway body with $r_{max} \approx$ 2000~km begins to sweep up
lower mass planetesimals and contains nearly all of the mass in
the annulus a few Myr later.
The cumulative size distribution of small objects with $r_i \lesssim$
100 m slowly approaches a power law with $q = 2.25$ throughout the
evolution. The distribution is shallow, $q < 2$, for $\tau \lesssim$
20 Myr as growth produces many 50--500 m objects. The distribution
steepens as the largest bodies grow past 1 km and settles at
$q = 2.25$ for $\tau \gtrsim$ 150 Myr. This distribution
is steeper than the theoretical limit of $q = 2.5$ (\cite{doh69};
\cite{wil94}), because growth and fragmentation never reach equilibrium.
Calculations with rebound collisions yield similar results. With larger
coefficients of restitution, ($c_1$,$c_2$) = ($10^{-2}$,$10^{-3}$),
rebound collisions occur for $r_i \lesssim$ 5 m. These collisions
produce fragments but no mergers into larger bodies. As a result, the size distribution is initially very steep for
$r_i \lesssim$ 5 m and very shallow for $r_i \gtrsim$ 5 m (Figure 4).
As the largest objects grow from 1 km to 10 km at $\tau$ = 16--135 Myr,
bodies with $r_i \lesssim$ 5 m are swept up by the large bodies
and replaced by collision fragments. This process smooths out the
size distribution at $r_i \sim$ 1--20 m, although the slope still
changes at $r_i \sim$ 5 m.
The evolution of the largest bodies is unaffected by rebounds.
These objects reach sizes of 100 km only slightly later than models
without rebounds, 258 Myr {\it vs} 255 Myr, and then begin to runaway from
lower mass planetesimals. Several objects reach radii of 1000 km in
another $\sim$ 20 Myr and then begin to consume all of the material
left in the annulus.
Fragmentation is not important in any of these low eccentricity
calculations. Catastrophic fragmentation produces no mass loss.
because the velocities remain artificially low. These models lose
only 1\%--3\% of their initial mass due to cratering. The
timescale to grow into a 1000 km object is nearly identical to
models without fragmentation (see KL98): Pluto forms in
$\tau_P \approx$ 276--280 Myr ($M_0/\rm 10 ~ M_E$)$^{-1}$ for
$r_0$ = 80 m. Calculations with larger $r_0$ should have smaller
growth times (see KL98).
\subsection{Models With Limited Velocity Evolution}
To understand how fragmentation changes the velocity dispersions
of colliding planetesimals, we consider calculations with `limited'
velocity evolution. As in Davis {\it et al}. (1985, 1994), we assume
that collision fragments receive a fixed fraction $f_{KE}$
of the center-of-mass impact energy, but consider no other
changes to the kinetic energy of the bodies. For most collisions,
this assumption produces fragments with velocities larger than the
relative collision velocity $V_{ij}$. To conserve kinetic energy,
the merged bodies have a lower velocity dispersion after the collision.
This redistribution of velocity mimics dynamical friction and
should lead to more rapid growth than models with no velocity
evolution. Table 5 summarizes results for $e_0$ = $10^{-3}$,
$S_0 = 2 \times 10^6$ erg g$^{-1}$, and coefficients of restitution,
($c_1,c_2$) = ($10^{-2},10^{-3}$), for our standard mass distribution
with $q_0 = 3$, $\delta$ = 1.4, and $r_0$ = 80 m.
Figure 5 shows how $N_C$ evolves with time for $M_0$ = 10 $M_E$.
During the first 10--20 Myr, the size distribution has two power
laws, $q \approx 4$ for $r_i \lesssim$ 5 m and $q \approx 1.25$
for $r_i \gtrsim$ 5 m. This break in the slope is due
to rebounds, which prevent growth of the smallest objects. As the
largest objects grow to sizes of 1--10 km, collision debris adds
to the population of 5~m objects. The slope of the size
distribution is then $q \approx 2.5$ for $r_i \lesssim$ 100 m.
For large objects, $q$ approaches 2.5 once $r_{max}$ exceeds 100 km.
Once $r_{max} \gtrsim$ 1000 km, the complete number distribution
follows a power law with $q = 2.5$, except for a small kink at
$r_i \approx$ 1 km whose amplitude decreases with time.
Limited velocity evolution eventually produces larger objects
on shorter timescales than models without velocity evolution.
In the first 20--40 Myr, collisions between the largest bodies,
$r_i \approx$ 100--500 m, add material with high velocity dispersion
to batches with $r_i \sim$ 1--10 m. The horizontal velocity dispersions
of these low mass objects increase from 4 m s$^{-1}$ to 10--30 m s$^{-1}$
in 17 Myr and reach a roughly constant value of $\sim$ 20 m s$^{-1}$
after 200 Myr (Figure 6). This large velocity dispersion initially
slows down the growth of the largest objects relative to models with
no velocity evolution. It takes this model $\sim$ 1 Myr longer to
produce objects with $r_i \sim$ 1 km, but these objects then have
velocities $\sim$ 1 m s$^{-1}$ smaller than the initial velocity
of the planetesimal swarm (see Figure 6). This smaller velocity
dispersion enhances the growth of the largest objects once gravitational
focusing becomes important. The model produces 10 km objects in
120 Myr and 100 km objects in 202 Myr. This rapid evolution leads
to runaway growth and the production of a few 1000+ km objects after
another 15 Myr.
Figure 7 compares $r_{max}$ in models with no velocity evolution
(thin solid lines) and models with limited velocity evolution
(thick solid lines). The annuli have initial masses $M_0$ = 1,
10, and 100 $M_E$. These models are nearly indistinguishable for
$r_{max} \lesssim$ 10 km. The limited velocity evolution models
then produce larger objects on shorter timescales. These models
do not have a mass-dependent velocity evolution such as viscous
stirring or dynamical friction, so the timescale to produce 1000 km
objects is still inversely proportional to the mass in the annulus,
$\tau_P$ = 216 Myr $(M_0/10 ~ M_E)^{-1}$ for $e_0$ = $10^{-3}$.
Other than the accelerated growth rate at late times, there is little
difference between models with limited velocity evolution and models
with no velocity evolution (see Tables 4--5). Both sets produce
comparable numbers of large KBOs, $r_i \gtrsim$ 100 km, that
contain most of the mass in the annulus when the first Pluto
forms. These models also lose $\sim$ 1\%--3\% of their initial mass
due to cratering. The mass loss depends solely on the total kinetic
energy of all the bodies, which is a constant in these models.
Catastrophic fragmentation still produces no mass loss, because
we assume relatively strong objects with $S_0 = 2 \times 10^6$
erg g$^{-1}$. We describe models with weaker bodies in the next section.
\subsection{Models with Velocity Evolution}
We now consider a complete coagulation calculation with fragmentation
and velocity evolution. In addition to velocity redistribution from
fragmentation, these models include (i) gas drag,
(ii) dynamical friction and viscous stirring from
long-range (elastic) collisions, and
(iii) dynamical friction and viscous stirring from
short-range (inelastic) collisions (see the Appendix of KL98).
To approximate the disappearance of the solar nebula on reasonable
timescales, we assume that the gas density decays exponentially
with time, $\rho_g(t) = \rho_{g,0}~e^{-t/\tau_g}$ where
$\rho_{g,0} = 1.18 \times 10^{-9}~(a/1 AU)^{-21/8}~(M_0/4 M_E)$
g cm$^{-3}$ (WS93 and references therein). The influence of
gas drag on the planetesimals thus decreases with an $e$-folding
time of $\tau_g$, which we set at $\tau_g$ = 10 Myr (\cite{har98}).
We adopt $\delta$ = 1.4, $q_0 = 3$, and $r_0$ = 80 m. The initial
velocities are $h_i$ = 4.0 ($e_0/10^{-3}$) m~s$^{-1}$ and
$v_i$ = 2.1 ($e_0/10^{-3}$) m~s$^{-1}$. Tables 6--7 summarize
the initial conditions and results for models with
$M_0$ = 1--100 $M_E$ and $e_0$ = $10^{-4}$ to $10^{-2}$.
\subsubsection{A Standard Model with $e_0 = 10^{-3}$
and $S_0 = 2 \times 10^6$ erg g$^{-1}$}
Figure 8 shows how $N_C$ and $h_i$ evolve for $M_0$ = 10 $M_E$,
$e_0 = 10^{-3}$, and $S_0 = 2 \times 10^6$ erg g$^{-1}$.
Inelastic collisions act rapidly to circularize the orbits of
objects with $r_i \gtrsim$ 5 m, which decrease in velocity from
$h_i$ = 4 m s$^{-1}$ to $h_i$ = 1--2 m s$^{-1}$ in 5 Myr. Larger
bodies have less frequent collisions; their orbits circularize on longer
timescales. Small bodies with $r_i \lesssim$ 5~m collide frequently,
but rebounds prevent these bodies from circularizing their orbits.
Instead, collision fragments increase the velocity dispersion of the
lowest mass bodies. These processes produce an inverted velocity
distribution, where bodies with $r_i \approx$ 5 m have smaller
velocities than objects with $r_i \lesssim$ 5 m and $r_i \gtrsim$
10 m.
The steady damping of particle velocities enhances growth of the
larger bodies relative to calculations with limited velocity
evolution. The largest objects grow slowly for 8.5 Myr, when there
are $\sim$ 500 objects with $r_i$ = 1 km. The size distribution then
has three main features:
(i) a pronounced fragmentation tail with a modest velocity dispersion,
$h_i \approx$ 1--3 m s$^{-1}$;
(ii) a transition region with pronounced kink in the size distribution;
and (iii) a group of rapidly growing bodies with low velocities,
$h_i$ = 0.02 m s$^{-1}$ (Figure 8; left panel). These features remain
prominent as $r_{max}$ increases from 1 km to 100 km in only 3.5 Myr.
During runaway growth, dynamical friction and viscous stirring begin
to increase particle velocities (Figure 8; right panel). This phase
ends when $r_{max}$ reaches $\sim$ 300 km at 15 Myr. The velocity
dispersions of the small to intermediate mass bodies are then
large enough, $\sim$ 10~m s$^{-1}$, to reduce gravitational
focusing factors considerably. The largest objects enter a
steady growth phase, where their radii grow slowly with time.
There are 2 Charon-sized objects with
$r_i \gtrsim$ 500 km at 19 Myr; 50 ``Charons'' at 25 Myr, and
$\sim$ 150 Charons at 36.5 Myr when the first ``Pluto'' appears.
The size distribution then closely follows a power law with
$q = 2.5$ for $r_i \lesssim$ 30~m and a steeper power law with
$q = 3$ for $r_i$ = 1--1000 km. The modest velocity dispersion
of the largest objects, $h_i \approx$ 0.5 m s$^{-1}$, maintains
steady growth for another 60 Myr:
4 objects have $r_i$ = 1450 km at 50 Myr;
8 objects have $r_i$ = 2000 km at 100 Myr.
Figure 9 illustrates how the largest objects grow as a function of $M_0$.
All models begin with slow growth, where inelastic collisions reduce
the velocity dispersions of the intermediate mass objects. Slow growth
lasts longer as $M_0$ decreases, because the growth rate depends on
the collision rate. Viscous stirring prolongs the slow growth phase
of small $M_0$ models by counteracting collisional damping earlier
in the evolution. Slow growth thus produces more 1--2 km objects
in models with smaller $M_0$. Runaway growth eventually turns 1 km
bodies into 100 km objects. This phase ends when bodies with
$r_i \lesssim$ 1 km have velocity dispersions exceeding 10--20 m s$^{-1}$.
The large gravitational focusing factors that began runaway growth are
then smaller by several orders of magnitude. The growth then returns
to a steady phase where the largest bodies gradually approach radii
of 1000 km.
In these models, cratering also acts to damp runaway growth. As noted
in Sect. 3.3, collision debris increases the velocities of the
smallest objects. Viscous stirring and dynamical friction enhance
this evolution as the largest objects grow beyond 1 km. The velocity
dispersions of small objects increase from $\sim$ 20 m s$^{-1}$ at
the end of runaway growth to $\sim$ 100 m s$^{-1}$ at 100 Myr.
The largest objects then have $r_i \approx$ 2000 km.
Collision debris produces $\sim$ 30\% of this increase; dynamical
friction and viscous stirring are responsible for the rest.
Although all models with $e_0$ = $10^{-3}$ make at least one Pluto,
only annuli with $M_0 \sim$ 10 $M_E$ meet both success criteria.
In each calculation, $r_5$ steadily increases with time
during the slow growth phase (Figure 10). The number of 50 km radius
KBOs increases dramatically during runaway growth, when gravitational
focusing factors are large. At the end of runaway growth, $r_5$ begins
to decrease with time as the largest bodies try to separate themselves
from the rest of the mass distribution. This evolution is modest and
short-lived, because the runaway growth phase ends quickly. The number
of 50 km radius KBOs then approaches a roughly constant value which
grows with increasing $M_0$. Based on Figure 10, annuli with
$M_0 \lesssim$ 3 $M_E$ produce too few 50 km radius KBOs compared
with our success criterion; annuli with $M_0 \gtrsim$ 30 $M_E$
probably produce too many. Annuli with 3 $M_E$ $\lesssim M_0 \lesssim$
30 $M_E$ can produce 1 or more Plutos and roughly $10^5$ KBOs in
$\lesssim$ 100 Myr.
This `standard model' has several important input parameters,
including the initial eccentricity, the initial size distribution,
and the intrinsic strength of the bodies. To understand how
the evolution depends on these parameters, we now consider
variations on the standard model. We begin with a discussion
of $e_0$ and then describe models with different input
strengths and size distributions.
\subsubsection{Models with $e_0 = 10^{-4}$ and $10^{-2}$ for
$S_0 = 2 \times 10^6$ erg g$^{-1}$}
The velocity dispersion of the planetesimal swarm affects growth
primarily through gravitational focusing. Large bodies grow
faster when velocity dispersions are small and gravitational
focusing factors are large. Despite small $e_0$, all of our
calculations begin in the ``high velocity regime,'' where
gravitational focusing factors are near unity. Collisional
damping and dynamical friction reduce velocity dispersions
to the low velocity regime where growth is rapid. Planetesimals
with small $e_0$ can reach this regime first, so we expect that
smaller $e_0$ leads to more rapid growth.
Calculations with $e_0 = 10^{-4}$ and $10^{-2}$ confirm these
general considerations. In models with $e_0 = 10^{-2}$, the larger
initial velocities reduce collisional damping compared to models
with $e_0 = 10^{-3}$. Gravitational focusing factors thus
increase slowly. Additional cratering debris also counteracts
collisional damping and combines with dynamical friction and
viscous stirring to keep velocity dispersions large. As a result,
models with $e_0 = 10^{-2}$ experience a prolonged linear growth phase.
This phase is $\sim$ 10 times longer than for $e_0 = 10^{-3}$ models.
Slow growth ends when the largest objects reach the sizes needed
to produce modest gravitational focusing factors. A short
runaway growth phase eventually produces several Plutos.
The final size distribution has a larger fraction of mass in
more massive objects, as indicated by a large value for $r_{95\%}$,
but has roughly comparable numbers of 50 km radius KBOs (Table 6).
These models also lose more mass to dust, $\sim$ 50\%, compared to
the 1\%--3\% lost in models with $e_0 = 10^{-3}$.
Growth is rapid in models with $e_0 = 10^{-4}$, because
collisional damping quickly reduces the velocity dispersion.
This change does not have a dramatic effect on the growth of
KBOs, because damping quickly reduces particle velocities
to the low velocity limit. The damping time is then
independent of velocity. Viscous stirring is also less
effective. In our calculations, the growth times for
$e_0 = 10^{-4}$ models are a factor of $\sim$ 2--10 smaller
than $e = 10^{-3}$ models (Table 6). Models with
$e_0 \lesssim$ a few $\times~10^{-5}$ probably have similar
growth times, but we have not investigated this possibility
in detail.
Figure 11 compares the size distribution near the end of our
calculations for three different values of $e_0$. All
models produce two power law size distributions, with
$q = 2.5$ for small objects and $q = 3$ for large objects.
These power laws are connected by a transition region which
moves to larger radii with increasing $e_0$. The fragmentation
population thus extends to larger radii with {\it larger} $e_0$.
In contrast, the merger population (the steep power law at
larger radii) extends to smaller radii with {\it smaller} $e_0$.
This feature of the calculations can be tested directly with
observations (\cite{kl99})
\subsubsection{Models with Weaker Bodies}
The intrinsic strength $S_0$ of a planetesimal changes the growth
rate by setting the impact energy $Q_d$ needed to disrupt colliding
bodies. In our disruption model, $Q_d$ depends on the sum of $S_0$
and the gravitational binding energy of a colliding pair of
planetesimals, $ 4 \pi G \rho_0 R_c^2/15$ (eq. [A11] and [A13]).
The gravitational term is small compared to $S_0$ when the combined
radius of the merged object is $R_c \lesssim 0.03 S_0^{1/2}$ km.
The maximum radius of our initial size distribution, $r_0$ = 80 m, falls
below this limit for $S_0 \lesssim$ 25 erg g$^{-1}$. For collisions
between equal mass bodies, we can then derive a simple expression relating
the minimum strength necessary for growth and the velocity dispersion,
\begin{equation}
S_{0,min} \approx 6 \times 10^4 ~ {\rm erg~g^{-1}} \left ( \frac{V_{ij}}{100~{\rm m~s^{-1}}} \right ) ^2
\end{equation}
\noindent
At the start of our calculations, this result yields
\begin{equation}
S_{0,min} \approx 300~{\rm erg~g^{-1}} \left ( \frac{e_0}{10^{-3}} \right )^2 .
\end{equation}
\noindent
Bodies with $e_0 \lesssim$ 0.1 initially grow for the standard
case with $S_0$ = $2 \times 10^6$ erg g$^{-1}$. As these objects
grow to 1 km sizes, viscous stirring and dynamical friction increase
the velocities of small objects. Once the velocities reach the threshold
set by Equation (1), catastrophic disruption produces debris that is
lost from the calculation. This process should limit the growth of
the largest objects by reducing the reservoir of small bodies available
for accretion. We thus expect the maximum size of KBOs to depend on $S_0$.
To test these ideas in detail, we consider models with various $S_0$.
Calculations with $S_0$ = 10 to $2 \times 10^6$ erg g$^{-1}$ for $e_0
= 10^{-4}$ and $S_0$ = $10^4$ to $2 \times 10^6$ erg g$^{-1}$ for $e_0
= 10^{-3}$ allow velocity evolution to increase particle velocities up to
the disruption threshold. Models with $S_0 \lesssim 2 \times 10^6$
erg g$^{-1}$ and $e_0 \gtrsim 10^{-3}$ lose too much mass in the
early stages to be of much practical value. Models with $S_0 \gtrsim
2 \times 10^6$ erg g$^{-1}$ are identical to models with
$S_0 = 2 \times 10^6$ erg g$^{-1}$.
Table 7 summarizes our results at 50 Myr and 100 Myr for $M_0 = 10~M_E$
and several different values of $\delta$. For both values of $e_0$,
stronger objects can grow to larger sizes at 100 Myr (see Figure 12).
In each model, accretion and collisional damping lead to a short
runaway growth phase that produces 100+ km objects with low
velocities ($h_i \lesssim$ 0.1~m~s$^{-1}$), but leaves most of
the initial mass in 0.1--1~km objects with much larger velocities
($h_i \sim$ 3--10~m~s$^{-1}$). Dynamical friction and viscous
stirring then increase the velocities of these small objects to
the disruption threshold. The timescale to reach this threshold
increases with $S_0$; $r_{max}$ also increases with $S_0$ as indicated
in Table 7 and Figure 12. When all small bodies have been disrupted,
the maximum radius is nearly independent of $\delta$:
\begin{equation}
{\rm log}~r_{max} \approx 2.45 + 0.22~{\rm log}~S_0 ~
\end{equation}
\noindent
for 10 erg g$^{-1}$ $\le S_0 \le 10^4$ erg g$^{-1}$ and
$e_0 = 10^{-4}$ and $10^{-3}$. We did not run models with
larger $S_0$ to the disruption threshold. Future calculations
will allow us to see whether $r_{max}$ reaches a threshold value at
large $S_0$ or continues to increase as indicated by Equation (3).
Although $r_{max}$ depends on $S_0$, both $r_5$ and the slope of
the final size distribution at large radius are independent of $S_0$.
The radius limit for $10^5$ KBOs has a small range, $r_5 \approx$
45--60 km, for any combination of $\delta$ and $S_0$ (Table 7).
Figure 13 shows the evolution of the size distribution for $S_0$
= 10 erg g$^{-1}$. As in Figure 8 and Figure 11, accretion produces
a fragmentation tail with $q = 2.5$ at small radii and a steeper
power law with $q = 3$ at large radii. The $q = 3$ power law
persists throughout the catastrophic disruption phase; the
fragmentation tail evolves into a very steep power law with $q = 4$.
This behavior of the fragmentation tail occurs because larger objects
initially experience more disruptive collisions than do smaller objects.
Catastrophic disruption adds high velocity fragments from larger
objects to the smaller mass bins; kinetic energy from this debris
and viscous stirring gradually push smaller and smaller objects
over the disruption threshold. Eventually, the smallest objects in
our grid, $r_i \approx$ 1 ~m, reach the disruption threshold and
are slowly removed from the calculation.
\subsubsection{Models with Different Size Distributions}
The initial size distribution is one of the most uncertain input
parameters of our coagulation models. The growth of 1--10 m or
larger bodies from interstellar dust grains is poorly understood.
Predicted sizes for conditions in the outer solar system range from
$\lesssim$ 1 m up to several hundred km depending on details of both
microscopic and macroscopic physics (e.g., \cite{gol73}; \cite{tre90};
\cite{cz93a}, 1993b; \cite{bai94}; \cite{we97a}; \cite{bos97};
\cite{wur98}). To test the sensitivity of our results to the
initial conditions, we consider models with
(a) $q_0 = 4.5$, (b) $ q_0 = 1.5$, and
(c) $N_C = {\rm Const}~\delta(r - r_0)$.
These models produce final size distributions that are indistinguishable
from our standard model with $q_0 = 3$. Both $r_{max}$ and $r_5$ are
also independent of the initial size distribution. The time to
runaway growth and the timescale to produce one Pluto increase
with the amount of material initially in the smallest objects,
because collisional damping is more effective when there is a
large reservoir of small objects. We derive
$\tau_P$ = 30 Myr for $q_0 = 4.5$,
$\tau_P$ = 37 Myr for $q_0 = 3$,
$\tau_P$ = 42 Myr for $q_0 = 1.5$, and
$\tau_P$ = 49 Myr for $N_C = {\rm Const} ~ \delta(r - 80~m)$.
To test the importance of the mass spacing factor,
we recomputed these models for $\delta$ = 1.25. Our results for
(a), (b), and (c) in the preceding paragraph are indistinguishable
from results with $\delta$ = 1.4, except that the timescale to
produce Pluto decreases by $\sim$ 5\%.
The model with $\delta$ = 1.25 and our standard initial size distribution,
$q_0 = 3$, produced a single large body that ran away from the rest
of the large bodies. The final radius of this single object is
$\sim$ 50\% larger than $r_{max}$ for other calculations with
$M_0 = 10 M_E$. Several tests indicate that forming a single
large body is a stochastic process sensitive to $\delta$:
small $\delta$ models produce such an object more often than
large $\delta$ models. We plan to investigate this possibility
further in future studies.
\subsubsection{Other Input Parameters}
To conclude this section, we briefly comment on the sensitivity
of our calculations to other input parameters listed in Table 1.
The results described above are insensitive to factor of two
variations in the particle mass density $\rho_0$, the relative
gas velocity $\eta$, the minimum velocity for cratering $V_f$,
and the crushing energy $Q_c$. We suspect that factor of ten
variations in $\eta$, $V_f$, and $Q_c$ will also have no impact
on the results. Larger variations in $\rho_0$ would probably change
the variation of $r_{max}$ with $S_0$ in Table 7, but we have not
investigated this possibility. Increasing the fraction of kinetic
energy imparted to fragmentation debris $f_{KE}$ decreases the
time needed to produce 100+ km objects\footnote{In contrast, use
of the WS93 fragmentation algorithm increases the time needed to
produce 100+ km objects, although this increase is $\lesssim$
10\%--20\%}. The growth time decreases by $\sim$ 10\% for
$f_{KE}$ = 0.1 and $\sim$ 20\% for $f_{KE}$ = 0.2. Variations in
the input $f_{KE}$ do not change the final size distribution or
the number of KBOs as a function of $M_0$. This parameter thus
has less impact on the results than either $e_0$ or $S_0$.
\subsection{Limitations of the Models}
We summarized the major uncertainties of our planetesimal calculations
in KL98 and will repeat important points for the current models here.
Our choice of a single accumulation zone does not allow us to follow
the evolution in semimajor axis of a planetesimal swarm (\cite{spa91};
\cite{we97b}). Although multi-zone calculations are important for
understanding migration and other long-term aspects of planetesimal
evolution, single-annulus models are a reasonable first approximation
for the early evolution of KBOs. The growth of large nearby bodies,
such as those that will merge to form Neptune, should modify the
velocity evolution of KBOs once these bodies reach sizes much
larger than 1000 km (see \cite{mor97}). For most solar nebulae,
these long-distance interactions should remain small until Pluto
forms beyond 30 AU (KL98; see also \cite{laz94}; \cite{roq94};
\cite{mor97}; \cite{war98}). Calculations now underway will
test this assertion in more detail.
Our relatively coarse mass grid probably overestimates the timescale
to produce KBOs and Pluto by $\sim$ 5\%--10\% (KL98).
The delay in runaway growth relative to a $\delta = 1.25$ model
is 3\%--5\% for $\delta$ = 1.4 and 5\%--10\% for $\delta$ = 2.0.
Although these delays are small compared to the overall uncertainties
in our algorithms, calculations with $\delta \gtrsim$ 2 rarely
produce one or more isolated bodies that grow much faster than
smaller bodies. The better mass resolution of $\delta \lesssim$ 1.4
calculations allows more mass batches to satisfy the isolation
condition, defined in the Appendix, which leads to more accurate
calculations of the cumulative mass distribution and the velocity
evolution of the lowest mass objects.
The lack of a rigorous treatment of gas dynamics probably has little
impact on our results. Gas drag removes $\lesssim$ 1\% of the initial
mass from these models. Gas accretion by large bodies is also
insignificant. The minimum radius needed to capture gas from the
disk is $r_i \sim$ 1000--2000 km for typical temperatures of
50--100 K at 30--50 AU (\cite{bec90}; \cite{ost94}).
Our models reach this limit on timescales exceeding the lifetime of
the gaseous disk, so we expect little gas accretion by Kuiper Belt
bodies.
Our calculations probably overestimate the amount of mass lost to
dust. At both 1 AU and 35 AU, losses from catastrophic fragmentation,
cratering, and gas drag grow with increasing $\delta$.
In large $\delta$ models, small delays in the formation of runaway
bodies allow dynamical friction and viscous stirring extra time to
increase the velocity dispersions, and hence mass loss, of the smallest
objects. These effects are probably small, $\sim$ 10\%--20\%, for
most of our calculations.
Our choice of the initial size distribution has little impact
on our results. Models with $q_0 = 1.5$ and $ q_0 = 4.5$ produce
final size distributions very similar to those for calculations with
$q_0 = 3$. The timescale to produce 1000 km objects lengthens
as $q_0$ decreases. The `equilibrium' size distribution with
$q = 3$ is similar to the observed size distribution of interstellar
dust grains, $q \approx$ 2--3 (e.g, \cite{kmh94}; \cite{li97} and
references therein). Similar size distributions are derived from
calculations of the growth of very small particles using measured
sticking efficiencies (e.g., \cite{wur98}).
Aside from the timescale to produce 1000 km objects and the amount
of mass lost to gas drag and fragmentation, the initial eccentricity
distribution probably also has little impact on our conclusions.
The number of 50 km radius KBOs is not sensitive to $e_0$;
$r_{95\%}$ increases with $e_0$ only for $e_0 \gtrsim 10^{-2}$
(Table 6). The slope of the final size distribution is also
insensitive to $e_0$.
We suspect that initial eccentricities outside the range considered
here are unrealistic. Viscous stirring and gas drag appear to set a
lower limit on the eccentricity of small objects, $e \sim 10^{-5}$.
Models with $e_0 \lesssim 10^{-4}$ should thus closely resemble
$e_0$ = $10^{-4}$ models. For $e \gtrsim 10^{-2}$, collisions
lead to substantial fragmentation and mass loss from the numerical
grid. Circularization is then less effective and growth is very slow
(see Table 6). These calculations probably poorly approximate reality:
dynamical friction between 1--100 m objects and smaller dust particles
not included in our grid should reduce the velocities of 1--100 m
objects on very short timescales\footnote{This problem does not occur
in models with small $e_0$, because the mass loss is $\lesssim$
1\% of the initial mass.}. We expect that these calculations would
then more closely resemble models with smaller $e_0$, if dust
particles can grow back into 1 m bodies.
The final limitation of our model is the fragmentation algorithm.
We adopt an energy-scaling fragmentation law, because other types
of models have not been developed and tested for the low velocity
conditions appropriate in the Kuiper Belt. Other scaling models seem
to yield better results for main belt asteroids than do energy-scaling
models, but these models assume that the collision can be approximated
as a point-like impact on a large body (\cite{dav94}; \cite{dur98};
\cite{rya98}). This assumption is quite good for the high speed
impacts, $\gtrsim$ 100--500 m s$^{-1}$, of strong, dense objects
in the inner solar system. Point-like impacts are probably rare for
the lower velocity collisions of weaker, low density objects like KBOs.
Our consideration of KBOs with a large range of intrinsic strengths
suggests that an improved fragmentation model would not change our
results significantly.
\section{DISCUSSION AND SUMMARY}
In KL98 and this paper, we have developed a time-dependent planetesimal
evolution code to calculate the formation of KBOs in a single annulus
outside the orbit of Neptune. The computer program includes coagulation
with realistic cross-sections, energy-scaling algorithms to treat
cratering and disruption, and velocity evolution using the statistical
expressions of Hornung {\it et al}. (1985). Our numerical solutions match
standard analytic test cases and generally reproduce the results
of other accretion and collision calculations (e.g., WS93; \cite{dav97}).
Our calculations demonstrate that plausible models can satisfy current
observations of the Kuiper Belt. Several Plutos and $\sim 10^5$
50 km radius KBOs form in Minimum Mass Solar Nebulae with
$e_0 \approx 10^{-3}$ on timescales of 20--40 Myr. Growth is more
rapid in more massive nebulae and in planetesimal swarms with
smaller initial velocities. The formation time is less sensitive
to the initial size distribution, the intrinsic strength of KBOs,
and other input parameters listed in Table 1.
Each Kuiper Belt model yields a cumulative size distribution with
two main features. Objects with $r_i \lesssim$ 0.1 km follow
$N_C \propto r^{-q}$ with $q = 2.5$, as expected for collision
fragments (\cite{doh69}; \cite{wil94}). Larger objects with
$r_i \gtrsim$ 1--10 km follow a $q \approx 3$ power law over several
orders of magnitude in radius. These slopes do not depend on
$M_0$, $e_0$, $S_0$, $f_{KE}$, and $q_0$, among other input
parameters. Kenyon \& Luu (1999) compare these results with
observations. Here, we note that the $q \approx 3$ power law
for large bodies is identical to the observed slope, $3 \pm 0.5$
(\cite{jew98}; \cite{luu98}; but see also \cite{gla98}).
Fragmentation and velocity evolution are important components in the
formation of present day KBOs. Fragmentation produces a large reservoir
of small bodies that damp the velocity dispersions of the large objects
through dynamical friction. These processes allow a short runaway growth
phase where 1 km objects grow into 100 km objects. Continued fragmentation
and velocity evolution damp runaway growth by increasing the velocity
dispersions of small objects. This evolution leaves $\sim$ 1\%--2\%
of the initial mass in 50 km radius KBOs. The remaining mass is in
0.1--10~km radius objects. Fragmentation will gradually erode these
smaller objects into dust grains that are removed from the Kuiper Belt
on short timescales, $\sim 10^7$ yr (see \cite{bac93}; \cite{bac95}).
Thus, 50 km radius KBOs comprise a small fraction of the original
Kuiper Belt.
Fragmentation also limits the size of the largest object in the Kuiper
Belt. The maximum radius ranges from $r_{max} \approx$ 450 km for
$S_0$ = 10 erg g$^{-1}$ to $r_{max} \gtrsim$ 3000 km for
$S_0$ = $2 \times 10^6$ erg g$^{-1}$. Pluto formation sets
a lower limit on the tensile strength of KBOs, $S_0 \ge 300$ erg g$^{-1}$.
These results suggest a refinement of our picture for KBO formation
in the outer solar system. In KL98, we speculated that velocity
perturbations due to the growth and outward migration of Neptune
would limit the growth of KBOs at radii $\lesssim$ 1000 km. Although
this hypothesis is plausible (see, for example, \cite{mal93}; \cite{mor97}),
our current models demonstrate that 50--1000 km radius KBOs form naturally
at $\sim$ 35 AU on timescales, $\tau_P \sim$ 10--100 Myr, comparable
to the Neptune formation time. Although a few objects can reach
2000+ km radii on timescales of 2--3 $\tau_P$, nearly all of the
initial mass beyond 30 AU remains in small, 1 km radius objects that
can be depleted by collisional disruption (\cite{dav97}) or gravitational
sculpting (\cite{hol93}) or both on timescales exceeding 100 Myr.
This evolution can account for the observation of 50+ km KBOs in a
currently small mass Kuiper Belt without intervention by Neptune.
Finally, our new results further support the notion that KBOs will form
in other solar systems. The dusty circumstellar disks detected in many
pre--main-sequence stars suggest masses of 1--100 $M_E$ at distances
of 30--100 AU (e.g., \cite{sar93}; \cite{bec96}; see also \cite{clo97};
\cite{hoh97}; \cite{lay97}; \cite{ake98}; \cite{sta98}). KBOs with
50+ km radii can grow in this material as the central stars contract
to the main-sequence if the disks are not too turbulent (see
\cite{cz93a}, 1993b). Smaller, 1--10 km radius KBOs probably form
in less massive pre--main-sequence disks. Our results also
indicate that the growth of 100--1000 km radius KBOs is accompanied
by substantial dust production, $\sim$ 0.1--1 $M_E$, in models with
$M_0 \sim$ 10--100 $M_E$. This dust could be responsible for the
ringlike structures observed in pre--main-sequence stars such as
GG Tau (\cite{rod96}) and older main sequence stars such as
$\epsilon$ Eri (\cite{gre98}) and HR 4796 (\cite{jay98}; \cite{koe98}).
The less massive disks in $\alpha$ Lyr, $\alpha$ PsA, and
$\beta$ Pic may also harbor KBOs if the dust masses are
reasonably close to the `maximum' masses inferred for these
systems (\cite{bac93}). In all of these stars, the dynamics and
mass distribution of dust may well provide useful constraints on
the properties of presumed KBOs. We hope to explore this possibility
in future studies.
\vskip 4ex
We thank B. Bromley for making it possible to run our code on the
JPL Cray T3D `Cosmos' and the HP Exemplar `Neptune' and for a
generous allotment of computer time through funding from the
NASA Offices of Mission to Planet Earth, Aeronautics, and Space Science.
Comments from A. Cameron, F. Franklin, M. Geller, M. Holman,
S. Starrfield, and J. Wood greatly improved our presentation.
We acknowledge G. Stewart for clarifying details of the WS93 calculations.
|
\section{ Introduction }
The quantization of fields in the presence of external classical
backgrounds leads to interesting phenomena such as the production
of particles via the amplification of vacuum
fluctuations. This effect has been mainly studied in
bosonic models, for example production of scalars or gravitons in scalar
or gravitational backgrounds.
In addition, this mechanism for the creation of particles is believed to be
responsible for the generation of most of the particles that constitute the
present universe \cite{Linde}, and in fact it plays a key role in the
modern theories of preheating after inflation. In those models, the energy
of the inflaton field is resonantly converted into particles during
the period of coherent oscillations after inflation.
This parametric
resonance phenomenon makes the occupation number of the
newly created bosons grow exponentially fast and causes their spectra to be
characterized by resonance bands.
Recently, the resonant generation of spin $1/2$ particles
has also been considered in the literature
\cite{Baacke}. In these works, it has been shown that the limit on the
occupation number imposed by Pauli
exclusion principle is saturated and thus the non-perturbative results
deviate considerably from what is expected in a perturbative approach.
In this work we are interested in the creation of spin $3/2$ particles
through the amplification of vacuum fluctuations. The generation
of such particles in the early universe has traditionally been treated
by considering the perturbative decay of other particles \cite{Ellis,Moroi},
but not using the non-perturbative
approach based on the Bogolyubov transformations technique.
Some estimations of the gravitino production during inflation, based on the
analogy with Dirac fermions can be found in \cite{Lyth}.
The spin $1/2$ case suggests that both approaches can give rise to
quite different results.
This could be of the utmost importance
in the so-called gravitino problem:
in supergravity models, the superpartner of the graviton field
(gravitino) is described by a spin $3/2$ particle. If such particles
are created after inflation by some mechanism (particle collision,
vacuum fluctuations)
they could disrupt primordial nucleosynthesis if they do not decay
fast enough, or if they are stable particles and their masses are
high, they could overclose the universe. In the perturbative
approach, these facts impose stringent
constraints on both the reheating temperature and the gravitino mass
\cite{Sarkarrep}.
The calculation of spin $3/2$ particle production from vacuum fluctuations
is plagued with consistency problems that hamper the quantization of
such fields
in the presence of external backgrounds. It has been known for a long
time \cite{Velo}, that a spin $3/2$ particle in
scalar, electromagnetic or gravitational backgrounds can give rise,
apart from algebraic inconsistencies, to
faster than light propagation modes. This fact completely prevents
a consistent quantization in such cases \cite{johnson}.
The only theory in which these problems seem to be absent is supergravity,
provided the background fields satisfy the corresponding equations of motion
\cite{SUGRA}.
However, the complicated form of the Rarita-Schwinger equation
makes it very difficult to extract explicit results even in
simple backgrounds. In this paper we will
show that when we consider helicity $\pm 3/2$
states (which dominate the high-energy interactions of
gravitinos \cite{Ellis,Moroi})
propagating in arbitrary homogeneous (and isotropic) scalar or
gravitational backgrounds, the equations can be reduced to a Dirac-like
equation. The
quantization can be done along the same
lines as for Dirac spinors and therefore the standard Bogolyubov
technique \cite{Birrell} can be used to calculate the particle production.
We will also show explicitly, within a previously considered supergravity
inflationary model,
that the expected amplification does take place.
The massive spin $3/2$ dynamics in flat space-time is described by the
Rarita-Schwinger equation. We will include the scalar field
coupling by modifying
the mass term, (following the notation in \cite{Moroi}):
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}\gamma_5\gamma_\nu\partial_\rho\psi_\sigma+
\frac{1}{2}(m_{3/2}-\Phi)[\gamma^\mu,\gamma^\nu]\psi_\nu=0.
\end{eqnarray}
As usual in supergravity models we will consider Majorana spinors
satisfying $\psi_\mu=C\bar\psi_\mu^T$ with $C=i\gamma^2\gamma^0$ the
charge conjugation matrix. Contracting this equation with $\partial_\mu$
and $\gamma_\lambda\gamma_\mu$ we get:
\begin{eqnarray}
&-&
\not{\!\partial}\Phi\gamma^\nu\psi_\nu+\partial^\mu\Phi\psi_\mu\nonumber \\
&+&
\frac{1}{2}(m_{3/2}-\Phi)(\not{\!\partial}\gamma^\nu\psi_\nu-\gamma^\nu\not{\!\partial}\psi_\nu)=0,
\label{primera}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
2i(\partial_\lambda\gamma^\sigma\psi_\sigma-\not{\!\partial}\psi_\lambda)
+(m_{3/2}-\Phi)(\gamma_\lambda\gamma^\nu\psi_\nu+2\psi_\lambda)=0.
\label{segunda}
\end{eqnarray}
Finally contracting this last equation with $\gamma^\lambda$ we
get:
\begin{eqnarray}
i(\not{\!\partial}\gamma^\sigma\psi_\sigma-\gamma^\lambda\not{\!\partial}\psi_\lambda)+
3(m_{3/2}-\Phi)\gamma^\mu\psi_\mu=0.
\label{tercera}
\end{eqnarray}
When $\Phi=0$ the three equations (\ref{primera}), (\ref{segunda}) and
(\ref{tercera}) can be written as the Dirac equation plus two constraints,
i.e:
\begin{eqnarray}
(i\not{\!\partial} -m_{3/2})\psi_\mu=0,\\
\gamma^\mu\psi_\mu=0,\\
\partial^\mu\psi_\mu=0.
\end{eqnarray}
The general solution of these equations can be expanded in helicity
$l=s/2+m$ modes:
\begin{eqnarray}
\psi^{pl}_\mu(x)=e^{-ipx}\sum_{s,m} J_{sm}u(\vec p,s)\epsilon_\mu(\vec p,m),
\label{planewaves}
\end{eqnarray}
with $J_{sm}$ the Clebsch-Gordan coefficients whose values are:
$J_{-1-1}=J_{11}=1$, $J_{-11}=J_{1-1}=1/\sqrt{3}$ and
$J_{-10}=J_{10}=\sqrt{2/3}$. Here $u(\vec p,s)$ are spinors with definite
helicity $s=\pm 1$ and normalized as $u^\dagger(\vec p,r)u(\vec p,s)=
\delta_{rs}$. If we set $p^{\mu}=(\omega, p\sin \theta \cos \phi,
p\sin \theta \sin \phi, p\cos \theta)$ with $p_\mu p^\mu=m_{3/2}^2$
and $p=\vert \vec p \vert$, then
the three spin $1$ polarization vectors are given by:
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon_\mu(\vec p, 1)&=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}
(0,\cos \theta \cos\phi\nonumber \\
&-&i\sin \phi,
\cos\theta \sin\phi+i\cos\phi,-\sin\theta),\\
\epsilon_\mu(\vec p, 0)&=&\frac{1}{m_{3/2}}(p,-\omega\sin \theta \cos\phi,
\nonumber\\
&-&\omega\sin\theta \sin\phi,-\omega\cos\theta),\\
\epsilon_\mu(\vec p,-1)&=&-\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}
(0,\cos \theta \cos\phi\nonumber \\
&+&i\sin \phi,
\cos\theta \sin\phi-i\cos\phi,-\sin\theta).
\end{eqnarray}
The normalization is $\epsilon_\mu^*(\vec p,m)\epsilon^\mu(\vec p,n)
=\delta_{mn}$,
$p^\mu\epsilon_\mu(\vec p,m)=p^\mu\epsilon_\mu^*(\vec p,m)=0$. The
corresponding quantization details can
be found elsewhere \cite{Moroi}.
Now we turn to the $\Phi\neq 0$ case. The expression in (\ref{planewaves})
is no longer a
solution of the equations of motion. Let us now concentrate on homogeneous
scalar fields, only dependent on the time coordinate $\Phi(t)$. We look
for general homogeneous solutions of the Rarita-Schwinger equation
of the form:
\begin{eqnarray}
\psi^{pl}_{\mu}(x)=e^{i\vec p \cdot \vec x}f^{pl}(t)\sum_{s,m}J_{sm}
u(\vec p, s)
\epsilon_\mu(\vec p,m)
\label{ansatz}
\end{eqnarray}
These fields satisfy the condition $\gamma^\mu\psi_\mu=0$, since they
differ from (\ref{planewaves}) in just a scalar factor. Now if we restrict
ourselves to the helicity $l=\pm 3/2$ states, they satisfy
$\psi^{p\pm 3/2}_0=0$
and, since the spatial derivatives of the scalar field vanish
$(\partial_i\Phi=0)$, then (\ref{primera}) and (\ref{tercera}) are
automatically
satisfied provided $\partial^i\psi_i=0$. From (\ref{ansatz}) this last
condition
is equivalent to $p^i\psi_i=0$ which holds from the
condition $p^\mu\epsilon_\mu(\vec p,m)=0$. Accordingly, for helicity
$\pm 3/2$ states propagating in an homogeneous scalar background, the
Rarita-Schwinger equation reduces again to the Dirac form:
\begin{eqnarray}
(i\not{\!\partial} -m_{3/2}+\Phi(t))\psi^{\pm 3/2}_\mu=0
\end{eqnarray}
As far as these modes satisfy a Dirac-like equation, it appears that
all the difficulties in
the quantization would concern just the
helicity $\pm 1/2$ modes in this case.
In fact the
above ansatz (\ref{ansatz})
is not a solution for the helicity $\pm 1/2$ modes even for homogeneous
backgrounds.
Let us include the effect of curved space-time. We will concentrate
on spatially flat Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) metrics,
and we will introduce it
by {\it minimal} coupling as done in supergravity, i.e,
$D_\rho \psi_\sigma=(\partial_\rho+\frac{i}{2}
\Omega^{ab}_\rho\Sigma_{ab})\psi_\sigma$ with $\Omega^{ab}_\rho$ the
spin-connection coefficients and $\Sigma_{ab}=\frac{i}{4}[\gamma_a,\gamma_b]$.
The $\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}$ removes the Christoffel symbols
contribution in the covariant derivative.
We will continue considering $\Phi(t)$ to be a function of time alone.
We will only consider the linearized equation in $1/M$
(where $M_P^2=8\pi M^2$) for supergravity
\cite{Bailin}, i.e, we will ignore the torsion contribution
to the spin-connection which is of ${\cal O}(M^{-2})$.
In this case the equations of motion for the gravitino read:
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}\gamma_5\gamma_\nu D_\rho\psi_\sigma+
\frac{1}{2}(m_{3/2}-\Phi)[\gamma^\mu,\gamma^\nu]\psi_\nu=0.
\end{eqnarray}
Contracting with $D_\mu$, taking into account that $D_\mu\gamma_\nu=0$
and $[D_\mu,D_\rho]=-\frac{i}{2}R^{ab}_{\;\;\;\mu\rho}\Sigma_{ab}$
(the vector part cancels because of the $\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}$ term),
we get:
\begin{eqnarray}
-\frac{i}{4}\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}\gamma_5\gamma_\nu
R^{ab}_{\;\;\;\mu\rho}\Sigma_{ab}\psi_\sigma-(\not{\!{\!D}}\Phi)\gamma^\nu\psi_\nu
+(D^\mu\Phi)\psi_\mu \nonumber\\
+\frac{1}{2}(m_{3/2}-\Phi)(\not{\!{\!D}}\gamma^\nu\psi_\nu-\gamma^\nu\not{\!{\!D}}\psi_\nu)=0.
\label{primera2}
\end{eqnarray}
Following the same steps as in flat space-time we obtain
(\ref{segunda}) and (\ref{tercera}) but replacing ordinary derivatives
by covariant ones. For FRW metrics and
helicity $\pm 3/2$ states, i.e., $\psi_0=0$,
it is possible to show that due
to the form of the Riemann tensor, the first term
in (\ref{primera2})
is proportional to $\gamma^\mu \psi_\mu$ and accordingly we get:
\begin{eqnarray}
(i\not{\!{\!D}} -m_{3/2}+\Phi)\psi_\mu=0, \label{cons0}\\
\gamma^\mu \psi_\mu=0, \label{cons1}\\
D^\mu \psi_\mu=0. \label{cons2}
\end{eqnarray}
Here again we can use the standard formulae for particle production
obtained for the spin $1/2$ cases to study the creation of helicity $\pm 3/2$
states in a FRW background. With that purpose we have to reduce equation
(\ref{cons0}) to a second order equation. Let us first write the equation in
conformal time defined as $dt=a(\eta)d\eta$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\left(ia^{-1}\delta^\mu_a\gamma^a\partial_\mu-m_{3/2}+\Phi
+i\frac{3}{2}\frac{\dot a}{a^2}\gamma^0\right)\psi_\mu=0,
\label{dirconf}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\dot a=da/d\eta$. We will adopt the following ansatz for the
helicity $l=\pm 3/2$ solutions:
\begin{eqnarray}
\psi_\mu^{pl}(x)=a^{-3/2}(\eta)e^{i\vec p \cdot \vec x} U_\mu^{\vec p l}(\eta),
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
U_\mu^{\vec p l}(\eta)&=&\frac{1}{\sqrt{\omega+m_{3/2}^0}}\left(
i\gamma^0\partial_0
-\vec p\cdot \vec\gamma\right.\nonumber \\
&+&\left.\left. a(\eta)(m_{3/2}-\Phi(\eta)\right)\right)f_{pl}(\eta)u(\vec p, s)
\delta^a_\mu\epsilon_a(\vec p, m),
\end{eqnarray}
and the normalization
$U_\mu^{\vec p l\dagger} (0)U^\mu_{\vec p l}(0)=2\omega$ and
$m^0_{3/2}=a(0)m_{3/2}$.
One can check that this ansatz automatically satisfies
(\ref{cons1}) and (\ref{cons2}). An appropriate form for
the spinor $u(\vec p, s)$ and polarization
vectors $\epsilon_a(\vec p, m)$ can be obtained if we choose
the Dirac representation
for the gamma matrices and we take (without loss of generality)
the $z$-axis to be along the $\vec p$
direction. In this case $u(\vec p,1)^T=(1,0,0,0)$, $u(\vec p, -1)^T=(0,1,0,0)$,
$\epsilon_a(\vec p, 1)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(0,1,i,0)$ and
$\epsilon_a(\vec p, -1)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(0,1,-i,0)$. With this
choice,
$u(\vec p,\pm 1)$ are eigenstates of $\gamma^0$ with eigenvalues $+1$.
Then equation (\ref{dirconf}) reduces to the well-known form:
\begin{eqnarray}
\left(\frac{d^2}{d\eta^2}\right.&+&p^2-i\frac{d}{d\eta}\left.\left(
a(\eta)(m_{3/2}-\Phi(\eta)\right)\right) \nonumber \\
&+&\left.
a^2(\eta)(m_{3/2}-\Phi(\eta))^2\right)f_{pl}(\eta)=0.
\label{master}
\end{eqnarray}
In order to quantize the modes we will expand an arbitrary solution
with helicity $l=\pm 3/2$ as:
\begin{eqnarray}
\psi^{l}_\mu(x)&=&\int \frac{d^3p}{(2\pi)^3 2\omega}a^{-3/2}(\eta)
\left(e^{i\vec p\cdot \vec x}U_\mu^{\vec p l}(\eta)a_{\vec p l}
\right.\nonumber\\
&+&\left.
e^{-i\vec p\cdot \vec x}U_\mu^{\vec p l C}(\eta)a_{\vec p l}^\dagger\right),
\end{eqnarray}
where the creation and annhilation operators satisfy the anticommutation
relations $\{a_{\vec p l},a_{\vec p' l'}^\dagger\}
=(2\pi)^3 2\omega \delta_{ll'}\delta(\vec p-\vec p')$.
In order to see how this works in practice, we will consider a specific
supergravity inflationary model (see \cite{Holman,Sarkar}), in which the inflaton
field is taken as the scalar component of a chiral superfield, and its
potential is derived from the superpotential $I=(\Delta^2/M)(\phi-M)^2$.
This is the simplest choice that satisfies
the conditions that supersymmetry
remains unbroken in the minimum of the potential and that the present
cosmological constant is zero. The observed CMB anisotropy fixes the
inflationary scale
around $\lambda\equiv \Delta/M\simeq 10^{-4}$. For the sake of
simplicity, we will consider the case in which the gravitino mass is
much smaller than the effective mass of the inflaton in this model,
$m_{3/2}\ll m_{\phi}\simeq 10^{-8}M$ and since the production
will take place during a few inflaton oscillations,
we will neglect the mass term in
the equations.
The scalar field potential is given by \cite{Bailin}:
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\phi)=e^{\vert \phi \vert ^2/M^2}\left(\vert \frac{\partial I}{\partial \phi}
+\frac{\phi^*I}{M^2}\vert ^2-\frac{3\vert I\vert ^2}{M^2}\right).
\end{eqnarray}
For the above superpotential, the imaginary direction is known to be
stable
and
therefore we will take for simplicity a real inflaton field. Along the
real direction the potential can be written as \cite{Sarkar}:
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\phi)=\lambda^4 e^{\phi^2}\left((2(\phi -1)+\phi(\phi-1)^2)^2-3(\phi-1)^4
\right)
\end{eqnarray}
where we are working in units $M=1$. We will assume, as indicated
in \cite{Sarkar},
that the potential contributions of dilaton and moduli fields are fixed
during and after inflation.
This potential has
a minimum at $\phi=1$. The coupling of the inflaton field
to gravitinos is given by the following mass term in the supergravity
lagrangian \cite{Bailin}:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal L}=-\frac{1}{4}e^{G/2}\bar \psi_\mu
[\gamma^\mu,\gamma^\nu]\psi_\nu,\\
e^{G/2}=\lambda^2 e^{\phi^2/2}(\phi-1)^2,
\end{eqnarray}
where we have chosen the minimal form for the K\"ahler potential
$G(\Phi,\Phi^\dagger)=
\Phi^\dagger \Phi+\mbox{log} \vert I \vert ^2$. The rest of interaction terms in the
supergravity lagrangian are not relevant for our purposes.
The inflaton and Friedmann equations can be
written in conformal time as:
\begin{eqnarray}
\ddot \phi +2 \frac{\dot b}{b}\dot \phi +\frac{b^2}{\lambda^4}V_{,\phi}=0,\\
\frac{\dot b^2}{b^2}=\frac{1}{3}\left(\frac{1}{2}\dot \phi^2
+\frac{b^2}{\lambda^4}V\right),
\end{eqnarray}
where the derivatives are with respect to the new time coordinate
$\tilde \eta=a_0\lambda^2 \eta$ and the new scale factor is defined as
$b(\tilde \eta)=a(\tilde\eta)/a_0$ with $a_0=a(0)$.
The solution of this equation shows that after the inflationary
phase, the scalar field starts oscillating around the minimum of the
potential with damped amplitude.
Substituting in (\ref{master}) for this particular case we obtain:
\begin{eqnarray}
\left(\frac{d^2}{d\tilde\eta^2}+\kappa^2+\frac{i}{\lambda^2}
\frac{d}{d\tilde\eta}(be^{G/2})+
\frac{b^2}{\lambda^4} e^{G}\right)f_{\kappa l}(\tilde\eta)=0,
\label{master2}
\end{eqnarray}
with $\kappa=p/(a_0\lambda^2)$. From this expression we see that
when the scalar interaction is switched off, there is no particle
production, even in the expanding background.
Following \cite{Baacke,Mostepanenko}
we can calculate the occupation number:
\begin{eqnarray}
N_{\kappa l}(\tilde T)&=&\frac{1}{4\kappa}\left(2 \kappa
+i[\dot f^*_{\kappa l}(\tilde T)
f_{\kappa l}(\tilde T)- f^*_{\kappa l}(\tilde T)
\dot f_{\kappa l}(\tilde T)]\right.\nonumber \\
&-&\left.\frac{2}{\lambda^2}be^{G(\tilde T)/2}
\vert f_{\kappa l}(\tilde T)\vert ^2 ]\right)
\label{occupation}
\end{eqnarray}
In order for the particle number to be well defined, we must evaluate
it when the interaction is vanishingly small, that is, for large values
of $\tilde T$.
Here $f_{\kappa l}$ is a solution of equation (\ref{master2})
with initial conditions $f_{\kappa l}(0)=1$ and
$\dot f_{\kappa l}(0)=-i\kappa$ which corresponds to a plane wave for
$\tilde \eta\leq 0$. In order to define the initial vacuum
at $\tilde \eta=0$, we have taken the inflaton to be at the minimum of
the potential at that moment ($\phi(0)=1$), which implies
$e^{G(\phi=1)/2}=0$ and $b(0)=1$. We have chosen $\dot \phi(0)=1.8$
in our numerical computations which corresponds to an initial amplitude
of the inflaton oscillations of about $0.06M_p$
and a maximum value of the coupling
$e^{G/2}$ of $10^{-10}M_p$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\mbox{\epsfysize=7cm\epsfxsize=7cm
\epsffile{grv2.ps}}
\end{center}
\vspace {-.7cm}
\leftskip 1cm
\rightskip 1cm
{\footnotesize
{\bf Figure 1.-}Number density of helicity $l=\pm 3/2$ gravitinos ($\kappa^2
N_{\kappa l}$) against
$\kappa$. }
\end{figure}
The results for the spectra in the expanding background are shown in Fig.1.
Note that
we have not considered the backreaction effects of the produced
particles.
In the
flat space calculation, we find that broad resonance bands may
appear, similar
to those in \cite{Baacke,MaMa}. When expansion
is taken into account (Fig.1),
the production is reduced by 3-4 orders of
magnitude, however the number
of particles produced is not negligible.
From Fig. 1, we can estimate a lower bound to the total number density of
gravitinos of both helicities as:
\begin{eqnarray}
n(\eta)=\frac{1}{\pi^2 a^3(\eta)}\int_{0}^{\infty} N_{pl}p^2 dp=
\frac{a_0^3\lambda^6}{\pi^2 a^3}\int_{0}^{\infty}
N_{\kappa l}\kappa^2 d\kappa
\label{numer}
\end{eqnarray}
Comparing with
the number density of a thermal distribution of helicity $\pm 1/2$
gravitinos as
estimated in \cite{Pagels} (the helicity
$\pm 3/2$ could be even less abundant)
for a typical
value of the scale factor at the end of inflation
\cite{Kolb} $a_0\simeq 10^{-26}$,
the vacuum fluctuation production is suppressed by a factor $ 10^{10}$.
The corresponding cosmological consequences have been studied in
\cite{Ellis,LiEll}. Comparing with the entropy density today we obtain:
$n/s \geq 10^{-12}$. This result is 4-5 orders of magnitude
larger than the perturbative production during reheating
from direct inflaton decay \cite{Sarkar} and it could pose
compatibility
problems with the
nucleosynthesis bounds \cite{Moroi,Sarkarrep} for some values of
the gravitino mass.
We have considered the production
of helicity $\pm 3/2$ gravitinos (which are the relevant states for the current
nucleosynthesis bounds) in a particular inflationary
model. The expression (\ref{numer}) shows that the results are
very sensitive to the model parameters, but they can be used to
discriminate between different supergravity inflationary models. The
completion of the picture would
require to study other models and also include
the production of helicity $\pm 1/2$ modes;
however, the Bogolyubov technique appears very involved for this
purpose. (After the appearance of this work, the helicity $\pm
1/2$ case was considered in Kallosh et al., hep-th/9907124)
{\bf Acknowledgments:} A.L.M. acknowledges support from SEUID-Royal Society
and (CICYT-AEN97-1693)(Spain). A.M. is supported by INLAKS
and an ORS award. We thank Andrew Liddle for valuable discussions.
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\thebibliography{references}
\vspace {-0.9cm}
\bibitem{Linde} L. Kofman, A. D. Linde and A.A. Starobinsky,
{\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 73} (1994) 3195;
L.Kofman, A.D. Linde and A. A. Starobinsky, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D 56}
(1997) 3258; J.H. Traschen, R.H. Brandenberger, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D42}
(1990), 2491; Y. Shtanov, J. Traschen and R. Brandenberger, {\it Phys. Rev.}
{\bf D51}(1995), 5438
\bibitem{Baacke} J. Baacke, K. Heitmann and C. Patzold, {\it Phys. Rev.}
{\bf D58} 125013 (1998); P.B. Greene and L. Kofman, {\it Phys. Lett.}
{\bf B448}, 6 (1999)
\bibitem{Ellis} J. Ellis, J.E. Kim and D.V. Nanopoulos, {\it Phys. Lett.}
{\bf 145B}, 181 (1984)
\bibitem{Moroi} M. Kawasaki and T. Moroi, {\it Prog. Theor. Phys.} {\bf 93},
879 (1995); T. Moroi, PhD Thesis (1995), hep-ph/9503210
\bibitem{Lyth} D.H. Lyth, D. Roberts and M. Smith {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D57}
7120 (1998)
\bibitem{Sarkarrep} S. Sarkar, {\it Rep. Prog. Phys.} {\bf 59}, 1493 (1996)
\bibitem{Velo} G. Velo and D. Zwanziger, {\it Phys. Rev} {\bf 186} (1969)
1337; C.R. Hagen and L.P.S. Singh, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D 26}
(1982) 393
\bibitem{johnson} K. Johnson and E.C.G. Sudarshan, {\it Ann. Phys.}(N.Y.)
13 (1961) 126
\bibitem{SUGRA} S. Deser and B. Zumino, {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 38}
(1977) 1433; {\it Phys. Lett.} {\bf 62B}, 335 (1976)
\bibitem{Birrell} N.D. Birrell and P.C.W.
Davies {\it Quantum Fields in Curved Space}, Cambridge University Press
(1982)
\bibitem{Bailin} D. Bailin and A. Love, {\it Supersymmetric Gauge Field
Theory and String Theory}, IOP, Bristol, (1994)
\bibitem{Holman} P. Holman, P. Ramond and G.G. Ross, {\it Phys. Lett.}
{\bf 137B}, 343 (1984)
\bibitem{Sarkar} G.G. Ross and S. Sarkar, {\it Nucl. Phys.}{\bf B461}
(1996) 597
\bibitem{Mostepanenko} V.M. Mostepanenko and V.M Frolov,
{\it Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.}
{\bf 19} 451 (1974); A.A. Grib, S.G. Mamayev and V.M. Mostepanenko {
\it Vacuum Quantum Effects in Strong Fields}, Friedmann Laboratory
Publishing, St. Petersburg (1994)
\bibitem{MaMa} A.L. Maroto and A. Mazumdar, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D59},
083510 (1999)
\bibitem{Pagels} H. Pagels and J. Primack, {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 48}
223 (1982)
\bibitem{Kolb} E.W. Kolb and M.S Turner, {\it The Early Universe}
(Addison-Wesley) (1990)
\bibitem{LiEll} J. Ellis, A. Linde and D. Nanopoulos, {\it Phys. Lett.}
{\bf 118B}, 59 (1982)
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
CP violation is an important test for physics beyond
the standard model. In the standard model, only one CP violating
phase exists in the Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix. However, in the
supersymmetric standard model there are many complex parameters,
in addition to Yukawa couplings, which lead to new sources of CP
violation. These include the mass coefficient $\mu$ of the
bilinear term involving the two Higgs doublets, the $SU(3)$,
$SU(2)$ and $U(1)$ gaugino masses $M_3$, $M_2$ and $M_1$, and the
parameters $A_f$ and $B$ which respectively are the coefficients
of the supersymmetric breaking trilinear and bilinear couplings. (
the subscript $f$ denotes the flavor index.) \vskip 0.3cm In
minimal supersymmetric standard model (MSSM), only two of these
phases are physical. Through appropriate field redefinitions we
end up with the phase of $\mu$ ($\phi_{\mu}$) and the phase of $A$
($\phi_A$) as the physical phases which cannot be rotated away.
The phase of $B$ is fixed by the condition that $B\mu$ is real. It
is known that, unless these phases are sufficiently small, their
contributions to the neutron electric dipole moment (EDM) are
larger than the experimental limit $1.1\times 10^{-25}$ e.cm.
Recently, the effect of these phases on the EDM of the neutron
was examined in a model with dilaton-dominated supersymmetry
(SUSY) breaking, taking into account the cancellation mechanism
between the different contributions. It was shown that for a wide
region of the parameter space the phase of $\mu$ is constrainted
to be of order $10^{-1}$, while the phase of $A$ is strongly
correlated with that of $\mu$ in order not to violate the bound
on the neutron EDM. \vskip 0.3cm The effect of SUSY CP violating
phases on the relic density of the LSP has been considered for
the MSSM case in Ref.~\cite{falk1}, and for the supersymmetric
standard model coupled to N=1 supergravity in Ref.~\cite{falk2}.
It was shown in Ref.~\cite{falk1} that the upper bound on the LSP
(from $\Omega h^2 \leq 0.25$) is relaxed from 250 GeV to 650 GeV.
The effect of CP violation on the direct detection rates of the
LSP in MSSM is also considered in Ref.~\cite{nath2,falk3}. We
argue that such a large upper bound on the LSP is not possible in
the model we consider here. We show that in case of the bino-like
LSP the chance of the CP phases to have a significant effect is
very small. The impact of the phases on the direct and indirect
detection rates is an important issue and we present some details
here. \vskip 0.3cm The paper is organized as follows. In section
2 we discuss the effect of the CP phases on the LSP mass and
purity within the string inspired model considered in
Ref.~\cite{barr}. In section 3 we compute the relic abundance of
the LSP for low and intermediate values of $\tan \beta$. We find
that the CP phases have almost no effect on the LSP relic
density, so that the upper bound on the LSP mass obtained in
Ref.~\cite{shafi,report} remains unchanged. In section 4 we
discuss the large $\tan \beta$($\simeq m_t/m_b$) case and again
find that there is no significant effect of CP phases on the LSP
relic density. In section 5 we show that CP phases can have a
substantial effect on the LSP detection rates. Our conclusions
are given in section 6
\section{String inspired model}
We will consider the string inspired model which has been recently
studied in Ref.~\cite{barr}. In this model, the dilaton $S$ and
overall modulus field $T$ both contribute to SUSY breaking. The
soft scalar masses $m_i$ and the gaugino masses $M_a$ are given
as~\cite{munoz1}
\begin{eqnarray}
m^2_i &=& m^2_{3/2}(1 + n_i \cos^2\theta),
\label{scalar}\\
M_a &=& \sqrt{3} m_{3/2} \sin\theta e^{- i \alpha_{S}},
\label{gaugino}
\end{eqnarray}
where $m_{3/2}$ is the gravitino mass, $n_i$ is the modular
weight of the chiral multiplet, and $\sin \theta$ defines the
ratio between the $F$-terms of $S$ and $T$, (For example, the
limit $\sin \theta \rightarrow 1$ corresponds to a
dilaton-dominant SUSY breaking). The phase $\alpha_S$ originates
from the $F$-term of $S$.
The $A$-terms can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
A_{ijk} &=& - \sqrt{3} m_{3/2} \sin\theta e^{-i \alpha_S}
- m_{3/2} \cos\theta
(3 + n_i + n_j + n_k) e^{-i \alpha_T},
\label{trilinear}
\end{eqnarray}
where $n_i$, $n_j$ and $n_k$ are the modular weights of the fields
that are coupled by this $A$-term. One needs a correction term in
eq~(\ref{trilinear}) when the corresponding Yukawa coupling
depends on moduli fields. However, the $T$-dependent Yukawa
coupling includes a suppression factor~\cite{vafa}, and so we
ignore it. Finally, the phase $\alpha_T$ originates from the
$F$-term of $T$. \vskip 0.3cm The magnitude of the soft SUSY
breaking term $B \mu H_1 H_2$ depends on the way one generates a
`natural' $\mu$-term. Here we take $\mu$ and $B$ as free
parameters and we will fix them by requiring successful
electroweak (EW) symmetry breaking. \vskip 0.3cm As stated
earlier, the gaugino masses as well as $A$-terms and $B$-term
are, in general, complex. We have the freedom to rotate $M_a$ and
$A_{ijk}$ at the same time~\cite{dugan}. Here we use the basis in
which $M_a$ is real. Similarly, we can rotate the phase of $B$ so
that $B\mu$ itself is real. In other words, $\phi_B = -\phi_{\mu}
= {\rm arg}(BM^*)$. In this basis, $A$-terms contain a single
phase, $(\alpha_A \equiv \alpha_T - \alpha_S)$. \vskip 0.3cm As
shown in eqs.(\ref{scalar}-\ref{trilinear}), the values of the
soft SUSY breaking parameters at string scale depend on the
modular weights of the matter states. The modular weights of the
matter fields $n_i$ are normally negative integers. Following the
approach of Ref.~\cite{lust} the `natural' values of modular
weights for matter fields ( in case of $Z_N$ orbifolds) are
-1,-2,-3 and -4. It was shown in Ref.~\cite{kobayashi} that the
following modular weights for quark and lepton superfields is
favorable for EW breaking $$n_Q=n_U=n_{H_1}= -1 ,$$ and
$$n_D=n_L=n_E=n_{H_2}=-2 .$$ Under this assumption we have
\begin{equation}
A_t=A_b= - \sqrt{3} m_{3/2} \sin\theta + m_{3/2} \cos\theta e^{-i
\alpha_A},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
A_{\tau}= - \sqrt{3} m_{3/2} \sin\theta + 2\ m_{3/2} \cos\theta
e^{-i \alpha_A},
\end{equation}
\vskip 0.3cm Given the boundary conditions in
eqs.~(\ref{scalar}-\ref{trilinear}) at the compactification
scale, we determine the evolution of the couplings and the mass
parameters according to their one loop renormalization group
equation in order to estimate the mass spectrum of the SUSY
particles at the weak scale. The radiative EW symmetry breaking
imposes the following conditions on the renormalized quantities:
\begin{equation}
m^2_{H_1} + m^2_{H_2} + 2\mu^2 > 2 B \mu,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
(m^2_{H_1}+\mu^2)( m^2_{H_2} + \mu^2) < (B \mu)^2,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\mu^2= \frac{m^2_{H_1} - m^2_{H_2}\tan^2\beta}{\tan^2\beta -1} - \frac{M_Z^2}{2},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\sin 2\beta = \frac{- 2 B \mu}{m^2_{H_1} + m^2_{H_2} + 2\mu^2},
\end{equation}
where $\tan\beta=\langle H_2^0 \rangle/\langle H_1^0 \rangle$ is
the ratio of the two Higgs VEVs that gives masses to the up and
down type quarks, and $m_{H_1}^2$, $m_{H_2}^2$ are the two soft
Higgs square masses at the EW scale. Using the above equations we
can determine $\vert \mu \vert$ and $B$ in terms of $m_{3/2}$,
$\theta$ and $\alpha_A$. The phase of $\phi_{\mu}$ remains
undetermined. \vskip 0.3cm Since we are interested in
investigating the effect of the supersymmetric phases $\alpha_A$
and $\phi_{\mu}$ on the relic density of the LSP and its direct
and indirect detection rates, we first study the allowed regions
of these phases and later impose the constraints (derived in
Ref~\cite{barr}) from the experimental bounds on the electric
dipole moments. \vskip 0.3cm The neutralinos $\chi_i^0$,
$(i=1,2,3,4)$ are the physical (mass) superpositions of the
Higgsinos $\tilde{H}_1^0$, $\tilde{H}_2^0$ and the two neutral
gaugino $\tilde{B}^0$ (bino) and $\tilde{W}_3^0$ (wino). The
neutralino mass matrix is given by
\begin{equation}
\hspace{-0.4cm}{\small M_N = \left(\begin{array}{clcr}M_1&0 &
-M_Z\cos\beta\sin\theta_W &M_Z\sin\beta\sin\theta_W\\
0&M_2&M_Z\cos\beta\cos\theta_W&-M_Z\sin\beta\cos\theta_W\\
-M_Z\cos\beta\sin\theta_W &
M_Z\cos\beta\cos\theta_W&0&\mu e^{\phi_{\mu}}\\
M_Z\sin\beta\sin\theta_W&-M_Z\sin\beta\cos\theta_W&\mu e^{\phi_{\mu}}&0
\end{array}\right),}
\label{neutralino}
\end{equation}
where $M_1$ and $M_2$ now refer to `low energy' quantities whose asymptotic
values are given in equation (\ref{gaugino}).
The lightest eigenstates $\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ is a linear
combination of the original fields:
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\chi}^0_1 = N_{11}\tilde{B}+ N_{12}\tilde{W}^3+
N_{13}\tilde{H}_1^0 + N_{14}\tilde{H}_2^0,
\end{equation}
where the unitary matrix $N_{ij}$ relates the $\tilde{\chi}^0_i$
fields to the original ones. The entries of this matrix depend on
$m_{3/2}$, $\theta$ and $\phi_{\mu}$. The dependence of the
$\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ (LSP) mass on $\phi_{\mu}$ is shown in figure
1 for $m_{3/2} \simeq 100 GeV$, $\cos^2 \theta \simeq 1/2$ and
$\alpha_A \simeq \pi/2$. \vskip 0.3cm
\begin{figure}[h]
\psfig{figure=mas1.eps,height=7cm,width=12cm} \caption{LSP mass as
a function of the phase $\phi_{\mu}$ .} \vskip 0.3cm
\end{figure}
A useful parameter for describing the neutralino composition is
the gaugino "purity" function
\begin{equation}
f_g= \vert N_{11}\vert^2 + \vert N_{12} \vert^2
\end{equation}
We plot this function versus $\phi_{\mu}$ in figure (2) which clearly shows
that the LSP is essentially a pure bino.
\begin{figure}[h]
\psfig{figure=mas2.eps,height=7cm,width=12cm} \caption{LSP gaugino
purity as a function of the phase $\phi_{\mu}$ .} \vskip 0.3cm
\end{figure}
These two figures show that the neutralino mass and composition
are only slightly dependent on the supersymmetric phase
$\phi_{\mu}$.
\section{Relic Abundance Calculation for low and\\ intermediate values of $\tan \beta$}
In this section we compute the relic density of the LSP in the
case of low $\tan \beta$ ({\it i.e.}\ $\tan \beta \simeq 3$), as well as
for intermediate $\tan \beta$ values ({\it i.e.}\ $\tan \beta \simeq
15$). Using a standard method~\cite{report} in which we expand the
thermally averaged cross section $\langle \sigma_A v \rangle$ as
\begin{equation} \langle \sigma_A v \rangle = a + b v^2 + ...\ ,
\end{equation}
where $v$ is the relative velocity, $a$ is the s-wave contribution
at zero relative velocity and $b$ contains contributions from both
the s and p waves, the relic abundance is given by~\cite{report}.
\begin{equation}
\Omega_{\chi} h^2 = \frac{\rho_{\chi}}{\rho_c/h^2} = 2.82 \times 10^8
Y_{\infty} (m_{\chi}/GeV),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
Y_{\infty}^{-1}=0.264\ g_*^{1/2}\ M_P\
m_{\chi}\ (\frac{a}{x_F}+\frac{3b}{x_F^2}),
\end{equation}
$h$ is the well known Hubble parameter, $ 0.4 \leq h \leq 0.8$, and $
\rho_c \sim 2 \times 10^{-29} h^2$ is the critical density of the
universe. The freeze-out temperature is given by
\begin{equation}
x_F= \ln \frac{0.0764 M_P ( a+ 6 b/ x_F) c ( 2+c) m_{\chi}}{\sqrt{g_* x_F}}
\end{equation}
Here $ x_F=m_{\chi}/T_F$, $ M_P= 1.22 \times 10^{19} $ GeV is the
Planck mass, and $ g_*$ ($ 8 \leq \sqrt{g_*} \leq 10$) is the
effective number of relativistic degrees of freedom at $T_F$.
Also $c=1/2$ as explained in Ref~\cite{nojiri}. \vskip 0.3cm
Given that the LSP is bino-like, the annihilation is
predominantly into leptons, with the other channels either closed
or suppressed. It is worth noting that the squark exchanges are
suppressed due to their large masses, as figure (3) shows. \vskip
0.3cm
\begin{figure}[h]
\psfig{figure=lsp2.eps,height=7cm,width=12cm} \caption{The squarks
(dashed-dotted) and sleptons (solid line) masses versus the LSP
mass, for $\cos^2\theta \simeq 1/2$ and $\alpha_A \simeq \pi/2$ .
}\vskip 0.3cm
\end{figure}
The annihilation process is dominated by the exchange of the right
slepton. In fact, the masses of the right slepton are essentially
independent of $\alpha_A$ and $\phi_{\mu}$, unless there is a
significant amount of slepton mixing. Here, the off-diagonal
element of the matrices are much smaller than the diagonal
elements $M_{l_L}^2$ and $M_{l_R}^2$. Furthermore, since the LSP
is essentially a bino, it only slightly depends on the phase of
$\mu$ as figure (1) confirms. Therefore, we find that the
constraint on the relic density: $0.1 \leq \Omega_{{\rm LSP}}
\leq 0.9$, with $0.4 \leq h \leq 0.8$ leads, as figure (4) shows,
to the previously known upper bound on the LSP mass found in the
case of vanishing SUSY phases~\cite{shafi,falk2}, namely,
$m_{\chi} \leq 250$ GeV. \vskip 0.3cm
\begin{figure}[h]
\psfig{figure=lsp1.eps,height=7cm,width=12cm} \caption{The relic
abundance of the LSP versus its mass.} \vskip 0.3cm
\end{figure}
This result is different from the one discussed in
Ref.~\cite{falk1} where it was claimed that the CP violating
phases have a significant effect in that the cosmological upper
bound on the bino mass is increased from 250 GeV to 650 GeV. This
enhancement can be traced to the assumptions proposed in that
model, namely that all the scalar masses are equal and of order
$M_W$ at the weak scale. Also, the sfermion mxings were assumed
to be large (with $\mu \sim TeV$). It turns out that such
assumptions may lead to unacceptable charge and color breaking, as
explained in Ref.~\cite{falk2}. Moreover, they cannot be
motivated from supergravity or superstring models. \vskip 0.3cm
We have also considered the relic density for intermediate $\tan
\beta$ ({\it i.e.}\ $\tan \beta \simeq 15$). We find that there is no
significant difference between this and the case of low $\tan
\beta$. The upper bound on the LSP mass is still of order 250 GeV.
\section{SUSY CP phases with Large $\tan \beta$}
We now extend our study to the case when $\tan \beta$ is large
($\simeq 50$). In a large class of supersymmetric models with
flavor $U(1)$ symmetry, $\tan \beta \sim (\frac{m_t}{m_b}).
\epsilon^{n}$, where $\epsilon \simeq 0.2$ ($\simeq$ Cabibbo
angle) is a `small' expansion parameter, and $n=0,1,2$. (See for
instance \cite{zt} and reference therein). \vskip 0.3cm For $\tan
\beta \simeq \frac{m_t}{m_b}$, it is known that the
phenomenological aspects of these models are very different
compared with the small $\tan \beta$ case. In particular,
radiative EW symmetry breaking is an important non-trivial issue.
Non-universality, such as $m_{H_1}^2
> m_{H_2}^2$ at the Planck scale, is favored for a successful EW
breaking with large $\tan \beta$. Further, non-universality of the
squark and slepton masses can affect symmetry breaking as well as
other phenomenological aspects. We have adopted this
non-universality in our choice for the modular weights in section
2. \vskip 0.3cm In the large $\tan \beta$ case the Higgs potential
has two characteristic features. It follows from the minimization
conditions that
\begin{equation}
m_2^2 \simeq -\frac{M_Z^2}{2},
\label{cons1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
m_3^2 \simeq \frac{M_A^2}{\tan^2 \beta}\sim 0,
\label{cons2}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
M_A^2 \simeq m_1^2 +m_2^2 >0.
\label{cons3}
\end{equation}
Here, $m_i^2 = m_{H_i}^2 + \mu, i=1,2$ and $m_3^2 = B \mu$. A
combination of eqs.(\ref{cons1}) and (\ref{cons3}) gives the
following constraint on the low energy parameters
\begin{equation}
m_1^2 -m_2^2 > M_Z^2 ,
\label{cons4}
\end{equation}
i.e $m_{H_1}^2 -m_{H_2}^2 > M_Z^2$. In order to have electroweak
breaking in the large $\tan \beta$ case, the difference between
the masses of the two Higgs fields should satisfy the above
inequality. \vskip 0.3cm
In our model we find that this inequality
is indeed satisfied, and the EW symmetry is broken at the weak
scale. Also, one of the stau leptons ($\tilde{\tau}_R$) has a
`small' mass of order O(100) GeV, and happens to be the lightest
slepton. It therefore dominates the LSP annihilation process.
This relaxes the upper bound on the LSP mass from 250 to 300 GeV.
Thus, even in the of large $\tan \beta$ case the effect of the
supersymmetric phases are relatively small as figure (5) shows.
This essentially follows because the diagonal elements of the
stau mass matrices, in this model are larger than the
off-diagonal ones, {\it i.e.}, there is no large mixing, as well as from
the fact that the LSP is bino like. \vskip 0.3cm
\begin{figure}[h]
\psfig{figure=tan2.eps,height=7cm,width=12cm} \caption{The relic
abundance with non-vanishing phases (solid line) and vanishing
phases (dashed line) versus the LSP mass in case of
$\tan\beta\simeq \frac{m_t}{m_b}$.}\vskip 0.3cm
\end{figure}
\section{ CP phases and detection rates of the LSP}
We have seen that the effects of CP violating phases on the
neutralino relic density are very small. In this section we
examine the effect of these phases on the event rates of relic
neutralinos scattering off nuclei in terrestrial detectors. The
direct detection experiments provide the most natural way of
searching for the neutralino dark matter. Any large CP violating
phases can affect the detection rate, as will see below. It is
interesting to note that the measured event rate may shed light
on the value of the supersymmetric phases. \vskip 0.3cm The
differential detection rate is given by~\cite{report}
\begin{equation}
\frac{d R}{d Q} = \frac{\sigma \rho_{\chi}}{2 m_{\chi} m_r^2} F^2(Q)
\int_{v_{min}}^{\infty} \frac{ f_1(v)}{v} dv,
\label{rate}
\end{equation}
where $f_1(v)$ is the distribution of speeds relative to the detector.
The reduced mass is $m_r= \frac{m_{\chi} m_N}{m_{\chi}^2+ m_r^2}$, where $
m_N$ is the mass of the nucleus, $ v_{min}= (\frac{Q m_N}{2 m_r^2})^{1/2}$, $Q$
is the energy deposited in the detector, and $\rho_{\chi}$ is the
density of the neutralino near the Earth. $\sigma$ is the elastic-scattering cross
section of the LSP with a given nucleus. In
general $\sigma$ has two contributions: a spin-dependent contribution
arising from $Z^0$ and $\tilde{q}$ exchange diagrams, and a spin-independent
(scalar) contribution due to the Higgs and squark exchange diagrams. For
$^{76}Ge$ detector, where the total spin of $^{76}Ge$ is equal to zero,
we have contributions only from the scalar part.
\begin{equation}
\sigma = \frac{4 m_r^2}{\pi} [ Z f_p + (A-Z) f_n ]^2,
\end{equation}
where $Z$ is the nuclear charge, and $A-Z$ is the number of
neutrons. The expressions for $f_p$ and $f_n$, and their
dependence on the SUSY phases can be found in Ref.~\cite{nath2,
falk3}. The effect of the CP violating phases enter through the
neutralino eigenvector components $N_{ij}$, and also through the
matrices that diagonalize the squark mass matrices. Finally,
$F(Q)$ in (\ref{rate}) is the form factor. We use the standard
parameterization~\cite{engel}
\begin{equation}
F(Q) = \frac{3 j_1(q R_1) }{ q R_1} e^{-\frac{1}{2} q^2 s^2},
\end{equation}
where the momentum transfer $q^2= 2 m_N Q$, $R_1=(R^2 -5
s^2)^{1/2}$ with $R=1.2 fm A^{1/2}$, and A is the mass number of
$^{76}Ge$. $j_1 $ is the spherical Bessel function and $s \simeq 1
fm $. \vskip 0.3cm The ratio $R$ of the event rate with
non-vanishing CP violating phases to the event rate in the absence
of these phases is presented in figure (6). The solid curve
corresponds to the case $\alpha_A=0$, while the dashed one
corresponds to $\alpha_A=\pi/2$. \vskip 0.3cm
\begin{figure}[h]
\psfig{figure=dir1.eps,height=7cm,width=12cm} \caption{The ratio
of the direct detection rates as function of $\phi_{\mu}$.}
\end{figure}
\vskip 0.3cm From this figure, it is clear that, in the model we
are considering, the CP violating phases can significantly affect
the event rates of the direct detection of the LSP. The phase
$\phi_{\mu}$ reduces the value of $R$, while the phase $\alpha_A$
in the trilinear coupling increases it. However, as explained in
Ref.~\cite{barr}, $\phi_{\mu}$ is constrained from the electric
dipole moment experimental limit to be $\leq 10^{-1}$ \vskip
0.3cm For completeness, we also examine the effect of CP
violating phases on the indirect detection rates of the LSP in
the halo. The observation of energetic neutrinos from the
annihilation of the LSP that accumulate in the sun or in the
earth is a promising method for detecting them. The technique for
detecting such energetic neutrinos is through observation of
upward going muons produced by charged current interactions of the
neutrinos in the rock below the detector. The flux of such muons
from neutralino annihilation in the sun is given by
\begin{equation}
\Gamma = 2.9 \times 10^8 m^{-2} yr^{-1} \tanh^2(t/\tau) \rho_{\chi}^{0.3}
f(m_{\chi}) \zeta(m_{\chi}) (\frac{m_{\chi}^2}{GeV})^2
(\frac{f_P}{GeV^{-2}})^2 .
\end{equation}
The neutralino-mass dependence of the capture rates is described
by~\cite{report}
\begin{equation}
f(m_{\chi}) = \sum_i f_i \phi_i S_i(m_{\chi}) F_i(m_{\chi}) \frac{m_i^3
m_{\chi}}{(m_{\chi}+m_i)^2},
\end{equation}
where the quantities $\phi_i$ and $f_i$ describe the distribution
of element $i$ in the sun and they are listed in
Ref.~\cite{report}, the quantity
$S_i(m_{\chi})=S(\frac{m_{\chi}}{m_{N_i}})$ is the kinematics
suppression factor for the capture of neutralino of mass $
m_{\chi}$ from a nucleus of mass $m_{N_i}$~\cite{report}, and
$F_i(m_{\chi})$ is the form factor suppression for the capture of
a neutralino of mass $ m_{\chi}$ by a nucleus $i$. Finally, the
function $\zeta (m_{\chi})$ describes the energy spectrum from
neutralino annihilation for a given mass.\\ \vskip 0.3cm
\begin{figure}[h]
\psfig{figure=dir2.eps,height=7cm,width=12cm} \caption{The ratio
of the indirect detection rates as function of $\phi_{\mu}$}
\end{figure}
\vskip 0.3cm
In Figure (7) we present the ratio of the muon fluxes
resulting from captured neutralinos in the sun in the case of
non-vanishing CP violating phases to that of vanishing $\phi_A$,
for $\rho_{\chi}=0.3 GeV/cm^3$. We see that the predicted muon
flux increases as the phase of A-term is increased. \vskip 0.3cm
We can understand this important effect of CP violating phases on
the detection rate as follows. The phases affect the neutralino
eigenvector components $N_{ij}$ and the squark mass matrices.
Consequently, they have a significant effect on the neutralino
coupling to quarks. The spin independent contribution, as also
shown in Ref.~\cite{nath2} and~\cite{falk3}, is decreased by
increasing the phase of $\mu$, and goes in the other direction if
the phase of $A$-term is increased. This leads to the same
behaviour for the elastic scattering cross section, which
translates this dependence on the phases of $\mu$ and $A$ to the
detection rates as figures 6 and 7 confirm.
\section{Conclusions}
We have studied the impact of CP violating phases from soft SUSY
breaking terms in string-inspired models on the LSP, its purity
and its relic abundance density. For different values of $\tan
\beta$ (of order unity, intermediate and of order $m_t/m_b$), we
found that these phases have no significant effect on the LSP
relic density, so that the upper bound on the LSP mass is
essentially unchanged. We have examined the effect of these
phases on the direct and indirect detection rates. We found that
increasing the value of the phase $\phi_{\mu}$ leads to a decrease
the event rates, while the phase $\phi_A$ of the trilinear
coupling has the opposite effect.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
S.K. would like to acknowledge the support provided by the
Fulbright Commission and the hospitality of the Bartol Research
Institute. Q.S. is supported in part by DOE Grant No.\
DE-FG02-91ER40626, and the Nato contract number CRG-970149.
\providecommand{\bysame}{\leavevmode\hbox
to3em{\hrulefill}\thinspace}
\newpage
|
\section{#1}}
\renewcommand{\theequation}{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}
\title{\large\bf The twisted quantum affine algebra $\A$ and
correlation functions of the Izergin-Korepin model}
\author{\large Bo-Yu Hou$^{~1}$, Wen-Li Yang$^{~1,~2}$
and Yao-Zhong Zhang$^{~2}$}
\address{$^{1}~$ Institute of Modern Physics,
Northwest University, Xian 710069,China\\
$^{2}~$ Department of Mathematics, University of Queensland,
Brisbane, Qld 4072, Australia}
\maketitle
\vspace{10pt}
\begin{abstract}
We derive the exchange relations of the
vertex operators of $U_q(A_2^{(2)})$ and show that these vertex operators
give the bosonization of the Izergin-Korepin model. We give an integral
expression of the correlation functions of the Izergin-Korepin model
and derive the difference equations which they satisfy.
\end{abstract}
\section{Introduction}
It is well-known that quantum affine algberas play an essential
role in the studies of low-dimensional massive integrable
models such as quantum spin chains, since they provide the symmetry
algberas of these models.Based on the works of
q-vertex operators\cite{Fre92}\cite{Fre88}
and level-one
highest weight representations of the quantum affine algebra
$U_q(\widehat{sl}_2)$, the Kyoto group\cite{DFJMN}\cite{JM}
developed a new method
which enabled the group to diagonalize the XXZ spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ chain
directly in the thermodynamic limit and moreover compute the
correlation functions of the spin operators.This approach was later
generalized to higher spin XXZ chains \cite{ID,BW,HK}, vertex models with
$U_q(\widehat{sl}_n)$ symmetries\cite{K}, the face type
statistical mechanics models \cite{LP,AJ}, and more recently to
integrable models with quantum affine superalgbera symmetry \cite{YZ}.
In this paper, we will extend the above programme further to the
Izergin-Korepin 19-vertex model\cite{IK}---\cite{Mar}
which has twisted quantum affine algebra $\A$ as
its non-abelian symmetry.The bosonic
realiztion of $\A$ and its level-one vertex operators were
constructed recently \cite{Jing}. In section 3,
we use the results of \cite{Jing} to calculate the
exchange relations of the $q$-vertex operators .We show that these
vertex operators satisfy the Faddeev-Zamolodchikov algebra with the
R-matrix of $\A$ as its constructure constant.
A Miki's construction of $\A$ is also given. In section 4,
generalizing the Kyoto group's work
\cite{DFJMN} to the case of twisted quantum affine algebra $\A$,
we give the bosonization of the
Izergin-Korepin model .
In section 5,
we compute the
correlation functions of the local operators (such as the spin operator
$S_z$ ) and give an integral
expression of the correlation functions. A set of
difference equations satisfied by the correlation functions have also
been derived.
\section{Preliminaries}
In this section, we briefly review the bosonization of the twisted quantum
affine algebra $U_q(A^{(2)}_2)$ at level one \cite{Jing}.
\subsection{ Quantum affine algebra $U_q(A^{(2)}_2)$ }
The symmetric Cartan matrix of the twisted affine Lie algebra $A^{(2)}_2$
is
\begin{eqnarray*}
(a_{ij})=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
8&-4\\
-4&2
\end{array}\right)
\end{eqnarray*}
where $i,j=0,1$. Quantum affine algebra
$U_q(A^{(2)}_2)$ is a $q$-analogue of the universal
enveloping algebra of $A^{(2)}_2$ generated by the Chevalley
generators $\{e_i,f_i,t_i^{\pm 1},d | i=0,1\}$, where $d$ is the
usual derivation operator.
The defining relations are\cite{CP}\cite{DGZ}
\begin{eqnarray*}
& & t_it_j =t_jt_i,\ \ t_id=dt_i, \ \ [d,e_i]=\delta_{i,0}e_i,\ \
[d,f_i]=-\delta_{i,0}f_i,\\
& &t_ie_jt_i^{-1}=(q^{1\over 2})^{a_{ij}}e_j,
\ \ t_if_jt_i^{-1}=(q^{1\over 2})^{-a_{ij}}f_j ,\\
& &[e_i,f_j] =\delta_{ij} \frac{t_i-t_i^{-1}}{q_i-q_i^{-1}},~~\\
& & \sum_{r=0}^{1-a_{ij}}(-1)^r
\left[
\begin{array}{c}
1-a_{ij}\\
r
\end{array}
\right]_{q_i}
(e_i)^re_j(e_i)^{1-a_{ij}-r}=0~~~,~~~{\rm if}~i\neq j,\\
& & \sum_{r=0}^{1-a_{ij}}(-1)^r
\left[
\begin{array}{c}
1-a_{ij}\\
r
\end{array}
\right]_{q_i}
(f_i)^rf_j(f_i)^{1-a_{ij}-r}=0~~~,~~~{\rm if}~i\neq j,\\
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent where $~q_1=q^{1\over 2}~, ~q_0=q^2$ , $t_i=q_i^{h_i}$ , and
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &[n]_{q_i}=\frac{q_i^n-q_i^{-n}}{q_i-q_i^{-1}}~~~,
~~~[n]_{q_i}!=[n]_{q_i}[n-1]_{q_i}\cdot\cdot\cdot [1]_{q_i}~~,\\
& &\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n\\
r
\end{array}
\right]_{q_i}=\frac{[n]_{q_i}!}{[n-r]_{q_i}!
[r]_{q_i}!}
\end{eqnarray*}
$U_q(A^{(2)}_2)$ is a quasi-triangular Hopf algebra
endowed with Hopf algebra structure:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\Delta(t_i)=t_i\otimes t_i,~~~~
\Delta(e_i)=e_i\otimes 1+t_i\otimes e_i,~~~~
\Delta(f_i)=f_i\otimes t_i^{-1}+1\otimes f_i ,\\
\label{counit}
&&\epsilon(t_i)=1,~~~~\epsilon(e_i)=\epsilon(f_i)=0,\\
&&S(e_i)=-t_i^{-1} e_i,~~~~ S(f_i)=-f_i t_i, ~~~~
S(t_i^{\pm 1})=t_i^{\mp 1},~~~~ S(d)=-d.
\end{eqnarray}
$\A$ can also be realized by
the Drinfeld generators \cite{Jing}\cite{Dri88} $\{d,\ \ X^{\pm}_{m}$,
$a_n$, $K^{\pm 1},\gamma^{\pm 1/2} | m \in
{\bf Z}, n \in {\bf Z}_{\ne 0}\}$.
The relations read
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{DRB1}
& &\gamma\ \ {\rm is\ \ central },\ \
[K,a_n]=0,\ \ [d,K]=0,\ \ [d,a_n]=na_n,\\
& &[a_m,a_n] =\delta_{m+n,0}
{\{[4n]_{q_1}-(-1)^n[2n]_{q_1}\}(\gamma^m-\gamma^{-m})
\over m(q_1-q_1^{-1})} ,\\
& &KX^{\pm}_m =q^{\pm 1}X^{\pm}_m K,\ \
[d,X^{\pm}_m]=mX^{\pm}_m ,\\
& &[a_m,X^{\pm}_n]=\pm {\{[4m]_{q_1}-(-1)^m[2m]_{q_1}\} \over m}
\gamma^{\mp |m|/2}X^{\pm}_{n+m},\\
& &[X^{+}_m,X^{-}_n]=\frac{1}{ q_1-q_1^{-1}}
(\gamma^{(m-n)/2}\psi^{+}_{m+n} -\gamma^{-(m-n)/2 }
\psi^{-}_{m+n}),\\
\label{DRB2}
& &(z-wq^{\pm 2})(z+wq^{\mp 1})X^{\pm}(z)X^{\pm}(w)=
(zq^{\pm 2}-w)(zq^{\mp 1}+w)X^{\pm}(w)X^{\pm}(z)~~,
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent where the corresponding Drinfeld currents
$\psi^{\pm}(z)$ and $X^{\pm}(z)$ are defined by
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &\psi^+(z)=\sum_{m=0}^{\infty}\psi^{+}_mz^{-m}=
Kexp\{(q_1-q_1^{-1})\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}a_kz^{-k}\}~~,\\
& &\psi^-(z)=\sum_{m=0}^{\infty}\psi^{-}_{-m}z^{m}=
K^{-1}exp\{-(q_1-q_1^{-1})\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}a_{-k}z^{k}\}~~~,\\
& &X^{\pm}(z)=\sum_{n\in Z}X^{\pm}_mz^{-m}~~.
\end{eqnarray*}
The Chevalley generators are related to the Drinfeld generators
by the formulae:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{CB1}
& &t_1= K,\ \ e_1 = X^{+}_0,\ \ t_0=\gamma K^{-2},
\ \ f_1 = X^{-}_0 ,\\
\label{CB2}
& &e_0= K^{-2}[X_0^{-},X^{-}_1]_q,~~~
f_0=\frac{1}{[4]_{q_1}^2}[X^{+}_{-1},X^{+}_0]_{q^{-1}}K^2~~.
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Bosonization of $\A$ at level one}
Let us introduce the bosonic $q$-oscillators\cite{Jing}
$\{a_n~,Q~, P| n\in Z-\{0\}\}$ which satisfy the commutation relations
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &[a_m,a_n]=\delta_{m+n,0}\frac{1}{m}
\{[4m]_{q_1}-(-1)^m[2m]_{q_1}\}
[2m]_{q_1},\\
& &[P,a_m]=[Q,a_m]=0~~,~~[P,Q] = 1,
\end{eqnarray*}
Set $ F_1=\oplus_{n\in Z}C[a_{-1},a_{-2},.....]e^{\frac{Q}{2}+nQ}|0>$,
where the Fock vacuum vector $|0>$ is defined by
\begin{eqnarray*}
a_n|0>=0~~~{\rm for}~ n>0~~~,~~~~P|0>=0.
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent Then, on $F_1$ the
Drinfeld currents of $\A$ at level-one are realized
by the free boson fields as \cite{Jing}
\begin{eqnarray}
& & \gamma=q~~,~~ K=q^P~~~,\nonumber\\
& &\psi^{+}(z)=q^Pexp\{(q_1-q_1^{-1})\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}a_nz^{-n}\}~~,\nonumber\\
& &\psi^{-}(z)=q^{-P}exp\{-(q_1-q_1^{-1})\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}a_{-n}z^{n}\}
~~~,\nonumber\\
\label{CUR}
& &X^{\pm}(z) =
exp\{\pm\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{a_{-n}}{[2n]_{q_1}}q^{\mp\frac{n}{2}}z^n\}
exp\{\mp\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{a_{n}}{[2n]_{q_1}}q^{\mp\frac{n}{2}}z^{-n}\}
e^{\pm Q}z^{\pm P+\frac{1}{2}}~~.
\end{eqnarray}
By the relations between Chevalley basis and Drinfeld basis
(\ref{CB1}---\ref{CB2}), one can check that
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &t_1e^{\frac{Q}{2}}|0>=q^{\frac{1}{2}}e^{\frac{Q}{2}}|0>
=(q^{\frac{1}{2}})^{<\alpha_1,\Lambda_1>}e^{\frac{Q}{2}}|0>,\\
& &t_0e^{\frac{Q}{2}}|0>=e^{\frac{Q}{2}}|0>
=(q^{\frac{1}{2}})^{<\alpha_0,\Lambda_1>}e^{\frac{Q}{2}}|0>,\\
& &e_ie^{\frac{Q}{2}}|0>=0~~~, ~~i=0,1,
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent where $\alpha_1,~\alpha_0=-2\alpha_1+\delta$ are the simple
roots of $A^{(2)}_2$, $\Lambda_1$ is one basical fundamental weight, and
$\delta$ is the imaginary root. The Fock space $F_1$ coincides with the
level-one irreducible
highest weight module $V(\Lambda_1)$ with the highest weight vector
given by $|\Lambda_1>=e^{\frac{Q}{2}}|0>$.
\subsection{Level-one vertex operators}
Let $V$ be the 3-dimensional evaluation representation of
$\A$ ,$\{v_1, v_0, v_{-1}\}$ be the basis vectors of $V$, and
$E_{i,j}$ be the $3\times 3$ matrix whose $(i,j)$-element is unity
and zero otherwise.Then
the 3-dimenional level-0 representation $V_z$ of $\A$ is given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &e_1=\alpha^{-1}[2]_{q_1}E_{1,0}+\alpha E_{0,-1},~~~
e_0=zE_{-1,1},\\
& &f_1=\alpha^{-1}[2]_{q_1}E_{-1,0}+\alpha E_{0,1}~~,~~
f_0=z^{-1}E_{1,-1},\\
& & t_1=q_1^2E_{1,1}+q_1^{-2}E_{-1,-1}+E_{0,0},~~~~
t_0=q_0E_{-1,-1}+q_0^{-1}E_{1,1}+E_{0,0}~~,
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent where $\alpha=\{[2]_{q_1}
q^{-\frac{1}{2}}\}^{\frac{1}{2}}$.
We define the dual modules $V_z^{*b}$ of $V_z$ by
$\pi_{V^{*b}}(a)=\pi_{V}(b(a))^{t}$, $\forall a\in \A$, where
$t$ is the transposition operation. $b$ is the
anti-automorphism defined by
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{DEF}
b(x)=(-q)^{\hat{\rho}}S(x)(-q)^{-\hat{\rho}}\stackrel{def}{=}
(-q)^{3d}(-q^{\frac{1}{2}})^{\frac{1}{2}h_1}S(x)
(-q)^{-3d}(-q^{\frac{1}{2}})^{-\frac{1}{2}h_1},~~~ \forall x\in \A ~,
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent where $2\hat{\rho}=6d+\frac{1}{2}h_1$.
A convenient
feature of $b$ is that $b^2=id$ (since
$S^2(x)=q^{-2\hat{\rho}}xq^{2\hat{\rho}}$) and that
the following isomorphism holds:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{IM}
C:~V_z\longrightarrow V^{*b}_z~~~~, ~~v_i\otimes z^n\longrightarrow
v_{-i}^*\otimes z^n.
\end{eqnarray}
Throughout, we denote by $V(\lambda)$ a level-one irreducible
highest weight $\A$-module with
highest weight $\lambda$. Consider the following intertwiners of
$\A$-modules:
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &\Phi_{\lambda}^{\mu V}(z) :
V(\lambda) \longrightarrow V(\mu)\otimes V_{z} ,\ \ \ \
\Phi_{\lambda}^{\mu V^{*}}(z) :
V(\lambda) \longrightarrow V(\mu)\otimes V_{z}^{*b} ,\\
& &\Psi_{\lambda}^{V \mu}(z) :
V(\lambda) \longrightarrow V_{z}\otimes V(\mu),\ \ \ \
\Psi_{\lambda}^{V^* \mu}(z) :
V(\lambda) \longrightarrow V_{z}^{*b}\otimes V(\mu).
\end{eqnarray*}
They are intertwiners in the sense that for any $x\in \A$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{EX}
\Theta(z)\cdot x=\Delta(x)\cdot \Theta(z),\ \ \ \Theta(z)=
\Phi(z),\Phi^{*}(z),\Psi(z),\Psi^{*}(z).
\end{eqnarray}
$\Phi(z)$ ($\Phi^{*}(z)$) is called type I (dual) vertex operator
and $\Psi(z)$
($\Psi^{*}(z)$) type II (dual) vertex operator.
We expand the vertex operators as
\begin{eqnarray}
& &\Phi(z)=\sum_{j=1,0,-1}\Phi_j(z)\otimes v_j\ ,\ \ \ \
\Phi^{*}(z)=\sum_{j=1,0,-1}\Phi^{*}_j(z)\otimes v^{*}_j,\\
& &\Psi(z)=\sum_{j=1,0,-1}v_j\otimes\Psi_j(z)\ ,\ \ \ \
\Psi^{*}(z)=\sum_{j=1,0,-1}v^{*}_j\otimes\Psi^{*}_j(z).
\end{eqnarray}
Define the operators $\Phi_j(z),\Phi^{*}_j(z),\Psi_j(z)$ and
$\Psi^{*}_j(z)$ $(j=1,0,-1)$ acting on the Fock space $F_1$ by
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{VOX1}
& &\Phi_{-1}(z)=
exp\{\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{[2n]_{q_1}}{n}q^{\frac{9}{2}n}
\omega_{-n}(-z)^n\}
exp\{\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{[2n]_{q_1}}{n}q^{-\frac{7}{2}n}
\omega_{n}(-z)^{-n}\}e^{Q}(zq^4)^{P+\frac{1}{2}},\\
& & \Phi_{0}(z)=\{\frac{q^{-\frac{1}{2}}}{[2]_{q_1}}\}^{1\over 2}
[\Phi_{-1}(z),f_1]_q~~,~~
\Phi_{1}(z)=\{\frac{q^{1\over 2}}{[2]_{q_1}}\}^{1\over 2}
[\Phi_{0}(z),f_1]~~,\\
& &\Psi_{1}(z)=
exp\{-\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{[2n]_{q_1}}{n}q^{\frac{1}{2}n}
\omega_{-n}z^n\}
exp\{-\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{[2n]_{q_1}}{n}q^{-\frac{3}{2}n}
\omega_{n}z^{-n}\}e^{-Q}(-zq)^{-P+\frac{1}{2}},\\
& & \Psi_{0}(z)=\{\frac{q^{-1\over 2}}{[2]_{q_1}}\}^{1\over 2}
[\Psi_{1}(z),e_1]_q~~,~~
\Psi_{1}(z)=\{\frac{q^{1\over 2}}{[2]_{q_1}}\}^{1\over 2}
[\Psi_{0}(z),e_1]~~,\\
\label{VOX2}
& &\Phi_i^*(z)=\Phi_{-i}(-zq^{-3})~~,\Psi_i^*(z)=\Psi_{-i}(-zq^{3}),
\end{eqnarray}
where $[a,b]_x=ab-xba$ and
the bosonic $q$-oscillators $\omega_m$ are defined by
\begin{eqnarray*}
\omega_m=-\frac{m}{\{[4m]_{q_1}-(-1)^m[2m]_{q_1}\}
[2m]_{q_1}}a_m~~,
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent such that $[a_n,\omega_m]=\delta_{m+n,0}$.
According to \cite{Jing}, the operators $\Phi(z),\;\Phi^*(z),\;
\Psi(z)$ and $\Psi^*(z)$ defined in (\ref{VOX1}---\ref{VOX2}) are the only
vertex operators of $\A$ which intertwine the level-one irreducible
highest weight
$\A$-modules :
\begin{eqnarray}
& &\Phi(z) :
V(\Lambda_1) \longrightarrow V(\Lambda_1)\otimes V_{z} ,\ \ \ \
\Phi^{*}(z) :
V(\Lambda_1) \longrightarrow V(\Lambda_1)\otimes V_{z}^{*b} ,\nonumber\\
& &\Psi(z) :
V(\Lambda_1) \longrightarrow V_{z}\otimes V(\Lambda_1),\ \ \ \
\Psi^{*}(z) :
V(\Lambda_1) \longrightarrow V_{z}^{*b}\otimes V(\Lambda_1).
\end{eqnarray}
\section{Exchange relations of vertex operators}
In this section, we derive the exchange relations of the type I and type II
vertex operators of $\A$.
\subsection{The R-matrix}
We introduce some abbreviations:
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &(z;p_1,p_2,...,p_m)=\prod_{\{l_1,l_2,...,l_m\}=0}^{\infty}
(1-zp_1^{l_1}p_2^{l_2}
\cdot\cdot\cdot p_m^{l_m})~~,\\
& &\Theta_p(z)=(z;p)(pz^{-1};p)(p;p)~~,~~\{z\}=(z;q^6,q^6)~~.
\end{eqnarray*}
Let $\overline{R}(z)\in End(V\otimes V)$
be the R-matrix of $\A$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{R}
\overline{R}(z)(v_i\otimes v_j)=\sum_{k,l}\overline{R}^{i,j}_{kl}(z)v_k\otimes v_l, \ \ \ \
\forall v_i, v_j, v_k, v_l\in V,
\end{eqnarray}
where the matrix elements are given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &\overline{R}^{1,1}_{1,1}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})=\overline{R}^{-1,-1}_{-1,-1}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})=1,~~
\overline{R}^{-1,0}_{0,-1}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})=\overline{R}^{0,1}_{1,0}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})
=\frac{(q-q^{-1})z_2}{z_1q-z_2q^{-1}},\\
& &\overline{R}^{-1,0}_{-1,0}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})=\overline{R}^{0,-1}_{0,-1}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})
=\overline{R}^{1,0}_{1,0}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})=\overline{R}^{0,1}_{0,1}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})=
\frac{z_1-z_2}{z_1q-z_2q^{-1}},\\
& &\overline{R}^{0,-1}_{-1,0}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})=\overline{R}^{1,0}_{0,1}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})
=\frac{(q-q^{-1})z_1}{z_1q-z_2q^{-1}},~~
\overline{R}^{-1,1}_{-1,1}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})=
\overline{R}^{1,-1}_{1,-1}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})
=\frac{(z_1-z_2)q^2(z_1q+z_2)}{(z_1q-z_2q^{-1})(z_1q^4+z_2q)},\\
& &\overline{R}^{1,-1}_{-1,1}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})
=\frac{(q^2-1)z_1\{z_2+z_2q^2+z_1q^3-z_1q^2\}}
{(z_1q-z_2q^{-1})(z_1q^4+z_2q)},~~
\overline{R}^{-1,1}_{1,-1}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})
=\frac{(q^2-1)z_2\{z_2-z_2q+z_1q^3+z_1q\}}
{(z_1q-z_2q^{-1})(z_1q^4+z_2q)},\\
& &\overline{R}^{1,-1}_{0,0}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})=
\overline{R}^{0,0}_{-1,1}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})
=\frac{(q-q^{-1})q^{\frac{7}{2}}z_1(z_1-z_2)}
{(z_1q-z_2q^{-1})(z_1q^4+z_2q)},\\
& &\overline{R}^{-1,1}_{0,0}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})=
\overline{R}^{0,0}_{1,-1}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})
=\frac{(q^{-1}-q)q^{\frac{3}{2}}z_2(z_1-z_2)}
{(z_1q-z_2q^{-1})(z_1q^4+z_2q)},\\
& &\overline{R}^{0,0}_{0,0}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})
=\frac{z_1-z_2}{z_1q-z_2q^{-1}}+
\frac{(q-q^{-1})(q+q^4)z_2z_1}
{(z_1q-z_2q^{-1})(z_1q^4+z_2q)},\\
& &R^{ij}_{kl}=0\ \ ,\ \ {\rm otherwise}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Define the R-matrices $R^{I}(z)$, $R^{II}(z)$ and $R^{U}(z)$ :
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{SC}
R^{I}(z)=r(z)\overline{R}(z)~~,~~R^{II}(z)=\overline{r}(z)\overline{R}(z)~~,~~
R^{U}(z)=\rho(z)\overline{R}(z)~~,
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent where
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &r(z)=z^{-1}\frac{(-q^3z;q^6)(q^2z;q^6)(q^6z^{-1};q^6)(-q^5z^{-1};q^6)}
{(-q^3z^{-1};q^6)(q^2z^{-1};q^6)(q^6z;q^6)(-q^5z;q^6)}~~,\\
& &\overline{r}(z)=\frac{(q^4z;q^6)(-q^3z;q^6)(-qz^{-1};q^6)(q^6z^{-1};q^6)}
{(-q^3z^{-1};q^6)(q^4z^{-1};q^6)(q^6z;q^6)(-qz;q^6)}~~,\\
& &\rho(z)=\frac{r(z)}{\tau(zq^{-1})}~~,~~{\rm and }~~
\tau(z)=z^{-1}\frac{\Theta_{q^6}(qz)\Theta_{q^6}(-q^2z)}
{\Theta_{q^6}(q^5z)\Theta_{q^6}(-q^4z)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Then the R-matrices satisfy Yang-Baxter equation(YBE) on
$V\otimes V\otimes V$
\begin{eqnarray*}
R^{i}_{12}(z)R^{i}_{13}(zw)R^{i}_{23}(w)=R^{i}_{23}(w)R^{i}_{13}(zw)
R^{i}_{12}(z),~~{\rm for}~~ i=I, II, U ~~~~,
\end{eqnarray*}
and moreover enjoys: (i) the initial condition,
$R^{i}(1)=P$ for $i=I,II,U $, with $P$ being
the permutation operator; (ii) the unitarity condition,
\begin{eqnarray*}
R^{i}_{12}(\frac{z}{w})R^{i}_{21}(\frac{w}{z})=1,~~{\rm for }~~
i=I,II,U
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent where $R^{i}_{21}(z)=PR^{i}_{12}(z)P$; and (iii) the crossing
relations
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &(R^{i})^{k,l}_{m,n}(z)=(-q^{\frac{1}{2}})^{-\rho_l}(R^{(i)})^{-n,k}_{-l,m}
(-z^{-1}q^{-3})(-q^{\frac{1}{2}})^{\rho_n},~~{\rm for} ~~
i=I,II.
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent Here and throughout,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{CR}
\rho_1=-1~~,~~\rho_0=0~~,~~\rho_{-1}=1.
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{The Faddeev-Zamolodchikov algebra}
Now, we are in the position to calculate the exchange relations of the type I
and type II vertex operators of $\A$ given in (\ref{VOX1}---\ref{VOX2}).
Firstly we bosonize the derivation operator $d$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{DER}
d=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}na_{-n}\omega_n-\frac{P^2}{2}~~.
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent One can easily check that this $d$ operator obeys the following
commutation relations :
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{DER1}
q^dX^{\pm}(z)q^{-d}=X^{\pm}(zq^{-1})~~,~~
q^d\Phi_i(z)q^{-d}=\Phi_i(zq^{-1})~~,~~
q^d\Psi_i(z)q^{-d}=\Psi_i(zq^{-1})~~,
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent as required.
Define
\begin{eqnarray*}
\oint dzf(z)=Res(f)=f_{-1} \ \ ,\ \ {\rm for \ \ formal\ \ series \ \
function\ \ } f(z)=\sum_{n\in Z}f_nz^{n} .
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent Then the Chevalley generators of $\A$ can be expressed
by the integrals,
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &e_1=\oint z^{-1}dzX^+(z),~~
f_1=\oint z^{-1}dz X^-(z), \\
& &e_0=K^{-2}\oint\oint dzw^{-1}dw~[X^-(w),X^-(z)]_{q},\\
& &f_0=\frac{1}{[4]_{q_1}}\oint\oint
z^{-2}dzw^{-1}dw~[X^+(z),X^+(w)]_{q^{-1}}.
\end{eqnarray*}
From the normal order relations in appendix A, one can also obtain the
integral expression of the vertex
operators defined in (\ref{VOX1}---\ref{VOX2})
\begin{eqnarray}
\Phi_0(z)&=&\{\frac{q^{-\frac{1}{2}}}{[2]_{q_1}}\}^{\frac{1}{2}}
\oint \frac{dw}{w}~\frac{(q^{-1}-q)}
{zq^3(1+\frac{zq^5}{w})(1+\frac{w}{zq^3})}
:\Phi_{-1}(z)X^{-}(w):,\\
\Phi_{1}(z)&=&\frac{1-q^2}{[2]_{q_1}}\oint \frac{dw_1}{w_1}
\oint \frac{dw}{w}~
\frac{(1-\frac{w}{w_1})\{w_1^2(1-\frac{w}{w_1q^2})
(1+\frac{wq}{w_1})(1+\frac{zq^5}{w_1})-zwq^2
(1+\frac{w_1}{zq^3})(1-\frac{wq^2}{w_1})(1+\frac{w_1q}{w})\}}
{z^3q^{12}(1+\frac{zq^5}{w_1})(1+\frac{wq}{w_1})
(1+\frac{w_1}{zq^3})
(1+\frac{w_1q^5}{w})
(1+\frac{w}{zq^5})
(1+\frac{w}{zq^3})}\nonumber\\
& &~~\times :\Phi_{-1}(z)X^-(w)X^-(w_1):,\\
\Psi_0(z)&=&\{\frac{q^{-\frac{1}{2}}}{[2]_{q_1}}\}^{\frac{1}{2}}
\oint \frac{dw}{w}~\frac{(1-q^2)}
{wq(1-\frac{w}{zq^2})(1-\frac{z}{w})}
:\Psi_{1}(z)X^{+}(w):,\\
\Psi_{-1}(z)&=&\frac{1-q^2}{[2]_{q_1}}\oint \frac{dw_1}{w_1}
\oint \frac{dw}{w}~
\frac{(1-\frac{w}{w_1})\{
(1-\frac{w_1}{wq^2})(1-\frac{z}{w_1})(1+\frac{w}{w_1q})w_1-
zq(1-\frac{w}{w_1q^2})(1-\frac{w_1}{zq^2})(1+\frac{w_1}{wq})\}}
{zwq(1-\frac{w}{zq^2})(1-\frac{z}{w})(1-\frac{w_1}{zq^2})(1+\frac{w_1}{wq})
(1-\frac{z}{w_1})(1+\frac{w}{w_1q})}\nonumber\\
& &~~\times~:\Psi_{1}(z)X^+(w)X^+(w_1):.
\end{eqnarray}
By the technique proposed in \cite{AJ} , using the above
integral expressions and the relations given in appendix A and appendix B,
and after tedious calcualtions , we can show that
the bosonic vertex operators defined in
(\ref{VOX1}---\ref{VOX2}) satisfy the Faddeev-Zamolodchikov (ZF)
algebra
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{ZF1}
& &\Phi_j(z_2)\Phi_i(z_1)=\sum_{kl}R^{I}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})^{k,l}_{i,j}
\Phi_k(z_1)\Phi_l(z_2) ,\\
& &\Psi^{*}_i(z_1)\Psi^{*}_j(z_2)=-\sum_{kl}R^{II}(\frac{z_1}{z_2})_{kl}^{ij}
\Psi^{*}_l(z_2)\Psi^{*}_k(z_1) ,\\
\label{ZF2}
& &\Psi^{*}_i(z_1)\Phi_j(z_2)=\tau(\frac{z_1}{z_2})
\Phi_j(z_2)\Psi^{*}_i(z_1)~~~.
\end{eqnarray}
And moreover,
the bosonic vertex operators define
in (\ref{VOX1}---\ref{VOX2}) have the following invertibility relations,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{DEF1}
&&\Phi_i(z)\Phi^{*}_j(z)=g\delta_{ij}(-q^{\frac{1}{2}})^{\rho_i},
~~ g=\frac{(q^6;q^6)(-q^5;q^6)}{(-q^3;q^6)(q^2;q^6)},\\
&&\sum_{k}(-q^{\frac{1}{2}})^{-\rho_k}\Phi^{*}_k(z)\Phi_k(z)=g,
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\Psi_i(z_1)\Psi^{*}_j(z_2)=\frac{\overline{g}\delta_{ij}
(-q^{\frac{1}{2}})^{-\rho_i}}{1-\frac{z_2}{z_1}}~ + ~{\rm
regular~~ term}~~~~~ {\rm when}~ z_1\longrightarrow z_2,\\
&&\overline{g}=\frac{q(q^4;q^6)(-q^3;q^6)}{(-q;q^6)(q^6;q^6)}~~.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
In the derivation of the above relations the following fact is helpful,
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &:\Phi_{-1}(z)\Phi_{-1}(-zq^{-3})X^{-}(zq^2)X^-(-zq^3)(zq^2)^{-1}
(-zq^3)^{-1}:=id,\\
& &:\Psi_{1}(z)\Psi_{1}(-zq^{3})X^{+}(zq^2)X^+(-zq^3)(zq^2)^{-1}
(-zq^3)^{-1}:=id.
\end{eqnarray*}
\subsection{Miki's construction of $\A$}
We generalize the Miki's construction to the twisted quantum affine algebra
$\A$ case.
Define
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &(L^+(z))^{j}_{i}=\Phi_i(zq^{\frac{1}{2}})
\Psi^{*}_j(zq^{-\frac{1}{2}}), \\
& &(L^-(z))^{j}_{i}=\Phi_i(zq^{-\frac{1}{2}})\Psi^{*}_j(zq^{\frac{1}{2}}).
\end{eqnarray*}
Then from the Faddeev-Zamolodchikov algebra in
(\ref{ZF1}---\ref{ZF2}) and the identity
\begin{eqnarray*}
-\frac{r(z)}{\overline{r}(z)}=
\frac{\tau(zq^{-1})}{\tau(z^{-1}q^{-1})}
=\frac{\tau(zq)}{\tau(z^{-1}q)}~~,
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent we can verify by straightforward computations that
the L-operators $L^{\pm}(z)$ give a
realization of the Reshetikhin-Semenov-Tian-Shansky (RS) algebra\cite{RS}
at level one in the twisted quantum affine algebra $\A$
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &R^U(\frac{z}{w})L^{\pm}_1(z)L^{\pm}_2(w)=
L^{\pm}_2(w)L^{\pm}_1(z)R^U(\frac{z}{w}),\\
& &R^U(\frac{z^+}{w^-})L^{+}_1(z)L^{-}_2(w)=
L^{-}_2(w)L^{+}_1(z)R^U(\frac{z^-}{w^+}) ,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $L^{\pm}_1(z)=L^{\pm}(z)\otimes 1$,
$L^{\pm}_2(z)=1\otimes L^{\pm}(z)$ and $z^{\pm}=zq^{\pm\frac{1}{2}}$.
We remark that the Drinfeld bases (\ref{DRB1}---\ref{DRB2}) of the twisted
quantum affine algebra
$\A$ can also be derived by using the twisted RS algbera and the
corresponding
Gauss decomposition\cite{YZP}.
\section{The Izergin-Korepin model }
In this section, we give a mathematical definition of the Izergin-Korepin
model on an infinite lattice.
\subsection{Space of states}
By means of the R-matrix (\ref{R}) of $\A$,
one can define the Izergin-Korepin model on the infinte lattice $\cdots
\otimes V\otimes V\otimes V\cdots$. Let $h$ be the operator on
$V\otimes V$ such that
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &PR(\frac{z_1}{z_2})=1+u h+\cdots,\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ u
\longrightarrow 0 ,\\
& &\ \ \ \ \ P:{\rm the\ \ \ \ permutation \ \ operator },\ \
e^{u}\equiv \frac{z_1}{z_2}.
\end{eqnarray*}
The Hamiltonian $H$ of the Izergin-Korepin model is defined by\cite{MN}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{HAM}
H=\sum_{l\in Z}h_{l+1,l}.
\end{eqnarray}
$H$ acts formally on the infinite tensor product,
\begin{equation}
\cdots V\otimes V\otimes V\cdots.\label{vvv}
\end{equation}
It can be easily checked that
\begin{eqnarray*}
[U'_q(A^{(2)}_2), H]=0,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $U'_q(A^{(2)}_2)$ is the subalgebra of $\A$ with the
derivation operator $d$ being dropped. So $U'_q(A^{(2)}_2)$ plays
the role of infinite dimensional {\it non-abelian symmetries} of
the Izergin-Korepin model on the infinite lattice.
Since the level-one vertex operators only exist between
$V(\Lambda_1)$ and itself , following \cite{DFJMN},
we can replace the infinite tensor product
(\ref{vvv}) by the level-0 $\A$-module,
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\bf H}={\rm Hom}(V(\Lambda_1),V(\Lambda_1))\cong V(\Lambda_1)\otimes
V(\Lambda_1)^{*b},
\end{eqnarray*}
where $V(\Lambda_1)$ is level-one irreducible highest weight
$\A$-module and $V(\Lambda_1)^{*b}$ is the dual module of $V(\Lambda_1)$.
By theorem 2, this homomorphism can be realized by applying the type
I vertex operators repeatedly.
So we shall make the (hypothetical) identification:
\begin{eqnarray*}
``{\bf \rm the \ \ space \ \ of \ \ physical \ \ states } " =
V (\Lambda_1)\otimes V(\Lambda_1)^{*b}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Namely, we take
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\bf H}\equiv End(V(\Lambda_1))
\end{eqnarray*}
as the space of states of the Izergin-Korepin
model on the infinite lattice.
The left action of $\A$ on ${\bf H}$ is defined by
\begin{eqnarray*}
x.f=\sum x_{(1)}\circ f\circ b(x_{(2)}),~~~
\forall x\in\A,~f\in {\bf H},
\end{eqnarray*}
where we have used notation $\Delta(x)=\sum x_{(1)}
\otimes x_{(2)}$. A linear operator of the form $O=A\otimes B
$ ($A\in End(V(\Lambda_1))$ and $B\in End(V(\Lambda_1)^{*b})$ )
operate on a state $f$ as :$f\longrightarrow A\circ f \circ B^{t}$.
Note that
${\bf H}$ has the unique canonical element which is refered as to
the physical vacuum \cite{JM} and denoted by
$|vac>$
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{VAC}
|vac>=\chi^{-\frac{1}{2}}(-q)^{-\hat{\rho}},
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent where $\chi$ coincide with the character of $\A$-module
$V(\Lambda_1)$
\begin{eqnarray*}
\chi=tr_{V(\Lambda_1)}(q^{-2\hat{\rho}})=q^{\frac{1}{4}}(1+q)
\prod_{n=1}^{\infty}(1+q^{6n-1})(1+q^{6n+1}).
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent The proof of the above character formula is given in appendix C.
\subsection{Local structure and local operators}
Following Jimbo and Miwa \cite{JM}, we use the type I
vertex operators and their variants to incorporate the local structure
into the space of physical states ${\bf H}$, that is to formulate the action
of local operators of the Izergin-Korepin model on
the infinite tensor product (\ref{vvv}) in terms of their actions on
${\bf H}$.
Using the isomorphisms (c.f. theorem 2)
\begin{eqnarray}
\Phi(z)&:&~V(\Lambda_1)\longrightarrow V(\Lambda_1)\otimes V_z,\nonumber\\
\Phi^{*,t}(-zq^3)&:&~V_z\otimes V(\Lambda_1)^{*b}\longrightarrow
V(\Lambda_1)^{*b},
\end{eqnarray}
were $t$ is the transposition on the quantum space,
we have the following identification:
\begin{eqnarray*}
V(\Lambda_1)\otimes V(\Lambda_1)^{*b}\stackrel{\sim}{\rightarrow}
V(\Lambda_1)\otimes V_z\otimes V(\Lambda_1)^{*b}\stackrel{\sim}{\rightarrow}
V(\Lambda_1)\otimes V(\Lambda_1)^{*b}.
\end{eqnarray*}
The resulting isomorphism can be identified with
the translation (or shift) operator defined by
\begin{eqnarray*}
T=g^{-1}\sum_i\Phi_i(1)\otimes \Phi_i^{*,t}(-q^3).
\end{eqnarray*}
Its inverse is given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
T^{-1}=g^{-1}\sum_i\Phi_i^{*}(1)\otimes \Phi_i^{t}(-q^{-3}).
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus we can define the local operators on $V$ as operators on
${\bf H}$ \cite{JM}. Let us label the tensor components from the middle as
$1,2,\cdots$ for the left half and as $0,-1,-2,\cdots$ for
the right half. The operators acting on the site 1 are defined by
\begin{eqnarray}
E_{i,j}\stackrel{def}{=}E^{(1)}_{i,j}=
g^{-1}(-q^{-\frac{1}{2}})^{-\rho_j}\Phi^{*}_i(1)\Phi_j(1)\otimes id.
\end{eqnarray}
In particular, we have spin operator $S_z$
\begin{eqnarray*}
S_z=g^{-1}\{
\Phi^*_1(1)\Phi_1(1)(-q^{-\frac{1}{2}})
+\Phi^*_0(1)\Phi_0(1)
-\Phi^*_{-1}(1)\Phi_{-1}(1)(-q^{-\frac{1}{2}})^{-1}\}
\otimes id.
\end{eqnarray*}
More generally we set
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{L}
E^{(n)}_{i,j}=T^{-(n-1)}E_{i,j}T^{n-1}\ \ \ \ (n\in Z).
\end{eqnarray}
Then, from the invertibility relations of the type I vertex operators
of $\A$, we can show that
the local operators $E^{(n)}_{ij}$ acting on
${\bf H}$ satisfy the following relations:
\begin{equation}
E^{(m)}_{i,j}E^{(n)}_{k,l}=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\delta_{jk}E^{(n)}_{i,l} & {\rm if}\ \ \ m=n \\
E^{(n)}_{k,l}E^{(m)}_{i,j}&{\rm if}\ \ \ m\ne n.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
Moreover, we can define transfer matrix of the Izergin-Korepin model on the
infinite lattice as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{TRM}
T(z)=g^{-1}\sum_{i}\Phi_i(z)\otimes \Phi^{*,t}_i(-zq^3)~~.
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent The commutativity
of the transfer matrix ,[T(z),T(w)]=0,
follows from the ZF algebraic relations (\ref{ZF1}).
The translation operator is $T=T(1)$, as expected.
Comparing with the definition of Hamiltonian of the Izergin-Korepin model
(\ref{HAM}), the action of such a Hamiltonian on {\bf H} can be
given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{NH}
H=z\frac{d}{dz}\{ ln T(z)\}|_{z=1}
\end{eqnarray}
As is expected from the physical point of view,
the vacuum vector
$|vac>$ is translationally invariant and singlet (i.e. belong
to the trivial representation of $\A$)
\begin{eqnarray}
T|vac>=|vac> ,\nonumber\\
x.|vac>=\epsilon(x)|vac>.
\end{eqnarray}
This is proved as follows.
\begin{eqnarray*}
T(z)|vac>
&=&\chi^{-\frac{1}{2}}g^{-1}\sum_i\Phi_i(z)(-q)^{-\hat{\rho}}
\Phi^{*}_i(-zq^3)\\
&\stackrel{def}{=}&\chi^{-\frac{1}{2}}g^{-1}\sum_i\Phi_i(z)
(-q)^{-3d}(-q^{\frac{1}{2}})^
{-\frac{1}{2}h_1}
\Phi^{*}_i(-zq^3)\\
&=&\chi^{-\frac{1}{2}}g^{-1}\sum_i\Phi_i(z)\Phi_i^{*}(zq^6)
(-q^{\frac{1}{2}})^{\rho_i}(-q)^{-\hat{\rho}}\\
&\stackrel{def}{=}&\chi^{-\frac{1}{2}}g^{-1}\sum_i
\Phi^*_{-i}(-zq^3)\Phi_{-i}(-zq^3)
(-q^{\frac{1}{2}})^{-\rho_{-i}}(-q)^{-\hat{\rho}}\\
&=&\chi^{-\frac{1}{2}}(-q)^{-\hat{\rho}}=|vac>,
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent where we have used the fact $\rho_i=-\rho_{-i}$ ,
(\ref{DEF}) and (\ref{DEF1}).Similary,
\begin{eqnarray*}
x.|vac>&=&\chi^{-\frac{1}{2}}\sum x_{(1)}(-q)^{\hat{\rho}}b(x_{(2)})\\
&=&\chi^{-\frac{1}{2}}\sum x_{(1)}S(x_{(2)})(-q)^{\hat{\rho}}\\
&=&\epsilon(x)|vac>
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent In the third line we have used the axioms of Hopf algebra
\cite{JM}
\begin{eqnarray*}
m\circ(id\otimes S)\circ \Delta=\epsilon.
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent This completes the proof.
For any local operator $O$ on ${\bf H}$ defined in (\ref{L}),
its vacuum expectation value
is given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
<vac|O|vac>\stackrel{def}{=}<O>=
\frac{tr_{V(\Lambda_1)}(q^{-2\hat{\rho}}O)}
{tr_{V(\Lambda_1)}(q^{-2\hat{\rho}})}=
\frac{tr_{V(\Lambda_1)}(q^{-6d-\frac{1}{2}h_1}O)}
{tr_{V(\Lambda_1)}(q^{-6d-\frac{1}{2}h_1})},
\end{eqnarray*}
where the normalization $<vac|vac>=1$ has been chosen. We shall
denote the correlator $<vac|O|vac>$ by $<O>$.
By the proposition 4 and the definition of the local operators $
E^{(n)}_{i,j}$ (\ref{L}), we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
<E^{(n)}_{i,j}>=<vac|T^{-(n-1)}E_{i,j}T^{(n-1)}|vac>=
<vac|E_{i,j}|vac>=<E_{i,j}>
\end{eqnarray*}
\subsection{The n-particle states and form factors}
In order to construct the general eigenstates of the transfer matrix of
the Izergin-Korepin model (\ref{TRM}), we employ the type
II vertex operators.Define the n-particle states
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{nst}
|\xi_n,\xi_{n-1},\cdot\cdot\cdot,\xi_1>
_{i_n,i_{n-1},\cdot\cdot\cdot,i_1}
&=&\overline{g}^{-\frac{n}{2}}
\Psi^*_{i_n}(\xi_n) \Psi^*_{i_{n-1}}(\xi_{n-1})
\cdot\cdot\cdot\Psi^*_{i_1}(\xi_1)|vac>\nonumber\\
&=&\overline{g}^{-\frac{n}{2}}
\chi^{-\frac{1}{2}}\Psi^*_{i_n}(\xi_n) \Psi^*_{i_{n-1}}(\xi_{n-1})
\cdot\cdot\cdot\Psi^*_{i_1}(\xi_1)(-q)^{-\hat{\rho}},
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent and its dual states
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{nst1}
{}_{i_n,i_{n-1},\cdot\cdot\cdot,i_1}
<\xi_n,\xi_{n-1},\cdot\cdot\cdot,\xi_1|
=\overline{g}^{-\frac{n}{2}}
\chi^{-\frac{1}{2}}(-q)^{-\hat{\rho}}
\Psi_{i_1}(\xi_1) \Psi_{i_2}(\xi_2)
\cdot\cdot\cdot\Psi_{i_n}(\xi_n).
\end{eqnarray}
Using the commutation relation of the type I vertex operators
,(\ref{ZF2}), one can verify that
\begin{eqnarray*}
T(z)|\xi_n,\cdot\cdot\cdot,\xi_1>_{i_n,i_{n-1},\cdot\cdot\cdot,i_1}
&=&g^{-1}\overline{g}^{-\frac{n}{2}}
\chi^{-\frac{1}{2}}\sum_i \Phi_i(z)
\Psi^*_{i_n}(\xi_n) \Psi^*_{i_{n-1}}(\xi_{n-1})
\cdot\cdot\cdot\Psi^*_{i_1}(\xi_1)(-q)^{-\hat{\rho}}\Phi^*_i(-zq^3)\\
&=&g^{-1}\overline{g}^{-\frac{n}{2}}
\chi^{-\frac{1}{2}}\sum_i \Phi_i(z)
\Psi^*_{i_n}(\xi_n) \Psi^*_{i_{n-1}}(\xi_{n-1})
\cdot\cdot\cdot\Psi^*_{i_1}(\xi_1)\Phi^*_i(zq^6)(-q^{\frac{1}{2}})^{\rho_i}
(-q)^{-\hat{\rho}}\\
&=&g^{-1}\overline{g}^{-\frac{n}{2}}
\chi^{-\frac{1}{2}}\sum_i \prod_{j=1}^{n}\tau(\xi_j/z)\Phi_i(z)
\Phi^*_i(zq^6)(-q^{\frac{1}{2}})^{\rho_i}
\Psi^*_{i_n}(\xi_n) \Psi^*_{i_{n-1}}(\xi_{n-1})\\
& &~~~~~~~\times\cdot\cdot\cdot\Psi^*_{i_1}(\xi_1)
(-q)^{-\hat{\rho}}\\
&=&\prod_{j=1}^{n}\tau(\xi_j/z)
|\xi_n,\cdot\cdot\cdot,\xi_1>_{i_n,i_{n-1},\cdot\cdot\cdot,i_1}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent Here we have used $\tau(zq^6)=\tau(z)$.Therefore the n-particle
states (\ref{nst}) are the eigenstates of transfer matrix $T(z)$. Likewise
for its dual states (\ref{nst1}). Hence, the Hamiltonian $H$ (\ref{NH}) on
the n-particle states are given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
H|\xi_n,\cdot\cdot\cdot,\xi_1>_{i_n,i_{n-1},\cdot\cdot\cdot,i_1}
=\sum_{j=1}^{n}\epsilon(\xi_j)
|\xi_n,\cdot\cdot\cdot,\xi_1>_{i_n,i_{n-1},\cdot\cdot\cdot,i_1},
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent where
\begin{eqnarray*}
\epsilon(z)=-z\frac{d}{z}ln\tau(z).
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent These results coincide with the energy of the elementary
excitations derived from the Bethe ansatz method\cite{VR}.
In much the same way as the correlation functions, the form
factors of a local operator $O$ of the form $O=A\otimes B$
can be given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
<vac|O|\xi_n,\cdot\cdot\cdot,\xi_1>_{i_n,i_{n-1},\cdot\cdot\cdot,i_1}
=\frac{\overline{g}^{-\frac{n}{2}}tr_{V(\Lambda_1)}((-q)^{-\hat{\rho}}A
\Psi^*_{i_n}(\xi_n) \Psi^*_{i_{n-1}}(\xi_{n-1})
\cdot\cdot\cdot\Psi^*_{i_1}(\xi_1)
(-q)^{-\hat{\rho}}B^{t})}
{tr_{V(\Lambda_1)}(q^{-2\hat{\rho}})}
\end{eqnarray*}
In particular , for the spin operator $S_z$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &<vac|S_z|\xi_n,\cdot\cdot\cdot,\xi_1>_{i_n,i_{n-1},\cdot\cdot\cdot,i_1}\\
& &~~~~=g^{-1}\frac{\overline{g}^{-\frac{n}{2}}tr_{V(\Lambda_1)}
(q^{-2\hat{\rho}}
\{\Phi^{*}_1(1)\Phi_1(1)(-q^{\frac{1}{2}})
+\Phi^{*}_0(1)\Phi_0(1)
-\Phi^{*}_{-1}(1)\Phi_{-1}(1)(-q^{\frac{1}{2}})^{-1}\}
\Psi^*_{i_n}(\xi_n) \Psi^*_{i_{n-1}}(\xi_{n-1})
\cdot\cdot\cdot\Psi^*_{i_1}(\xi_1))}
{tr_{V(\Lambda_1)}(q^{-2\hat{\rho}})}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\section{Correlation functions}
The aim of this section is to calculate $<E_{mn}>$.
The generalization to the calculation of the multi-point functions
and the form factors is straightforward.
Set
\begin{eqnarray*}
P^m_n(z_1,z_2|q)=
\frac{tr_{V(\Lambda_1)}(q^{-2\hat{\rho}}
\Phi^{*}_m(z_1)\Phi_n(z_2))}
{tr_{V(\Lambda_1)}(q^{-2\hat{\rho}})} ,
\end{eqnarray*}
then $<E_{mn}>=g^{-1}P^m_n(z,z|q)(-q^{\frac{1}{2}})^{-\rho_n}$.
Using the Clavelli-Shapiro technique\cite{CS} which we will present it in
appendix C, we get
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{P}
& &P^m_n(z_1,z_2|q)\stackrel{def}{=}\delta_{mn}P_m(z_1,z_2|q)\nonumber\\
& &~~~~=\frac{\delta_{mn}(C_{-1})^2(C^{(-)})^2}{\chi}G(-\frac{z_2q^3}{z_1})
\oint \frac{dw}{w}\oint\frac{dw_1}{w_1}
\theta(\frac{-z_1z_2q^5}{ww_1})I_m(z_1,z_2;w,w_1),
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent where $\theta (z)$ is the elliptic function,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\theta(z)\stackrel{def}{=}
\sum_{n\in Z}q^{3(n+\frac{1}{2})^2}z^n~~~,
\end{eqnarray*}
\begin{eqnarray*}
I_1(z_1,z_2;w,w_1)&=&
(\frac{-z_1z_2q^5}{ww_1})^{\frac{1}{2}}W_1(-\frac{wq^3}{z_1})
W_1(-\frac{w_1q^3}{z_1})
\{
\frac{w}{z_2q^4}W_1(\frac{w}{z_2})W_1(\frac{w_1}{z_2})H(\frac{w_1}{w})
+\frac{z_2q^5}{w}W_2(\frac{z_2}{w_1})W_2(\frac{z_2}{w})H(\frac{w}{w_1})\\
& & ~~~~~~~
-qW_2(\frac{z_2}{w})W_1(\frac{w_1}{z_2})H(\frac{w_1}{w})
-W_2(\frac{z_2}{w_1})W_1(\frac{w}{z_2})H(\frac{w}{w_1})\}~~~,\\
I_0(z_1,z_2;w,w_1)&=&
(\frac{-z_1z_2q^5}{ww_1})^{\frac{1}{2}}W_1(-\frac{wq^3}{z_1})
W_2(\frac{z_2}{w})H(\frac{w_1}{w})
\{\frac{z_1q^2}{w}W_2(-\frac{z_1}{wq^3})W_1(\frac{w_1}{z_2})
-\frac{z_2q^5}{w_1}W_1(-\frac{w_1q^3}{z_1})W_2(\frac{z_2}{w_1})\\
& & ~~~~~~~
+W_1(-\frac{wq^3}{z_1})W_1(\frac{w_1}{z_2})
+q^2(\frac{-z_1z_2q^5}{ww_1})^{\frac{1}{2}}
W_2(-\frac{z_1}{wq^3})W_2(\frac{z_2}{w_1})\}~~~,\\
I_{-1}(z_1,z_2;w,w_1)&=&
-(\frac{-z_1z_2q^5}{ww_1})^{\frac{3}{2}}W_2(\frac{z_2}{w})
W_2(\frac{z_2}{w_1})
\{
qW_2(-\frac{z_1}{wq^3})W_1(-\frac{w_1q^3}{z_1})H(\frac{w_1}{w})
+W_2(-\frac{z_1}{w_1q^3})W_1(-\frac{wq^3}{z_1})H(\frac{w}{w_1})\\
& &~~~~+\frac{w}{z_1q}W_1(-\frac{wq^3}{z_1})W_1(-\frac{w_1q^3}{z_1})
H(\frac{w_1}{w})
+\frac{z_1q^2}{w}W_2(-\frac{z_1}{w_1q^3})W_2(-\frac{z_1}{wq^3})
H(\frac{w}{w_1})\}
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent and the functions $G(z)$, $W_1(z)$, $W_2(z)$, $H(z)$ and
the constant $C_{-1}$, $C^{(-)}$ are given in appendix D (\ref{CT1}---
\ref{CT2}).
In particular,the correlation function of spin operator $S_z$
is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
<vac|S_z|vac>
=P_1(z,z|q)(-q^{-\frac{1}{2}})+P_0(z,z|q)
-P_{-1}(z,z|q)(-q^{-\frac{1}{2}})^{-1}
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent where $P_m(z_1,z_2|q)$ are defined in (\ref{P}).
We now derive the difference equations satisfied by these one-point
functions.
Noting (\ref{DER1}) and using the cyclicity of trace,
we get the difference equations of $P_m(z_1,z_2|q)$
\begin{eqnarray*}
P_m(z_1,z_2|q)
&=&\chi^{-1}tr_{V(\Lambda_1)}(q^{-6d-\frac{1}{2}h_1}
\Phi^*_m(z_1)\Phi_m(z_2))\\
&=&\chi^{-1}tr_{V(\Lambda_1)}(q^{-6d-\frac{1}{2}h_1}
\Phi_{-m}(-z_1q^{-3})\Phi_m(z_2))\\
&=&\chi^{-1}\sum_{n}R^I(z_2,-z_1q^{-3})^{n,-n}_{m,-m}
tr_{V(\Lambda_1)}(q^{-6d-\frac{1}{2}h_1}
\Phi_n(z_2)\Phi^*_n(z_1))\\
&=&\chi^{-1}
\sum_{n}q^{-\rho_n}R^I(z_2,-z_1q^{-3})^{n,-n}_{m,-m}
tr_{V(\Lambda_1)}
(\Phi_n(z_2q^6)q^{-6d-\frac{1}{2}h_1}
\Phi^*_n(z_1))\\
&=&\sum_{n}q^{-\rho_n}R^I(z_2,-z_1q^{-3})^{n,-n}_{m,-m}P_n(z_1,z_2q^6|q)~~.
\end{eqnarray*}
\section*{Acknowledgements}
W.L.Yang would like to thank Prof.Fan for fruitful
discussions.Y.-Z.Zhang thanks Australian Research
Council
IREX programme for an Asia-Pacific Link Award and Institute of Modern
Physics of Northwest University for hospitality. The financial support
from the National Natural Science Foundation of China
and Australian Research
Council large, small, QEII fellowship
grants is also gratefully acknowledge.
\section*{Appendix A.}
In this apppendix, we give the normal order relations of fundmental bosonic
fields:
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &\Phi_{-1}(z)\Phi_{-1}(w)=zq^4g(w/z):\Phi_{-1}(z)\Phi_{-1}(w):~~,\\
& &\Phi_{-1}(z)X^{-}(w)=\frac{1}{zq^4(1+\frac{w}{zq^3})}
:\Phi_{-1}(z)X^-(w):~~,\\
& &X^-(w)\Phi_{-1}(z)=\frac{1}{w(1+\frac{zq^5}{w})}
:\Phi_{-1}(z)X^-(w):~~,\\
& &\Phi_{-1}(z)X^{+}(w)=(zq^4+w):\Phi_{-1}(z)X^+(w):X^+(w)\Phi_{-1}(z)~~,\\
& &\Psi_{1}(z)\Psi_{1}(w)=-zq\overline{g}(w/z):
\Psi_{1}(z)\Psi_{1}(w):~~,\\
& &\Psi_{1}(z)\Phi_{-1}(w)=-(zq)^{-1}h_1(w/z):
\Psi_{1}(z)\Phi_{-1}(w):~~,\\
& &\Phi_{-1}(z)\Psi_{1}(w)=(zq^4)^{-1}h_2(w/z):
\Phi_{-1}(z)\Psi_{1}(w):~~,\\
& &\Psi_{1}(z)X^{-}(w)=(w-zq):\Phi_{-1}(z)X^-(w):~~,~~
X^{-}(w) \Psi_{1}(z), \\
& &X^+(w)\Psi_{1}(z)=\frac{1}{w-z}
:\Psi_{1}(z)X^+(w):~~,\\
& &\Psi_{1}(z)X^+(w)=-\frac{1}{zq(1-\frac{w}{zq^2})}
:\Psi_{1}(z)X^+(w):~~,
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent where
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &g(z)=\frac{(-q^3z;q^6)(q^2z;q^6)}{(q^6z;q^6)(-q^5z;q^6)}~~,~~
\overline{g}(z)=\frac{(-qz;q^6)(z;q^6)}{(q^4z;q^6)(-q^3z;q^6)},\\
& &h_1(z)=\frac{(-q^8z;q^6)(q^7z;q^6)}{(q^5z;q^6)(-q^4z;q^6)}~~,~~
h_2(z)=\frac{(-q^2z;q^6)(qz;q^6)}{(q^{-1}z;q^6)(-q^{-2}z;q^6)},
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent and
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &X^+(z)X^+(w)=\frac{(z-w)(z-wq^{-2})}{z+wq^{-1}}:X^+(z)X^+(w):~~,\\
& &X^-(z)X^-(w)=\frac{(z-w)(z-wq^{2})}{z+wq}:X^-(z)X^-(w):~~,\\
& &X^+(z)X^-(w)=\frac{z+w}{(z-wq)(z-wq^{-1})}:X^+(z)X^+(w):~~,\\
& &X^-(w)X^+(z)=\frac{z+w}{(w-zq)(w-zq^{-1})}:X^+(z)X^+(w):~~.
\end{eqnarray*}
\section*{Appendix B. }
By means of the bosonic realiztion of $\A$, the integral expressions of
the vertex operators and the technique given in Ref.\cite{AJ}, one
can check the following relations
\begin{itemize}
\item For the type I vertex operators
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &[\Phi_1(z),f_1]_{q^{-1}}=0,\ \ \Phi_1(z)=\frac{1}{\alpha}
[\Phi_0(z),f_1],\ \
\Phi_0(z)=\frac{\alpha}{[2]_{q_1}}[\Phi_{-1}(z),f_1]_q,\\
& &[\Phi_1(z),e_1]=\frac{[2]_{q_1}}{\alpha}t_1\Phi_0(z),
\ \ [\Phi_0(z),e_1]=\alpha t_1\Phi_{-1}(z),\ \
[\Phi_{-1}(z),e_1]=0,\\
& &\Phi_1(z)t_1=qt_1\Phi_1(z),\ \
\Phi_0(z)t_1=t_1\Phi_0(z),\ \
\Phi_{-1}(z)t_1=q^{-1}t_1\Phi_{-1}(z),\\
\end{eqnarray*}
where we take $\alpha=\{[2]_{q_1}q^{-\frac{1}{2}}\}^{\frac{1}{2}}$.
\item For the type II vertex operators
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &\Psi_{-1}(z)=\frac{1}{\alpha}[\Psi_0(z),e_1],
\ \ \Psi_0(z)=\frac{\alpha}{[2]_{q_1}}[\Psi_1(z),e_1]_q,\ \
[\Psi_{-1}(z),e_1]_{q^{-1}}=0,\\
& &[\Psi_1(z),f_1]=0,\ \ [\Psi_0(z),f_1]=\alpha t_1^{-1}\Psi_1(z),\ \
[\Psi_{-1}(z),f_1]=\frac{[2]_{q_1}}{\alpha}t_1^{-1}\Psi_0(z),\\
& &\Psi_1(z)t_1=qt_1\Psi_1(z),\ \ \Psi_0(z)t_1=t_1\Psi_0(z),
\ \
\Psi_{-1}(z)t_1=q^{-1}t_1\Psi_{-1}(z).
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{itemize}
\section*{Appendix C.}
In computating the correlation
functions, one encounters the trace of the form
\begin{eqnarray*}
tr(x^{-d}e^{\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}A_{m}a_{-m}}
e^{\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}B_{m}a_{m})}f^{P})~~~~,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $A_{m}$ ,$ B_m$ and $f$ are all some
coefficients.
We can calculate the contributions
from the oscillators modes and the zero modes {\it separately}.
The trace over the oscillator modes can be carried out as follows
by using the Clavelli-Shapiro
technique \cite{CS}.
Let us introduce the extra oscillators
$a'_m$ which commutate with $a_m$.
$a'_m$ satisfy the same commutation relations as those
satisfied by $a_m$.
Introduce the operators
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &H_m=\frac{a_m\otimes 1}{1-x^m}+1\otimes a'_{-m}~~~,~~~m>0~~~,\\
& &H_m=a_m\otimes 1+\frac{1\otimes a'_{-m}}{x^m-1}~~~~,~~~m<0~~~,
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent which act on the space of the tensor Fock spaces of $\{a_m\}$ and
$\{a'_m\}$.
Then for any bosonic operator $O(a_m)$, one can show
\begin{eqnarray*}
tr(x^{-d}O(a_m))=\frac{
<0|O(H_m)|0>
}{\prod _{n=1}(1-x^n)}
\end{eqnarray*}
providing that $d$ satisfies the derivation properties (\ref{DRB1}).
We write $<0|O(H_m)|0>\equiv <<O(a_m)>>$. Then by the
Wick theorem, one obtains
\begin{eqnarray*}
& &<<\Phi_{-1}(z)\Phi_{-1}(w)>>=C_{-1}C_{-1}G(w/z)~~,\\
& &<<\Phi_{-1}(z)X^-(w)>>=C_{-1}C^{(-)}W_1(w/z)~~,\\
& &<<X^-(z)\Phi_{-1}(w)>>=C_{-1}C^{(-)}W_2(w/z)~~,\\
& &<<X^-(z)X^-(w)>>=C^{(-)}C^{(-)}H(w/z)~~,
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent where
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{CT1}
& &C_{-1}=\frac{\{-q^9\}\{q^8\}}{\{q^{12}\}\{-q^{11}\}}~~~,~~~
C^{(-)}=\frac{(q^6;q^6)(q^8;q^6)}{(-q^7;q^6)}~~,\\
& &G(z)=\frac{ \{-q^3z\} \{q^2z\}\{-q^9z^{-1}\}\{q^8z^{-1}\}}
{ \{q^6z\} \{-q^5z\}\{q^{12}z^{-1}\}\{-q^{11}z^{-1}\}}~~~,\\
& &W_1(z)=\frac{(-q^{11}z^{-1};q^6)}{(-q^{-3}z;q^6)}~~~,~~
W_2(z)=\frac{(-q^{3}z^{-1};q^6)}{(-q^{5}z;q^6)}~~~,~~\\
\label{CT2}
& &H(z)=\frac{(q^2z;q^6)(z;q^6)(q^8z^{-1};q^6)(q^6z^{-1};q^6)}
{(-qz;q^6)(-q^7z^{-1};q^6)}~~~.
\end{eqnarray}
Now , we use the above technique to calculate the character of
$\A$-module $V(\Lambda_1)$
\begin{eqnarray*}
\chi&=&tr_{V(\Lambda_1)}(q^{-2\hat{\rho}})=
tr_{F_1}(q^{-6d}q^{-\frac{1}{2}h_1})
=tr_{F_1}(q^{-6d}q^{-P})\\
&=&\frac{1}{\prod_{n=1}^{\infty}(1-q^{6n})}
\sum_{n\in Z}q^{3(n+\frac{1}{2})^2}q^{-(n+\frac{1}{2})}\\
&=&q^{\frac{1}{4}}(1+q)\prod_{n=1}^{\infty}(1+q^{6n-1})(1+q^{6n+1})~~~.
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent We have used the Jacobi tripe product identity\cite{Mu}
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sum_{n\in Z}q^{(n+v-\frac{1}{2})^2}t^n
=q^{\frac{1}{12}}q^{v^2-v+\frac{1}{6}}
\prod_{n=1}^{\infty}(1-q^{2n})(1+q^{2(n+v-1)}t) (1+q^{2(n-v)}t^{-1})
\end{eqnarray*}
|
\section{Introduction}
Currently, relativistic nucleus-nucleus collisions are used to
study the characteristics of nuclear matter under extreme
conditions. One of the goals in this study is to search for the
quark-gluon plasma (QGP), which is believed to be formed at high
temperature and/or density \cite{Sta92,Har96,QM96,Hwa95} during a
nucleus-nucleus collision at high energies. Photons arising from
the electromagnetic interactions of the constituents of the plasma
will provide information on the properties of the plasma at the
time of their production \cite{Shu80}. Since photons hardly
reinteract in the produced medium, they form a relatively `clean'
probe to study a QGP state. The possible detection, in near
future, of the photon produced in the QGP phase in relativistic
heavy-ion collider (RHIC) and/or large hadron collider (LHC) will
be of great interest in probing such a QGP state, but presently
that might not be the case at CERN SPS energies
\cite{Hwa85,McL85,Kaj86,Kap91,Sri92,WA80,WA98,WA9897,Xio92,Hun96}.
Photons measured after the subtraction of the photons from meson
decays are usually called ``direct photon''. The direct photons
could be produced from the interaction of matter in the QGP phase,
a mixed QGP and hadron phase, and a pure hadron phase
\cite{Sta92,Har96}. The thermal direct photon and prompt direct
photon are referred to the photons produced from the partonic QCD
processes in the QGP phase and in the hadron phase, respectively.
However, the photons produced in the hadronic interactions are
sorted into hadronic direct photon, although the prompt direct
photon is also originated from hadrons. Different processes give
rise to photons in different (transverse) momentum regions. Of
course, photons, which might show up in the low transverse
momentum region, extending to the region of intermediate
transverse momentum of 1 $-$3 GeV/c, from a QGP are specially
important. Photons with energies up to 2 GeV can come from the
decay of $\pi^0$ and $\eta$ resonances as well as from $\rho,
\omega, \eta'$, and $a_1$, and from the interaction of hadron
matter via $\pi \rho \rightarrow \gamma \pi$ and $\pi\pi
\rightarrow \gamma \rho$ reactions (i.e., hadronic direct photons)
\cite{Xio92,Hun96,Ste96,Li97}. If a hot quark-gluon plasma is
formed initially, clear signal of photon from the plasma could be
visible by examining photons with $p_T$ in the region of 2$-$3
GeV/c \cite{Kaj86,Kap91,Sri92}. However, photons in this
transverse momentum region could also be produced in the collision
of a parton from the projectile nucleon with another parton from
the target nucleon, i.e., prompt direct photon. Such a
contribution must be subtracted in order to infer the net photons
from the QGP source, i.e., thermal direct photon.
WA80 experimental data of transverse momentum dependent upper
limits of direct photon in 200A GeV/c S + Au central
collisions \cite{WA80} initiate theoretical interests extensively
\cite{Hun96,Li97,Sri94,Dum94,Dum98,Son98,Sol97}. Refs.
\cite{Sri94} and \cite{Dum94} concluded that WA80 data can only be
understood if a scenario with QGP phase transition is assumed.
However, in Ref. \cite{Li97} the single photon production has been
calculated using relativistic hadronic transport model and taking
into account self-consistently the change of hadron mass in dense
matter. It was found there that the spectra with either free or
in-medium meson mass do not exceed the WA80 upper limits, although
the experimental transverse momentum distribution in low $p_T$
region was not reproduced quite well. Ref. \cite{Hun96} calculated
the direct photon production using the rate theory (thermal model)
and the hydrodynamical model for space-time evolution of
temperature, their results were below WA80 upper limits.
Recently, WA93 measured the invariant differential
cross section distribution of inclusive photons at low transverse
momentum in S + Au central collisions at 200A GeV/c \cite{WA93}.
The results indicated that the photon yields at low transverse
momentum are much enhanced in comparing with the results of
photons from hadron decays measured by WA80 and with the VENUS
4.12 calculations.
We have already studied in details the photon production from QCD
hard processes in high transverse momentum region in
nucleon-nucleon, nucleon-nucleus, and nucleus-nucleus collisions
with the effects of parton intrinsic transverse momentum and the
contributions of next-to-leading-order Feynman diagram corrections
\cite{Won98}. The results show that the inclusion of intrinsic
transverse momentum of parton leads to an enhancement of photon
production cross section and the enhancement increases as
$\sqrt{s}$ decrease. Such an enhancement is an important
consideration in the region of photon momenta under investigation
in high energy heavy-ion collisions.
In this paper, we study the low transverse momentum distribution
of both inclusive photons and direct photons produced in S + Au
central collisions at 200A GeV/c using a hadron and string
cascade model, JPCIAE \cite{Sa99,Sa99b}. We have considered
consistently the photons from different sources, such as the
partonic QCD scattering, the hadronic final-state interaction, and
the hadron decay. Our results reproduce successfully both the WA80
data of direct photon upper limits and the WA93 data of low
transverse momentum inclusive photons. We have also compared the
contributions from different hadron decays in inclusive photon
production. The effects of the partonic QCD processes and the
hadronic final-state interactions on direct photon production are
discussed as well.
\section{BRIEF DESCRIPTION FOR THE MODEL}
A hadron and string cascade model, JPCIAE, was proposed to
describe the relativistic nuclear collision \cite{Sa99,Sa99b}. In
JPCIAE the simulation is performed in the laboratory system. The
origin of coordinate space is positioned at the center of the
target nucleus and the beam direction is taken as the $z$ axis. As
for the origin of time it is set at the moment when the distance
between the projectile and target nuclei along z direction is
equal to zero (the collision time can be negative).
A colliding nucleus is depicted as a sphere with radius $\sim$
1.05 A$^{1/3}$ ($A$ refers to the atomic mass number of this
nucleus) in its rest frame. The spatial distribution of nucleons
in this frame is sampled randomly due to the Woods-Saxon
distribution. The projectile nucleons are assumed to have an
incident momentum and the target nucleons are at rest. That means
the Fermi motion in a nucleus and the mean field of a nuclear
system are here neglected due to relativistic energy in question.
For the spatial distribution of the projectile nucleons the
Lorentz contraction is taken into account. A formation time is
given to each particle and a particle starts to scatter with
others after it is ``born''. The formation time is a sensitive
parameter in this model, see Ref. \cite{Sa99} for the details.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centerline{
\epsfig{file=pwa80.ps,width=8cm}
}
\caption[wa80]{
Transverse momentum distribution of direct photon (in rapidity
range of 2.1 $\leq$y$\leq$ 2.9) produced in S + Au central
collisions at 200A GeV/c. The arrows stand for WA80 upper limits
at the 90\% confidence level \cite{WA80}, the solid circles refer
to the results of JPCIAE, and the dashed curve are the results of
\cite{Li97}. \label{wa80}}
\end{figure}
A collision time is calculated according to the requirement that
the minimum approaching distance of a colliding pair should be
less than or equal to the value $\sqrt{\sigma_{tot}/\pi}$, where
$\sigma_{tot}$ is the total cross section of the colliding pair.
The minimum distance is calculated in the center of mass system
(C.M.S.) frame of the two colliding particles. If these two
particles are moving towards each other at the time when both of
them are ``born'', the minimum distance is defined as the distance
perpendicular to the momenta of both particles. If the two
particles are moving back to back, the minimum distance is defined
as the distance at the moment when both of them are ``born''. All
the possible collision pairs are then ordered into a collision
time sequence, called the collision time list. The initial
collision time list is composed of the colliding nucleon pairs, in
each pair here one partner is from the projectile nucleus and the
other from the target nucleus.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centerline{
\epsfig{file=pwa802.ps,width=8cm}
}
\caption[wa802]{
The solid curve is the theoretical transverse momentum distribution
of direct photons (i.e. the inclusive photons after subtraction of
$\pi^0$ and $\eta$ decay photons) in full rapidity space produced
in S + Au central collisions at 200A GeV/c. The full triangles,
the open squares, the full squares, and the open circles are the
$\rho$, $\Delta$, $\eta'$, and $\phi$ and $\omega$ decay photons,
respectively. The photons from hadronic interactions, cf. Eqs.
\ref{hh}, and \ref{hh1} are shown by full circles.
\label{wa802}}
\end{figure}
Then the pair with the least collision time in the initial
collision time list is selected to start the first collision. If
the c.m.s. energy, $\sqrt{s}$, of this colliding pair (a hadron-
hadron collision) is larger than or equal to $\sim$ 4 GeV, two
string states are formed and PYTHIA is called to produce the final
state hadrons (scattered state). Otherwise no string state is
formed and the conventional two-body scattering process
\cite{Cu81,Be88,Sa98} is executed. After the scattering of this
colliding pair, both the particle list and the collision time list
are then updated and they are now not only composed of the
projectile and target nucleons but also the produced hadrons.
Repeat the previous steps to perform the second collision, the
third collision, $\cdots$, until the collision time list is empty,
i.e. no more collision occurs in the system. Finally, we consider
the decay of the unstable particles.
In PYTHIA we consider not only the low-$p_T$ processes but also
the high-$p_T$ processes of the particle production
\cite{Sj94,And81}. Many partonic QCD scattering processes
including photon production have been considered. A user is
allowed to run the program with any desired subset of those
processes.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centerline{
\epsfig{file=pwa93.ps,width=8cm}
}
\caption[]{
The transverse momentum distribution of inclusive photons in
S + Au central collisions at 200A GeV/c. The solid circles
represent WA93 data, the open circles refers to the results of
JPCIAE normalized to the experimental data at $p_T$ = 0.5 GeV/c,
the open triangles are the results of VENUS 4.12 normalized
to the experimental data at $p_T$ = 0.3 GeV/c and the dotted
histogram is WA80 decay photons.
\label{wa93}}
\end{figure}
We have inspected this model and the corresponding event
generator, JPCIAE, by comparing model predictions with the NA35
data of the charge multiplicity, the rapidity and the transverse
momentum distributions of the negative charge particles (h$^-$)
and the participant protons in $p p$, $p A$, and $A B$ collisions
\cite{Sa99}. The agreements between theory and experiment are
reasonably good. The model has explained successfully the $J/\psi$
suppression in $p A$ and $A B$ (including $Pb Pb$) as well
\cite{Sa99,Sa99b}.
\section{RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS}
We have studied the photon production in S + Au central collisions
at 200A GeV/c using JPCIAE model. Following partonic QCD
scattering processes with photon emission were selected
\begin{eqnarray}\label{py}
f_i + \bar{f}_i &\rightarrow & g + \gamma ,\\
f_i + \bar{f}_i &\rightarrow & \gamma + \gamma ,\\
f_i + g &\rightarrow & f_i + \gamma ,\\
g + g &\rightarrow & \gamma + \gamma ,\\
g + g &\rightarrow & g + \gamma ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $f_i$ refers to the quark with $i$ flavor and both
low-$p_T$ and high-$p_T$ contributions are included. The
hadronic photon production reactions
\begin{equation}\label{hh}
\pi + \pi \rightarrow \rho + \gamma ,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{hh1}
\pi + \rho \rightarrow \pi + \gamma ,
\end{equation}
were taken into account as well. For simplicity, the isospin
averaged parameterization formulas \cite{Kap91,Li97} were used for
the relevant cross sections here. Of course, the hadron decays,
such as $\pi^0$, $\eta$, $\rho$, $\omega$, $\eta'$, $a_1$,
$\Delta$, etc. were included as well.
The results of the transverse momentum distribution of direct
photons (i.e., the inclusive photons after subtraction of $\pi^0$
and $\eta$ decay photons) produced in a rapidity range of 2.1
$\leq$ y $\leq$ 2.9 in central S + Au collisions at 200A GeV/c are
given in Figure \ref{wa80}. In this figure the arrows stand for WA80
upper limits at the 90\% confidence level \cite{WA80}, the solid
circles refer to the results of JPCIAE calculated with the same
centrality and rapidity cuts as WA80, and the dashed curve represents
results of \cite{Li97}. One sees from this figure that in comparing
with the WA80 data the results of JPCIAE is somewhat better than
Ref.\cite{Li97}, in low $p_T$ region especially. That might be
attributed to the contributions from partonic QCD processes
(low-$p_T$ processes) and from emission of photons off quarks and
leptons in shower. In addition, JPCIAE model is also more
self-consistent than one used in \cite{Li97} where the results of
RQMD has to be an input of hadronic transport simulation.
The JPCIAE results of transverse momentum distribution of direct
photons in full rapidity space produced in central S + Au collisions
at 200A GeV/c are given in Figure \ref{wa802} as solid curve.
In this figure the full triangles, the open squares, the
full squares, and the open circles are the $\rho$, $\Delta$, $\eta'$,
and $\phi$ and $\omega$ decay photons, respectively. The photons
from hadronic interactions, cf. Eqs. \ref{hh}, and \ref{hh1} , are
shown by full circles. From Fig. \ref{wa802} we can see that at
low transverse momentum region the sum of above decay photons and
the photons from hadronic interactions is far below the direct
photons. That indicates the prompt direct photon is visible at
low transverse momentum region in the case of no QGP formation.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centerline{
\epsfig{file=pwa932.ps,width=8cm}
}
\caption[wa932]{
The transverse momentum distributions of photons in central
collisions S + Au at 200A GeV/c. The solid, the long-dashed, the
dotted, the dashed, and the dot-dashed curves represent the
inclusive photons, the $\pi^0$ decay, the $\Delta$ decay, the
$\eta$ and $\eta'$ decays, and the $\rho$ decay photons,
respectively. \label{wa932}}
\end{figure}
After WA80 measured the upper limits of direct photon in S + Au
central collisions at 200A GeV/c, WA93 measured further the
low transverse momentum distribution of inclusive photons for the
same reaction system. WA93 data (solid circles with error bar)
are compared with the WA80 results of decay photons (dotted
histogram) and with the theoretical calculations of VENUS 4.12
(open triangles, normalized to the experimental data at $p_T$ =
0.3 GeV/c)) in Figure \ref{wa93}. In this figure the open circle
are the results of JPCIAE normalized to the experimental data at
$p_T$ = 0.5 GeV/c. From this figure one knows that the WA93 datum
point below $p_T$ = 0.1 GeV/c is distinctly larger than the WA80
decay photons and the VENUS 4.12 results. However, JPCIAE
reproduces this WA93 datum point and others successfully due
to the contributions from partonic QCD processes (low-$p_T$
processes) and from emission of photons off quarks and leptons
in shower were taken into account in JPCIAE calculations.
We have calculated also the transverse momentum distributions of
different decay photons in S + Au central collisions at 200A GeV
/c using JPCIAE model, as shown in Fig. \ref{wa932}. In this
figure the solid, the long-dashed, the dotted, the dashed, and the
dot-dashed curves represent inclusive photons, the $\pi^0$ decay,
the $\Delta$ decay, the $\eta$ and $\eta'$ decay, and the $\rho$
decay photons, respectively. The results indicate that the $\pi^0$
decay photons are absolutely dominant in the production of
inclusive photons. The contributions from $\eta$, $\eta'$, and
$\rho$ decay and even from $\Delta$ decay are much less than one
from the $\pi^0$ decay, which accounts for nearly 98.8 $\%$ of
total decay photons.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centerline{
\epsfig{file=ppi0.ps,width=8cm}
}
\caption[pi0]{
The rescattering effects to the $\pi^0$ production in central S +
Au collisions at 200A GeV/c. The solid and the dashed curves are
the results with and without rescattering, respectively.
\label{pi0}}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{pi0} shows the rescattering effect to the $\pi^0$
production in S + Au central collisions at 200A GeV/c. In this
figure the transverse momentum distributions of $\pi^0$ with and
without rescattering are shown, respectively, by the solid and the
dashed curves. The total neutral pion yield with rescattering is
nearly twice of the one without rescattering. In the high
transverse momentum region the effect of rescattering leads
$\pi^0$ yield increasing nearly a factor of 1.5 . This increasing
factor is even bigger in the low transverse momentum region. The
$\pi^0$ yield with rescattering at $p_T$ = 0.05 GeV/c is about 2.4
times of the one without rescattering. The enhancement of $\pi^0$
yield due to rescattering also responds to the inclusive photon
production enhancement at low transverse momentum.
In summary, we have used the hadron and string cascade model,
JPCIAE, to study the photon production in 200A GeV/c S + Au
central collisions. The model takes into account photon production
from the partonic QCD process, the hadronic final-state
interaction, and the hadron decay and deals with them consistently.
The results of JPCIAE reproduce successfully both the WA80 data of
transverse momentum dependent upper limits of the direct photon
and the WA93 data of inclusive photon low transverse momentum
distribution. We have compared the contributions from different
hadron decays and the results show that $\pi^0$ is much dominant
in the inclusive photon production. Therefore $\pi^0$
rescattering plays an important role in low transverse momentum
distribution of inclusive photon. The partonic QCD processes
(low-$p_T$ processes) and the photon emission off quarks and leptons
in shower are quite important in transverse momentum distribution
at low $p_T$ region both for inclusive photon and direct photon.
\section{ACKNOWLEDGMENTS}
We would like to thank G. Q. Li for supply us the isospin averaged
parameterization formulas of hadronic direct photon production cross
sections and for discussions. Many thanks to T. Sj\"{o}strand for
detailed instructions in using PYTHIA. This work was supported by
national Natural Science Foundation of China and Nuclear Industry
Foundation of China.
|
\section{Introduction}
The transition from string theory to the standard model can
be characterized in terms of a hierarchy of supersymmetries:
from $N=8$ to $N=0$. These supersymmetries must be
spontaneously broken, either all at once, to $N=0$, or
partially, first to $N=1$ (or higher) and then to $N=0$.
For phenomenological applications of weak-scale supersymmetry,
one would like to construct the effective field theory that
describes the breaking of $N=8$ to $N=1$. In this paper we
will focus on a simpler case, that of $N=2$ broken to $N=1$.
We will construct a set of effective supergravity theories
that contain an unbroken, linearly realized $N=1$ supersymmetry,
as well as a spontaneously broken, nonlinearly realized, $N=2$.
Heuristically, it might seem impossible to partially break
$N=2$ to $N=1$. The argument runs as follows. Start with
the $N=2$ supersymmetry algebra
\begin{eqnarray}
\{ Q_\alpha,\,\bar
Q_{\dot\alpha} \} &\ =\ & 2\, \sigma^m_{
\alpha\dot\alpha}\,P_m \nonumber \\
\{ S_\alpha,\,\bar
S_{\dot\alpha} \} &=& 2\, \sigma^m_{
\alpha\dot\alpha}\,P_m\ ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $Q_\alpha$ and its conjugate $\bar Q_{\dot\alpha}$ denote the
first, unbroken supersymmetry, and $S_\alpha$, $\bar S_{\dot\alpha}$
the second. Suppose that one supersymmetry is not broken, so
\begin{equation}
Q\, |0\rangle \ =\ \bar Q\, |0\rangle\ =\ 0\ .
\end{equation}
Because of the supersymmetry algebra, this implies that the Hamiltonian
also annihilates the vacuum,
\begin{equation}
H\, |0\rangle \ =\ 0\ .
\end{equation}
Then, according to the supersymmetry algebra,
\begin{equation}
(\bar S S + S \bar S)\, |0\rangle\ =\ 0\ .
\label{SSbar}
\end{equation}
For a positive definite Hilbert space, this leads one to
conclude
that
\begin{equation}
S\, |0\rangle\ =\ \bar S\, |0\rangle\ =\ 0\ .
\end{equation}
This argument can be evaded by two loopholes.
The first is that in a spontaneously broken theory, one can only
consider the algebra of the {\it currents}, since the charges of
the spontaneously broken symmetries do not exist rigorously.
The second exploits the fact that in covariantly-quantized
supergravity theories, the gravitino $\psi_{m\alpha}$ is a gauge field
with negative-norm components, so the Hilbert space does not have
positive norm.
There are by now many examples of partial supersymmetry breaking
which take advantage the first loophole. The first was given by
Hughes, Liu and Polchinski \cite{hlp}, who showed that
supersymmetry is partially broken on the world volume of an
$N=1$ supersymmetric 3-brane propagating in six-dimensional
superspace. Later, Bagger and Galperin \cite{2bagger,BGT}
used the techniques of Coleman, Wess, Zumino \cite{cwz}, and
Volkov \cite{volkov} to construct an effective field theory
of partial supersymmetry breaking, with the broken supersymmetry
realized nonlinearly. They found that the Goldstone fermion
could belong to an $N=1$ chiral {\it or} an $N=1$ vector multiplet.
Antoniadis, Partouche and Taylor discovered another realization
in which the Goldstone fermion is contained in an $N=2$ vector
multiplet \cite{apt}.
Each of these examples relies on the fact that in partially broken
supersymmetry, the current algebra can be modified as follows,
\begin{eqnarray}
\{ \bar Q_{\dot\alpha},\
J^1_{\alpha m}
\} &\ =\ & 2 \,\sigma^n_{\alpha\dot\alpha}\,
T_{mn}\nonumber \\
\{ \bar S_{\dot\alpha},\ J^2_{\alpha m}
\} &=& 2\, \sigma^n_{\alpha\dot\alpha}\,
(v^4 \eta_{mn}+ T_{mn})\ ,\label{zweite}
\end{eqnarray}
where the $J^i_{\alpha m}$ ($i = 1,2$) are the supercurrents and
$T_{mn}$ is the stress-energy tensor. The shift in the second
stress-energy tensor in (\ref{zweite}) prevents the current algebra
from being integrated into a charge algebra, and circumvents the
no-go theorem.
In gravity, however, a shift in the stress-energy tensor corresponds
to a shift in the vacuum energy. This suggests that the mechanism
of partial breaking might be different in supergravity theories.
Indeed, theories with partial breaking were constructed by Cecotti,
Girardello and Porrati, and by Zinov'ev \cite{zin}, starting from
linearly realized $N=2$ supergravity. (A geometrical interpretation
was given in \cite{fgp-local}.) These authors considered scenarios
with vector- and hypermultiplets and found that the gravitational
couplings exploited the second loophole. It is natural to ask
whether their results apply more generally in supergravity
theories.
In this paper we will address this question using a model-independent
approach with a minimal field content motivated by the superHiggs-effect.
We will see that partial breaking in flat space can be accomplished
using three dual representations for the $N=1$ massive spin-3/2
multiplet. When coupled to gravity, the dual representations
give rise to new $N=2$ supergravities with new $N=2$ supersymmetry
algebras.
In each case, our technique will be as follows: We will start with
the Lagrangian and supersymmetry transformations for the massive
$N=1$ spin-3/2 multiplet. We shall then ``unHiggs" the
representation by adding appropriate Goldstone fields and coupling
it to gravity.
\section{The SuperHiggs Effect in Partially Broken Supersymmetry}
\subsection{Dual Versions of Massive $N=1$ Spin-3/2 Multiplets}
The starting point for our investigation is the massive $N=1$
spin-3/2 multiplet. This multiplet contains six bosonic and
six fermionic degrees of freedom, arranged in states of the
following spins,
\begin{equation}
\pmatrix{
{3\over2} \cropen{1\jot }
1\ \ \ 1 \cropen{1\jot }
{1\over2}}\ .
\end{equation}
The traditional representation of this multiplet contains
the following fields \cite{fvn}: one spin-3/2 fermion, one spin-1/2
fermion, and two spin-one vectors, each of mass $m$. The dual
representations have the same fermions, but one or two antisymmetric
tensors in place of one or two of the vectors. As we shall see,
each representation gives rise to a distinct $N=2$ supersymmetry
algebra.
The traditional representation is described by the following
Lagrangian \cite{fvn},
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal L} &\ = \ & \epsilon^{m n \rho \sigma} \overline \psi_{m}
\overline \sigma_n \partial_\rho \psi_\sigma
- {\rm i} \overline \zeta \overline \sigma^m \partial_m \zeta
- {1 \over 4} {\cal A}_{m n} \bar{\cal A}^{m n} \nonumber \\
& &-\ {1\over 2}m^2\, {\cal A}_m \bar{\cal A}^m
\ +\ {1\over 2}m\,\zeta\zeta \ +\ {1\over 2}m\,\bar\zeta\bar\zeta \nonumber \\[1mm]
& & -\ m\,\psi_m \sigma^{m n} \psi_n -\ m\,\bar\psi_m \bar\sigma^{m n} \bar\psi_n\ .
\end{eqnarray}
Here $\psi_m$ is a spin-3/2 Rarita-Schwinger field, $\zeta$ a spin-1/2
fermion, and ${\cal A}_m = A_m + {\rm i} B_m$ a complex spin-one vector. This
Lagrangian is invariant under the following $N=1$ supersymmetry
transformations,
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta_\eta {\cal A}_m &\ =\ & 2\psi_m\eta - {\rm i}{2\over\sqrt{3}}
\bar\zeta\bar\sigma_m\eta
-{2\over \sqrt{3}m}\partial_m(\zeta\eta) \nonumber \\
\delta_\eta \zeta &=& {1\over\sqrt{3}}\bar{\cal A}_{mn}\sigma^{mn}
\eta -{\rm i}{m\over\sqrt{3}}
\sigma^m\bar\eta {\cal A}_m \nonumber \\
\delta_\eta \psi_m &=& {1\over 3m}\partial_m(\bar{\cal A}_{rs}
\sigma^{rs} \eta + 2{\rm i} m
\sigma^n\bar\eta {\cal A}_n)
- {{\rm i}\over 2}(H_{+mn}\sigma^n + {1\over 3}H_{-mn}\sigma^n)
\bar\eta \nonumber
\\ & & -\ {2\over 3}m({\sigma_m}^n \bar{\cal A}_n \eta + \bar
{\cal A}_m\eta)\ ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $H_{\pm mn}={\cal A}_{mn}\pm {{\rm i}\over 2}\epsilon_{mnrs}{\cal A}^{rs}$ and
${\cal A}_{mn}=\partial_m{\cal A}_n - \partial_n{\cal A}_m$.
A dual Lagrangian and its supersymmetry transformations can
be found by using a Poincar\'e duality which relates a massive vector field
to a massive antisymmetric tensor field of rank two. This duality
can be used to relate the vector $B_m$ to an antisymmetric tensor
$B_{mn}$ by $B_{mn} = 1/m\ \epsilon_{mnrs}\partial^r B^{s}$
or $B_m = v_m/m$ \cite{dual}.
This dual representation is special in the sense that it can
also be written in $N=1$ superspace formulation\footnote{
The massive version of the de Wit/van Holten formulation
(see \cite{gatsie} and references therein) leads to a
reducible supersymmetry representation.} \cite{ogsok}.
It has the following component Lagrangian,
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal L} &\ =\ & \epsilon^{pqrs} \bar \psi_{p}
\bar \sigma_q \partial_r \psi_s
- {\rm i} \bar \zeta \bar \sigma^m \partial_m \zeta
- {1 \over 4} A_{mn} A^{mn}
+ {1\over 2}v^m v_m \nonumber \\
& & -\ {1\over 2}m^2 A_m A^m - {1\over4}m^2
B_{mn}B^{mn} \ +\ {1\over 2}m\,\zeta\zeta \ +\ {1\over
2}m\,\bar\zeta\bar\zeta\nonumber\\[1mm]
& & -\ m\,\psi_m \sigma^{mn} \psi_n \ -\ m\,\bar\psi_m
\bar\sigma^{mn} \bar\psi_n\ ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $A_{mn}$ is the field strength associated with the real vector
field $A_m$, and $v_m = {1\over 2}\epsilon_{mnrs} \partial^n B^{rs}$
is the field strength for the antisymmetric tensor
$B_{mn}$. This Lagrangian is invariant under the following
$N=1$ supersymmetry transformations:\footnote{Here,
the square brackets denote antisymmetrization, without a
factor of 1/2.}
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta_\eta A_m &\ =\ & (\psi_m\eta + \bar\psi_m\bar\eta) +
{{\rm i}\over\sqrt{3}}
(\bar\eta\bar\sigma_m\zeta - \bar\zeta\bar\sigma_m\eta)
-{1\over \sqrt{3}m}\partial_m(\zeta\eta + \bar\zeta\bar\eta)
\nonumber \\
\delta_\eta B_{mn} &=& {2\over\sqrt{3}}\left( \eta\sigma_{mn}\zeta
+ {{\rm i}\over 2m}\partial_{[m}\bar\zeta\bar\sigma_{n]}\eta \right)
\ +\ {\rm i}\eta\sigma_{[ m}\bar\psi_{n ]} + {1\over
m} \eta\psi_{mn}
\ + h.c. \nonumber\\
\delta_\eta \zeta &=& {1\over\sqrt{3}} A_{mn}\sigma^{mn}\eta -
{{\rm i} m\over\sqrt{3}}
\sigma^m\bar\eta A_m - {1\over\sqrt{3}}m\sigma_{mn}\eta B^{mn} -
{1\over\sqrt{3}} v_m\sigma^m\bar\eta \nonumber \\
\delta_\eta \psi_m &=& {1\over 3m}\partial_m \left( A_{rs}
\sigma^{rs}\eta + 2{\rm i} m
\sigma^n\bar\eta A_n \right)
-{{\rm i}\over 2} (H^A_{+mn}\sigma^n + {1\over 3}H^A_{-mn}\sigma^n)
\bar\eta \nonumber \\
& & -\ {2\over 3}m ({\sigma_m}^n A_n \eta +
A_m\eta)\ +\ {1\over 3m}\partial_m \left( 2
v_n\sigma^n\bar\eta - m
\sigma^{rs}\eta B_{rs} \right) \nonumber\\
&& -\ {2{\rm i}\over 3} (v_m + \sigma_{mn}v^n)\eta
- {{\rm i} m\over 3} (B_{mn}\sigma^n\bar\eta + {\rm i}
\epsilon_{mnrs}B^{n r}\sigma^s\bar\eta) \ ,
\end{eqnarray}
A third representation can be found by dualizing the remaining
vector, $A_n$. Its derivation is straightforward, so we will not
write its Lagrangian and transformations here.
Each of the three dual Lagrangians describe the dynamics of free
massive spin-3/2 and 1/2 fermions, together with their supersymmetric
partners, massive spin-one vector and tensor fields. They can be
regarded as ``unitary gauge'' representations of theories with
additional symmetries: a fermionic gauge symmetry for the massive
spin-3/2 fermion, as well as additional gauge symmetries associated
with the massive gauge fields.
\subsection{UnHiggsing Massive $N=1$ Spin-3/2 Multiplets}
To study partial breaking, these Lagrangians must be unHiggsed
by including appropriate gauge and Goldstone fields. In each
case we need to add a Goldstone fermion and Goldstone bosons
and then gauge the full $N=2$ supersymmetry. In this way we can
construct theories with $N=2$ supersymmetry nonlinearly realized,
and $N=1$ represented linearly on the fields. The resulting effective
field theories describe the physics of partial supersymmetry breaking,
well below the scale $v$ where the second supersymmetry is broken.
In what follows we will focus on the first two cases presented above;
the example with two antisymmetric tensors can be worked out in a
similar fashion. In each case we introduce Goldstone fields by a
St\"uckelberg redefinition. We unHiggs the complex massive vector
${\cal A}_{m}$ by replacing
\eq{
{\cal A}_{m}\ \rightarrow\ {\cal A}_{m} - {\sqrt{2}\over m}\partial_m\phi \ ;
}
for the dual representation, we take
\al{
A_{m} &\rightarrow& A_{m} - {1\over m}\partial_m\phi \nonumber \\
B_{mn}&\rightarrow& B_{mn} - {1\over m}\partial_{[ m} B_{n ]}\ . \nonumber
}
The introduction of the Goldstino $\nu$ requires an additional
shift
\eq{
\psi_m\ \rightarrow\ \psi_m - {1\over\sqrt{6}m}
(2 \partial_m \nu + {\rm i} m \sigma_m \bar\nu) \nonumber
}
to obtain a proper kinetic term for $\nu$.
In Figure 1(a) the physical fields of the traditional representation
for the massive spin-3/2 multiplet are arranged in terms of
massless $N=1$ multiplets. The lowest superspins form an $N=1$
chiral and an $N=1$ vector multiplet. These fields may be thought
of as $N=1$ ``matter.'' The remaining fields are the gauge fields of
$N=2$ supergravity. In unitary gauge, the two vectors eat the two
scalars, while the Rarita-Schwinger field eats one linear combination of
the spin-1/2 fermions. This leaves the massive $N=1$ multiplet coupled
to $N=1$ supergravity. As we shall see, Figure 1 only illustrates
the field content; it does not describe the $N=1$ multiplet structure
of the unHiggsed theory.
\begin{figure}[t]
\epsffile[100 470 530 630]{fi1.ps}
\caption{The unHiggsed versions of the (a) traditional and (b)
dual representations of the $N=1$ massive spin-3/2 multiplet.}
\end{figure}
The resulting Lagrangian is as follows,
\begin{eqnarray}
&& e^{-1}{\cal L} \ =\ \nonumber\\
&& -\ {1 \over 2 \kappa^2} {\cal R}
+ \epsilon^{m n r s} \overline \psi_{m i}
\overline \sigma_n D_r \psi^i_s
- {\rm i} \overline \chi \ \overline \sigma^m D_m \chi
- {\rm i} \overline \lambda \overline \sigma^m D_m \lambda
- {\cal D}^m \phi \overline{{\cal D}_m \phi} \nonumber\\
&& -\ {1 \over 4} {\cal A}_{m n} \overline {\cal A}^{m n}
- \ \Bigl( {1 \over \sqrt{2}} m \psi^2_m \sigma^m
\overline \lambda
+ {\rm i} m\psi^2_m \sigma^m
\overline \chi
+ \sqrt{2} {\rm i} m \lambda \chi
+\ {1 \over 2} m \chi \chi \nonumber\\
&& +\ m \, \psi^2_m \sigma^{m n} \psi^2_n
+\ {\kappa \over 4} \epsilon_{i j}
\psi^i_m \psi_{n}^{j}
\overline H_+^{m n}
+ {\kappa \over \sqrt{2}} \chi \sigma^m
\overline \sigma^n \psi^1_m \overline{{\cal D}_n \phi}
\nonumber \\
& & + \ {\kappa \over 2 \sqrt{2}} \overline
\lambda
\overline \sigma_m \psi^1_n \overline H_-^{m n}
+ {\kappa \over \sqrt{2}}
\epsilon^{m n r s}
\overline \psi_{m 2} \overline \sigma_n \psi^1_r
\overline{{\cal D}_s \phi}
\ + h.c. \Bigr) \ ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\kappa$ denotes Newton's constant, $m = \kappa v^2$, and $D_m$ is the
covariant derivative.
The supercovariant derivatives take the form
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat{\cal D}_m\phi&\ =\ &\partial_m\phi - {\kappa\over\sqrt{2}}\psi^1_m\chi -
{1\over\sqrt{2}} \kappa v^2 {\cal A}_m\nonumber \\
\hat{\cal A}_{mn}&=&{\cal A}_{mn} + \kappa\psi^2_{ [m}\psi^1_{n] } -
{\kappa\over\sqrt{2}}\bar\lambda\bar\sigma_{ [n}\psi^1_{m ]} \ .
\end{eqnarray}
This Lagrangian is invariant under two independent abelian gauge
symmetries, as well as the following supersymmetry transformations,
\newpage
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta e^a_m &\ =\ &{\rm i} \kappa (\eta^i \sigma^a \overline \psi_{m i} +
\bar\eta^i \bar\sigma^a \psi_{m i}) \nonumber \\
\delta \psi^i_{m} & = & {2 \over \kappa} D_m \eta^i
\nonumber \\
& & +\ \left( -{{\rm i} \over 2} \hat H_{+m n}
\sigma^n \overline \eta^1
+ \sqrt{2} \overline{{\cal D}_m \phi} \eta^1
- \kappa\psi^1_m(\bar\chi\bar\eta^1)
+ {\rm i} v^2 \sigma_m \overline \eta^2 \right){\delta_2}^i \nonumber \\
\delta {\cal A}_m &=& 2 \epsilon_{i j} \psi_{m}^{i} \eta^j
+ \sqrt{2} \overline \lambda \overline \sigma_m \eta^1 \nonumber \\
\delta \lambda &=& {{\rm i} \over \sqrt{2}} \overline{\hat{\cal A}}_{mn}
\sigma^{mn} \eta^1
- {\rm i} \sqrt{2} v^2 \eta^2 \nonumber \\
\delta \chi &=& {\rm i} \sqrt{2} \sigma^m {\hat{\cal D}_m \phi}\overline \eta^1
+ 2 v^2 \eta^2 \nonumber \\
\delta \phi &=& \sqrt{2} \chi \eta^1 \ , \label{chiraltrafo}
\end{eqnarray}
for $i=1,2$. This result holds to leading order, that is, up
to and including terms in the transformations that are linear in
the fields. Note that this representation is irreducible in the sense
that there are no subsets of fields that transform only into themselves
under the supersymmetry transformations.
Let us now consider the dual case with one massive tensor.
The degree of freedom counting is shown in Figure 1(b). This
time, however, the ``matter'' fields include an $N=1$ vector
multiplet together with an $N=1$ {\it linear} multiplet. In
unitary gauge, one vector eats one scalar, while the antisymmetric
tensor eats the other vector. These are the minimal set of
fields that arise when coupling the alternative spin-3/2 multiplet
to $N=2$ supergravity.
The Lagrangian and
supersymmetry transformations for this system can be worked out following the
same procedures described above. They
can also be derived by dualizing first the scalar $\phi_B$ and then the vector $B_m$
using the method\footnote{The transformations
(\ref{vectortrafo}) do not appear to be dual to (\ref{chiraltrafo}),
because the vectors $A_m$ and $B_m$ in (\ref{vectortrafo})
have been rotated to simplify the transformations.} described in \cite{cremdual}.
As $\kappa
\rightarrow 0$, the
dualities relating a massless antisymmetric tensor $B_{mn}$ to
a massless scalar $\phi$ and a massless vector $A_m$ to another
vector $B_m$ reduce to the simple expressions $v_m = -\partial_m \phi$ and $F^B_{mn} =
1/2\ \epsilon_{mnrs}F^{Ars}$.
The Lagrangian is as follows,
\begin{eqnarray}
& &e^{-1}{\cal L}\ =\ \nonumber \\
& & -\ {1 \over 2 \kappa^2} {\cal R}
+ \epsilon^{pqrs} \bar \psi_{p i}
\bar \sigma_q D_r \psi^i_s
- {\rm i} \bar \chi \bar \sigma^m D_m \chi
- {\rm i} \bar \lambda \bar \sigma^m D_m \lambda
- {1\over 2}{\cal D}^m \phi {\cal D}_m \phi \nonumber\\
&& -\ {1 \over 4} {\cal F}^A_{mn} {\cal F}^{Amn} - {1\over4}{\cal F}^B_{mn}{\cal F}^{Bmn}
+ {1\over 2}v^m v_m
- \Bigl( {1 \over \sqrt{2}} m \, \psi^2_m \sigma^m
\bar \lambda + m {\rm i} \psi^2_m \sigma^m
\bar \chi
\nonumber \\
& &+\ \sqrt{2} m {\rm i} \lambda \chi
+ {1 \over 2} m \chi \chi
+ m \, \psi^2_m \sigma^{m n} \psi^2_n
+ {\kappa \over 2\sqrt{2}} \epsilon_{i j} \psi^i_m \psi_{n}^{j}
{\cal F}^{Amn}_{-} \nonumber\\
&&+\ {\kappa \over {2}} \chi \sigma^m
\bar \sigma^n \psi^1_m {\cal D}_n \phi
+ {\kappa \over 2 } \bar \lambda
\bar \sigma_m \psi^1_n {\cal F}^{Bmn}_{+}
+
{\kappa \over {2}}
\epsilon^{pqrs}
\bar \psi^2_{p } \bar \sigma_q \psi^1_r
{\cal D}_s \phi\nonumber\\
&&- {\rm i}\, {\kappa \over {2}} \chi \sigma^m
\bar \sigma^n \psi^1_m v_n
- {\rm i} \, {\kappa \over {2}}
\epsilon^{pqrs}
\bar \psi^2_{p } \bar \sigma_q \psi^1_r
v_s
\ + h.c. \Bigr)
\end{eqnarray}
where, as before, $m = \kappa v^2$, and
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal D}_m \phi &\ =\ & \partial_m \phi - {m\over\sqrt{2}} (A_m + B_m) \nonumber \\
{\cal F}^A_{mn} &=& \partial_{[m }A_{n]} + {m\over\sqrt{2}} B_{mn} \nonumber \\
{\cal F}^B_{mn} &=& \partial_{[m }B_{n]} - {m\over\sqrt{2}} B_{mn}\ .
\end{eqnarray}
This Lagrangian is invariant under an ordinary abelian gauge symmetry,
an antisymmetric tensor gauge symmetry, as well as the following two
supersymmetries,
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta_{\eta} e^a_m &\ =\ &{\rm i}\, \kappa (\eta^i \sigma^a \overline \psi_{m i} +
\bar\eta^i \bar\sigma^a \psi_{m i}) \nonumber \\
\delta_{\eta} \psi^1_m &=& {2\over\kappa}D_m\eta^1 \nonumber \\
\delta_\eta A_m &=& \sqrt{2}\epsilon_{ij}(\psi_m^i\eta^j + \bar\psi_m^i\bar\eta^j) \nonumber \\
\delta_\eta B_m &=& \bar\eta^1\bar\sigma_m\lambda + \bar\lambda\bar\sigma_m\eta^1\nonumber \\
\delta_\eta B_{mn} &=& 2\eta^1\sigma_{mn}\chi
+ {\rm i}\,\eta^1\sigma_{[ m}\bar\psi^2_{n ]}
+ {\rm i}\,\eta^2\sigma_{[ m}\bar\psi^1_{n ]}
\ + h.c. \nonumber\\
\delta_\eta \lambda &=& {\rm i}\, \hat{\cal F}^B_{mn}\sigma^{mn}\eta^1 - {\rm i} \sqrt{2}
v^2 \eta^2\nonumber\\
\delta_\eta \chi &=& {\rm i}\, \sigma^m\bar\eta^1 \hat{\cal D}_m\phi - \hat
v_m\sigma^m\bar\eta^1 + 2 v^2 \eta^2\nonumber \\
\delta_{\eta} \psi^2_m &=& {2\over\kappa}
D_m\eta^2 + {\rm i} v^2 \sigma_m \bar\eta^2
- {{\rm i}\over\sqrt{2}}\hat{\cal F}^A_{+mn}\sigma^n\bar\eta^1\nonumber \\
& & +\ \hat{\cal D}_m \phi \eta^1 +\kappa\left( (\bar\psi^1_m\bar\chi)\eta^1
- (\bar\chi\bar\eta^1)\psi^1_m \right) - {\rm i}\, \hat v_m\eta^1\nonumber \\
\delta_\eta \phi &=& \chi\eta^1 + \bar\chi\bar\eta^1 \label{vectortrafo}
\end{eqnarray}
up to linear order in the fields.
The supercovariant derivatives are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat {\cal D}_m\phi&\ =\ & {\cal D}_m\phi - {\kappa\over{2}}(\psi^1_m\chi +
\bar\psi^1_m\bar\chi) \nonumber\\
\hat {\cal F}^A_{mn}&=& {\cal F}^A_{mn} + {\kappa\over \sqrt{2}}(\psi^2_{
[m}\psi^1_{n] } + \bar\psi^2_{ [m}\bar\psi^1_{n] }) \nonumber \\
\hat {\cal F}^B_{mn}&=& {\cal F}^B_{mn} - {\kappa\over 2}(\bar\lambda\bar\sigma_{
[n}\psi^1_{m ]} + \bar\psi^1_{ [m}\bar\sigma_{n] }\lambda) \nonumber\\
\hat v_m &=& v_m + \Bigl(\, {\rm i}\kappa \psi^{1}_n\sigma_{m}{}^n\chi
-{{\rm i}\kappa\over
2}\epsilon_{m}{}^{nrs}\psi_n^{1}\sigma_r\bar\psi_s^{2}
\ + h.c. \Bigr) \ .
\end{eqnarray}
These fields form an irreducible representation of the $N=2$
algebra.
Each of the two Lagrangians has a full $N=2$ supersymmetry (up to
the appropriate order). The first
supersymmetry is realized linearly. The second
is realized nonlinearly: it is spontaneously broken. In each case,
the transformations imply that
\begin{equation}
\zeta\ =\ {1\over \sqrt3}\,
(\chi - {\rm i} \sqrt 2 \lambda)
\end{equation}
does not shift, while
\begin{equation}
\nu\ =\ {1\over \sqrt3}\,
(\sqrt 2 \chi + {\rm i} \lambda )
\end{equation}
does. Therefore $\nu$ is the Goldstone fermion for $N=2$ supersymmetry,
spontaneously broken to $N=1$.
\section{Dual Algebras from Partial Supersymmetry Breaking}
Now that we have explicit realizations of partial supersymmetry
breaking, we can see how they avoid the no-go argument
presented in the introduction. We first compute the second
supercurrent. In each case it turns out to be
\begin{equation}
J^2_{m\alpha}\ =\
v^2\,(\sqrt6\, {\rm i} \,\sigma_{\alpha\dot\alpha m}
\bar\nu^{\dot\alpha} +
4\,\sigma_{\alpha\beta m n} \psi^{2n\beta})\ ,
\end{equation}
plus higher-order terms. The commutator of the second
supercharge with the second supercurrent is then
\begin{equation}
\{\,\bar S_{\dot\alpha},\,J^2_{m\alpha}
\,\}\ =\ 0 \ +\ \hbox{terms at least linear in the fields}\ .
\end{equation}
From this we see that the stress-energy tensors in the current
algebra (\ref{zweite}) do not differ by a constant shift.
The supergravity couplings must exploit the second loophole
to the no-go theorem.
To check this assertion, note that the
operators $J^i_{\alpha m}$ and $T_{mn}$ contain contributions
from {\it all} of the fields, including the second gravitino. When
covariantly-quantized, the second gravitino gives rise to states of
negative norm. Indeed, we find
\begin{equation}
(\bar S S + S \bar S)\,
|0\rangle\ =\ 0\ ,
\end{equation}
even though
\begin{equation}
S\,|0\rangle\ \ne\ 0 \quad\qquad
\bar S\,|0\rangle\ \ne\ 0\ .
\end{equation}
To elucidate the role of the bosonic symmetries associated with
partial supersymmetry breaking, let us now compute the closure of
the first and second supersymmetry transformations to zeroth order
in the fields. In this way we can identify the Goldstone fields
associated with any spontaneously broken bosonic symmetries.
For the traditional representation, (Figure 1(a)), we find
\begin{eqnarray}
\left[ \,\delta_{\eta_1}, \,\delta_{\eta_2} \right] \, \phi
&\ =\ & 2\sqrt{2}\, v^2\,\eta_1\eta_2 \nonumber \\
\left[ \,\delta_{\eta_1}, \,\delta_{\eta_2} \right] \, {\cal A}_m
&=& {4\over\kappa} \, \partial_m\, (\eta_1\eta_2)\ .
\end{eqnarray}
This shows that the complex scalar $\phi$ is indeed the Goldstone
boson for a gauged central charge. Moreover, in unitary gauge,
where
\begin{equation}
\phi\ =\ \nu\ =\ 0\ ,
\end{equation}
this Lagrangian reduces to the usual representation for a massive
$N=1$ spin-3/2 multiplet \cite{fvn}.
For the dual representation (Figure 1(b)), we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\left[ \,\delta_{\eta_1}, \,\delta_{\eta_2} \right] \, \phi
&\ =\ & 2\, v^2\,(\eta_1\eta_2 + \bar\eta_1\bar\eta_2) \nonumber \\
\left[ \, \delta_{\eta^2}, \, \delta_{\eta^1} \right] \, A_m &\ =\ &
{2\sqrt{2} \over \kappa}
\partial_m(\eta^1\eta^2 + \bar\eta_1\bar\eta_2)
- \sqrt{2} \, {\rm i} \, v^2 \, (\eta^2\sigma_m\bar\eta^1 -
\eta^1\sigma_m\bar\eta^2) \nonumber \\
\left[ \, \delta_{\eta^2}, \, \delta_{\eta^1} \right] \, B_m &=&
\sqrt{2} \, {\rm i} \, v^2 \, (\eta^2\sigma_m\bar\eta^1 -
\eta^1\sigma_m\bar\eta^2) \nonumber \\
\left[ \, \delta_{\eta^2}, \, \delta_{\eta^1} \right] \, B_{mn} &=&
{2 \, {\rm i}\over \kappa}D_{[m }
(\eta^2\sigma_{ n]}\bar\eta^1 - \eta^1\sigma_{n] }\bar\eta^2)\ .
\end{eqnarray}
The real vector $-(A_m - B_m)/\sqrt{2}$ is the Goldstone boson for
a gauged {\it vectorial} central extension of the $N=2$ algebra. In
addition, the real scalar $\phi$ is the Goldstone boson associated
with a single real gauged central charge. In unitary gauge, with
\begin{equation}
-{1\over\sqrt{2}}(A_m - B_m)\ =\ \phi\ =\ \nu\ =\ 0\ ,
\end{equation}
this Lagrangian reduces to the dual representation for
the massive $N=1$ spin-3/2 multiplet \cite{ogsok}.
Finally, for the case with two tensors ${\cal A}_{mn}= A_{mn} +{\rm i} B_{mn}$
and two Goldstone vectors ${\cal A}_m = A_m +{\rm i} B_m$, the algebra is
\al{
\left[ \delta_{\eta^2}, \delta_{\eta^1} \right] {\cal A}_m\ &=&\ {4\over \kappa}
D_m(\bar\eta^1\bar\eta^2) - 4{\rm i} v^2 \eta^2\sigma_m\bar\eta^1 \nonumber \\
\left[ \delta_{\eta^2}, \delta_{\eta^1} \right] {\cal A}_{mn} &=& -{4{\rm i}\over
\kappa}D_{[m }
(\eta^2\sigma_{ n]}\bar\eta^1), \nonumber
}
This case requires {\it two} vectorial central extensions
of the supersymmetry algebra.
\section{Discussion and Conclusion}
In this paper we have examined the partial breaking of supersymmetry
in flat space. We have seen that partial breaking can be accomplished
using either of three representations of the massive $N=1$ spin-3/2
multiplet. We unHiggsed the representations, and found
a new $N=2$ supergravity and a new $N=2$ supersymmetry algebra.
Each of these theories gives rise to different $N=1$ multiplet
structures in the limit $\kappa \rightarrow 0$. For the
traditional representation, we find a massless chiral multiplet,
($\chi$, $\phi$), together with a pair of ``twisted" massless $N=1$
multiplets, ($\psi^2_m$, ${\cal A}_m$, $\lambda$). The twisted multiplets
transform irreducibly into each other under the first, unbroken
supersymmetry. They can be untwisted with the help of a second
unbroken supersymmetry which appears in this limit.\footnote{We
are indebted to W.~Siegel for pointing this out.} The second
supersymmetry transformations are obtained from (\ref{chiraltrafo})
(in the $\kappa \rightarrow 0$ limit) by ${\cal A}_m \rightarrow \bar{\cal A}_m$,
$\lambda \rightarrow -\lambda$. We see that the twisted multiplet
is actually a massless $N=2$ multiplet.
In the case of the dual representation, the $N=1$ transformations
(\ref{vectortrafo}) reduce, in the $\kappa \rightarrow 0$ limit,
to those of a massless vector multiplet, ($B_m$, $\lambda$), a
linear multiplet, ($\chi$, $B_{mn}$, $\phi$), and a massless
spin-3/2 multiplet, ($\psi^2_m$, $A_m$).\footnote{The transformations
that mix the gravitino and the
antisymmetric tensor are physically irrelevant because the
transformations of the corresponding field strengths vanish
on-shell.}
This multiplet structure can also be obtained by an explicit
superfield unHiggsing of the massive spinor superfield $\Psi_\alpha$
in the Ogievetsky/Sokatchev formulation \cite{ogsok},
\eq{
{\cal L} \ =\ \underbrace{-{1\over 2}(\Psi \bar\Psi) \pi^\perp \pmatrix{ \Psi \cr \bar\Psi \cr}}_{{\cal L}^\perp} +
{1\over 2}m(\Psi\Psi + \bar\Psi\bar\Psi) \ , \label{perpm}
}
where $\pi^\perp = \sqrt{\Box \Pi_1}$ and $\Pi_1$ is the superspin-1
projector for a spinor superfield \cite{sok}.
The St\"uckelberg redefinition $ \Psi_\alpha \rightarrow \Psi_\alpha
- {\rm i} D_\alpha V + L_\alpha + 2{\rm i} W_\alpha/m + D_\alpha L/4m$ leads to
\eq{
{\cal L}\ \rightarrow\ {\cal L}^\perp + {2}W^\alpha D_\alpha V - {1\over 8}L^2 + {1\over 2}m(
(\Psi_\alpha - {\rm i} D_\alpha V + L_\alpha)^2 \ + h.c.)\ , \nonumber
}
where $V$ is a real vector and $L_\alpha$ a chiral spinor superfield; $W_\alpha$ and $L$ are the corresponding field strengths. The correct
multiplet structure is obtained in the limit $m \rightarrow 0$.
Note, however, that the auxiliary superspin-0 is lost so we expect
${1/m}$ singularities in the supersymmetry transformations.
The multiplet structure of the dual theory with two antisymmetric
tensors consists of the $N=2$ representation, ($\psi^2_m$, $A_m +{\rm i} B_m =
{\cal A}_m$, $\lambda$), as well as a linear multiplet with two antisymmetric
tensors, ($\chi$, $A_{mn} +{\rm i} B_{mn} = {\cal A}_{mn}$).
The argument that prevents the coupling of this multiplet to
supergravity (see \cite{nonclos} and references therein) does not apply here
since the ``non-closure'' terms in the supersymmetry algebra are cancelled by
terms from the variation of $\psi^2_m$.
The Lagrangian for the traditional representation is a truncation of
the supergravity coupling found by Cecotti, Girardello, and Porrati,
and by Zinov'ev \cite{zin}.
Their results were based on {\it linear} $N=2$ supersymmetry; they
involved at least one $N=2$ vector-multiplet and one hypermultiplet.
The Lagrangians for the dual cases are new. They contain new realizations
of $N=2$ supergravity.
In each case, the couplings presented here are minimal and model-independent.
They describe the superHiggs effect in the low-energy effective theories
that arise from partial supersymmetry breaking.
\section{Acknowledgements}
We would like to thank S.~Osofsky for collaboration at an early stage of
this project and A.~Galperin and W.~Siegel for useful discussions.
This work was supported by the National Science
Foundation, grant NSF-PHY-9404057.
\newpage
|
\section{Introduction.}
\label{sec:intro}
Dynamical mass generation is an interesting strong--coupling
phenomenon which requires non--perturbative methods, and has been
studied extensively in $N$--flavour non--compact U(1) gauge theory in
three dimensions (QED${}_3$)
\cite{pisarski84,appelquist86,kondo+nak92,dorey92,maris96,aitch+mav:prb,ijra+gac+mkk+dmcn+nm}.
In this non--supersymmetric model the dynamics drives the coupling to
a non--trivial fixed point in the infra red
\cite{aitch+mav:prb,ijra+gac+mkk+dmcn+nm}: this leads to dynamical
mass generation (and hence chiral symmetry breaking) and critical
behaviour in the normal (chirally symmetric) phase.
The situation for supersymmetric versions of electrodynamics is less
clear. In an early work on three dimensional ${\mathcal N}=2$
supersymmetric QED, it was argued using component formalism that (at
least in Landau gauge) a dynamical mass is generated
\cite{pisarski84}. It was pointed out that the vanishing of the
effective potential in supersymmetric field theories meant that the
question of energetic favourability could not be answered simply; it
was conjectured that the issue of the selection of the finite solution
over the vanishing one might be resolved at the level of the effective
action, and the Ward identities arising from the supersymmetry
\cite{pisarski84}. However, it has been argued on the grounds of
gauge dependence that a (non--perturbative) non--renormalization
theorem in four dimensional ${\mathcal N}=1$ supersymmetric
electrodynamics forbids the dynamical generation of mass
\cite{clark+love}. On dimensional reduction, four dimensional
${\mathcal N}=1$ supersymmetry reduces to three dimensional ${\mathcal
N}=2$ extended supersymmetry, and so the non--renormalization
theorem should also hold for the three dimensional extended model.
Recently there has been speculation that the gauge dependence argument
for the four dimensional model is not sound
\cite{kaiselip,appelquist98}. The analysis of the four dimensional
model employs a simplified form of the U(1) Ward identity, and a
heavily truncated vertex \cite{clark+love}. This is because in four
dimensions supersymmetry and U(1) gauge invariance require, in
addition to the usual three point vertex, $n$--point vertices for all
$n>3$ (see section \ref{sec:n=2action}). This problem does not arise
in the three dimensional ${\mathcal N}=1$ model, where supersymmetry
and U(1) gauge invariance require three-- and four--point vertices
only. Recently there has been evidence from numerical studies
\cite{walker99_1} that the ${\mathcal N}=2$ model does not generate a
mass dynamically, in line with the dimensional reduction of the
non--renormalization theorem, but in contradistinction to the results
of reference \cite{pisarski84}.
An early work on ${\mathcal N}=1$ supersymmetric QED in three
dimensions demonstrated that troublesome logarithmic divergences
present in the wavefunction renormalization of non--supersymmetric
QED${}_3$ are absent in the supersymmetric model, and it was argued
that this allowed dynamical mass generation to take place for numbers
of flavours less than a critical number \cite{koopmans89}, which was
related to the critical flavour number of non--supersymmetric
QED${}_3$ \cite{appelquist86}. The analysis was done in component
formalism, in Landau gauge and with a trivial three--point vertex (set
to unity) which does not satisfy the U(1) Ward identity except in the
limits of zero transferred momentum and trivial (unit) wavefunction
renormalization.
It is therefore of interest to look more closely at the infra red
structure of both ${\mathcal N}=1$ and ${\mathcal N}=2$ supersymmetric
U(1) gauge field theory. The actual dynamically generated mass is the
$p\rightarrow 0$ limit of the mass function and is the pole of the
matter two point correlation function; as such, it must be a gauge
invariant object. Only if the $p\rightarrow 0$ limit leaves a gauge
independent constant can it be said with certainty that a mass has
been dynamically generated. It is therefore crucial to give a careful
treatment of gauge dependence, and to look closely at the full vertex.
Since supersymmetry cannot be dynamically broken in a supersymmetric
U(1) gauge field theory \cite{witten82}, we do not have to consider
the possibility of different dynamical masses for each component of
the multiplet. With these issues in mind, we choose to work in
superfield formalism, which keeps supersymmetry manifest, and we will,
as far as possible, work in a general gauge. In components
computations (see {e.g.} reference \cite{walker99_2}) it is necessary
to use the U(1) Ward identity and the Ward identities arising from
supersymmetry to constrain the vertices: the advantage of the
superfield formalism is that we only need to examine the U(1) Ward
identity, for the formalism ensures that the supersymmetry Ward
identities are satisfied. In particular, by using the superfield
formalism we will be able to choose a three--point vertex which
satisfies the U(1) Ward identity exactly in the ${\mathcal N}=1$ case.
It is known \cite{clark77,clark+love} that superfield formalism for
gauge theories results in spurious infra red divergences arising from
the propagation of a gauge artifact: by careful choice of
approximations and, where necessary, gauge, we can avoid most of the
infra red divergences and they do not spoil our results.
We use the same approach to study the non--perturbative physics of
both the ${\mathcal N}=1$ and ${\mathcal N}=2$ models: we construct a
non--perturbative {\sl ansatz} for the matter superfield propagator,
and study the behaviour of the functions appearing therein through the
Dyson--Schwinger equations. In principle there are Dyson--Schwinger
equations for the matter superfields, the gauge superfield, and for
the full vertex. The gauge superfield Dyson--Schwinger equation will be
resummed to leading order in $1/N$, where $N$ is the number of matter
flavours; this is exactly what is done in normal QED${}_3$. The
vertex will be constrained by the U(1) Ward identity. When the
results of the resummation and a choice for the vertex are put into
the Dyson--Schwinger equation for the matter superfield, coupled
integral equations for the self energy and wavefunction
renormalization result, which have to be solved. As with normal
QED${}_3$, approximations have to be sought in order to look for
solutions of the equations.
For the ${\mathcal N}=1$ model we will present two approaches for
studying the Dyson--Schwinger equations. First, we consider some of
the simplest approximations, which are sufficient when applied to
normal QED${}_3$ to demonstrate the existence of dynamical mass
generation (at least in Landau gauge) \cite{kondo+nak92}. The
advantages of making these computationally convenient approximations
are twofold: they allow us to work in a general gauge throughout, and
admit conversion of the integral equation to an equivalent
differential equation. The differential equation is simple to solve,
and has a gauge invariant, constant solution in the $p\rightarrow 0$
limit. The second method incorporates the full vertex, consistent
with the U(1) Ward identity. Ideally we would like to probe the gauge
dependence in exactly the same way again; however, the richer
structure of the integral equations arising from this approach only
admit more direct methods. In both approaches we find the expected
critical behaviour in the wavefunction renormalization
\cite{appelquist81,aitch+mav+mcneill,kondo+mura97}
\begin{equation}
\label{expectedwf}
Z(p) \sim \left( \frac{p}{\alpha} \right)^\gamma , \qquad \gamma \sim
{\mathcal O}(1/N),
\end{equation}
and exhibit the possibility of a finite dynamically generated mass.
In contrast to reference \cite{koopmans89} we find no evidence for a
critical flavour number, above which there is no dynamical mass
generation.
For the ${\mathcal N}=2$ model we again make some simple
approximations which allow us to probe the gauge dependence. Again we
find the expected critical behaviour in the wavefunction
renormalization (\ref{expectedwf}), but this time we find that there
is no gauge independent dynamically generated mass. This is based on
a refinement of the gauge dependence argument of reference
\cite{clark+love}; we note that the refinement relies on the existence
of the scale arising from the compactified dimension, so that the
non--renormalization theorem for the four dimensional model
\cite{clark+love} may still be evaded \cite{kaiselip,appelquist98}.
In section \ref{sec:action} we construct the action functional for a
${\mathcal N}=1$ supersymmetric theory of $N$ matter flavours
interacting with a U(1) gauge field in superfield formalism. We also
give the dressed propagators for the model which result from this
action. We construct the U(1) Ward identity in section \ref{sec:brs}
using the BRS method, and in section \ref{sec:ds} we construct the
Dyson--Schwinger equations for the model, which we use to analyse the
non--perturbative properties of the theory. We present and briefly
discuss our simple computation in section \ref{sec:gauge}, in which we
are able to probe the gauge dependence of the mass function by making
convenient approximations in the integral equations. Our more
complete computation follows in section \ref{sec:fullcomp}, where we
choose a vertex which satisfies the U(1) Ward identity. Here we
cannot use the elegant methods of section \ref{sec:gauge}, but we are
able to demonstrate that the solution obtained there persists in this
more complete computation. To conclude this part of the paper, we
also discuss the question of whether the finite mass solution is
preferred to the vanishing mass solution, in the context of the
suggestion \cite{pisarski84} that this can be answered by appealing to
the effective action and the supersymmetry Ward identities. We find
that no extra information can be obtained in this way, in contrast to
the models of references \cite{alvarez78,ciuchini95,diamandis98} which,
crucially, have extra constraints.
We turn to the ${\mathcal N}=2$ extended model in section
\ref{sec:n=2action}, where we build an action functional and dressed
propagators for four dimensional ${\mathcal N}=1$ supersymmetric
$N$--flavour electrodynamics. We construct the Dyson--Schwinger
equations for the model in section \ref{sec:n=2ds} and then compactify
one dimension to obtain the coupled integral equations for the three
dimensional ${\mathcal N}=2$ model we wish to analyse. We compute the
wavefunction renormalization and refine the argument of reference
\cite{clark+love} for the non--existence of dynamical mass generation.
We append discussion and concluding remarks in section
\ref{sec:discuss}, and briefly contrast with the situation in
non--supersymmetric QED${}_3$. In the appendices we collect some
useful results and basic features of ${\mathcal N}=1$ supersymmetry in
three and four dimensions, which are essential to the analysis of the
models we consider.
\section{The ${\mathcal N}=1$ Action.}
\label{sec:action}
The ${\mathcal N}=1$ rigid superspace in three dimensions can be
parameterized by the usual three space--time coordinates and two
Grassmann--odd coordinates arranged in the Majorana spinor
$\theta^\alpha$, where $\alpha \in \{ 1,2 \}$ \cite{gates83:super},
which we denote collectively by the symbol $z$. We collect some
basic features of this ${\mathcal N}=1$ superspace and superfields in
appendix \ref{app:3d}. Consider complex scalar ``matter''
superfields $\Phi$, $\Phi^*$ (mappings from superspace to $\mathbb C$)
which transform under local U(1) transformations in the familiar way:
\begin{eqnarray}
\Phi(z) \longrightarrow &\Phi^\prime (z^\prime)& = e^{+ieG(z)} \,\Phi(z),
\nonumber\\
\Phi^* (z) \longrightarrow &\Phi^*{}^\prime (z^\prime)& = \Phi^* (z)\,
e^{-ieG(z)} .
\end{eqnarray}
Here $e$ is the (dimensionful) gauge coupling and $G(z)$ must be a
real scalar superfield (a mapping from superspace to $\mathbb R$) to
preserve the superfield nature of $\Phi^\prime$; in order to build an
action functional invariant under local U(1) transformations, we must
construct covariant derivatives which transform in the same way as the
matter superfields themselves:
\begin{equation}
\nabla_\alpha \longrightarrow \nabla^\prime_\alpha = e^{ieG(z)}
\nabla_\alpha e^{-ieG(z)} .
\end{equation}
The covariant derivatives can be written in terms of a real spinor
(superfield) connexion $\Gamma_\alpha$ as follows:
\begin{equation}
\nabla_\alpha = D_\alpha - i e \Gamma_\alpha ;
\end{equation}
here $D_\alpha$ is the normal spinorial derivative, covariant with
respect to supersymmetry transformations \cite{gates83:super}. The
connexion transforms in the usual way under infinitesimal local U(1)
transformations:
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_\alpha (z) \longrightarrow \Gamma^\prime_\alpha (z^\prime) =
\Gamma_\alpha (z) + D_\alpha G(z) .
\end{equation}
We wish to consider a model with ${\mathcal N}=1$ supersymmetry, local
U(1) gauge invariance and $N$ matter flavours. The required action
then comprises three parts: the gauge invariant classical field
strength term for the connexion $\Gamma_\alpha$, a (Lorentz) gauge
fixing term and a locally U(1) invariant kinetic term for the matter
superfields $\Phi$ and $\Phi^*$:
\begin{equation} \label{n=1action}
S = S_{g}^{\mathrm{class}} + S_{g}^{\mathrm{GF}} + S_m ;
\end{equation}
\begin{eqnarray}
S_g^{\mathrm{class}} &=& \int d^3 x\, d^2\theta \; \Gamma_\alpha \left(
-\frac{1}{8} D^\eta D^\alpha D^\beta D_\eta \right) \Gamma_\beta
,\nonumber\\
S_g^{\mathrm{GF}} &=& \int d^3 x\, d^2 \theta\; \Gamma_\alpha \left(
\frac{1}{4\xi} D^\alpha D^2 D^\beta \right) \Gamma_\beta ,\nonumber\\
S_m &=& \int d^3 x\, d^2\theta\; \left(-\frac{1}{2}\right) \left[
\nabla^\alpha \Phi \right]^* \left[ \nabla_\alpha \Phi \right] .
\end{eqnarray}
We have included in the matter part an implicit sum over $N$ flavours,
which do not interact with each other but interact with the same gauge
field. The parameter $\xi$ is the familiar gauge parameter;
supersymmetric Feynman and Landau gauges are given by $\xi=1,0$
respectively. From this action it is easy to derive the renormalized
propagators for the matter fields and connexion:
\begin{eqnarray} \label{props}
\Delta(p;12) &=& i \frac{ Z(p) D^2 -
\Sigma(p)}{Z^2(p)\,p^2+\Sigma^2(p)} \delta^2(12), \nonumber\\
\Delta_{\alpha\beta} (p;12) &=& -i
\frac{1}{p^4}\frac{1}{1+\alpha/|p|} \left[ (1\!+\!\xi) p_{\alpha\beta}
\, D^2 - (1\!-\!\xi) C_{\alpha\beta} \, p^2 \right] \delta^2(12).
\end{eqnarray}
The gauge field propagator includes the effects of massless matter
loops (to leading order in $1/N$) in the vacuum polarization factor
\cite{pisarski84} \[(1+\alpha/|p|)^{-1}.\] Both the spinor and scalar
components of the matter superfield $\Phi$ contribute to this
correction, and so the vacuum polarization is exactly twice that of
non--supersymmetric U(1) gauge theory \cite{pisarski84,koopmans89},
and the effective ultra violet scale $\alpha$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\alpha \doteq \frac{e^2 N}{4}.
\end{equation}
The second rank antisymmetric symbol $C_{\alpha\beta}$ appearing in
the gauge field propagator acts as a metric for spinor indices
\cite{gates83:super}, (see appendix \ref{app:3d}) and we have written
three--vectors in a convenient spinor notation: $p_{\alpha\beta}$ is a
symmetric second rank spinor. In all the above an abbreviated
superspace notation has been used where, for instance,
\begin{equation}
\delta^2(12) \equiv \delta^2(\theta_1 - \theta_2) \doteq - \left
( \theta_1 - \theta_2\right)^2.
\end{equation}
The interaction piece of the action is given by:
\begin{equation}
S_{\mathrm{INT}} = \int d^3 x\, d^2\theta\; \left( -\frac{1}{2}
C^{\alpha\beta} ie \, \Gamma_\alpha \Phi D_\beta \Phi^* + \frac{1}{2}
C^{\alpha\beta} ie \, \Gamma_\alpha \Phi^* D_\beta \Phi - \frac{1}{2}
e^2 C^{\alpha\beta} \Gamma_\beta \Gamma_\alpha \Phi^* \Phi \right).
\end{equation}
The Feynman rules derived from this action are given at the end of
appendix \ref{app:3d}. Finally, note that we have not used any
Wess--Zumino type gauge fixing for the connexion superfield; this is
not a gauge invariant truncation (nor one which respects
supersymmetry), and we wish, as far as is possible, to investigate the
full gauge dependence of the non--perturbative correlation functions.
\section{BRS Invariance And Ward Identities.}
\label{sec:brs}
Following the BRS approach, to compute the Ward identities for this
model we promote the gauge fixed action (\ref{n=1action}) to an action
invariant under an enhanced gauge symmetry. The gauge fixing term in
(\ref{n=1action}) transforms under infinitesimal gauge transformations
as follows:
\begin{equation}
\delta_{\mathrm G} \frac{1}{4\xi} \Gamma_\alpha \left( D^\alpha D^2 D^\beta \right)
\Gamma_\beta = \frac{1}{\xi} G \left( \square D^\alpha \Gamma_\alpha
\right).
\end{equation}
To make a BRS invariant action, we add a ghost term to the action,
whose transformation properties cancel those of the gauge fixing term:
\begin{equation}
S^{\mathrm{ghost}} = \int d^3 x \, d^2 \theta\; \left(- u \square w \right),
\end{equation}
where $u$, $w$ are real Grassmann--odd scalar ghost superfields. The
full action is then invariant under the extended gauge symmetry
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta_\eta \Phi &=& ie \left(\eta w\right) \, \Phi, \nonumber\\
\delta_\eta \Phi^* &=& -ie \Phi^* \, \left(\eta w\right), \nonumber\\
\delta_\eta \Gamma_\alpha &=& D_\alpha \left( \eta
w\right),\nonumber\\
\delta_\eta u &=& -\frac{1}{\xi} \eta \, D^\alpha \Gamma_\alpha ,
\nonumber\\
\delta_\eta w &=& 0;
\end{eqnarray}
here $\eta$ is a real Grassmann--odd number. Note that $\delta^2_\eta
=0$. The generating functional can now be written
\begin{equation}
{\mathcal Z} = \int I\!\!D \Phi \, I\!\!D \Phi^* \, I\!\!D \Gamma_\alpha \,
I\!\!D u \, I\!\!D w \; e^{iS + iS_{\mathrm{s}} -i\Delta_{\mathrm{s}}} ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
S_{\mathrm{s}} &=& \int d^3 x\, d^2\theta\; \left( J^*\Phi
+ J\Phi^* +K^\alpha \Gamma_\alpha +\sigma u + \tau w \right),
\nonumber\\
\Delta_{\mathrm{s}} &=& \int d^3 x\, d^2\theta\; \left(
J^* \delta_\eta \Phi + J \delta_\eta \Phi^* +K^\alpha \delta_\eta
\Gamma_\alpha +\sigma \delta_\eta u + \tau \delta_\eta w \right).
\end{eqnarray}
The set $\{J,J^*,K^\alpha,\sigma,\tau\}$ are superfield sources; the
last three are Grassmann--odd valued and $K$ is a spinor. Using the
fact that $\eta^2 =0$, the Ward identity immediately follows
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{wione}
0 &=& \int I\!\!D \Phi \, I\!\!D \Phi^* \, I\!\!D \Gamma_\alpha \,
I\!\!D u \, I\!\!D w \; e^{iS +iS_{\mathrm{s}}} \times \nonumber\\
&& \qquad \times \left( \int d^3 x\, d^2\theta\; \left( J^* \delta_\eta \Phi
+ J \delta_\eta \Phi^* +K^\alpha \delta_\eta \Gamma_\alpha +\sigma
\delta_\eta u + \tau \delta_\eta w \right) \right).
\end{eqnarray}
To interpret this in terms of correlation functions for the model, we
construct the quantum effective action (the index $c$ indicates a
classical value):
\begin{eqnarray}
\Gamma\left[ \Phi_c,\Phi^*_c,\Gamma_\alpha^c,u_c,w_c \right] &=& -i \ln
{\mathcal Z}\left[J,J^*,K^\alpha,\sigma,\tau\right] \nonumber\\
&& \qquad - \int d^3 x\, d^2\theta\; \left( J\Phi_c^* + J^* \Phi_c +
K^\alpha \Gamma_\alpha^c +\sigma u_c + \tau w_c \right);
\end{eqnarray}
the sources are given by functional derivatives of the effective action
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\frac{\delta \Gamma}{\delta\Phi_c} = - J^*, \qquad \frac{\delta
\Gamma}{\delta\Phi_c^*} = - J, \nonumber\\
&&\frac{\delta \Gamma}{\delta\Gamma_\alpha^c} = K^\alpha, \nonumber\\
&&\frac{\delta \Gamma}{\delta u_c} = \sigma, \qquad\quad \frac{\delta
\Gamma}{\delta w_c} = \tau .
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\Gamma\left[ \Phi_c,\Phi^*_c,\Gamma_\alpha^c,u_c,w_c \right] &=& \int
d^5 x\, d^5 y \; \left( \Phi^*_c (x) \Delta^{-1} (x-y) \Phi_c (y) +
\Gamma_\alpha (x) \left( \Delta^{-1} (x-y) \right)^{\alpha\beta}
\Gamma_\beta (y) \right) \nonumber\\
&+& \int d^5 x \,d^5 y \,d^5 z \; \left( \Phi^*_c (x) \,
\Gamma_\alpha^c (y) \, \frac{e}{2}G(x,y,z) D^\alpha \Phi_c (z) \right.\nonumber\\
&& \qquad\qquad + \left. \Phi_c (x) \,
\Gamma_\alpha^c (y) \, \frac{e}{2}G(x,y,z) D^\alpha \Phi^*_c (z) \right) +
\cdots
\end{eqnarray}
Now we can carry out the functional integral in the identity
(\ref{wione}) to obtain
\begin{equation}
0= \int d^5 x \left( ie \frac{\delta\Gamma}{\delta \Phi^*_c} \Phi^*_c
w_c - ie \frac{\delta\Gamma}{\delta \Phi_c} w_c \Phi_c + D_\alpha
\frac{\delta\Gamma}{\delta\Gamma_\alpha^c} w_c + \frac{1}{\xi}
\frac{\delta\Gamma}{\delta u_c} D^\alpha \Gamma_\alpha^c \right).
\end{equation}
Taking functional
derivatives with respect to $w_c$, $\Phi^*_c$ and $\Phi_c$ we obtain
the Ward identity in configuration space:
\begin{equation}\label{wiconfig}
0= D^2(y) G(x,y,z) + i \Delta^{-1} (x-z) \delta(x-y) -i \Delta^{-1}
(x-z) \delta(z-y),
\end{equation}
which in momentum space reads
\begin{equation}\label{wimom}
D^2(p-q) G(p,p-q,q) = i \Delta^{-1} (p) -i \Delta^{-1} (q) .
\end{equation}
The advantage of using a superspace formulation is now apparent, for
using the identity
\begin{equation}
\left(D^2 (p) \right)^2 = -p^2,
\end{equation}
the Ward identity (\ref{wimom}) can be inverted. In fact, as we shall
see, the structure of the Dyson--Schwinger equations is such that it
can always be organized so that $D^2(p-q)$ acts to the left of the
full vertex, and so the Ward identity can be used exactly as it
appears in (\ref{wimom}). Of course, as with the non-supersymmetric
U(1) theory, the Ward identity does not constrain the transverse part of the
vertex, for which
\begin{equation}
D^2(p-q) G(p,p-q,q) = 0.
\end{equation}
Since, as discussed above, the integral equations can be arranged so
that the full vertex only appears with an accompanying $D^2$, this
will not be a problem for our analysis. Moreover, in not having to
invert the Ward identity, we will not introduce any extra kinematical
singularities as $p\rightarrow q$; this is known to cause problems in
the non--supersymmetric model \cite{curtis90}.
In principle the four--point vertex could also be constrained by the
U(1) Ward identity; however, the form depends in a complicated way on
the three--point vertex and it is sufficient for us to choose a
trivial function for our four--point vertex. As we will show, the
graph which includes the four--point vertex contributes only to the
wavefunction renormalization, and the contribution vanishes in
supersymmetric Feynman gauge.
\section{The Dyson--Schwinger Equations.}
\label{sec:ds}
The non--perturbative properties of the model are determined through
the Dyson--Schwinger equations. These equations lead to coupled
integral equations for the self energy and wavefunction
renormalization, which can be solved (in principle) to yield the
dynamically generated mass:
\begin{equation}
\label{dynmassdef}
M\doteq \lim_{p\rightarrow 0} M(p) \equiv \lim_{p\rightarrow 0}
\frac{\Sigma(p)}{Z(p)}.
\end{equation}
The truncated Dyson--Schwinger equation we will use is shown
graphically in figure \ref{fig:dseq}. The graph on the left hand side
is a convenient shorthand for the difference between the full inverse
propagator and the bare inverse propagator.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\begin{picture}(260,80)(0,0)
\Line(0,30)(60,30)
\GCirc(30,30){7}{0.5}
\LongArrow(20,20)(40,20)
\Text(30,10)[]{$p$}
\Text(5,40)[]{$\Phi$}
\Text(55,40)[]{$\Phi^*$}
\Text(70,30)[]{$=$}
\Line(80,30)(140,30)
\PhotonArc(110,48)(15,0,360){3.5}{7}
\GCirc(110,63){5}{0.5}
\LongArrow(100,20)(120,20)
\Vertex(110,30){4}
\LongArrowArcn(110,44)(12,130,50)
\Text(110,48)[]{$q$}
\Text(110,10)[]{$p$}
\Text(85,40)[]{$\Phi$}
\Text(135,40)[]{$\Phi^*$}
\Text(150,30)[]{$-$}
\Line(160,30)(260,30)
\GCirc(210,30){7}{0.5}
\PhotonArc(210,30)(25,0,180){4}{5.5}
\GCirc(210,55){5}{0.5}
\LongArrowArcn(210,38)(25,130,50)
\Text(212,72)[]{$p-q$}
\Vertex(185,30){4}
\Vertex(235,30){1}
\Text(165,40)[]{$\Phi$}
\Text(255,40)[]{$\Phi^*$}
\LongArrow(200,20)(220,20)
\Text(210,10)[]{$q$}
\end{picture}
\caption{\label{fig:dseq} Schematic form of the Dyson--Schwinger
equation for the non--perturbative matter two point correlation
function. Solid lines represent matter superfield propagators,
and wavy lines gauge superfield propagators; blobs indicate full
non--perturbative quantities.}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The graph on the left hand side of figure \ref{fig:dseq} is given by
\begin{eqnarray} \label{dslhs}
&&-i \int d^2\theta_1\,d^2\theta_2 \; \Phi(-p,\theta_1) \,\left[ Z(p)
D^2 (p) + \Sigma(p) \right] \,\delta^2(12) \,\Phi^* (p,\theta_2)
\nonumber\\
&&+i \int d^2\theta \; \Phi(-p,\theta) \, D^2(p) \,
\Phi^*(p,\theta)\nonumber\\
&&\quad = -i (Z(p)-1) \int d^2\theta \; \Phi(-p,\theta) D^2 (p) \Phi^*(p,\theta)
-i \Sigma (p) \int d^2\theta\; \Phi(-p,\theta) \Phi^*(p,\theta).
\end{eqnarray}
The first ``seagull'' graph on the right is simply
\begin{equation} \label{seagull}
\int \frac{d^3q}{(2\pi)^3} \; d^2\theta_1 \, d^2
\theta_2 \; \Phi(-p,\theta_1) \left[ -\frac{e^2}{2} G_4 C^{\beta\alpha}
\delta^2(12) \Delta_{\alpha\beta}(P;12) \right] \Phi^* (p,\theta_2),
\end{equation}
and the last graph is given by $(P \doteq p-q)$
\begin{equation} \label{maingraph}
\int \frac{d^3q}{(2\pi)^3} \; d^2\theta_1 \, d^2 \theta_2 \;
\Phi(-p,\theta_1) \, \left[ -\frac{e^2}{4} G_3(p,P,q) D^\alpha (q)
D^\beta (q) \Delta (q;12) \right] \Delta_{\alpha\beta} (P;12) \, \Phi^*(p,\theta_2).
\end{equation}
Our use of a symmetric second rank spinor notation for three vectors
immediately implies the following identities
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{SuSpIds}
&&C^{\alpha\beta} \,p_{\alpha\beta} = 0,\nonumber\\
&&q^{\alpha\mu}\,p_{\mu\beta} = \delta^\alpha_\beta \,p\cdot q.
\end{eqnarray}
Note that the second of these identities indicates that the $C$
symbol from the four--point vertex in the last graph projects out only
the $(1\!-\!\xi)$ component of the gauge field propagator, and indeed
the entire graph would vanish in the supersymmetric Feynman gauge,
$\xi=1$.
Upon substitution of the propagators (\ref{props}), the superspace
integrations can be performed using the identities above along with
the relations (\ref{SpIds}) and (\ref{DIds}) in appendix \ref{app:3d}. We will
present two computations in what follows: first, a computation in
which the simplest approximations are made: $G_3(p,P,q)$ is set
to $Z(q)$, and the bifurcation method is used, in which $\Sigma$ is
set to vanish in the denominators of all the kernels. These
approximations are drastic but computationally extremely convenient,
and are sufficient to demonstrate the existence of a dynamically
generated mass in non--supersymmetric U(1) gauge theory
\cite{kondo+nak92}. These approximations will give us enough
flexibility to probe the gauge dependence of the solution. Second, we
present a more complete computation, in which the full three--vertex
consistent with the Ward identity (\ref{wimom}) is used.
The treatments in the two cases follow a similar strategy: inserting
the propagators (\ref{props}) into equations (\ref{maingraph}) and
(\ref{seagull}) along with a choice for the three--point vertex, the
superspace parts of the integrals can be unpacked and reassembled
using the identities (\ref{SuSpIds}), (\ref{SpIds}) and (\ref{DIds})
to appear as functions of $\{Z,\Sigma,p,q\}$ multiplying the two
superspace structures:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{SuSpStrs}
&&\int d^2\theta\; \Phi(-p,\theta) \, D^2(p) \, \Phi^* (p,\theta)
;\nonumber\\
&&\int d^2\theta\; \Phi(-p,\theta) \, \Phi^* (p,\theta).
\end{eqnarray}
Comparison with equation (\ref{dslhs}) shows that the function
multiplying the first of these structures is to be identified with the
wavefunction renormalization, and that multiplying the second with the
self energy function. From this point the usual procedure followed
with the non--supersymmetric model can be adopted to study the coupled
integral equations which multiply the structures above. The angular
integrations can be performed, leaving integral equations now over the
variable $|q|$ only, which can in principle be evaluated. In
practice, the kernels have to be approximated with low--momentum
expansions. This is justified, for the (supersymmetric and
non--supersymmetric) model is super renormalizable, and dynamical mass
generation, if it occurs at all, occurs in the deep infra red. Two
methods of solution can be employed for the resulting approximate
integral equations: conversion to an equivalent differential equation,
or direct integration with trial functions. The first of these will
be used with our simple approximation, and the second for the more
complete computation.
\section{Simple Computation: Gauge Dependence.}
\label{sec:gauge}
In this section we present a computation of the wavefunction
renormalization and self energy functions based on the simplest
approximations. In defence of the approximations, they are sufficient
to demonstrate the existence of a dynamically generated mass in
non--supersymmetric U(1) gauge theory \cite{kondo+nak92}; the
three--point vertex we choose is compatible with the Ward identity
only in the limit of vanishing transferred momentum $(p)$, though it
is consistent with a non--trivial wavefunction renormalization. The
results of the computation for our model are clear: the expected
critical behaviour \cite{appelquist81,aitch+mav+mcneill,kondo+mura97}
is found for the wavefunction renormalization, and there is a simple
form for a gauge independent dynamically generated mass. This is
shown in a neat way, by converting the integral equation for the mass
function to an equivalent differential equation, from which it is
obvious that a $\xi$--independent constant solution exists. It is
impossible to use this neat method in the more complete computation to
follow in section \ref{sec:fullcomp}, for the rich structure of the
integral equation resulting from the full vertex prohibits the
conversion to a differential equation.
In the approximation $G_3 = Z(q)$ the superspace parts of the
integrals can be unpacked as described above, yielding the following
integral equations for the wavefunction renormalization and self
energy function $\left({\mathbb K}(q) \doteq Z^2(q)\,q^2 +
\Sigma^2(q)\right)$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{naivegaps}
Z(p) &=& 1 +\frac{1}{4}\frac{\alpha}{N\pi^2} \int dq\; q^2
\frac{Z^2(q)}{{\mathbb K}(q)} \int dx\; \frac{1}{P^4}\frac{1}{1+\alpha/|P|} 2
(1\!+\!\xi) \left(qpx-q^2\right) , \\
\Sigma(p) &=& \frac{1}{4}\frac{\alpha}{N\pi^2} \int dq\; q^2
\frac{\Sigma(q)Z(q)}{{\mathbb K}(q)} \int dx\;
\frac{1}{P^4}\frac{1}{1+\alpha/|P|} \left( 2(1\!+\!\xi) \left(qpx-q^2\right) +
2(1\!-\!\xi) P^2 \right); \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $P^2 = p^2 +q^2 - 2pqx$. The seagull graph (\ref{seagull})
gives only an irrelevant $p$ independent contribution to $Z$ which
would vanish in the supersymmetric Feynman gauge, and does not
contribute at all to $\Sigma$:
\begin{equation}
\label{gull:trivial}
Z_{\mathrm{seagull}} \simeq \frac{(1\!-\!\xi)}{N\pi^2} \int dq\; \left
( \frac{1}{q} - \frac{1}{q+\alpha} \right).
\end{equation}
The angular $x$ integrations in (\ref{naivegaps}) can be performed
easily to obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{naiveinitialgaps}
Z(p) &=& 1 + \frac{1}{4}\frac{\alpha}{N\pi^2} \int dq\; 2q^2
\frac{Z^2 (q) (1\!+\!\xi)}{{\mathbb K}(q)} {\mathcal I}_1
(p,q;\alpha),\nonumber\\
\Sigma(p) &=& \frac{1}{4}\frac{\alpha}{N\pi^2} \int dq\; 2q^2
\frac{Z(q)\Sigma(q)}{{\mathbb K}(q)} \left[ (1\!+\!\xi){\mathcal
I}_1(p,q;\alpha) + (1\!-\!\xi){\mathcal I}_2(p,q;\alpha) \right],
\end{eqnarray}
where the kernels ${\mathcal I}_i$ are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
{\mathcal I}_1 &=& \frac{1}{2pq} \left( \frac{p^2-q^2}{\alpha}
\left[ \frac{1}{|p-q|} - \frac{1}{p+q} \right] -
\frac{p^2-q^2}{\alpha^2} \ln\left[ \frac{p+q}{|p-q|}
\right] \right.\nonumber\\
&&\qquad + \left. \frac{p^2-q^2-\alpha^2}{\alpha^2} \ln \left
[ \frac{p+q+\alpha}{|p-q|+\alpha} \right] \right),\nonumber\\
{\mathcal I}_2 &=& \frac{1}{pq} \ln\left
[ \frac{p+q+\alpha}{|p-q|+\alpha} \right].
\end{eqnarray}
In the limit of $p,q \ll \alpha$ the logarithms can be expanded
\[ \ln\left[ \frac{p+q+\alpha}{|p-q|+\alpha} \right] \simeq \theta
(p-q) \left( \frac{2q}{\alpha} - 2\frac{pq}{\alpha^2} +\cdots \right)
+ \langle p\leftrightarrow q\rangle, \] and upon using the bifurcation
method in the denominators the gap equations take on the following
approximate form:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{naivefinalgaps}
Z(p) &=& 1 + \frac{1}{2}\frac{(1\!+\!\xi)}{N\pi^2 \alpha p^2}
\int_0^p dq\; q^2 - \frac{1}{2}\frac{(1\!+\!\xi)}{N\pi^2\alpha}
\int_p^\alpha dq\; \left( 2-\frac{2\alpha}{q} - \frac{p^2}{q^2}
\right) \nonumber\\
\Sigma(p) &=& \frac{(1\!-\!\xi)}{N\pi^2} \int_0^p dq\; \frac{1}{p}
\frac{\Sigma(q)}{Z(q)} - 2\frac{\xi}{N\pi^2} \int_p^\alpha dq\;
\frac{1}{q}\frac{\Sigma(q)}{Z(q)}.
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Wavefunction Renormalization.}
The first of equations (\ref{naivefinalgaps}) can be integrated
directly, to obtain the wavefunction renormalization in the normal
phase (where there is no mass generation) and as an approximation to
the wavefunction renormalization when there is mass generation:
\begin{equation}
\label{naivewfsoln}
Z(p) \simeq a + \left(\frac{p}{\alpha}\right)^\gamma + f\left(\frac{p}{\alpha}\right),
\end{equation}
where $a$ is a constant and the function $f$ vanishes at least as
quickly as $p/\alpha$ in the limit $p\rightarrow 0$. In the above
we have used the usual renormalization group argument to resum
logarithmic terms as
\[ 1+ \gamma \ln \left( \frac{p}{\alpha} \right) \simeq
\left(\frac{p}{\alpha} \right)^\gamma.\] The exponent $\gamma$ is
given by
\begin{equation}
\gamma \simeq (1\!+\!\xi) \frac{1}{N\pi^2} .
\end{equation}
This critical behaviour is qualitatively the same as that found in
non--supersymmetric electrodynamics
\cite{aitch+mav+mcneill,kondo+mura97}, so this gives us confidence in
our approach, and demonstrates that the rough qualitative behaviour is
exhibited even within the drastic approximation scheme used here. The
non--trivial wavefunction renormalization we have found here is to be
contrasted with the early results of reference \cite{koopmans89} in
which the wavefunction renormalization was taken to be unity.
\subsection{Self Energy.}
Turning now to the self energy function, we wish to construct an
equivalent differential equation for the mass function
\[ M(p;\xi) = \frac{\Sigma(p;\xi)}{Z(p;\xi)}; \]
this is achieved by differentiating the second integral equation
(\ref{naivefinalgaps}) twice with respect to $p$ and once with respect
to $\xi$. The reason we take an extra derivative with respect to
$\xi$ is that this will allow us to probe the gauge dependence of the
solution directly, without having to fully solve the equation, for we
are only interested in the gauge dependence of the solution. First we
rescale variables as $p \mapsto \alpha p$ and $M(p) \mapsto \alpha
m(p)$ and then the resulting differential equation is:
\begin{equation}
\label{naivediffeq}
\left( \dot{m} \right)^{\prime\prime} + \frac{1}{p} \left( 2 - \frac{1}{N\pi^2}
(1\!+\!\xi) \right) \left(\dot{m} \right)^\prime -\frac{2}{N\pi^2}
\frac{\xi}{p^2} \dot{m} - \frac{1}{N\pi^2} \frac{1}{p} m^\prime -
\frac{2}{N\pi^2} m = 0;
\end{equation}
the superior point denotes a derivative with respect to $\xi$ and
primes denote derivatives with respect to $p$.
Demanding that $\dot{m}=0$ for all values of $p$ (in the infra red)
yields the solution
\begin{equation}
\label{diffsoln}
M(p) = M_0 e^{-p^2/\alpha^2} ,
\end{equation}
which is obviously constant and $\xi$--independent in the
$p\rightarrow 0$ limit. We should be cautious, however, for the
approximation of neglecting the mass function in the denominators
might not be consistent with this limit. When, in the next section,
we use the full vertex and restore the mass in the denominators, we
will be able to show that this solution appears to persist in the
limit $p\rightarrow 0$, confirming our assertion here. It is
interesting to note that there are no solutions to (\ref{naivediffeq})
which are gauge independent in the limit $p\rightarrow 0$ but gauge
dependent elsewhere (this can be shown by developing a gauge dependent
power series for $m$ and then constraining the gauge dependence via
the indicial equation): this contrasts the case of non--supersymmetric
QED${}_3$, in which such solutions do appear to exist, and seem to
lead to a critical flavour number. We will return to a full
discussion of this issue in section \ref{sec:discuss}.
\subsection{Concluding Remarks.}
The approximations we have used in this section are rather drastic,
but the results obtained are neat and transparent: the
wavefunction renormalization exhibits the expected critical behaviour
\cite{appelquist81,aitch+mav+mcneill,kondo+mura97}
\begin{equation}
Z(p) \simeq \left( \frac{p}{\alpha} \right)^\gamma , \qquad \gamma
\sim \frac{1}{N},
\end{equation}
and we find a gauge independent solution for the dynamically generated mass
\begin{equation}
\label{mass:naive}
M(p) = M_0 e^{-p^2/\alpha^2}.
\end{equation}
These results are in line with those found in non--supersymmetric
QED${}_3$, though we have no evidence here for a critical flavour
number above which no mass generation occurs, which is the case in the
non--supersymmetric model. This contrasts the results of reference
\cite{koopmans89}, in which a critical flavour number was found. We
discuss this issue further in section \ref{sec:discuss} after we have
presented our full computation.
Had we not used the bifurcation method in this section, the resulting
differential equation for the mass function would have been
non--linear. What is curious is that the bifurcation method works so
well: as we will show, the solutions derived above are entirely
consistent with the full vertex and the restoration of the mass in the
denominators of the kernel. The inaccuracies arising from regions of
integration where the bifurcation method is least reliable are
suppressed in the limits considered for the determination of the
dynamical mass (i.e. vanishing $p$).
\section{Full Computation.}
\label{sec:fullcomp}
In this section we turn to our more complete computation, where we use
a three--point vertex consistent with the U(1) Ward identity
(\ref{wimom}). The trick we use is to rewrite $P^2=-D^4 (P)$ in the
gauge field propagator, and then integrate by parts until the $D^2
(P)$ operators appear acting on the three--point vertex $G_3$, so that
the Ward identity (\ref{wimom}) can be used as it appears. When this
is done, the superspace parts of the integral equations can be
unpacked as described in section \ref{sec:ds} and reconstructed after
some algebra to obtain the coupled integral equations (in which we
have already performed the angular integrations):
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{fullgaps}
Z(p) &=& 1 + \frac{1}{4}\frac{\alpha}{N\pi^2} \int dq\;
\frac{q^2}{{\mathbb K}(q)} \left[ 4 (1\!+\!\xi) Z(p)Z(q) {\mathcal
J}_1 (p,q;\alpha) \right.\nonumber\\
&& \qquad\qquad\qquad + \left.2(1\!-\!\xi) \left( q^2 Z(p) Z(q) -q^2 Z^2 (q) +
\Sigma(p)\Sigma(q) - \Sigma^2(q) \right) {\mathcal J}_2 (p,q;\alpha)
\right], \nonumber\\
\Sigma(p) &=& \frac{1}{4}\frac{\alpha}{N\pi^2} \int dq\;
\frac{q^2}{{\mathbb K}(q)} \left[ 2 (1\!+\!\xi) \left
( \Sigma(p)Z(q) - \Sigma(q) Z(p) \right) {\mathcal J}_1 (p,q;\alpha)
\right. \nonumber\\
&&\qquad\qquad\qquad + \left.2 (1\!-\!\xi) \left( q^2 \Sigma(p) Z(q)
- p^2 \Sigma(q) Z(p) \right) {\mathcal J}_2 (p,q;\alpha) \right];
\end{eqnarray}
the angular integrals ${\mathcal J}_i(p,q;\alpha)$ are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
{\mathcal J}_1 (p,q;\alpha) &=& \frac{1}{2pq} \left( \frac{p^2-q^2}{\alpha}
\left[ \frac{1}{|p-q|} - \frac{1}{p+q} \right] -
\frac{p^2-q^2}{\alpha^2} \ln\left[ \frac{p+q}{|p-q|}
\right] \right. \nonumber\\
&& \qquad + \left.\frac{p^2-q^2-\alpha^2}{\alpha^2} \ln \left
[ \frac{p+q+\alpha}{|p-q|+\alpha} \right] \right),\nonumber\\
{\mathcal J}_2 (p,q;\alpha) &=& \frac{1}{pq} \left( \frac{1}{\alpha}
\left[ \frac{1}{|p-q|} - \frac{1}{p+q} \right] - \frac{1}{\alpha^2}
\ln\left[ \frac{p+q}{|p-q|} \right] + \frac{1}{\alpha^2} \ln\left
[ \frac{p+q+\alpha}{|p-q|+\alpha} \right] \right).
\end{eqnarray}
Again, the seagull graph gives an irrelevant $p$ independent
contribution to $Z$, equation (\ref{gull:trivial}), and also vanishes
in the supersymmetric Feynman gauge. Since much of our final analysis
will have to be restricted to this gauge (or at least to
approximations equivalent to considering this gauge), even if we were
to make a $p$--dependent {\sl ansatz} for $G_4$, the contribution
would vanish on account of the $C^{\alpha\beta}$ tensor structure in
the vertex projecting out only the $(1\!-\!\xi)$ component of the
gauge field propagator.
To derive the integral equations we have used the following Taylor
expansion for operators of the form $D^2(p+r)$ when acting on
$\Phi^*(p,\theta)$:
\begin{equation}
D^2 (p+r) = D^2 (p) + \frac{1}{2} r^{\alpha\beta} \left
[ \frac{\partial}{\partial r^{\alpha\beta}} D^2(r)\right]_{r=p} +
\frac{1}{2} \left[ \frac{1}{2} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial
r_{\alpha\beta} \partial r^{\alpha\beta}} D^2 (r) \right]_{r=p} .
\end{equation}
Note that this is an exact expansion, which terminates at second
order. The curious extra factors of one half which appear in the
expansion arise on account of the second of equations (\ref{SuSpIds})
which puts a factor of two into the dot product of two three--vectors.
When acting on $\Phi^*(p,\theta)$ we drop terms which involve
derivatives with respect to $r$, for these correspond to higher
derivative terms, which should be irrelevant for our study of the
infra red physics.
To study the integral equations it is again necessary to approximate
the logarithms with small momentum expansions, and we obtain
approximate integral equations for $\Sigma$ and $Z$, in which we have
used the abbreviated notations:
\begin{eqnarray}
A &\doteq& \frac{1}{4} \frac{1}{N\pi^2} \nonumber\\
Q(p,q;Z,\Sigma) &\doteq& q^2 Z(q) \left[ Z(p) - Z(q) \right] +
\Sigma(q) \left[ \Sigma(p) - \Sigma(q) \right] \nonumber\\
R(Z,\Sigma) &\doteq& \Sigma(p) \, Z(q) - \Sigma(q) \, Z(p)
\nonumber\\
S(p,q;Z,\Sigma) &\doteq& q^2 \Sigma(p) \, Z(q) - p^2 \Sigma(q), Z(p).
\end{eqnarray}
The wavefunction renormalization is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{fullgapwf}
Z(p) = 1 + \frac{4 (1\!+\!\xi)}{\alpha p^2} &A& \int_0^p dq\;
\frac{q^4\, Z(p) Z(q)}{{\mathbb K}(q)}
+ 4 (1\!+\!\xi) A \int_p^\alpha dq\; \frac{Z(p) Z(q)}{{\mathbb
K}(q)} \left( \frac{2q^2}{\alpha} - 2q - \frac{p^2}{\alpha} \right)
\nonumber\\
+2 (1\!-\!\xi) &A& \int_0^p dq\; \frac{Q(p,q;Z,\Sigma)}{{\mathbb K}(q)}
\left( \frac{q}{p^2-q^2} -\frac{2q^2}{\alpha p^2} \right)
\nonumber\\
+ 2(1\!-\!\xi) &A& \int_p^\alpha dq\; \frac{Q(p,q;Z,\Sigma)}{{\mathbb
K}(q)} \left( \frac{q^2}{p} \frac{1}{q^2-p^2} - \frac{2}{\alpha}
\right),
\end{eqnarray}
and for the self energy we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{fullgapse}
\Sigma(p) = \frac{2 (1\!+\!\xi)}{\alpha p^2} &A& \int_0^p dq\;
\frac{q^4\, R(Z,\Sigma)}{{\mathbb K}(q)}
+2 (1\!+\!\xi) A \int_p^\alpha dq\; \frac{q^2 \,
R(Z,\Sigma)}{{\mathbb K}(q)} \left( \frac{2}{\alpha} - \frac{2}{q} -
\frac{p^2}{\alpha q^2} \right) \nonumber\\
+ 2 (1\!-\!\xi) &A& \int_0^p dq\; \frac{q^2 \, S(p,q;Z,\Sigma)}{{\mathbb
K}(q)} \left( \frac{1}{q} \frac{1}{p^2-q^2} - \frac{2}{\alpha p^2}
\right) \nonumber\\
+ 2 (1\!-\!\xi) &A& \int_p^\alpha dq\; \frac{q^2 \,
S(p,q;Z,\Sigma)}{{\mathbb K}(q)} \left( \frac{1}{p}
\frac{1}{q^2-p^2} - \frac{2}{\alpha q^2} \right).
\end{eqnarray}
The kernels are infra red singular; this arises from the propagation
of a supersymmetric gauge artifact \cite{clark77}, namely the lowest
component of the gauge superfield; this singular behaviour in the
infra red is a general problem for superspace formulations of gauge
field theories, but is absent in supersymmetric Feynman gauge
\cite{clark+love}. Note that the singular terms as $p\rightarrow q$
are regulated on account of the vanishing of the functions $Q$ and $S$
in this same limit.
It is also evident from equations (\ref{fullgapwf}) and
(\ref{fullgapse}) that it is impossible to derive from them an
equivalent differential equation (not even within the bifurcation
method) on account of the presence of factors of $Z(p)$ and
$\Sigma(p)$ in the kernels. Furthermore, it is evident that even if
the factors of $Z(p)$ and $\Sigma(p)$ could be dealt with, the same
problem arises from the $(p^2 - q^2)^{-1}$ terms: the integrals cannot
be entirely removed by differentiation. However, this last problem is
removed in the supersymmetric Feynman gauge, in which the problem of
the gauge artifact discussed above is eliminated: for this reason much
of our analysis will be performed in Feynman gauge, or using
approximations which are computationally equivalent to this gauge.
\subsection{Wavefunction Renormalization.}
\label{sec:fullwf}
In the normal phase, where $\Sigma=0$, the integral equation for $Z$
can be integrated directly. We begin with the approximation
$Z(p)=Z(q)$, which is not quite as drastic as $Z=1$, but has the same
effect, namely to reduce the kernels to known functions of $p$ and
$q$. Performing the integrations yields the following form for $Z$
(compare with equation (\ref{naivewfsoln})):
\begin{eqnarray}
Z(p) &=& 1 + \frac{2(1\!+\!\xi)}{N\pi^2} - \frac{8}{3} \frac{(1\!+\!\xi)}{N\pi^2}
\left(\frac{p}{\alpha}\right) + \frac{(1\!+\!\xi)}{N\pi^2} \left
( \frac{p}{\alpha} \right)^2 + 2\frac{(1\!+\!\xi)}{N\pi^2} \ln
\left( \frac{p}{\alpha} \right) \nonumber\\
&\simeq& a + \left( \frac{p}{\alpha} \right)^\gamma + f\left
( \frac{p}{\alpha} \right) ; \label{wf:soln1}\\
\gamma &=& 2\frac{(1\!+\!\xi)}{N\pi^2}, \label{gammadef}
\end{eqnarray}
where we have used the usual renormalization group argument to resum
the logarithm, and as in equation (\ref{naivewfsoln}), $a$ is a
constant of order ${\mathcal O}(1/N)$ and the function $f$ vanishes at
least as fast as $p/\alpha$ in the limit $p/\alpha \rightarrow 0$.
The critical exponent $\gamma$ is found to have the usual $1/N$
behaviour. Note that the evaluation of the exponent $\gamma$ in this
more reliable approach differs by a factor of two from the result
obtained in section \ref{sec:gauge}; this is of little concern for the
exponent is not a gauge invariant object. The $N$ dependence is the
crucial property, and this is the same in both computations.
We can demonstrate that this solution is stable, by now relaxing the
assumption that $Z(p) =Z(q)$, and feeding the solution
\[ Z(q) = \left( \frac{q}{\alpha} \right)^\gamma \] back into the integral
equation. The parts of the integral equation which vanish in Feynman
gauge now give divergent contributions, in the form of hypergeometric
functions evaluated at the limit of their radius of convergence, and
divergent logarithms from the remaining singularities at $p=q$. These
singularities are again a consequence of the propagation of a
supersymmetric gauge artifact; they can be successfully avoided by
considering the supersymmetric Feynman gauge, $\xi=1$, in which the
iterated solution reads:
\begin{eqnarray}
Z(p) &=& \frac{16}{3-\gamma} \frac{1}{N\pi^2} \left( \frac{p}{\alpha}
\right) - \frac{2}{1+ \gamma} \frac{1}{N\pi^2} \left
( \frac{p}{\alpha} \right)^2 + \left( \frac{p}{\alpha}
\right)^\gamma; \label{wf:soln2} \\
\gamma &=& \frac{4}{N\pi^2} .
\end{eqnarray}
The critical exponent is unaltered, and the coefficients of the other
terms receive corrections of order ${\mathcal O}(1/N)$ in the
denominator. Hence, for large $N$ the solution is stable to
iteration, at least in supersymmetric Feynman gauge.
\subsection{Self Energy.}
\label{sec:fullse}
We turn now to the self energy, and the integral equation
(\ref{fullgapse}). As we discussed previously, it is impossible to
derive an equivalent differential equation, on account of the presence
of $\Sigma(p)$ and \( (p^2-q^2)^{-1}\) terms in the kernels. We again
study the equation in the Feynman gauge, which removes the
difficulties of the singular terms. Dividing through by $Z(p)$, we
obtain the following integral equation for the mass function $M(p)$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\left( \frac{1}{2N\pi^2} \right)^{-1} M(p) = \frac{2}{\alpha
p^2}&& \int_0^p dq\; \frac{q^4}{Z(q)} \frac{M(p) - M(q)}{q^2 + M^2 (q)} - 4
\int_p^\alpha dq\; \frac{q}{Z(q)}\frac{M(p)-M(q)}{q^2 +M^2(q)} \nonumber\\
+ \frac{4}{\alpha}&& \int_p^\alpha dq\;
\frac{q^2}{Z(q)}\frac{M(p)-M(q)}{q^2+M^2(q)} - \frac{2p^2}{\alpha} \int_p^\alpha
dq\; \frac{1}{Z(q)} \frac{M(p)-M(q)}{q^2 +M^2(q)} .
\end{eqnarray}
To study this we cannot use the usual method of setting
$M(p)=M(q)=M(0)$ everywhere and looking for self consistent solutions,
for in this limit the kernels reduce to zero. Instead, we recall the
solution of the differential equation in section \ref{sec:gauge},
equation (\ref{diffsoln}), and adopt the following {\sl ansatz} for
$M$ inside the kernels:
\begin{equation}
\label{Mansatz}
M(q) = m_0 e^{-p^2/\alpha^2}.
\end{equation}
We adopt also the solution \[Z(q) = \left( \frac{q}{\alpha}
\right)^\gamma \] for the wavefunction renormalization factors which
appear above. Unfortunately the integrations cannot be performed
analytically if the exponential factor in (\ref{Mansatz}) is present
in the denominators. Hence in the denominators we set $M$ to a
constant, $\bar{m}$, and it is with this in mind that the scale
$\bar{m}$ will be interpreted as an average mass over the range $p\in
[0,\alpha]$; we will see that in the limits we wish to consider,
dependence on the introduced scale drops out. We can then perform the
integrations analytically with result:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{fullresult}
\frac{M(p)}{m_0} &=& -\frac{\gamma \pi}{4} \left( \frac{\alpha}{\bar{m}}
\right)^\gamma e^{-p^2/\alpha^2} \csc \left( \frac{2-\gamma}{2} \pi
\right) + \frac{1}{2} e^{-p^2/\alpha^2} - \frac{\gamma}{4} \Gamma \left
( -\frac{\gamma}{2} , \left(\frac{\bar{m}}{\alpha}\right)^{3/2}
\right) \nonumber\\
&& + \frac{\gamma}{4} \left( \frac{\alpha}{\bar{m}}
\right)^\gamma e^{\bar{m}^2/\alpha^2} \Gamma \left
( \frac{2-\gamma}{2} \right) \Gamma \left( \frac{\gamma}{2} ,
\frac{\bar{m}^2}{\alpha^2} \right)
- \frac{\gamma}{2} \frac{1}{1-\gamma} \left( \frac{p}{\alpha}
\right)^{1-\gamma} e^{-p^2/\alpha^2} \nonumber\\
&& - \frac{1}{2} \frac{\gamma}{2-\gamma} \left
( \frac{\alpha}{\bar{m}} \right)^{\gamma} \left
( \sqrt{\frac{p}{\bar{m}}}\right)^{(2-\gamma)/2} {}_2F_1 \left( 1,
\frac{2-\gamma}{2} ; \frac{4-\gamma}{2}, - \sqrt{\frac{p}{\bar{m}}}
\right)\nonumber\\
&& + \frac{\gamma}{2} \frac{1}{1-\gamma} e^{-p^2/\alpha^2}
- \frac{\gamma\pi}{4} \left( \frac{\bar{m}}{\alpha} \right)^{1-\gamma}
e^{-p^2/\alpha^2} \csc \left( \frac{1-\gamma}{2} \pi \right)
+ \frac{1}{2} \frac{\gamma}{1-\gamma} \left( \frac{p}{\alpha}
\right)^{1-\gamma} e^{-p^2/\alpha^2}\nonumber\\
&& - \frac{1}{2} \frac{\gamma}{1+\gamma} \left( \frac{\bar{m}}{\alpha}
\right)^2 e^{-p^2/\alpha^2}
- \frac{\gamma}{4} \left( \frac{\bar{m}}{\alpha}
\right)^{1-\gamma} e^{\bar{m}^2/\alpha^2} \Gamma\left
( \frac{3-\gamma}{2} \right) \Gamma \left( \frac{\gamma-1}{2} ,
\frac{\bar{m}^2}{\alpha^2} \right) \nonumber\\
&& + \frac{1}{2} \frac{\gamma}{3-\gamma} \left( \frac{\bar{m}}{\alpha}
\right)^{1-\gamma} \left( \sqrt{\frac{p}{\bar{m}}}
\right)^{(3-\gamma)/2} {}_2F_1 \left( 1, \frac{3-\gamma}{2} ;
\frac{5-\gamma}{2} , - \sqrt{\frac{p}{\bar{m}}} \right) \nonumber\\
&& + \frac{\gamma}{4} \Gamma \left( \frac{1-\gamma}{2} , \left
( \frac{\bar{m}}{\alpha} \right)^{3/2} \right)
+ {\mathcal O} \left ( \frac{p^2}{\alpha^2} \right),
\end{eqnarray}
where \[ \gamma = \frac{4}{N\pi^2}.\] The limit $p\rightarrow 0$ is
now well defined, and if we also assume \( \bar{m} \ll \alpha \) and
take the limit \( \gamma \ll 1 \) we find that
\begin{equation}
\label{fullsoln}
\frac{M(0)}{m_0} = \frac{1}{1-\gamma} + \frac{\gamma}{2} \left
( \frac{\pi}{2} - \frac{1}{1-\gamma} \right) + \ldots
\end{equation}
where the dots represent the omission of terms smaller than the finite
terms exhibited above. It is clear then, that to leading order in
$1/N$, the {\sl ansatz} (\ref{Mansatz}) is stable to iteration, and we
have found that the solution of the differential equation in section
\ref{sec:gauge} is consistent with the full vertex and the restoration
of the mass in the denominators of the kernels. We have therefore
demonstrated the possibility of a finite dynamically generated mass
for this theory, though we still find no evidence for a critical
flavour number: we return to a discussion of this issue in section
\ref{sec:discuss}.
\subsection{Concluding Remarks.}
In this section we have presented a computation of the wavefunction
renormalization and self energy with a three-point vertex which is
consistent with the U(1) Ward identity. While we have not been able
to use the elegant methods of section \ref{sec:gauge}, we have been
able to perform a direct computation, and within the approximations
made we have found that the wavefunction renormalization exhibits the
expected critical behaviour
\cite{appelquist81,aitch+mav+mcneill,kondo+mura97} and we have
exhibited a finite solution to the gap equation for the mass function:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{fullconcs}
Z(p) &\simeq& \left( \frac{p}{\alpha} \right)^\gamma, \qquad \gamma =
2\frac{(1\!+\!\xi)}{N\pi^2}; \nonumber\\ &&\nonumber\\
M(p) &=& m_0 e^{-p^2/\alpha^2}.
\end{eqnarray}
These results are qualitatively the same as those derived using the
simple approximations of section \ref{sec:gauge}, justifying the
use of those approximations in determining qualitatively the gauge
dependence in this model.
Since we have found that a mass can be dynamically generated in this
model without breaking supersymmetry, it is natural to ask whether it
is possible to determine whether the massive or massless (for $m_0$
could still vanish) solution is favoured. In non--supersymmetric
theories this question can be addressed by appealing to the effective
potential (which upon using a suitable variational principle leads to
the same non--perturbative physics for QED${}_3$ as do the
Dyson--Schwinger equations \cite{adrian98}), but in supersymmetric
models this potential vanishes. Based on experience with
supersymmetric non--linear sigma models \cite{alvarez78} it was
conjectured \cite{pisarski84} that the question could be settled by
appealing to the effective action, and to the Ward identities arising
from the supersymmetry. The same approach was taken in reference
\cite{diamandis98} for a ($2+1$ dimensional) supersymmetric model with
a CP${}^1$ constraint. The simplest Ward identity arising from
supersymmetry relates the two--point correlation functions of the
physical degrees of freedom in the matter superfield (in the presence
of a mass $m$ for the multiplet):
\begin{equation}
\label{comptwi}
\langle \psi_\alpha (x) \psi_\beta (y) \rangle_0 = \left
( \partial_{\alpha\beta} + m \,C_{\alpha\beta} \right) \langle
\phi(x) \phi(y) \rangle_0 .
\end{equation}
Crucially, in the models of references
\cite{alvarez78,ciuchini95,diamandis98}, where there are further
similar Ward identities relating correlation functions of fields
arising from the implementation of the constraints, it was found that
these Ward identities were only satisfied when the mass for the matter
multiplet was non--vanishing. In the present model, and in the
${\mathcal N}=2$ model of reference \cite{pisarski84}, there are no
such constraints, and so the Ward identities place no further
requirements on the generated mass; of course, the superfield
formalism we have adopted means that the Ward identity (\ref{comptwi})
is satisfied automatically. This leaves open the question of whether
the vacuum selects the massless or massive solution in supersymmetric
U(1) gauge field theory.
\section{Extended Supersymmetric Action.}
\label{sec:n=2action}
The ${\mathcal N}=2$ extended rigid superspace is constructed in a way
slightly different to the ${\mathcal N}=1$ model: it can be obtained
by dimensional reduction from ${\mathcal N}=1$ supersymmetry in four
dimensions. The compactification is realised by considering all the
fields in the model to be independent of one spatial dimension and
then integrating out this variable. The rigid superspace of four
dimensional ${\mathcal N}=1$ supersymmetry is parameterized by the
usual four space--time coordinates and four Grassmann--odd coordinates
arranged in two spinors $\theta^\alpha$ and
$\bar{\theta}^{\dot{\alpha}}$, where $\alpha \in \{ 1,2 \}$ and
$\dot{\alpha} \in \{ \dot{1},\dot{2} \}$ \cite{srivastava}, which we
again denote collectively by $z$. This furnishes the superspace with
two spinorial derivatives $D_\alpha$ and $\bar{D}_{\dot{\alpha}}$,
covariant under supersymmetry transformations, which leads to a
crucial difference compared to the three dimensional model, in that
the matter superfields now come in two types: chiral $(\Phi)$ and
antichiral $(\Phi^\dagger)$, which respectively obey the constraints
\begin{equation}
\label{chiral}
\bar{D}_{\dot{\alpha}} \Phi = 0 , \qquad D_\alpha \Phi^\dagger = 0.
\end{equation}
We collect some basic results for four dimensional superspace in
appendix \ref{app:4d}. Consider chiral and antichiral superfields
which transform under local U(1) transformations in the following way:
\begin{eqnarray}
\Phi_\pm (z) \longrightarrow &\Phi^\prime_\pm (z^\prime)& = e^{\pm
ie \Lambda(z)} \Phi_\pm (z),\nonumber\\
\Phi^\dagger_\pm (z) \longrightarrow &\Phi^{\dagger\prime}_\pm
(z^\prime)& = \Phi^\dagger_\pm (z) e^{\mp ie \bar{\Lambda(z)}}.
\end{eqnarray}
The functions $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ must respectively be
chiral and antichiral, to preserve the chiral and antichiral nature of
the matter superfields. Note that $e$ is a dimensionless gauge
coupling: the dimensionful parameter which will again lead to a
dynamically generated scale will be the size of the compactified
dimension. The gauge field is now a real scalar superfield, and
transforms under infinitesimal U(1) transformations in the following
way
\begin{equation}
V(z) = V^\dagger (z) \longrightarrow V^\prime (z^\prime) = V (z) +
\frac{i}{2} \left( \bar{\Lambda} - \Lambda \right).
\end{equation}
We now wish to consider a model with ${\mathcal N}=1$ supersymmetry,
local U(1) gauge invariance and $N$ matter flavours; again the action
functional comprises three parts, a locally U(1) invariant kinetic
term for the matter superfields, a gauge invariant classical field
strength for the gauge superfield, a (Lorentz) gauge fixing term; for
convenience we will also add a bare mass term for the matter
superfields:
\begin{equation}
\label{n=2action}
S = S_{g}^{\mathrm{class}} + S_{g}^{\mathrm{GF}} +
S_m^{\mathrm k} + S_m^{\mathrm m};
\end{equation}
\begin{eqnarray}
S_{g}^{\mathrm{class}} &=& \int d^4 x\,d^4\theta\; V
\left[ \frac{1}{8} D^\alpha \bar{D}^2 D_\alpha \right] V,\nonumber\\
S_g^{\mathrm{GF}} &=& \int d^4 x\,d^4\theta\; \frac{1}{8} V \left
[ -\frac{1}{8\xi} D^2 \bar{D}^2 \right] V,\nonumber\\
S_m^{\mathrm k} &=& \int d^4 x\,d^4\theta\; \left[ \Phi^\dagger_+ e^{2eV}
\Phi_+ + \Phi^\dagger_- e^{-2eV} \Phi_- \right], \nonumber\\
S_m^{\mathrm m} &=& \int d^4 x\, d^2 \theta\; \mu_0 \,\Phi_+ \Phi_- + \int
d^4x \, d^2\bar{\theta}\; \mu_0 \,\Phi^\dagger_+ \Phi^\dagger_- .
\end{eqnarray}
Again we have included an implicit sum over $N$ flavours in the matter
parts. There are a number of important differences between this
action and the one we considered in the first part of this paper.
First, there are now twice as many matter superfields: an antichiral
and chiral superfield for each charge under U(1): as we shall see this
changes considerably the structure of the propagators; in particular,
note that in the absence of a bare mass $\mu_0$ the non--interacting
correlation function \( \langle \Phi_+ \Phi_- \rangle_0 \) vanishes,
and the Dyson--Schwinger equations for the self energy and
wavefunction renormalization are decoupled to an extent. Furthermore,
it is evident that the implementation of the interaction with the
gauge field is completely different: there are now an infinite number
of vertices with increasing numbers of gauge superfields. In the
Wess--Zumino gauge (which projects out the physical components of the
gauge superfield, but which thereby breaks supersymmetry explicitly)
the sequence of interaction vertices terminates at the four point
vertex, giving it the same content as the model considered in the
first part of this paper. In order to make the model tractable, we
will truncate the Dyson--Schwinger equations at the level of the
four--point vertex, effectively setting higher--point vertices to zero
\cite{clark+love}. This situation is certainly not ideal
\cite{kaiselip}, but we find that the graph in the Dyson--Schwinger
equation arising from the four--point vertex contributes trivially to
the wavefunction renormalization, and we therefore believe that this
truncation will not affect the infra red physics. The dressed
propagators for the model are as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{n=2props}
\Delta^{\Phi_+ \Phi_-} (p;12) &=& \frac{i\Sigma(p)}{Z^2(p)\, p^2 +
\Sigma^2(p)}\frac{\bar{D}^2}{4} \delta^4(12),\nonumber\\
\Delta^{\Phi_{\pm}^{\dagger} \Phi_{\pm}}(p;12) &=& \frac{i
Z(p)}{Z^2(p)\, p^2 + \Sigma^2(p)}\frac{D^2 \bar{D}^2}{16}
\delta^4(12),
\end{eqnarray}
we have again used an abbreviated superspace notation where, for
example \[ \delta^4(12)\equiv\delta^4(\theta_1 - \theta_2) =
\delta^2(\theta_1 -\theta_2) \, \delta^2(\bar{\theta}_1
-\bar{\theta}_2) \equiv \delta^2(12) \, \delta^2 (\bar{1}\bar{2}).\]
The undressed gauge superfield propagator reads \cite{srivastava}
\begin{equation}
\Delta^{VV}(p;12)= \frac{1}{2p^2}e^{\theta_1\not p\,\bar{\theta}_2 -
\theta_2\not p\,\theta_1} \left\{\frac{4}{p^2}\left( 1-\xi \right) -
\left(1+\xi\right) \delta^4(12) \right\};
\end{equation}
later we will dress this propagator with a vacuum polarization factor
as before.
For simplicity we will restrict our attention to the simple vertex
approximation considered in the approach of section \ref{sec:gauge};
this is in fact consistent with the U(1) Ward identity for this model
\cite{clark+love}, at least in the limit of vanishing transferred
momentum $p$.
\section{The Dyson--Schwinger Equations.}
\label{sec:n=2ds}
We can rewrite the matter superfields in terms of unconstrained scalar
superfields, which makes the evaluation of the superspace parts of the
Dyson--Schwinger equations simpler:
\begin{eqnarray}
\Phi_\pm (p,\theta,\bar{\theta}) &=& e^{-\theta \not p\, \bar{\theta}}
\Psi_\pm (p,\theta),\nonumber\\
\Phi_\pm^{\dagger} (p,\theta,\bar{\theta}) &=& e^{\theta \not p\, \bar{\theta}}
\Psi_\pm^{\dagger} (p,\bar{\theta}).
\end{eqnarray}
The Dyson--Schwinger equations for the current model are shown
schematically in figures \ref{fig:n=2se} and \ref{fig:n=2wf}. The
graphs on the left hand side are a convenient abbreviation for the
difference between the inverse full propagator and inverse bare
propagator.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\begin{picture}(200,80)(0,0)
\Line(0,30)(60,30)
\GCirc(30,30){7}{0.5}
\LongArrow(20,20)(40,20)
\Text(30,10)[]{$p$}
\Text(5,40)[]{$\Phi_+$}
\Text(55,40)[]{$\Phi_-$}
\Text(70,30)[]{$=$}
\Text(85,30)[]{$-$}
\Line(100,30)(200,30)
\GCirc(150,30){7}{0.5}
\PhotonArc(150,30)(25,5,180){4}{5.5}
\LongArrowArcn(150,38)(25,130,50)
\Text(152,72)[]{$p-q$}
\Vertex(125,30){1}
\Vertex(175,30){4}
\Text(105,40)[]{$\Phi_+$}
\Text(195,40)[]{$\Phi_-$}
\LongArrow(140,20)(160,20)
\Text(150,10)[]{$q$}
\end{picture}
\caption{\label{fig:n=2se}Schematic form of the Dyson--Schwinger
equation for the self energy function. Solid lines represent matter
superfields, and the wavy line represents the gauge superfield;
blobs indicate full non--perturbative quantities.}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\begin{picture}(280,80)(0,0)
\Line(0,30)(60,30)
\GCirc(30,30){7}{0.5}
\LongArrow(20,20)(40,20)
\Text(30,10)[]{$p$}
\Text(5,40)[]{$\Phi_+$}
\Text(55,40)[]{$\Phi_+^{\dagger}$}
\Text(70,30)[]{$=$}
\Text(85,30)[]{$-$}
\Line(100,30)(160,30)
\PhotonArc(130,48)(15,0,360){3.5}{7}
\LongArrow(120,20)(140,20)
\Vertex(130,30){4}
\LongArrowArcn(130,44)(12,130,50)
\Text(130,48)[]{$q$}
\Text(130,10)[]{$p$}
\Text(105,40)[]{$\Phi_+$}
\Text(155,40)[]{$\Phi_+^{\dagger}$}
\Text(170,30)[]{$-$}
\Line(180,30)(280,30)
\GCirc(230,30){7}{0.5}
\PhotonArc(230,30)(25,5,180){4}{5.5}
\LongArrowArcn(230,38)(25,130,50)
\Text(232,72)[]{$p-q$}
\Vertex(205,30){1}
\Vertex(255,30){4}
\Text(185,40)[]{$\Phi_+$}
\Text(275,40)[]{$\Phi_+^{\dagger}$}
\LongArrow(220,20)(240,20)
\Text(230,10)[]{$q$}
\end{picture}
\caption{\label{fig:n=2wf}Schematic form of the Dyson--Schwinger
equation for the wave-function renormalization. Solid lines
represent matter superfields and wavy lines represent gauge
superfields; blobs indicate full non--perturbative quantities.}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The full self energy function on the left hand side of figure
\ref{fig:n=2se} is written as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\int&& d^2 \theta_1 \, d^2 \theta_2 \; \Phi_+ (-p,\theta_2) \,\Sigma(p)
\frac{\bar{D}^2}{4} \delta^4(12) \, \Phi_-(p,\theta_1) \nonumber\\
&&= \int d^2\theta_1 \, d^2 \theta_2 \; e^{\theta_2\not p\,\bar{\theta}_2}
\Psi_+ (-p,\theta_2) \, \Sigma(p) \delta^2(12) \, e^{-\theta_1\not p\,
(\bar{\theta}_1 - \bar{\theta}_2)}
e^{-\theta_1\not p\,\bar{\theta}_1}\Psi_-(p,\theta_1)\nonumber\\
&&= \int d^2 \theta \; \Psi_+(-p,\theta) \Sigma(p) \Psi_- (p, \theta).
\end{eqnarray}
The graph on the right of figure \ref{fig:n=2se} is given by the
following $( P \doteq p-q)$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\int&& \frac{d^4q}{(2\pi)^4} \, d^4\theta \, d^4\bar{\theta} \; \Phi_+
(-p,\theta_2) \,\left[ \left( -4e^2 G_3\right) \,\Delta^{\Phi_+^{\dagger}
\Phi_-^{\dagger}} (q;12) \,\Delta^{VV}(P;12) \right],\Phi_- (p,\theta_1)
\nonumber\\
&&= -\int \frac{d^4q}{(2\pi)^4} \, d^4\theta \, d^4\bar{\theta}
\; 4e^2 G_3 \, \Phi_+ (-p,\theta_2) \, \frac{i\Sigma(q)}{Z^2(q)\, q^2+\Sigma^2(q)}
\frac{D^2}{4}\delta^4(12) \nonumber\\
&& \quad \times \frac{1}{2P^2}\, e^{\theta_1 \not{P}
\bar{\theta}_2 -\theta_2 \not{P}\bar{\theta}_1}
\left\{\frac{4}{P ^2}(1\!-\!\xi) - (1\!+\!\xi)\delta^4(12)\right\}
\Phi_-(p,\theta_1).
\end{eqnarray}
Expanding the exponentials and performing half of the superspace
integrations using the identities in appendix \ref{app:4d} leaves:
\begin{equation}
i \int \frac{d^4q}{(2\pi)^4} \; 4e^2 \, \Gamma_3 \,
\frac{\Sigma(q)}{Z^2(q)\, q^2+\Sigma^2 (q)} \,
\frac{2p^2}{P^4}(1\!-\!\xi)\int d^2\theta \; \Psi_+(-p,\theta)\Psi_-(p,\theta).
\end{equation}
Note that in this model the superspace integrations project out the
$(1\!-\!\xi)$ component of this graph. This is the basis of the
gauge dependence argument \cite{clark+love} for the non--generation of
dynamical mass in this theory.
Turning to figure \ref{fig:n=2wf}, the graph on the left for the full
wavefunction renormalization is written as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\int&& d^2 \theta_1\, d^2 \bar{\theta}_2 \; \Phi_+(-p,\theta_2) \,
\left( Z(p) -1 \right) \, \frac{\bar{D}^2 D^2}{16}\, \delta^4(12)\,
\Phi_+^{\dagger}(p,\theta_1) \nonumber \\
&&=\int d^2 \theta_1\, d^2 \bar{\theta}_2 \;
e^{\theta_2\not p\,\bar{\theta}_2} \Psi_+(-p,\theta_2) \,
\left( Z(p) -1\right) \, e^{-\theta_1\not p\,\bar{\theta}_1
-\theta_2\not p\,\bar{\theta}_2 +2\theta_1\not p\,\bar{\theta}_2} \,
e^{\theta_1\not p\,\bar{\theta}_1} \, \Psi_+^{\dagger}(p,\bar{\theta}_1)\nonumber\\
&&=\int d^2 \theta_1\, d^2 \bar{\theta}_2 \; \Psi_+
(-p,\theta_2) \left( Z(p) -1 \right) \,
e^{2\theta_1\not p\,\bar{\theta}_2} \,
\Psi_+^{\dagger}(p,\bar{\theta}_1)\nonumber\\
&&=\int d^4 \theta\; (Z(p)-1) \, \Phi_+(-p,\theta,
\bar{\theta})\, \Phi_+^{\dagger}(p,\theta,\bar{\theta}).
\end{eqnarray}
The superspace integrations can be performed in the same way as for
the self energy to write the graphs on the right of figure
\ref{fig:n=2wf}. The ``seagull'' graph is computed to be a trivial
$p$ independent contribution, as in the model of the first part of
this paper (and which again vanishes in supersymmetric Feynman gauge):
\begin{eqnarray}
\int&& \frac{d^4q}{(2\pi)^4} \; d^4\theta \; \frac{1}{2} 4e^2 G_4
\, \Phi_+(-p,\theta,\bar{\theta})\, \Delta^{VV}(q)\,
\Phi_+^{\dagger}(p,\theta,\bar{\theta})\nonumber\\
&&=\int \frac{d^4q}{(2\pi)^4} \; 2e^2\Gamma_4\,
\frac{2}{P^4}(1\!-\!\xi) \int d^4\theta \;
\Phi_+^{\dagger}(p,\theta,\bar{\theta})\, \Phi_+(-p,\theta,\bar{\theta}).
\end{eqnarray}
The last graph on the right of figure \ref{fig:n=2wf} is as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\int&& \frac{d^4q}{(2\pi)^4} \; d^4\theta_1 \, d^4 \theta_2 \;
\Phi_+(-p,\theta_2) \, 4e^2 G_3 \,
\Delta^{\Phi_+^{\dagger}\Phi_+}(q;12) \, \Delta^{VV}(P;12) \,
\Phi_+^{\dagger}(p,\theta_1) \nonumber \\
&&=\int \frac{d^4q}{(2\pi)^4} \; 4e^2 G_3 \, \frac{iZ(q)}{Z^2(q)\, q^2
+ \Sigma^2(q)}\, \left[ \frac{(p+q)^2}{2 P^4}(1\!-\!\xi) - (1\!+\!\xi)
\right]\nonumber \\
&&\quad \times \int d^4\theta \; \Phi_+(-p,\theta,\bar{\theta}) \,
\Phi_+^{\dagger}(p,\theta_1).
\end{eqnarray}
Collecting the results above, the Dyson--Schwinger equations of
figures \ref{fig:n=2se} and \ref{fig:n=2wf} then yield the following
coupled integral equations for the self energy and wavefunction
renormalization:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{n=2segap1}
\Sigma(p) = &&-i\, 4e^2 p^2 (1\!-\!\xi) \int \frac{d^4q}{(2\pi)^4} \;
G_3 \frac{\Sigma(q)}{Z^2(q)\, q^2 + \Sigma^2(q)}\frac{2}{(p-q)^4};\\
Z(p) = &1& -i \, 4e^2 \, (1\!+\!\xi)\int \frac{d^4q}{(2\pi)^4} \; G_3
\frac{Z(q)}{Z^2(q)\, q^2 + \Sigma^2(q)}\frac{1}{2(p-q)^2} \nonumber \\
&&+i4e^2 \, (1\!-\!\xi)\int \frac{d^4q}{(2\pi)^4} \; G_3
\frac{Z(q)}{Z^2(q)\, q^2 + \Sigma^2(q)} \frac{(p+q)^2}{(p-q)^4} \nonumber \\
&&+ 4e^2 (1\!-\!\xi) \int \frac{d^4q}{(2\pi)^4} \; G_4
\frac{1}{q^4}. \label{wfgap1}
\end{eqnarray}
To study the infra red physics of ${\mathcal N}=2$ supersymmetric U(1)
gauge field theory in three dimensions, we will simply consider all
the fields above to be independent of one coordinate, and then
integrate it out: this will introduce a natural scale $\rho$, the size
of the compactified dimension, and we will then be able to compare
directly with the model of the first part of this paper. We
compactify one dimension as follows:
\begin{equation}
\int dq_3 = \frac{1}{\rho}
\end{equation}
We can now incorporate the effects of massless matter loops into the
gauge field propagator, by dressing it with the appropriate vacuum
polarization factor:
\begin{equation}
\Delta^{VV}(p;12) \longrightarrow \frac{\Delta^{VV}(p;12)}{1 + {\bar{\alpha}}/|p|},
\end{equation}
where we have introduced the ultra violet scale \[ {\bar{\alpha}}
\doteq \frac{e^2 N}{\rho}\] in analogy with the treatment of normal
QED${}_3$ and the ${\mathcal N}=1$ model considered in the first part
of this paper. The combination $e^2/\rho$ relates the dimensionless
coupling $e$ of the original model to the dimensionful coupling in the
dimensionally reduced theory. We can carry out the angular part of
the momentum integration easily in three dimensions, with result
\begin{eqnarray}
\Sigma (p) =&& \frac{{\bar{\alpha}}}{2N\pi^3} (1\!-\!\xi) \int dq \; G_3
\frac{\Sigma(q)}{Z^2(q) \, q^2 + \Sigma^2 (q)} \, 2qp \, \left(
\frac{1}{{\bar{\alpha}}} \left( \frac{1}{|p-q|}-\frac{1}{p+q}\right)
\right. \nonumber\\
&& \qquad\qquad\qquad \left.+ \frac{1}{{\bar{\alpha}}^2} \ln \left[
\frac{p+q+{\bar{\alpha}}}{|p-q|+{\bar{\alpha}}}\right] -\frac{1}{{\bar{\alpha}}^2}\ln \left[
\frac{p+q}{|p-q|}\right] \right);\nonumber \\
Z(p) = &1& + \frac{{\bar{\alpha}}}{2N\pi^3} (1\!+\!\xi) \int dq \; G_3
\frac{Z(q)}{Z^2(q) \, q^2 + \Sigma^2 (q)} \,\frac{q}{2p}\, \ln
\left[\frac{p+q+{\bar{\alpha}}}{|p-q|+{\bar{\alpha}}}\right] \nonumber \\
&& - \frac{{\bar{\alpha}}}{2N\pi^3} (1\!-\!\xi) \int dq \; G_3
\frac{Z(q)}{Z^2(q) \, q^2 + \Sigma^2 (q)} \,\frac{q}{2p}\, \left(
\frac{2(p^2+q^2)}{{\bar{\alpha}}} \left( \frac{1}{|p-q|} -
\frac{1}{p+q}\right) \right. \nonumber\\
&& \qquad\qquad\qquad \left.-\frac{2(p^2+q^2)}{{\bar{\alpha}}^2} \ln \left[
\frac{p+q}{|p-q|}\right] +
\frac{2(p^2+q^2)-{\bar{\alpha}}^2}{{\bar{\alpha}}^2} \ln \left[
\frac{p+q+{\bar{\alpha}}}{|p-q|+{\bar{\alpha}}}\right] \right) \nonumber\\
&& -\frac{i{\bar{\alpha}}}{2N\pi^3} (1\!-\!\xi) \int dq \; \frac{q}{p}
G_4 \left( \frac{1}{{\bar{\alpha}}} \left(\frac{1}{|p-q|} -
\frac{1}{p+q}\right) \right. \nonumber\\
&& \qquad\qquad\qquad \left. -\frac{1}{{\bar{\alpha}}^2} \ln \left[
\frac{p+q}{|p-q|}\right] +\frac{1}{{\bar{\alpha}}^2} \ln \left[
\frac{p+q+{\bar{\alpha}}}{|p-q|+{\bar{\alpha}}}\right] \right).
\end{eqnarray}
To study these equations it is once again necessary to expand the
logarithms arising from the angular integrations, in the limit $p,q
\ll {\bar{\alpha}}$, which leaves
\begin{eqnarray} \label{n=2gaps}
\Sigma(p) =&& \frac{{\bar{\alpha}}}{N\pi^3} (1\!-\!\xi) \int dq \; {\mathcal{F}}(q)
\left[ \frac{2q^2 p}{p^2-q^2} \theta(p-q) + \frac{2 p^2 q}{q^2-p^2}
\theta(q-p) \right],\nonumber\\
Z(p) = &1& + \frac{{\bar{\alpha}}}{2N\pi^3} (1\!+\!\xi) \int dq\;
{\mathcal{G}}(q) \left[ \frac{q^2}{{\bar{\alpha}} p}
\theta(p-q) + \frac{q}{{\bar{\alpha}}} \theta(q-p) \right]\nonumber\\
&& - \frac{{\bar{\alpha}}}{2N\pi^3} (1\!-\!\xi) \int dq\; {\mathcal{G}}(q)
\left[ \left( \frac{p^2+3q^2}{p^2-q^2}\right)\frac{q^2}{{\bar{\alpha}} p}
\theta(p-q) + \left( \frac{3p^2+q^2}{q^2-p^2}\right) \frac{q}{{\bar{\alpha}}}
\theta(q-p)\right] \nonumber\\
&& - \frac{i{\bar{\alpha}}}{2N\pi^3} (1\!-\!\xi) \int dq\; \Gamma_4 \left[
\frac{2q^2}{{\bar{\alpha}} p}\frac{1}{p^2-q^2} \theta(p-q) +
\frac{2q}{{\bar{\alpha}}}\frac{1}{q^2-p^2} \theta(q-p) \right],
\end{eqnarray}
where we have introduced the convenient abbreviated notations:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\mathcal{F}}(q) = G_3 \, \frac{\Sigma(q)}{Z^2 (q) \, q^2 +
\Sigma^2 (q)} \nonumber\\
{\mathcal{G}}(q)= G_3 \, \frac{Z(q)}{Z^2(q) \, q^2 +\Sigma^2(q)}.
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Wavefunction Renormalization.}
\label{sec:n=2wf}
In the normal phase (or equivalently, within the bifurcation method)
where $\Sigma=0$, the integral equation for the wavefunction
renormalization can be integrated directly upon using the simple
approximation $G_3 = Z(q)$, $G_4=1$ \cite{clark+love}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{n=2wfnsoln}
Z(p)= &1&+ \frac{{\bar{\alpha}}}{2N\pi^3} (1\!+\!\xi) \left[ \frac{1}{{\bar{\alpha}}} -
\frac{1}{{\bar{\alpha}}}\ln \left( \frac{p}{{\bar{\alpha}}}\right) \right]\nonumber \\
&& - \frac{{\bar{\alpha}}}{2N\pi^3} (1\!-\!\xi) \left[ -\frac{3}{{\bar{\alpha}}} +
\frac{4}{{\bar{\alpha}}}{\tanh}^{-1} \left( 1-\frac{\varepsilon}{p}\right)
\right]\nonumber\\
&& - \frac{{\bar{\alpha}}}{2N\pi^3} (1\!-\!\xi) \left[ \frac{3}{{\bar{\alpha}}} \ln
\left(\frac{p}{{\bar{\alpha}}}\right) + \frac{2}{{\bar{\alpha}}}\ln\left(
\frac{{\bar{\alpha}}^2 - p^2}{2p\varepsilon}\right)\right]\nonumber\\
&& - \frac{i{\bar{\alpha}}}{2N\pi^3} (1\!-\!\xi) \left[ -\frac{2}{{\bar{\alpha}}} +
\frac{2}{{\bar{\alpha}}}\tanh^{-1}\left(1-\frac{\varepsilon}{p}\right)
+\frac{1}{{\bar{\alpha}}}\ln\left( \frac{{\bar{\alpha}}^2 -p^2}{2p\varepsilon}\right) \right] ,
\end{eqnarray}
where the limit $\varepsilon\rightarrow 0^+$ is implied. Again,
outside the supersymmetric Feynman gauge, there are many infra red
divergences which result from the propagation of a gauge artifact in
the gauge superfield. However, ignoring these divergences as
spurious, we can see that the solution above is consistent with the
expected critical behaviour, with an exponent of order ${\mathcal O}(1/N)$:
\begin{equation}
\label{n=2critwf}
Z(p) \simeq \left( \frac{p}{{\bar{\alpha}}}
\right)^{\bar{\gamma}} \qquad \bar{\gamma} \simeq \frac{1-2\xi}{N\pi^3}.
\end{equation}
While it is not obvious that this form for the wavefunction
renormalization is completely reliable, what is clear is that there is
no evidence for an overall factor of $(1\!-\!\xi)$ in the
wavefunction renormalization, a fact which will be crucial for the
discussion of the self energy which follows.
\subsection{Self Energy.}
\label{sec:n=2se}
It was argued in reference \cite{clark+love} that the overall factor
of $(1\!-\!\xi)$ in the first of equations (\ref{n=2gaps}) and its
four dimensional ancestor (\ref{n=2segap1}) for the self energy means
that the self energy vanishes in Feynman gauge, and since the full
gauge dependence was carried through, this indicates that the self
energy vanishes in all gauges; this was conjectured to be the result
of a four dimensional (non--perturbative) non--renormalization theorem
\cite{clark+love}. This argument has been criticized
\cite{kaiselip,appelquist98} on the grounds that the self energy
function is not a gauge invariant function, and nor are the functions
appearing in the kernel; in particular, the gauge dependence of the
functions appearing in the kernel could in principle conspire to
cancel the overall factor of $(1\!-\!\xi)$ and leave a gauge
independent integral equation, which could have finite solutions. To
answer this question it is convenient to divide the integral equation
for $\Sigma$ through by $Z(p)$ to obtain
\begin{equation} \label{n=2masseq}
M(p) = \frac{{\bar{\alpha}}}{N\pi^3} (1\!-\!\xi) \int dq \;
\frac{1}{Z(p)} \frac{M(q)}{q^2+M^2(q)} \left[ \frac{2q^2
p}{p^2-q^2} \theta(p-q) + \frac{2 p^2 q}{q^2-p^2} \theta(q-p) \right].
\end{equation}
In the limit $p\rightarrow 0$ the function $M(p)$ is gauge invariant;
since we have shown that there can be no factor of $(1\!-\!\xi)$ from
the wavefunction renormalization factor in (\ref{n=2masseq}), it seems
that the function $M(p)$, even if the result of integrating the kernel
were finite, would retain the overall factor of $(1\!-\!\xi)$, and
therefore the only self consistent solution would be that the mass
vanished. We have not probed the structure of the vertex $G_3$ coming
from the U(1) Ward identity \cite{clark+love}, but this will only
relate $G_3$ to combinations of $\Sigma$ and $Z$: it will not lead to
the gauge dependence required to cancel the overall factor of
$(1\!-\!\xi)$. In order to make this argument, we depend on the
approximate form of the wavefunction renormalization
(\ref{n=2critwf}), and hence on the scale $\bar{\alpha}$; therefore
our argument does not extend back to the four dimensional model where
the scale $\bar{\alpha}$ is absent, and the coupling remains
dimensionless.
A related point of interest is that, contrasting the ${\mathcal N}=1$
case, there is no part of the integral equation for $M(p)$ which is
not troubled by the infra red divergences generated by the gauge
artifact; these divergences are known to disappear in supersymmetric
Feynman gauge. The structure of the divergent terms make it
impossible to construct an equivalent differential equation from the
integral equation above.
\subsection{Concluding Remarks.}
In this part of the paper we have attempted to probe carefully the
gauge dependence of the ${\mathcal N}=2$ model. We have chosen a
simplified three--vertex and we have truncated the infinite series of
higher--point vertices at four. Within these approximations, we have
been able to compute the wavefunction renormalization, and have shown
that although the computation is plagued with (expected) infra red
divergences, we find no evidence for the overall gauge dependence
which would be necessary to cancel the factor of $(1\!-\!\xi)$ in
equation (\ref{n=2masseq}) and evade the gauge dependence argument of
reference \cite{clark+love}. We have followed this argument through
for the (compactified) three dimensional model, where the scale
$\bar{\alpha}$ is available; in particular, the renormalization group
resummed form for the wavefunction renormalization requires the
existence of the scale $\bar{\alpha}$. While the properties of the
four dimensional model are communicated to the three dimensional
extended model through the compactification, it is not clear that the
results presented here are applicable also for the four dimensional
model where the scale $\bar{\alpha}$ is necessarily absent; whence the
arguments of references \cite{kaiselip,appelquist98} on evading the
non--renormalization theorem in the four dimensional model could still
hold. Our results here are in agreement with a numerical evaluation
of the effective potential for the three dimensional model in
component formalism \cite{walker99_1}.
\section{Discussion And Conclusion.}
\label{sec:discuss}
\subsection{The ${\mathcal N}=1$ Model.}
The superfield formalism we have adopted has the advantage of keeping
supersymmetry manifest; this has allowed us to concentrate on two
aspects of the infra red physics which have troubled components
computations in both the supersymmetric and non--supersymmetric
versions of this model, namely gauge invariance and the full vertex.
In particular, the superfield formalism gave us extra power to deal
with the U(1) Ward identity for the full vertex. The disadvantages of
the superfield approach are apparent in the spurious singular terms
which appear as a result of propagating extra degrees of freedom in
the gauge superfield. This problem can be avoided in supersymmetric
Feynman gauge, and it is this which means we have had to give separate
treatments to probe the gauge dependence and the issue of the full
vertex.
The first treatment employed some of the simplest approximations: a
near trivial vertex (which satisfies the U(1) Ward identity only in
the limit of vanishing transferred momentum, but which allows for a
non--trivial wavefunction renormalization) and neglecting the mass in
the denominators of the kernels. This programme of approximations is
drastic, but computationally extremely convenient: enough to allow us
to probe the gauge dependence of the mass function. This vertex
choice and the bifurcation method have been used with some success in
the study of non--supersymmetric QED${}_3$, and is sufficient to
demonstrate the existence of a dynamically generated mass
\cite{kondo+nak92} (at least in Landau gauge). In the model studied
here, the method returns the expected critical behaviour in the
wavefunction renormalization, and exhibits a gauge independent
solution for the dynamically generated mass. The critical behaviour
we find contrasts the trivial wavefunction renormalization of
reference \cite{koopmans89}, and is qualitatively the same as that of
non--supersymmetric QED${}_3$, where mass is also dynamically
generated. Our second treatment employs the biggest advantage of the
superfield formalism, that of making the U(1) Ward identity tractable.
Unfortunately, the problem of infra red divergences in the superspace
approach restrict us to working in supersymmetric Feynman gauge for
this computation. However, we find again the expected critical
behaviour in the wavefunction renormalization and again exhibit the
possibility of a finite dynamically generated mass; in particular, we
find that the solution obtained in the first simplified approach is
consistent with the full vertex, and a non--vanishing mass function in
the denominators. It is possible to criticize the approaches taken in
both treatments we have presented, but since they tackle different
issues with the same result, we argue that taken together they provide
strong evidence for non--trivial infra red physics in ${\mathcal N}=1$
supersymmetric U(1) gauge theory.
The question of whether or not the finite mass solution is actually
selected has been addressed: contrary to the suggestion in reference
\cite{pisarski84} and the situations in the constrained models of
references \cite{alvarez78,ciuchini95,diamandis98}, we find that no extra
information can be obtained by appealing to the supersymmetry Ward
identities. Unfortunately this leaves us with no way to determine
whether the finite mass solution is actually selected by the vacuum of
this theory.
We have found no evidence in this model for a critical flavour number,
above which no mass generation occurs. This is in contrast to the
non--supersymmetric case \cite{appelquist86,dorey92}. As has been
noted already, the differential equation (\ref{naivediffeq}) has
finite solutions when the mass function is gauge invariant for all $p$
(in the range permitted by our approximations: the infra red), but no
solutions which are gauge invariant only in the limit of vanishing $p$
and gauge dependent elsewhere. This is to be contrasted with the
non--supersymmetric case, where solutions of the latter type do appear
to exist. The integral equation for the mass function in that case
(in general gauge, and with the simplified vertex choice of \( G_3 =
Z(q)\)) is as follows:
\begin{equation}
\label{n=0masseq}
M(p) = \frac{8}{\pi^2 N} \left[ \int_0^p dq\; \left( \frac{1}{p} +
\frac{\xi\alpha}{2p^2} \right) \frac{q^2 M(q)}{q^2+M^2(q)} +
\int_p^\alpha dq\; \left( q+\frac{\xi\alpha}{2} \right)
\frac{M(q)}{q^2+ M^2(q)} \right].
\end{equation}
The conventional method for the non--supersymmetric case is to
consider Landau gauge ($\xi=0$) and construct an equivalent
differential equation \cite{dorey92}:
\begin{equation}
\label{diffeqforNc}
\frac{\partial}{\partial p} \left( p^2 \frac{\partial M}{\partial p}
\right) = -\frac{8}{\pi^2 N} \frac{p^2 \, M}{p^2+M^2};
\end{equation}
the solution of this differential equation takes the form of a
hypergeometric function; crucially this leads to a constraint on $N$
such that above a certain critical flavour number, no mass generation
occurs \cite{dorey92}. Proceeding as we have done for the
supersymmetric model, one has to make three differentiations with
respect to $p$ to remove the integrations, and the linearized
(neglecting the mass in the denominators) result is as follows (in
dimensionless variables rescaled by $\alpha$):
\begin{equation}
p^3 \, \dot{m}^{\prime\prime\prime} + 6p^2 \, \dot{m}^{\prime\prime}
+\left[ 6p + \frac{8}{N\pi^2} \left(p+\xi\right) \right]
\dot{m}^\prime + \frac{16}{N\pi^2} \dot{m} + \frac{8}{N\pi^2} m^\prime = 0.
\end{equation}
Demanding as before that $\dot{m}=0$ for all $p$, we find a constant
solution for $m$; substituting a gauge dependent power series
indicates that there is also the possibility of gauge independent
constant as $p\rightarrow 0$ but with a gauge dependent function of
$p$ away from this limit. This latter type of solution does not exist
in the supersymmetric model. We see then that the gauge dependence of
the two models is rather subtly different, and the fact that we find
no critical flavour number may be related to this. In support of this
view it is instructive to attempt to construct a differential equation
similar to equation (\ref{diffeqforNc}) for the ${\mathcal N}=1$
supersymmetric model, which might then show some evidence for a
critical flavour number. To this end we return to the second of
integral equations (\ref{naiveinitialgaps}) for the self energy, and
again perform differentiations with respect to $p$, but retaining the
mass as a constant in the denominators \cite{dorey92}:
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial}{\partial p} \left( p^2 \frac{\partial M(p)}{\partial p}
\right) = \frac{2 (1\!-\!4\xi)}{N\pi^2} \frac{p^2 \, M(p)}{p^2+M^2}.
\end{equation}
By analogy with the analysis of reference \cite{dorey92} the
``critical flavour number'' derived from the equation above would be
\[ N_c = \frac{ 8 (1\!-\!4\xi)}{\pi^2},\] which on account of its
explicit gauge dependence has no physical meaning.
An interesting comparison can be made with the model of reference
\cite{pisarski91}, where dynamical mass generation in an $N$--flavour
effective theory of fermions in three dimensions is studied using the
renormalization group and the $\epsilon$ expansion. The effective
theory has for its degrees of freedom explicitly gauge independent
(composite operator) fields, and so the treatment is necessarily gauge
independent; in this approach also there is no critical flavour
number. We also found no critical flavour number when we included the
effects of the full vertex (and the non--trivial wavefunction
renormalization): this is reminiscent of results in
non--supersymmetric QED${}_3$ \cite{pennington91} where it has been
argued that the critical flavour number of reference
\cite{appelquist86} was an artifact of including only a trivial
wavefunction renormalization and simplified vertex. In both our
simple computation and the full computation, we have included the
effects of non--trivial wavefunction renormalization.
\subsection{The ${\mathcal N}=2$ Model.}
In contrast to the ${\mathcal N}=1$ model, in extended supersymmetric
electrodynamics, we find strong evidence for the non--existence of a
dynamically generated mass, based on a refinement of the gauge
dependence argument of reference \cite{clark+love}. We have used the
same truncation in the Dyson--Schwinger equations (in keeping only
three-- and four--point vertices) as used in the four dimensional
model. This truncation is consistent with restriction to the
Wess--Zumino gauge, which respects neither supersymmetry nor gauge
invariance. Within this approximation we have chosen a simplified
vertex (but one which is consistent with a non--trivial wavefunction
renormalization) and we have then computed the wavefunction
renormalization. We found no evidence for the appearance of an
overall factor of $(1\!-\!\xi)$ which, if present, could have evaded
\cite{kaiselip,appelquist98} the gauge dependence argument of
reference \cite{clark+love}. Instead we found that the wavefunction
seems to have the same sort of critical behaviour as in the
non--supersymmetric and ${\mathcal N}=1$ cases, though this is by no
means certain on account of the presence of infra red divergences
(again from an artifact in the gauge superfield). Our result here is
in line with reference \cite{walker99_1}, in which a numerical study
showed that a mass is not dynamically generated in the ${\mathcal
N}=2$ model. While we have been able to show that there is strong
evidence against the dynamical generation of mass in the three
dimensional extended supersymmetric model, our results depend
crucially on the existence of the scale $\bar{\alpha}$ (arising from
the size of the compactified dimension). In the four dimensional
model, where this scale is absent, the arguments of
\cite{kaiselip,appelquist98} could still hold, and the
non--renormalization theorem of reference \cite{clark+love} be evaded.
\section*{Acknowledgements.}
The authors wish to thank G. Diamandis and B. Georgalas for helpful
discussions. The work of N.E.M. is partially supported by P.P.A.R.C.
(U.K.) under an advanced fellowship. A.C.--S. would like to thank the
Theory Division at CERN for their hospitality during the last stages
of this work, and gratefully acknowledges financial support from
P.P.A.R.C. (U.K.) (studentship number 96314661), which has made his
visit to CERN possible.
|
\section{The superalgebra of observables.}
The superalgebra $H_{W({R})}$ of observables
of the rational Calogero model based on the root system ${R}$
is defined in the following way.
For any nonzero ${\vec v} \in V={\fam\openfam R}^N$ define the reflections
$R_{\vec v}$ as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{ref}
R_{\vec v} ({\vec x})={\vec x} -2 \frac {({\vec x},\,{\vec v})} {({\vec v},\,{\vec v})} {\vec v} \qquad
\mbox{ for any }{\vec x} \in V.
\end{equation}
Here $(\cdot,\cdot)$ stands for the inner product in
$V$: $({\vec x},\,{\vec y})=\sum_{i=1}^N x_i y_i$, where the $x_i$ are
the coordinates of vector ${\vec x}$: $x_i\defeq ({\vec x},\,\vec e_i)$,
and the vectors $\vec e_i$ constitute an orthonormal basis in $V$:
$(\vec e_i,\, \vec e_j)=\delta_{ij}$.
The reflections (\ref{ref}) have the following properties
\begin{equation}\label{prop}
R_{\vec v} ({\vec v})=-{\vec v},\qquad R_{\vec v}^2 =1,\qquad
({R}_{\vec v} ({\vec x}),\,\vec u)=({\vec x},\,{R}_{\vec v} (\vec u)),\quad
\mbox{ for any }{\vec v},\,{\vec x},\,\vec u\in V.
\end{equation}
The finite set of vectors ${R}\subset V$ is a {\it root system}
if ${R}$ is ${R}_{\vec v}$-invariant for any ${\vec v} \in {R}$ and
the group $W({R})$ generated by all reflections ${R}_{\vec v}$ with
${\vec v} \in {R}$ (Coxeter group) is finite.
Let ${\cal H}^\alpha$ ($\alpha=0,1$) be two copies of $V$ with
orthonormal bases $a^\alpha_i$ ($i=1,\,...\,,\,N$), respectively.
For every vector ${\vec v}=\sum_{i=1}^N v_i{\vec e_i}\in V$ let
$v^\alpha\in {\cal H}^\alpha$
be the vectors $v^\alpha=\sum_{i=1}^N v_i a^\alpha_i$,
so the bilinear forms on ${\cal H}^\alpha\otimes {\cal H}^\beta$
can be defined as
\begin{equation}
\label{bill}
(x^\alpha,\,y^\beta)=(\vec x,\, \vec y),
\end{equation}
where $\vec x,\,\vec y \in V$ and $x^\alpha,\,y^\alpha \in {\cal
H}^\alpha$ are their copies.
The reflections $R_{\vec v}$ act on ${\cal H}^\alpha$ as follows
\begin{equation}
R_{\vec v}(h^\alpha)=h^\alpha -
2\frac{(h^\alpha,\,v^\alpha)}{({\vec v},\,{\vec v})}v^\alpha,
\qquad \mbox{ for any } h^\alpha\in {\cal H}^\alpha.
\end{equation}
So the $W({R})$-action on the spaces ${\cal H}^\alpha$
is defined.
Let $\nu$ be a set of constants $\nu_{\vec v}$ with ${\vec v}\in{R}$ such that
$\nu_{\vec v}=\nu_{\vec w}$ if $R_{\vec v}$ and $R_{\vec w}$ belong to
one conjugacy class of $W({R})$.
Consider the algebra $H_{W({R})}(\nu)$
of polynomials in the $a^\alpha_i$ with coefficients
in the group algebra ${\fam\openfam C}[W({R})]$ subject to the relations
\begin{eqnarray}\label{rel1}
R_{\vec v} h^\alpha=R_{\vec v}(h^\alpha)R_{\vec v} , \quad \mbox{ for any }{\vec v}\in R,
\quad \mbox{ and } h^\alpha \in {\cal H}^\alpha \nn
\label{rel}
[ h_1^\alpha, h_2^\beta] = \varepsilon^{\alpha\beta}
\left((\vec h_1,\, \vec h_2)+
\sum_{{\vec v}\in{R}} \nu_{\vec v}
\frac {(\vec h_1,\,{\vec v})(\vec h_2,\,{\vec v})}{({\vec v},\,{\vec v})}R_{\vec v}\right)
\mbox{ for any $h_1^\alpha$, $h_2^\alpha\, \in {\cal H}^\alpha$}.
\end{eqnarray}
where $\varepsilon^{\alpha\beta}$
is the antisymmetric tensor, $\varepsilon^{01}=1$.
This algebra is associative because it has faithful representation
via Dunkl differential-difference operators \cite{Dunkl} acting on
the space of infinitely smooth functions on $V$. Namely, let
\begin{equation}\label{Dun}
D_i=
\frac {\partial} {\partial x_i} +\frac{1}{2} \sum_{{\vec v}\in{R}} \nu_{\vec v}\frac {v_i} {({\vec x},\,{\vec v})} (1-R_{\vec v})
\end{equation}
and
\cite{Poly, BHV}
\begin{equation}\label{aa}
a_i^\alpha =\frac 1 {\sqrt{2}} (x_i + (-1)^\alpha D_i),\quad
\alpha =0,1.
\end{equation}
The reflections $R_{\vec v}$ transform the deformed creation
and annihilation operators
(\ref{aa})
as vectors:
\begin{equation}\label{comav}
R_{\vec v} a_i^\alpha = \sum_{j=1}^N \left(\delta_{ij} - 2
\frac {v_i v_j}{({\vec v},\,{\vec v})}\right)a_j^\alpha R_{\vec v}.
\end{equation}
Since $[D_i,\, D_j]=0$ \cite{Dunkl}, it follows that
\begin{equation}\label{comaa}
[a^\alpha_i, a^\beta_j] = \varepsilon^{\alpha\beta}
\left(\delta_{ij}+
\sum_{{\vec v}\in{R}} \nu_{\vec v} \frac {v_i v_j}{({\vec v},\,{\vec v})}R_{\vec v}\right),
\end{equation}
which manifestly coincides with (\ref{rel}).
We call $H_{W({R})}(\nu)$ {\it the algebra of
observables of Calogero model based on the root system ${R}$}.
The commutation relations (\ref{rel}) suggest
to define the {\it parity} $\pi$ by setting:
\begin{equation}\label{pi}
\pi (a_i^\alpha)=1\ \mbox{ for any }\alpha,\,i,
\qquad \pi(g)=0 \ \mbox{ for any } g\in W({R})
\end{equation}
and consider $H_{W({R})}(\nu)$ as a superalgebra.
Obviously, ${\fam\openfam C}[W({R})]$
is a subalgebra of $H_{W({R})}(\nu)$.
Observe an important property of superalgebra
$H_{W({R})}(\nu)$: the Lie superalgebra of its inner
derivations \footnote{Let ${\cal A}$ be arbitrary associative
superalgebra. Then, the operators ${\cal D}_x$
which act on ${\cal A}$ via
${\cal D}_x(y)=[x,\,y\}$ (supercommutator) constitute
the Lie superalgebra of {\it inner}
derivations.} contains ${\fam\frfam sl}_2$ generated by
\begin{equation}\label{sl2}
T^{\alpha\beta}=\frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=1}^N
\left\{a_i^\alpha,\,a_i^\beta\right\}
\end{equation}
which commute with ${\fam\openfam C}[W({R})]$, i.e.,
$[T^{\alpha\beta},\,R_{\vec v}]=0$,
and act on $a_i^\alpha$ as on ${\fam\frfam sl}_2$-vectors:
\begin{equation}\label{sl2vec}
\left[T^{\alpha\beta},\,a_i^\gamma\right]=
\varepsilon^{\alpha\gamma}a_i^\beta +
\varepsilon^{\beta\gamma}a_i^\alpha.
\end{equation}
The restriction of operator
$T^{01}$ in the representation (\ref{aa}) on the subspace
of $W({R})$-invariant functions on $V$
is a second-order differential operator which is the well-known
Hamiltonian of the rational Calogero model \cite{Cal} based on the
root system ${R}$ \cite{OP}. The parameters $\nu_{\vec v}$ are
the coupling constants of this model.
One of the relations (\ref{sl2}), namely,
$[T^{01},\,a_i^\alpha]=
-(-1)^\alpha a_i^\alpha$, allows one to find the wave functions
of
the equation $T^{01}\psi =\epsilon \psi$
via usual Fock procedure with
the vacuum $ |0\rangle$ such that
$a_i^0|0\rangle$=0 $\mbox{ for any } i$ \cite{BHV}.
After $W({R})$-symmetrization these wave functions
become the wave functions of Calogero Hamiltonian.
\section{Supertraces on $H_{W({R})}(\nu)$.}\label{trace}
Any linear complex-valued function $str(\cdot)$ on the superalgebra
${\cal A}$ such that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{scom}
str(fg)&=&(-1)^{\pi(f)\pi(g)}str(gf)
\end{eqnarray}
for any $f,g \in
{\cal A}$ with definite parity $\pi(f)$ and $\pi(g)$ is called a {\it
supertrace}.
Every supertrace $str(\cdot)$ on ${\cal A}$ generates
the invariant bilinear form on ${\cal A}$
\begin{eqnarray}\label{bf}
B_{str}(f,g)=str(f\cdot g).
\end{eqnarray}
It is obvious that if such a bilinear form is degenerate,
then the
null-vectors (i.e., $v \in {\cal A}$ such that $B(v, x)=0$ for any
$x\in {\cal A}$) of
this form constitute the two-sided
ideal ${\cal I}\subset {\cal A}$.
The ideals of this sort are present
in the superalgebras $H_{W(A_1)}(\nu)$
(corresponding to the two-particle Calogero model) at $\nu =k+\frac{1}{2}$
\cite{V} and in the superalgebras $H_{W(A_2)}(\nu)$
(corresponding to three-particle Calogero model)
at $\nu =k+\frac{1}{2}$
and $\nu=k\pm\frac1 3$ \cite{K2}
for every integer $k$. For all the
other values of $\nu$ all supertraces on these superalgebras
generate the nondegenerate bilinear forms (\ref{bf}).
It is easy to describe all supertraces on
${\fam\openfam C}[W({R})]$. Every supertrace on ${\fam\openfam C}[W({R})]$
is completely determined by its values on
$W({R})\subset {\fam\openfam C}[W({R})]$
and the function $str$ is a central function on $W({R})$, i.e.,
the function constant on the conjugacy classes.
Before formulating the theorem establishing the connection between
the supertraces on $H_{W({R})}(\nu)$ and the supertraces on
${\fam\openfam C}[W({R})]$,
let
us introduce the grading $E$ on the vector space of
${\fam\openfam C}[W({R})]$. Consider the subspaces
\begin{equation}\label{Halpha}\label{eigs}
{\cal E}^\alpha (g) =\{h\in {\cal H}^\alpha:\quad gh=-hg \}
\mbox{ for } g\in W({R}).
\end{equation}
Clearly, $\dim~{\cal E}^0(g)=\dim~{\cal E}^1(g)$.
Set \footnote{
It follows from Lemma 3 formulated below that $\rho(g)=E(g)|_{mod 2}$
is a grading on the group algebra ${\fam\openfam C}[W({R})]$.
It is well known parity of elements of the Coxeter group.}
\begin{equation}\label{grad}
E(g)=\dim~\,{\cal E}^\alpha(g).
\end{equation}
Obviously, $E(g)$ is equal to the number of $(-1)$ in the spectrum
of matrix $g$.\footnote{Indeed, let $\vec x \in V$ be an eigenvector
of orthogonal matrix $g\in W({R})$, i.e., $g\vec x =\lambda\vec x $.
Then (\ref{rel1}) implies the relation
$gx^\alpha=\lambda^{-1}x^\alpha g$
in $H_{W({R})}(\nu)$.}
The following theorem was proved in \cite{KV}
\footnote{This theorem was proved for the case ${R}=A_N$ only
but the proof does not depend on the particular properties
of the symmetric group $S_N=W(A_{N-1})$.}:
{\bf Theorem 1.} {\it Let ${\cal P}(g)$ be the projection
${\fam\openfam C}[W({R})] \rightarrow {\fam\openfam C}[W({R})]$
defined as
\begin{equation} \label{(*)}
{\cal P}(\sum_i \alpha_i
g_i)=\sum_{i:\, g_i \neq {\bf 1}} \alpha_i g_i
\mbox{ for $g_i\in W({R})$, $\alpha_i\in {\fam\openfam C}$}.
\end{equation}
Let the grading $E$ defined in (\ref{grad})
and the subspaces ${\cal E}^\alpha(g)$ defined in (\ref{Halpha})
satisfy the equations
\begin{eqnarray}\label{main0}
E({\cal P}([h_0,\,h_1])g)=E(g)-1 \ \ \mbox{ for any } g\in
W({R}), \ \
\mbox{ and } h_\alpha\in {\cal E}^\alpha(g).
\end{eqnarray}
Then every supertrace on the algebra ${\fam\openfam C}[W({R})]$
satisfying the equations
\begin{eqnarray}\label{GLC}
str([h_0,\,h_1]g)=0\qquad \mbox{ for any } g\in W({R}) \mbox{
with }E(g)\neq 0 \mbox{ and } h_\alpha \in {\cal E}^\alpha(g),
\end{eqnarray}
can be uniquely extended to a supertrace on $H_{W({R})}(\nu)$.}
It is shown below that conditions (\ref{main0}) hold
for arbitrary Coxeter group $W({R})$ and the number of
independent solutions of conditions (\ref{GLC}) is equal to
the number of conjugacy classes in $W({R})$ with $E(g)=0$.
\section{Conditions \protect
(\ref{main0}) for an arbitrary Coxeter group.}
{\it Lemma 2. Let $g$ be an orthogonal $N\times N$ matrix
which has no eigenvalue $-1$,
i.e., the matrix $g+1$ is invertible.
Then the matrix $R_{{\vec v}}g$ has exactly one
eigenvalue equal to $-1$.}
To prove this lemma let us consider the equation
$R_{{\vec v}}g{\vec x}+{\vec x}=0$ or $g{\vec x}+ R_{{\vec v}}{\vec x}=0$
for eigenvector ${\vec x}$ corresponding to eigenvalue $-1$.
Using the definition of $R_{{\vec v}}$
one has $g{\vec x}+{\vec x}-2\frac {({\vec v},\, {\vec x})} {|{\vec v}|^2} v =0$; hence,
${\vec x}=2\frac {({\vec v},\, {\vec x})} {|{\vec v}|^2}(g+1)^{-1} {\vec v}$.
It remains to show that this equation has a nonzero solution.
Let ${\vec v}=(g+1)\vec w$.
Then $|{\vec v}|^2=2(|\vec w|^2+(\vec w,\, g\vec w))$ and
$((g+1)^{-1} {\vec v}, \, {\vec v})= |\vec w|^2+(\vec w,\, g\vec w)$.
So the vector ${\vec x}_1=2\frac 1 {|{\vec v}|^2}(g+1)^{-1} {\vec v}$ is the only
(up to a factor) solution.
{\it Lemma 3. \label{l2} Let $g$ be an orthogonal $N\times N$ matrix
and ${\vec c}_i$
($i=1,\, ... ,\, E(g)$) be the complete orthonormal set of its
eigenvectors corresponding to eigenvalue $-1$.
Then
\\{\em i)}
$E(R_{{\vec v}} g) = E(g)+1$ if $({\vec v},\,{\vec c}_i)=0$ for all $i$;
\\{\em ii)}
if there exists an $i$ such that $({\vec v},\, {\vec c}_i) \neq 0$, then
$E(R_{{\vec v}} g)=E(g)-1$ and the space of the
eigenvectors of $R_{{\vec v}} g$ corresponding to
eigenvalue $-1$ is the subspace of
$span\{{\vec c}_1,\,...,\, {\vec c}_{E(g)}\}$ orthogonal to ${\vec v}$.}
Let ${\vec c}_i$, $i=1,\,...\, N$, be the complete orthonormal set of
the eigenvectors of $g$, i.e. $g{\vec c}_i=\lambda_i {\vec c}_i$.
Here $\lambda_i=-1$ for $1\leq i\leq E(g)$. Let $x^i=({\vec x},\, {\vec c}_i)$
for every vector ${\vec x}$. Consider the equation for the eigenvector
${\vec x}=\sum_1^N x^i {\vec c}_i$ corresponding to eigenvalue $-1$ of matrix
$R_{{\vec v}} g$:
\begin{equation}
\label{-1} (\lambda_i+1) x^i -2\frac {(g{\vec x},\,{\vec v})} {|{\vec v}|^2}v^i=0,
\end{equation}
where $v^i=({\vec v}, {\vec c}_i)$. It follows from (\ref{-1})
that either $v^i=0$
for $1\leq i \leq E(g)$ or $(g{\vec x},\, {\vec v})=0$.
In the first case, one can consider the restriction of $R_{{\vec v}}$
and $g$ onto the subspace spanned by ${\vec c}_i$ with $i>E(g)$
and apply Lemma 2 to this
restriction and obtain {\em i)}.
In the second case, it follows from equation (\ref{-1}) that
$x^i=0$ for $i>E(g)$, hence, $g{\vec x}=-x$, $({\vec x}, \,{\vec v})=0$
which yields {\em i)}.
Now one can prove the following
{\bf Theorem 4.} {\it Let $g\in W({R})$.
Let
$c^\alpha_1, c^\alpha_2\in {\cal E}^\alpha (g)\subset H_{W({R})}$
(i.e. $gc^\alpha_1=-c^\alpha_1g$, $gc^\alpha_2=-c^\alpha_2g$).
Let ${\cal P}(g)$ be the projection
(\ref{(*)}).
Then
\begin{eqnarray}\label{main}
E({\cal P}([c^\alpha_1,\,c^\beta_2])g)=E(g)-1 \ \
\mbox{ for any } g\in W({R}).
\end{eqnarray}
}
Proof easily follows from the formula
\begin{equation}
{\cal P}([c^\alpha_1,\,c^\beta_2])=\varepsilon^{\alpha\beta}
\sum_{{\vec v}\in{R}} \nu_{\vec v} \frac {(\vec c_1,\,{\vec v})
(\vec c_2,\,{\vec v})}{({\vec v},\,{\vec v})}R_{\vec v}\,.
\end{equation}
Indeed, if $(\vec c_1,\,{\vec v})(\vec c_2,\,{\vec v})\neq 0$, then
Lemma 3 implies that $E(R_{\vec v} g)=E(g)-1$.
\section{The supertraces on ${{\fam\openfam C}[W(R)]}$, Ground Level Conditions
and the number of supertraces on $H_{W({R})}(\nu)$.}
\label{Q_N}
Due to the $W({R})$-invariance, the definition of the supertrace
on ${\fam\openfam C}[W(R)]$ is the definition of the central function on ${\fam\openfam C}[W(R)]$ i.e.
a function constant on each conjugacy class of ${\fam\openfam C}[W(R)]$.
Thus the number of the supertraces on ${\fam\openfam C}[W(R)]$
is equal to the number of conjugacy classes in ${\fam\openfam C}[W(R)]$.
Since ${\fam\openfam C}[W(R)] \subset H_{W({R})}(\nu)$, some
additional restrictions on these functions
follow from (\ref{scom}) and the defining relations (\ref{rel}) for
$H_{W({R})}(\nu )$. Indeed, consider some elements $c_i$ such that
$gc_i=-c_ig$,
where $g\in {W({R})}$ and $c_i\in {\cal H}^0 \oplus {\cal H}^1$.
Then, one finds from (\ref{scom}) and (\ref{eigs}) that
$str \left ( c_i c_j g
\right )$= $ - str \left ( c_j g c_i\right )$= $ str \left ( c_j c_i
g \right )$
and, therefore, $ str \left ( [ c_i, c_j] g \right )=0 $.
Since $[ c_i, c_j] g \in {\fam\openfam C}[W(R)] $,
these conditions restrict supertraces of degree-0 polynomials in
$a^\alpha_i$.
In \cite{KV} we called them Ground Level Conditions (GLC).
They express the supertrace of elements $g$ with $E(g)=e$
via the supertraces of elements $R_{{\vec v}}g$ with $E(R_{{\vec v}}g)=e-1$:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{GLC2}
str(g)=-str(([c^0_i,\, c^1_i]-1)g),
\mbox{ if } (\vec c_i,\,\vec c_i)=1.
\end{eqnarray}
Ground Level Conditions (\ref{GLC}) is an overdetermined system
of linear equations for the central functions on ${\fam\openfam C}[W(R)]$.
Let us prove by induction on $E(g)$ the following theorem
{\bf Theorem 5.}
{\it GLC (\ref{GLC}) have nonzero solutions
and the number of independent solutions is equal to the
number of conjugacy classes in $W({R})$ with $E(g)=0$.}
The first step is simple: if $E(g)=0$, then $str(g)$ is an arbitrary
central function.
The next step is also simple: if $E(G)=1$, then there exists
a unique element $c^0_1\in {\cal E}^0(g)$
and a unique element $c^1_1\in {\cal E}^1(g)$ such that
$|c^\alpha_1|=1$ and $gc^\alpha_1=-c^\alpha_1g$.
Since $(([c^0_1,\, c^1_1]-1)g)\in {\fam\openfam C}[W(R)]$ and
$E(([c^0_1,\, c^1_1]-1)g)=0$, then
\begin{equation}\label{sol}
str(g)=-str(([c^0_1,\, c^1_1]-1)g)
\end{equation}
is the unique possible value for $str(g)$ with $E(g)=1$.
A priori these values are not consistent with other GLC.
Suppose that Ground Level Conditions
\begin{equation}
str \left ( [ c^0_i, c^1_j] g \right ) =0
\end{equation}
considered for all $g$ with $E(g)\leq e$
and for all $c^\alpha_i\in {\cal E}^\alpha (g)$
($i=1,,\,...\,,e$) such that $(c^\alpha_i,\,c^\beta_j)=\delta_{ij}$
have $Q_e$ independent solutions.
{\bf Statement 6} {\it The value $Q_e$ does not depend on $e$.}
It was shown above that $Q_1=Q_0$. Let $e\geq 1$.
Let us consider $g\in W({R})$ with $E(g)=e+1$.
Let $c^\alpha_i\in {\cal E}^\alpha(g)$ ($i=1,2$) be such that
$(c^\alpha_i,\,c^\beta_j)=\delta_{ij}$.
These elements give the conditions:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{e11} str(g)=-str(([c^0_1,\, c^1_1]-1)g), \\
\label{e22} str(g)=-str(([c^0_2,\, c^1_2]-1)g), \\
\label{e21} str([c^0_1,\, c^1_2]g)=0.
\end{eqnarray}
Let us transform (\ref{e11}):
\begin{eqnarray}
str(g)&=&str(S_1)-str(S_{12}) \mbox{, where}\\
S_1&=&-\left([c^0_1,\, c^1_1]-1
-\sum_{{\vec v}\in{R}:\,({\vec v},\,\vec c_1)({\vec v},\,\vec c_2)\neq 0}
\nu_{\vec v} \frac {({\vec v},\,\vec c_1)^2}{|{\vec v}|^2}
R_{\vec v} \right) g =
\nn
&{}&
-\left(\sum_{{\vec v}\in{R}:\,\,({\vec v},\,\vec c_1)({\vec v},\,\vec c_2)=0}
\nu_{\vec v} \frac {({\vec v},\,\vec c_1)^2}{|{\vec v}|^2}
R_{\vec v} \right) g =
\nn
\label{s1}
&{}&
-\left(\sum_{{\vec v}\in{R}:\,\,({\vec v},\,\vec c_2)=0}\nu_{\vec v}
\frac {({\vec v},\,\vec c_1)^2}{|{\vec v}|^2}
R_{\vec v} \right) g, \\
S_{12}&=& \left(
\sum_{{\vec v}\in{R}:\,({\vec v},\,\vec c_1)({\vec v},\,\vec c_2)\neq 0}
\nu_{\vec v} \frac {({\vec v},\,\vec c_1)^2}{|{\vec v}|^2}R_{\vec v}
\right)g.
\end{eqnarray}
It is evident from (\ref{s1}) and Lemma 3 that $E(S_1)=e$ and
$S_1c^0_2=-c^0_2S_1$.
Hence, due to (\ref{GLC2}) and inductive hypothesis
\begin{equation}
str(S_1)=-str(([c^0_2,\,c_2^1]-1)S_1)=
str(([c^0_2,\,c_2^1]-1) (([c^0_1,\,c_1^1]-1)g - S_{12}))
\end{equation}
and as a result
\begin{equation}
str(S_1)=
str(([c^0_2,\,c_2^1]-1)([c^0_1,\,c_1^1]-1)g )
-str(([c^0_2,\,c_2^1]) S_{12})
+str(S_{12}).
\end{equation}
Finally, (\ref{e11}) is equivalent under inductive hypothesis to
\begin{equation}\label{e11a}
str(g)=
str(([c^0_2,\,c_2^1]-1)([c^0_1,\,c_1^1]-1)g )
-str(([c^0_2,\,c_2^1]) S_{12}).
\end{equation}
Analogously, (\ref{e22}) is equivalent under inductive hypothesis to
\begin{equation}\label{e22a}
str(g)=
str(([c^0_1,\,c_1^1]-1)([c^0_2,\,c_2^1]-1)g )
-str(([c^0_1,\,c_1^1]) S_{21}),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
S_{21} = \left(
\sum_{{\vec v}\in{R}:\,({\vec v},\,\vec c_1)({\vec v},\,\vec c_2)\neq 0}
\nu_{\vec v} \frac {({\vec v},\,\vec c_2)^2}{|{\vec v}|^2}R_{\vec v}
\right)g.
\end{equation}
Now, let us compare the corresponding terms in (\ref{e11a}) and
(\ref{e22a}).
First, the relation
\begin{equation}
str(([c^0_1,\,c_1^1]-1)([c^0_2,\,c_2^1]-1)g )=
str(([c^0_2,\,c_2^1]-1)([c^0_1,\,c_1^1]-1)g )
\end{equation}
is identically true for every (super)trace on ${\fam\openfam C}[W({R})]$, as
$[c^0_1,\,c_1^1]$ commutes with $g$.
Second,
\begin{equation}
str(([c^0_1,\,c_1^1]) S_{21})=
str(([c^0_2,\,c_2^1]) S_{12})
\end{equation}
since
\begin{equation}\label{r12}
str( [c^0_1,\,c_1^1] ({\vec v},\,\vec c_2)^2 R_{\vec v} g)=
str( [c^0_2,\,c_2^1] ({\vec v},\,\vec c_1)^2 R_{\vec v} g)
\end{equation}
for every ${\vec v}\in{R}$ such that
$({\vec v},\,\vec c_1)({\vec v},\,\vec c_2)\neq 0$.
Indeed, due to Lemma 3 the element
\begin{equation}
\vec c={\beta_1} \vec c_1 + {\beta_2} \vec c_2\,,\mbox{ where }
{\beta_1}=-({\vec v},\,\vec c_2)\neq 0 \mbox{ and }
{\beta_2}=({\vec v},\,\vec c_1)\neq 0\,,
\end{equation}
is orthogonal to ${\vec v}$:
\begin{equation}\label{ort1}
({\vec v},\,\vec c)=0
\end{equation}
and satisfies the relation
\begin{equation}
R_{\vec v} g c^\alpha = - c^\alpha R_{\vec v} g
\end{equation}
due to Lemma 3. This fact together with
\begin{equation}
E([c^0_i,\,c^1]R_{\vec v} g) = e-1 \mbox{ for } i=1,2
\end{equation}
(this also follows from Lemma 3)
and inductive hypothesis imply
\begin{equation}\label{ort2}
str([c^0_i, \,c^1] R_{\vec v} g)=
str([c^0, \,c^1_i] R_{\vec v} g)=0 \quad (i=1,2).
\end{equation}
Substituting
$\vec c_1=\frac 1 {\beta_1} (\vec c-{\beta_2} \vec c_2)$
and $\vec c_2=\frac 1 {\beta_2} (\vec c-{\beta_1} \vec c_1)$
in the left-hand side of (\ref{r12})
and using (\ref{ort1}) and (\ref{ort2})
one obtains the right-hand side of (\ref{r12}).
Thus, (\ref{e11}) is equivalent to (\ref{e22});
hence
\begin{equation}
str(([c^0_1,\, c^1_1]-1)g)-str(([c^0_2,\, c^1_2]-1)g)=0
\end{equation}
for every orthonormal pair $c_1,\,c_2\in {\cal E} (g)$.
Consequently,
\begin{equation}
str([c^0_1,\, c^1_2]g)=0
\end{equation}
which finishes the proof of Statement 6 and Theorem 5.
|
\section{Introduction}
High energy nuclear collisions will produce many
thousands charged particles in the central rapidity interval
usually covered
by tracking detectors. Among the measured charged hadrons are those
which are:
\begin{itemize}
\item
directly produced in the process of strong interaction between
two nuclei,
\item
products of decay of resonances during
the hadronization process and
\item
products of weak decays of heavy hadrons.
\end{itemize}
The characteristic distance between emission points of particles
originating from the first
two processes is of the order 1 to 100 fm; this distance can be
measured only in the statistical way using particle interferometry.
However, the characteristic
distance between weak decay point and the collision region
is often well measurable using recent experimental technics.
In this note we discuss a possible method of statistical
selection of weakly decaying particles in the experimental
case when the characteristic decay distance is of the same
order as experimental resolution of its measurement. In this case
the main problem is to make
efficient rejection of background due to the particles
originating directly from the interaction.
\section{General Description}
We consider here two body decay of a given particle and assume
that momenta and charges of both decay products are measured
by the experimental set up. Typical examples are neutral
strange or charm particle decays into charged particles
(V topology) which
can be easily measured.
The basic points of the method are the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item
for each combination of two tracks coming from the same interaction,
which are potential candidates for products of the decay
the hypothetical decay point is fitted and
the kinematical fit is done.
\item
values of cut--variables are calculated for each pair
and the probability density function (pdf) for accepted pairs
from the same interaction in the cut--space (see below) is obtained
('raw signal' pdf),
\item
the 'raw background' pdf in the cut--space is calculated using
combinations of tracks from different events,
\item
the acceptance region in the cut--space is selected using 'raw background'
pdf, expected 'signal' and 'background' multiplicities and number
of collisions,
\item
the 'signal' in the acceptance region is calculated as a
difference between 'raw signal' and 'raw background' pdfs
multiplied by a 'raw signal' average multiplicity.
\end{itemize}
The important element of the method is an introduction of the cut--space,
using which transparent and well defined method for the selection of
the best acceptance region (cuts) for the given experimental
case is developed.
The procedure should be used separately for different $y-p_T$
regions. The weighting factors, due to applied cuts in the cut--space
necessary to obtain final results are trivial.
\section{Cut--variables }
In this Section we describe a set of five cut--variables which are later
used to select the best acceptance region for separation of 'signal' from
the 'background'.
The cut--variables are defined in a specific way, which grantees
several important features of these variables calculated for
the 'signal' (real V decays):
\begin{itemize}
\item
the variables are independent from each other,
\item
the variables are independent of kinematical properties of the decaying
V particle (eg. y or p$_T$),
\item
the 'signal' pdf in cut--variables is independent of an
experimental resolution,
\item
the 'signal' pdf is uniform; the variables range between 0 and 1.
\item
the cuts in the cut--variables do not affect acceptance in the physically
important variables eg. rapidity or transverse momentum.
\end{itemize}
In the following a specific set of 5 cut--variables is described.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
The cumulative $\chi^2$ of the decay vertex fit.\\
The cumulative $\chi^2$ variable of the vertex fit is defined as:
\begin{equation}
C_{V} = \int^{\chi^2}_0 f(u,\nu)du,
\end{equation}
where $f(u,\nu)$ is chi--square probability density function for
$\nu$ degrees of freedom. The $\chi^2$ value for each decay is
calculated by decay vertex fit procedure.
\item
The cumulative $\chi^2$ of the kinematical fit.\\
The cumulative $\chi^2$ variable is defined as:
\begin{equation}
C_{K} = \int^{\chi^2}_0 f(u,\nu)du,
\end{equation}
where $f(u,\nu)$ is chi--square probability density function for
$\nu$ degrees of freedom. The $\chi^2$ value for each decay is
calculated using
standard method of Least Squares estimation with constrains
(kinematical fit).
In a case of measured momenta vectors of both decay products and
polar, $\theta_V$, and azimuthal, $\phi_V$, angles of the decay point
(defined in the spherical system with the origin in the interaction point)
the number of degrees of freedom is $\nu$ = 3. In the limit when there
is no information on $\theta_V$ and $\phi_V$ $\nu$ = 1.
\item
The polar angle of the decay product.\\
This cut--variable is defined as:
\begin{equation}
C_{\theta^*} = 0.5 (cos\theta^* + 1),
\end{equation}
where $\theta^*$ is an angle between momentum vector of positive (or
negative) decay product and V momentum vector calculated in the V
center of mass system.
The values obtained from the kinematical fit are used for the
calculation.
\item
The azimuthal angle of the decay product.\\
This cut--variable is defined as:
\begin{equation}
C_\phi = \frac {\phi} {2 \pi}
\end{equation}
where $\phi$ is an angle between a projection of the beam direction
and the projection of the momentum vector of the positive (or
negative) decay product onto plane perpendicular to the V direction.
The values obtained from the kinematical fit are used for
calculations.
\item
The cumulative life time.\\
The cumulative life time cut--variable is defined as:
\begin{equation}
C_\tau = \int^{R(\tau)}_0 P_{p_V}(R') dR',
\end{equation}
where $R$ is a distance between measured
V decay point and the interaction point,
$\tau$ is a V life time in the V
center of mass system and $P_{p_V}(R)$ is a
probability density function of decay at the distance $R$ calculated
for a V with momentum $p_V$. In the case of an ideal measurement
of the decay distance $R$ one gets:
\begin{equation}
P_{p_V}(R) = P_{p_V}^I(R) = Ae^{- \frac {\tau(R)} {\tau_0}} =
Ae^{- \frac {R} {R_0}},
\end{equation}
where $R_0 = p_V \tau_0 / m_V$ and $A$ is normalization factor.
If the decay distance measurement is not an ideal one we get:
\begin{equation}
P_{p_V}(R) = \int^{\infty}_0 P^I_{p_V}(R') \rho(R,R')dR',
\end{equation}
where $\rho(R,R')$ is a probability density that decay at a distance
$R'$ is measured as a decay at the distance $R$. The values obtained from
kinematical fit are used for the calculations.
\end{enumerate}
The choice of the given set of cut--variables is not unique, especially
various definitions of angular variables are possible.
The final selection depends on the experimental situation.
The variables should be defined in order to maximize nonuniformity
of the 'raw background' pdf.
\section{Cut-space and Acceptance Region}
We define a 5--D cut--space as a set of points:
\begin{equation}
{\bf C} = (C_{V}, C_{K}, C_{\theta^*}, C_{\phi}, C_{\tau}),
\end{equation}
From the definitions of $C_i$ given in previous Section follows
that:
\begin{equation}
V = \int \int \int \int dC_{V}dC_{K}dC_{\theta^*}dC_{\phi}dC_{\tau} =
\int dV = 1.
\end{equation}
For the 'signal' pdf we obtain:
\begin{equation}
\rho_s({\bf C}) = const({\bf C}) = 1
\end{equation}
where $\rho_s({\bf C})$ is a 'signal' pdf at point
{\bf C}.
The 'background' pdf, $\rho_b({\bf C})$,
is obviously nonuniform and therefore the ratio of the 'signal'
to the 'background' depends on the point {\bf C} or on the
subspace selected in the cut--space.
The average number of 'signal' events
(averaged over all collisions) in the subspace of the volume
$V^{acc}$ around any point {\bf C} is given by:
\begin{equation}
<n_s^{acc}> = V^{acc} <n_s>,
\end{equation}
where $<n_s>$ is an average number of all 'signal' events.
eg. all charged decays for which both decay products were measured.
The corresponding number of 'background' events is given by:
\begin{equation}
<n_b^{acc}> = <n_b> \int_{V^{acc}} dV \rho_b = \overline{\rho}_b^{acc}
V^{acc} <n_b>,
\end{equation}
where $<n_b>$ is an average number of 'background' events and
$\overline{\rho}_b^{acc}$ is an average 'background' density in
the subspace $V^{acc}$.
However, the average number of 'background' events and the 'background'
pdf can not be directly measured due to unknown contamination of
'signal' events. The 'background' pdf, $\rho_b({\bf C})$, can be safely estimated
by 'raw background' pdf, $\rho_{rb}({\bf C})$, obtained from combinations
of tracks from different events providing that $<n_s> << <n_b>$ and
that V decay products have similar $y-p_T$ distribution to that
obtained for tracks
originating from the main vertex.
The only multiplicity which is measured is 'raw signal' multiplicity i.e.
the average multiplicity of all track pairs, which are accepted as
candidates for products of V decay, $<n_{rs}> = <n_b> + <n_s>$.
If the total 'signal' multiplicity is much smaller than total
'background' multiplicity one can safely write:
\begin{equation}
<n_b> \approx <n_{rs}>.
\end{equation}
The above approximation allows to calculate 'signal' multiplicity
in the given acceptance (V$^{acc}$):
\begin{equation}
<n^{acc}_s> \equiv <n^{acc}_{rs}> - <n^{acc}_b> \approx
<n^{acc}_{rs}> - \overline{\rho}_{rb} V^{acc} <n_{rs}>,
\end{equation}
providing that the uncertainty of
the $<n^{acc}_s>$ due to the used approximation (Eq. 13)
is much smaller than $<n^{acc}_s>$ i.e.:
\begin{equation}
<n^{acc}_s> >> \frac {<n_s>} {<n_b>} <n^{acc}_b>
\end{equation}
or consequntly
\begin{equation}
\overline{\rho}_{rb}^{acc} << 1.
\end{equation}
Therefore in the region of cut--space in which the last inequality
is satisfied the 'signal' multiplicity can be expressed as:
\begin{equation}
<n_s> = <n_{rs}>(\overline{\rho}_{rs}^{acc}
- \overline{\rho}_{rb}^{acc}).
\end{equation}
For a given number of collisions, $N_{ev}$, the 'signal' can be
extracted from the 'background' in the subspace $V^{acc}$ when
the statistical uncertainty of the $<n_s>$ is much smaller than
$<n_s>$. Assuming that $<n_{rs}>$, $\overline{\rho}_{rs}^{acc}$ and
$\overline{\rho}_{rb}^{acc}$
are independent one gets:
\begin{equation}
\sigma(<n_s>) = [ (\sigma(<n_{rs}>)(\overline{\rho}_{rs}^{acc}
- \overline{\rho}_{rb}^{acc}))^2 +
( <n_{rs}> \sigma(\overline{\rho}_{rs}^{acc}))^2 +
( <n_{rs}> \sigma(\overline{\rho}_{rb}^{acc}))^2 ]^{1/2}
\end{equation}
Obviously the second term dominates in the above expression
(for central collisions $<n{rs}>$ is approximately fixed
and therefore $\sigma(<n_{rs}>)$ is relatively small even for
small number of collisions; number of background combinations
increarses like N$_{ev}^2$ whereas number of signal like
N$_{ev}$ and therefore $\sigma(\overline{\rho}_{rb}^{acc})$
is $\sqrt{N_{ev}}$ times smaller
than $\sigma(\overline{\rho}_{rs}^{acc})$.
Neglecting the first and the last terms in the Eq. 18 we get:
\begin{equation}
\sigma(<n_s>) = <n_{rs}> \sigma(\overline{\rho}_{rs}^{acc}).
\end{equation}
Let us try to estimate $\sigma(\overline{\rho}_{rs}^{acc})$.
From definition we have:
\begin{equation}
\overline{\rho}_{rs}^{acc} = \frac {n^{acc}_{rs}} {n_{rs} V^{acc}}.
\end{equation}
Due to the fact that n$^{acc}_{rs} << n_{rs}$ we can assume
Poissonian flactuations of n$^{acc}_{rs}$ and therefore we get:
\begin{equation}
\sigma\overline{\rho}_{rs}^{acc} = \frac {\sqrt{n^{acc}_{rs}}} {n_{rs} V^{acc}}.
\end{equation}
Substituting n$^{acc}_{rs}$ = n$_{rs}$ $\overline{\rho}_{rs}^{acc}$ V$^{acc}$
one gets:
\begin{equation}
\sigma\overline{\rho}_{rs}^{acc} = \sqrt{ \frac
{\overline{\rho}_{rs}^{acc}} {V^{acc}}}
\frac {1} {\sqrt{N_{ev} <n_{rs}>}}.
\end{equation}
Therefore the minimum number of events neccesary for signal--background
separation is given by:
\begin{equation}
N_{ev} >> \frac {<n_{rs}>} {<n_{s}>^2}
\frac {\overline{\rho}_{rs}^{acc}} {V^{acc}}
\end{equation}
\begin{center}
{\bf Acknowledgments}
\end{center}
We are grateful to E. Skrzypczak
for discussions and critical reading of the manuscript.
The support by polish State Committee for Scientific Research under Grants
2 0423 91 01
and 2 0436 91 01 is also acknowledged.
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
The recent discovery [1] that solitary wave solutions supported by nonlinear
wave equations may compactify under nonlinear dispersion, has shown
that nonlinear dispersion can cause qualitative changes in the nature
of genuinely nonlinear phenomena. Such nonlinearly dispersive
partial differential equations which support compacton solutions
are represented by the $K(m,n)$ equations of the form
\begin{equation}
u_t + a(u^m)_x + (u^n)_{3x} =0; \hspace{.2in}m,n>1
\end{equation}
Most of the
weakly nonlinear and linear dispersion equations studied so far
admit solitary waves, called solitons, that are infinite in extent.
On the other hand, it has been
shown that the interaction of nonlinear dispersion with nonlinear
convection generates exactly compact structures, called compactons,
free of exponential tails. The compacton solutions so generated
have immediate applications in the study
of pattern formations, as the observed stationary and dynamical patterns
in nature are usually finite in extent. The interaction also generates
many other nonlinear solitary wave structures like cuspons, peakons,
tipons etc. [2] which are otherwise not possible in the weakly nonlinear
models with linear dispersion. The compacton speed
depends on its height, but unlike solitons, its width is independent of
its speed. Beside the compact structure and the unusual speed-width
relation, the compactons have the remarkable soliton like property that they
collide elastically. However, unlike soliton collisions in an
integrable system, the point at which the compactons collide is marked
by the creation of low amplitude compacton-anticompacton pairs.More
recently [3,4] the study of the third-order $K(m,n)$ equations was
generalised by including into the equation higher order nonlinear
dispersive terms, like for example, the fifth-order $K(m,n,p)$ equations
of the form [3,4]
\begin{equation}
u_t + \beta _1 {(u^m)}_x + \beta _2 {( u^n)}_{3x} +
\beta _3 {(u^p)}_{5x} =0, \hspace{.2in}m, n, p >1
\end{equation}
This type of higher order dispersive
equations are useful for describing the dynamics of various physical
systems. As has been explained in [1], the compacton supporting
nonlinear dispersive equations arises if one controls the effects of
nonlinearity and
dispersion by two independent parameters while modelling physical
phenomena. In such cases, it is required to retain the quadratic and higher
order effects in dispersion. For example, one can show that the equations
governing the motion of mass points in a dense chain (which
leads to vibrational excitations in the chain) are a prototype of
the Eq.(2) above, if one consider the effect of the higher
order dispersive interactions. Similarly, for plasma ion acoustic waves,
if the ion-electron charge separation is treated separately from the
ions inertia, then again, considerations of
the effects of the higher order dispersive
interactions leads to the equations of the form as in Eq.(2) above.
Beside the applications of such higher order equations in physical systems (see
[3,4] for details), the studies of these generalised equations such as the
fifth-order nonlinear dispersive equations as above (Eq.(2)) are motivated by
the need to understand how far the concept of compact structures can be
extended and how generic are the properties of the compacton solutions.
A variety of explicit compact solitary wave structures of these fifth-
order nonlinear dispersive equations are constructed [3,4] and numerical
simulations of these equations have also revealed the existence of
compact travelling breathers [4].
In the present paper we report on the study of the stability property of the
compacton solutions [3,4] of these fifth-order nonlinear
dispersive equation.Beside predicting about the asymptotic nature of the
compacton solutions, the stability analysis is also important for the following
reasons.
Since the nonlinear dispersive equations represented by $K(m,n)$
equations (Eq.(1))
do not appear to be integrable [1], this suggests
that the observed almost elastic collisions of the compactons are
probably not due to the integrability property and thus the mechanism
responsible for the compact structure, coherence and robustness of the
compactons
calls for a more systematic study of the nonlinear
dispersive systems.
Stability analysis of the compacton solutions may
provide some clues regarding
the almost elastic nature of the compacton collisions. Beside, the stability
problem of the nonlinear dispersive equation is interesting
because for such equations
with higher power of the nonlinearity and nonlinear dispersion, the phenomena of
collapse is possible.
Further motivation for studying the stability properties of the
fifth-order nonlinear dispersive equations comes from the result of
the recent study on the
role of the fifth-order dispersion term on the soliton stability of
the usual KdV type linear dispersion equations. For example, it has
been shown that [5] the solitary wave solutions of the
fifth-order equation of the type
\begin{equation}
u_t + u^pu_x +\alpha u_{3x} + \beta u_{5x} =0
\end{equation}
are unstable with respect to the collapse
type instabilities, if p $\geq$ 4 for $\beta $ =0 while for
$\beta \neq $ 0, i.e. the addition of the fifth-order term stabilizes
the soliton for p$>$4 [5].
The exact upper limit of the nonlinearity
parameter $p$ in this case is still an open question [6].
It would therefore be appropriate to examine whether the addition of the
higher
order nonliner dispersion term puts any additional constraint on the conditions
for the stability of the corresponding compacton solutions.
Recently some attempts have been made to numerically
study the stability of compacton solutions of the fifth-order nonlinear
dispersive equations [7].
The rest of the paper is organised as follows: in Sec. 2 we present
some general properties like various self similar solutions,
conservation laws, various solitary wave structures etc.
of the fifth-order nonlinear dispersive
equations.
In Sec. 3 we discuss
the stability of the compacton solutions of these
equations using linear stability analysis. A short report on this
method appeared recently
in an rapid communication article [8].
Finally we conclude in Sec. 4.
\section{Some General Properties}
The fifth-order nonlinear dispersive $K(m,n,p)$ equation of the
form as in Eq.(2)
is not
derivable from a Lagrangian and hence does not
possess the usual conservation laws of mass, energy etc. that are
associated with the KdV type of equations ($m=n=p=1$ case). However, this
equation has exact compacton solutions for the nonlinearity parameters
within the range 2$\leq$ k $\leq$ 5, provided $k=m=n=p$ [3,4]. Since
this equation
does not have a Lagrangian and hence a conserved Hamiltonian, we cannot do
a linear stability analysis for the compacton solutions of this equation,
as the linear stability requires a Hamiltonian, as shown below. Hence,
we consider a slightly different fifth-order nonlinear dispersive equation
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{u_t - a \delta u^{a - 1} u_x + \alpha b (b-1) u^{b-2} (u_x)^3 +
4 \alpha b u^{b-1} u_x u_{2x} +
2 \alpha u^b u_{3x} } \nonumber \hspace{-.1in}\\
& & \mbox{} + 3 \beta c (c -1) u^{c-2} (u_x)^5 + 24 \beta c u^{c-1} (u_x)^3 u_{2x}
+ 24 \beta u^c u_x (u_{2x})^2 \nonumber \\
& & \mbox{} + 12 \beta u^c (u_x)^2 u_{3x} -
2 \gamma d (d-1)(d-2) u^{d-3} (u_x)^3 u_{2x} \nonumber \\
& & \mbox{} -
7 \gamma d (d-1) u^{d-2} u_x (u_{2x})^2
- 6 \gamma d (d-1) u^{d-2} (u_x)^3 u_{3x} -
10 \gamma d u^{d-1} u_{2x} u_{3x} \nonumber \\
& & \mbox{} - 6 \gamma d u^{ d-1} u_x u_{4x} - 2 \gamma u^d u_{5x} = 0
\end{eqnarray}
where $u(x)=\partial _x \phi (x)$.
At a first glance it may appear that this equation has been created
artificially.
However, a closer look will immediately reveal that this equation is very
similar to Eq.(2) above. It contains exactly the same terms as in Eq.(2),
but only the weightage of the terms are different. Comparing term by term
we see that
the set of parameters ${m,n,p}$ in Eq. (2)
corresponds to $a=m, b+1=n$ and $c+3=d+1=p$ in Eq. (4). Both Eqs.(2) and (4)
have compacton solutions. But the advantage of Eq.(4) is that it is
possible now to write a Lagrangian for this equation leading to a Hamiltonian
and thus one can do the stability analysis of the compacton solutions of
Eq.(4). Thus we will present here the stability analysis of the
fifth-order nonlinear dispersive equation given by Eq.(4), instead of
Eq.(2). The Lagrangian corresponding to Eq.(4) is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{\hspace{-.25in} L = \int {\cal L}\, dx }\nonumber \\
& & \hspace{-.5in} =
\int dx \big{[} \frac{1}{2} \phi _x \phi _t -
\delta \frac{{(\phi _x)}^{a +1}}{a+1} - \alpha {(\phi _x)}^b
{(\phi _{2x})}^2 - \beta {(\phi _x)}^c{(\phi _{2x} )}^4 -
\gamma {(\phi _x)}^d {(\phi _{3x})}^2 \big{]}
\end{eqnarray}
It is worth remarking here that recently Cooper et al [7]
have obtained compacton
solutions for a
slightly different fifth-order nonlinear equation which is again obtainable
from a Lagrangian.
The conserved Hamiltonian
H which is obtained from the Lagrangian [Eq. (5)] is
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{\hspace{-.5in} H= \int_{-\infty }^{\infty }
[ \pi \dot {\phi} - {\cal L}] dx, \hspace{.5in} \pi =
\frac{\partial {\cal L}}
{\partial {\dot \phi}} = \frac{1}{2} \phi _x} \nonumber \\
& & \hspace{-.6in}=\int _{-\infty }^{\infty}
\bigg [ \delta \frac{ u^{a+1}}{a+1}
+ \alpha u^b (u_x)^2 + \beta u^c
(u_x)^4 + \gamma u^d (u_{2x})^2 \bigg ] dx
\end{eqnarray}
This Hamiltonian also follows from the fact that Eq. (4) can be
written in the canonical form
\begin{equation}
u_t = \partial _x \frac{ \delta H}{\delta u} =\{u, H\}
\end{equation}
where the Poisson bracket structure is given by
\begin{equation}
\{ u(x) , u(y) \} = \partial _x \delta (x -y)
\end{equation}
We first consider the scaling relations between speed, width and amplitude
of the travelling wave $(\xi =x+Dt)$ structure of Eq. (4). Under the
scaling transformation $x \rightarrow \mu x, t \rightarrow \nu t$ and
$u \rightarrow \eta u$, it can be easily shown that
\begin{equation}
u(x,t) \rightarrow D^{\frac {1}{a-1}}u(D^{\frac {(b+1-a)}{2(a-1)}} \xi ) =
D^{\frac {1}{a-1}} u (D^{\frac {(c+3-b-1)}{2(a-1)}} \xi ) =
D^{\frac {1}{a-1}} u (D^{\frac {(d+1-b-1)}{2(a-1)}} \xi )
\end{equation}
Similarly Eq. (2) under scaling transformation also admits solutions of the
form
\begin{equation}
u(x,t) = D^{\frac {1}{(m-1)}} u ( D^{\frac {(p-n)}{2(m-1)}} \xi)
\end{equation}
From Eq. (9) we see that for the case when $a=b+1=c+3=d+1$ (which
corresponds to the case of $m=n=p$ in Eq. (10)), there is a
detailed balance between the convection and dispersion and as a
result of which the width of the sotitary wave solutions (compactons)
become independent of the amplitude (or speed $D$).
It can also be shown that the fifth-order equations [Eq. (4)] are invariant
under the stretching group of transformations [2] which supports
self-similar solutions (similarity structures) of the form
\begin{equation}
u(x,t) = t^{\frac {2}{\Delta}} F(\zeta )
\end{equation}
where $\zeta =xt^{-\mu},\ \mu ={\frac {b+1-a}{\Delta}}$ and $ \Delta =
b+3(1-a)$ along with $c+3=d+1$. Now, when $\mu =0$ or $\Delta =0$, the
self similar soluions of the form in Eq. (11) is no longer valid.
However, in that case, it can be shown that the equations [Eqs. (2) and (4)]
have additional invariance under shifts in time or space (spiral symmetry)
giving rise to the self similar solutions of the form
\begin{eqnarray}
u(x,t) & = & t^{\frac {1}{1-a}}F(x+Dlogt)\hspace{.2in}\ for \ a=b+1=c+3=d+1 \nonumber \\
& = & e^{-Dt}F(xe^{D(a-1)t}) \hspace{.2in} \ for \ 3a=b+3
\end{eqnarray}
Similarly, it can be shown that the fifth-order nonlinear dispersive $K(m,n,p)$
equations
of the form of Eq. (2) are also invariant under stretching group of
transformations
which admits similarity solutions of the form as in Eq. (11)
for $\mu = (p-n)/\Delta $ where
$\Delta = 3p-5n+2$ and $m=2n-p$. Again, when $n=m$ or when
$n=3m-2$ it can be shown that the $K(m,n,p)$ equations are invariant under
the spiral group of transformations leading to self similar solutions
of the form
\begin{eqnarray}
u(x,t) & = & t^{\frac {1}{1-m}}F(x+Dlogt) \hspace{.2in}\ for \ m=n=p \nonumber \\
& = & e^{-Dt}F(xe^{D(m-1)t}) \hspace{.3in} \ for \ 5n=3p+2 \ and \ m=2n-p
\end{eqnarray}
For the case when $m=n+2$ and $p=n-2$, substituting Eq. (11) in Eq. (2) we
get the equation for $F(\xi)$ as
\begin{equation}
-\alpha \xi F + F^{n+2} + (F^n)_{2\xi } + (F^{n-2})_{4\xi } = \beta
\end{equation}
where $\xi = xt^{-\alpha }$ , $\alpha = {\frac {1}{n+2}}$ and $\beta $ =constant.
For the particular case of $n$=2 ( in which case Eq. (2) reduces to the form
of the third-
order nonlinear dispersion $K(m,n)$ equation [Eq. (1)]) Eq. (14) reduces
to the generalised second-order Painleve equation [2].
We now make some comment
about the conserved quantities associated with these fifth-order nonlinear
dispersive equations.
A conservation law associated with equations of the form Eq.(2) and Eq.(4)
can be written as
\begin{equation}
\frac {\partial Q}{\partial t} + \frac {\partial X}{\partial x} =0
\end{equation}
where $Q$ is the density of the conserved quantity $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}Q dx$
and $X$ is the corresponding flux density.
In an earlier paper [3] we had reported
that Eq. (2) has only one conservation law. We now find that, like the $K(m,n)$
equations (Eq. (1)),
the fifth-order $K(m,n,p)$
equations (Eq. (2)) also have four conservation laws for the case
$m=n=p$, with four densities (Q's) same as that of Eq.(1) [1].
In fact, we are now able to show
that the same three (out of four) densities (Q's) of Eq.(1)
also exist
for arbitrary odd ($2n+1$)th-order nonlinear dispersion
equations (Eq. (36) in [3]).
It can be checked that
the $Q$ and $X$ values for the arbitrary odd ($2n+1$)th-
order $K(m,m,m,...)$
equations are
given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\noindent
Q_1 = u \ , \ \hspace{.3in}
X_1 & = & a_1(u^m)
+ (a_1 +a_3)(u^m)_{2x} + .... \nonumber \\
& + & (a_{2n-3} + a_{2n-1})(u^m)_{(2n-2)x}
+ a_{(2n-1}(u^m)_{(2n)x} \nonumber \\
Q_2 = ucosx \ , \ \hspace{.1in}
X_2 & = & a_1 [\sin x (u^m)_x + \cos x (u^m)_{2x}] +... \nonumber \\
& + & a_{2n-1}[\sin x (u^m)_{(2n-1)x}
+ \cos x (u^m)_{(2n)x}] \nonumber \\
Q_3 = u sinx \ , \ \hspace{.1in}
X_3 & = & a_1[-\cos x (u^m)_x + \sin x (u^m)_{2x}] +... \nonumber \\
& + & a_{(2n-1)}[-\cos x (u^m)_{(2n-1)x}
+ \sin x (u^m)_{(2n)x}]
\end{eqnarray}
where $a_1$, $a_3$ etc are coefficients of various dispersive terms.
We have not been able to prove in general
the existence of the fourth density
$Q_4=u^{m+1}$ [1] for the arbitrary odd order nonlinear equation
. However, we can show that for the third and fifth-order
nonlinear dispersion equation
$Q_4 = u^{m+1}$ is the fourth density
for arbitrary values of the nonlinearity parameter $m$.
We have also checked that $Q_4=u^{m+1}$ is also the fourth
density for the ninth and eleventh-order equation for the
particular value of the nonlinearity parameter $m=2$.
From the above
calculations we conjecture that $Q=u^{m+1}$ is the fourth density
for the arbitrary odd order nonlinear dispersion equation
for arbitrary values of the nonlinearity parameter $m$.
The origin or the symmetry associated with these unusal
conservation laws of these nonlinear dispersive equations are not known
at present. However, it should be noted that for the fifth-order nonlinear
dispersive
equation [Eq. (4)] which is derivable from a Lagrangian, there are only
three conserved quantities.
It can be easily shown [3,4] that both the equations Eq.(2) and Eq.(4)
support a class of one parameter
family of compacton solutions of the form
\begin{equation}
u(\xi ) = A \cos^{\nu}(B\xi )
\end{equation}
for$ \mid B\xi \mid \leq \pi /2 $, $u(\xi ) =0$ otherwise and where
$\xi = x- Dt \ , \ \nu = \frac {4}{(k-1)}.$ The width B of the
compacton solutions is independent of speed D. The compacton solutions
exist for the continuous values of the nonlinearity parameter $k=a=
b+1=c+3=d+1$ in the range $2\leq k \leq 5$. Similarly, it can be shown
that the fifth-order nonlinear dispersive equations of the form of
$ K(m,n,p)$ equations (Eq. (2)) also have the compacton solutions of the form
of Eq. (17) within the same range of the nonlinearity parameter
$2 \leq k=m=n=p \leq 5$. For the third-order nonlinear dispersive
equations (Eq.(1)) it has been shown that,
beside compacton solutions, the interaction of the nonlinear dispersion term
with the convective term gives rise to various other kinds of nonlinear
localised structures such as cuspons, peakons, spikons, tipons etc. [2].
In the same way, we have been able to obtain the peakon solution of the form
\begin{equation}
u(x,t) = u_0 [e^{-\beta {\mid \xi \mid} } -1]
\end{equation}
for the fifth-order nonlinear dispersive equation (Eq.(2)), but, only for the
special case of the nonlinear parameters $m = n = p = 2$.
So far we have not been able
to obtain the peakon solutions (if any) for the same equations for other
values of the nonlinear parameters $m,n,p$.
Similarly, we have not yet been able to
obtain other solitary wave structures (if any)
such as cuspons and tipons for the
fifth-order nonlinear dispersive equations (Eqs. (2),(4)).
\section{Compacton Stability}
In this section we discuss in detail the stability analysis of the compacton
solutions of the fifth-order nonlinear dispersive equations which
have been studied recently [3,4]. We use
here the method of linear stability analysis to analyze the problem.
As
has been mentioned above, we cannot do the linear stability analysis
for the compacton solutions of Eq.(2) as these equations do not have a
Lagrangian. Accordingly we will study the stability of the compacton
solutions for a slightly different equation (Eq.(4)) which can be
derived from a Lagrangian density
(Eq. (5)) and has a conserved Hamiltonian [Eq. (6)] and
momentum
\begin{equation}
P(u) = \frac {1}{2} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} u^2 dx
\end{equation}
It can be easily checked that Eq. (4) can also be derived from the variational
principle $\delta (H+Dp) =0$, where $P$ and $D$ denote the compacton
momentum and velocity respectively. Introducing the notations
\begin{eqnarray}
I_n & = & \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} u^n (x) dx,
\ \ J_2 = \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}
u^b (u_x)^2 dx, \ \ J_3 = \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} u^c (u_x)^4 dx \nonumber \\
J_4 & = & \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} u^d (u_{2x })^2 dx
\end{eqnarray}
we can write the Hamiltonian [Eq. (6)] and the momentum for the compactons as
\begin{equation}
H_c = [ \frac {\delta}{(a+1)} I_{a+1} +\alpha J_2 +
\beta J_3 + \gamma J_4] \, , \ \ P_c =\frac {1}{2} I_2
\end{equation}
Now we consider the scaling transformation $x\rightarrow \nu x$. Under this
transformation the integrals in Eq. (20) are transformed as
\begin{equation}
I_n(\nu )= \frac {I_n}{\nu }, \ \ J_2(\nu )= \nu J_2, \ \ J_3(\nu ) =
\nu ^3 J_3 \ \ and \ \ J_4(\nu ) = \nu ^3 J_4
\end{equation}
such that
\begin{equation}
H_c(\nu ) = \frac {\delta }{\nu (a+1)} I_{a+1} + \alpha \nu J_2 + \beta \nu ^3
J_3 + \gamma \nu ^3 J_4, \ \ and \ \ P_c(\nu )= \frac {P_c}{\nu }
\end{equation}
Integrating Eq. (4) twice we get
\begin{equation}
2DP_c + \delta I_{a+1} +\alpha (b+2) J_2 + \beta (c+4) J_3 +\gamma (d+2) J_4 =0
\end{equation}
Similarly from
$$\frac {d}{d\nu } [ H(\nu ) + D P_c (\nu )]_{\nu =1} =0 $$
we get,
\begin{equation}
-\frac {\delta }{(a+1)} I_{a+1} + \alpha J_2 + 3\beta J_3 + 3\gamma J_4
-DP_c=0
\end{equation}
We eliminate $J_4$ and $I_{a+1}$ from Eqs. (24) and (25) to
write the Hamiltonian (Eq. (21)) as
\begin{eqnarray}
H_c & = & \frac {\alpha J_2}{(3a+d+5)} (2a-4b+2d-2)+\frac {J_3}{(3a+d+5)}
(-8\beta
+4\beta d -4c\beta ) \nonumber \\
& = & \frac {DP_c}{(3a+d+5)}(a-d-9) \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
However, as mentioned above, the compacton solutions (Eq. (17)) exist for
nonlinear parameters $a=b+1=c+3=d+1=k$ within the range $2\leq k \leq 5$ for
which the Hamiltonian can be written as
\begin{equation}
H_c = - \frac {2DP_c}{(a+1)}
\end{equation}
Similarly Eq. (23) can be written as
\begin{equation}
H_c(\nu )=\frac {\alpha J_2}{2}(2\nu -1/\nu -\nu ^3) + \frac {DP_c}{4(a+1)}
[\nu ^3 (a-1) - \frac {(a+7)}{\nu }]
\end{equation}
Thus $H_c(1)=H_c$. Now, we consider the more general scaling transformation
$u \rightarrow \mu ^{\frac {1}{2}}u(\lambda x)$. Under this transformation
$H_c$ and $P_c$ are transformed as $H(\lambda ,\mu )$ and $P(\lambda , \mu)$
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\Phi (\lambda , \mu ) & = & \frac {\delta }{\lambda (a+1)}
\mu ^{\frac {a+1}{2}}I_{a+1}
+\alpha \lambda \mu ^ {\frac {b+2}{2}}J_2 + \beta \lambda ^3 \mu ^ {\frac {c+
4}{2}}J_3 \nonumber \\
& & \mbox{} + \gamma \lambda ^3 \mu ^{\frac {d+2}{2}}J_4 + D\frac {\mu }{\lambda }P_c
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Phi (\lambda , \mu) = H_c(\lambda ,\mu )+DP_c (\lambda , \mu )$. The
expressions $\frac {\partial \Phi}{\partial \lambda }= \frac{\partial \phi }{
\partial \mu }=0 $ give the stationary points at $\mu =\lambda =1$ (the
compacton equation) and near this point, using the Taylor's series for $\mu =
\lambda $ we get (the transformation in this case does not change the
momentum $P$)
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta ^{(2)}\Phi (\lambda ) & = & \delta ^ {(2)} H(\lambda ) =
\frac {(\lambda -1)^2}{8}
\bigg [\frac {\delta I_{a+1}}{a+1}(a-1)(a-3) \nonumber \\
& + & \alpha J_2
(b+2)(b+4) \mbox{}
+ \beta J_3 (c+10)(c+8) \nonumber \\
& + & \gamma J_4 (d+6)(d+8) \bigg ]
\end{eqnarray}
which has a definite sign. If it is positive (negative), the expression
\begin{equation}
H_c(\lambda )=H_c(\mu ,\lambda )|_{\mu = \lambda }=\frac {\delta }{a+1}
\lambda ^{\frac {(a-1)}{2}}I_{a+1} +\alpha \lambda ^{\frac {(b+4)}{2}}J_2 + \beta
\lambda ^{\frac {(c+10)}{2}}J_3 +\gamma \lambda ^{\frac {(d+8)}{2}}J_4
\end{equation}
has a minimum (maximum) at $\lambda =1$.
Now, let us assume that $u=u_c + v$, where $\mid v \mid \ll 1$ and the scalar
product $<u_c,v>=0$. Substituting this in Eq. (4) and after linearization we
get
\begin{equation}
\partial_T v=\partial _{\xi } \hat {L}v
\end{equation}
where $\xi =x-Dt \ , \ T=t$ and the operator $\hat {L}$ is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat {L} & = & D + a\delta u^{a-1}-2\alpha bu^{b-1}u_x\partial _x -\alpha b(b-1)
u^{b-2}u_x^2 -2\alpha bu^{b-1}u_{2x} -2\alpha u^b \partial _x ^2 \nonumber \\
& - & 3\beta c(c-1)
u^{c-2}u_x^4 -12\beta cu^{c-1}u_x^3\partial _x -12 \beta cu^{c-1}u_x^2u_{2x}
-24\beta u^cu_xu_{2x}\partial _x \nonumber \\
& - & 12\beta u^cu_x^2\partial _x^2
+ 3\gamma d(d-1)u^{d-2}u_{2x}^2 +6\gamma du^{d-1}u_{2x}\partial _x^2
+ 2\gamma d
(d-1)(d-2)u^{d-3}u_x^2u_{2x} \nonumber \\
& + & 4\gamma d(d-1)u^{d-2}u_xu_{2x}\partial _x
+2\gamma d(d-1)u^{d-2}u_x^2\partial _x^2
+4\gamma d(d-1)u^{d-2}u_xu_{3x} \nonumber \\
& + &
4\gamma d u^{d-1}u_{3x}\partial _x
+4\gamma du^{d-1}u_x\partial _x^3 +
2\gamma du^{d-1}u_{4x} +2\gamma u^d \partial _x^4
\end{eqnarray}
Eq. (31) has a solution of the form
\begin{equation}
v(\xi ,T) = e^{-iwT}\phi (\xi ) + e^{iw^*T}\phi ^*(\xi )
\end{equation}
where $ \phi (\xi )$ satisfies the equation
\begin{equation}
w\phi (\xi ) = i\partial _{\xi } \hat{L} \phi (\xi )
\end{equation}
Integrating the compacton equation of motion (Eq. (4)) once w.r.t. $\xi =
x-Dt$, the resulting equation can be written as
\begin{equation}
\hat{L}\partial _{\xi }u_c =0
\end{equation}
Similarly, integrating Eq. (4) once w.r.t. $\xi $ and differentiating
the resulting equation w.r.t $D$ we get
\begin{equation}
\hat{L}(\frac {\partial u_c}{\partial D})=-u_c
\end{equation}
Eq. (35) shows that the $w=0$
solution of Eq. (34) is given by $\phi (x) \propto
\partial _{\xi } u_c$. Similarly, Eq. (34) has also the solution
$(-w, \phi (-\xi ))$. Thus the compacton $u_c$ is stable if $w$ is real and
unstable if $w$ is complex.
Since Eq. (34) contains the product of two hermitian operators, hence all $w$
are real if one of the operators is positive definite. This implies that
a sufficient condition condition of real eigenvalue $w$ is [5]
\begin{equation}
<\psi , \hat{L} \psi > \ \ >0
\end{equation}
where $\psi $ is a function in the the subspace orthogonal to $u_c$, i.e.
\begin{equation}
<\psi , u_c > = <\psi , \partial _{\xi }u_c >=0
\end{equation}
Using Eqs.(35) and (36) and following Karpman [5], it can be shown that
the condition for the existence of such function $\psi $ satisfying Eqs. (37)
and (38) is equivalent to the condition
\begin{equation}
(\frac {\partial P_c}{\partial D}) >0
\end{equation}
From Eqs. (20), (21) and the exact compacton solution [Eq. (17)] of the
fifth-order nonlinear dispersive equation [Eq. (4)], it can be shown that
the condition in Eq. (39) is satisfied for arbitrary values of the nonlinear
parameters $k=a=b+1=c+3=d+1$. However, as has
been mentioned above, the compacton
solutions of the fifth-order nonlinear dispersive equation are allowed for
the nonlinearity parameter in the range $2\leq k \leq 5$. Since the stability
condition [Eq. (39)] is satisfied for arbitrary values of the nonlinearity
parameter $k$, this implies that all the allowed compacton solutions [Eq. (17)]
are stable.
We can obtain another condition for the compacton stability from the
Hamiltonian minimum condition. This is because the condition in Eq. (37)
is also associated with the extremum of $H+DP$, since, using the relation
$\delta (H+DP)=0$, one can show that the second variation of $H(u)$ and
$P(u)$ at $u=u_c$ can be written as
\begin{equation}
\delta ^{(2)} (H+DP)_{u_c} =\frac {1}{2} \int_{-\infty }^{\infty }
<v,\hat{L}v> d\xi \hspace{.5mm} >0
\end{equation}
where the operator $\hat{L}$ is given by Eq. (32). This means that, if the
condition in Eq. (37) is fulfilled, then $H(u)+DP(u)$ has a minimum at $u=u_c$.
Inversely, the minimum of $H(u)+DP(u)$ at $u=u_c$ is a sufficient condition
of compacton stability with respect to small perturbations. Thus from Eq. (30)
we obtain the condition for the minimum of the perturbed Hamiltonian
$H_c(\lambda )$ at $\lambda =1$ as
\begin{equation}
2DP_c(k-1)(k-7) > 64\alpha J_2 (k+1)
\end{equation}
Using Eq. (20), (21) and the exact compacton solutions [Eq. (17)] it can be shown
that the condition in Eq. (41) is satisfied for arbitrary values of nonlineariy
parameter $k$ within the range $2\leq k \leq 5$ for which the compacton
solutions are allowed. This result, that the condition for the
compacton stability is satisfied for arbitrary values of the nonlinearity
parameter, is unlike the soliton stability results, where it has been
shown that the stability condition of the soliton solutions puts a
restriction on the allowed values of the nonlinearity parameters [5,6,9,10].
We would like to mention here that the stability condition [Eq. (39)] is
obtained by assuming that at sufficiently small dispersion,
there is only one eigenstate with negative eigenvalue for the operator
$\hat{L}$ [Eq. (32)]. Details regarding this conjecture are explained
in [5]. The validity of this conjecture has been proven from
numerical experiments for many other systems, such as third and fifth-order
Korteweg-de Vries equations as well as nonlinear Schr\"odinger equations [5]
. At present we do not have any evidence to show that this conjecture is
also valid for our operator $\hat{L}$ [Eq. (32)], except for the fact that
the stability result that follows from using this conjecture also
agrees with the results
obtained independently from the Hamiltonian minimum condition
[Eqs. (40) and (41)]. Numerical experiments along the lines as refered in [5]
will be required to verify the validity of this conjecture for the systems
described here.
\section{Conclusions}
To conclude, in this paper we have shown how the nonlinear dispersion term
interacts with the nonlinear convection term in the fifth-order nonlinear
dispersive equations to generate exact compacton solutions free from
exponential tails and many other unusual nonlinear localised solutions like
peakons, cuspons etc. Using simple scaling relations and the invariance
property of the equations under stretching group as well as
spiral group of transformations, we have shown how these higher order
nonlinear dispersive equations support self similar solutions of various
patterns. Unlike the third-order nonlinear dispersive
equations [2], for the fifth-order nonlinear dispersive equations case,
various solitary wave solutions such as cuspons, peakons, tipons etc
cannot be shown as a plot in phase diagrams as functions of the
corresponding potentials.
However, using an ansatz, we have been able to obtain the
peakon solutions of the fifth-order nonlinear dispersive equations.
We have also shown that the fifth-
order nonlinear dispersive equations when expressed in the form of the
$K(m,n,p)$ equations [Eq. (2)] have four
conserved densities ($Q$'s in [Eq. (15)])
same as that for
the third-order nonlinear dispersive $K(m,n)$ equations [Eq. (1)], though the
corresponding flux densities ($X$'s in [Eq. (15)]) are obviously different.
Further, even for the arbitrary odd order nonlinear dispersive equations
we have proved the existence of three conservation laws and provided strong
evidence for the existence of the fourth one.
However, it
should be noted that, for the
case of the fifth-order nonlinear dispersive equations [Eq. (4)] which
are derivable from a Lagrangian, there are
only three conserved quantities [3]. We have used
linear stability analysis to examine the stability of the compacton solutions
for the fifth-order
nonlinear dispersive equations. The important differences between soliton and
compacton solutions that come out from the stability analysis of
the corresponding solutions are that, whereas the soliton solutions are allowed
for arbitrary values of the nonlinearity parameters, the stability
condition of the soliton solutions puts restrictions on the range of the
nonlinearity parameters for which stable soliton solutions are allowed
. On
the other hand, the compacton solutions are allowed only
within a certain range of the nonlinearity parameters
and all the allowed compacton solutions within this specific range of
the nonlinearity parameters are stable. This is because, as
shown above, as in the case of the
third-order nonlinear dispersive equations [8], the linear stability analysis
of the compacton solutions of the fifth-order
nonlinear dispersive equations also does not put any additional constraint
on the range of the nonlinear parameters.
\newpage
\section{References}
\begin{enumerate}
\item P. Rosenau and J.M. Hyman, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 70}, 564 (1993);
P. Rosenau, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 73}, 1737 (1994).
\item P. Rosenau, Phys. Lett. A {\bf 230}, 305 (1997)
\item B. Dey, Phys. Rev. E {\bf 57}, 4733 (1998)
\item P. Rosenau, Phys. Lett A, {\bf 252}, 297 (1999) and references therein.
\item V.I. Karpman, Phys. Lett. A {\bf 210}, 77 (1996) and references therein
\item B. Dey, A. Khare and C.N. Kumar, Phys. Lett. A {\bf 223}, 449 (1996)
\item F. Cooper, J.M. Hyman and A. Khare, e-print Patt-Sol/9704003
\item B. Dey and A. Khare, Phys. Rev. E {\bf 58}, R2741 (1998)
\item E.A. Kuznetsev, Phys. Lett. A {\bf 101}, 314 (1984)
\item V.I. Karpman, Phys. Lett. A {\bf 215}, 254 (1996) and references therein.
\end{enumerate}
\end{document}
\\
|
\section{Introduction}
One of the most important physics in top quark sector is to
probe anomalous flavor changing
neutral current (FCNC) couplings.
In the Standard Model (SM), FCNC couplings are forbidden at
the tree level and much suppressed in loops by the GIM
mechanism. Any signals on FCNC couplings in
the
processes of
top
quark decay and productions or indirectly in loops will
indicate the existence of
new physics beyond the SM. Recently in the framework of
effective lagrangian, Han and Hewett\cite{han}
have examined carefully the possibility of exploring
the FCNC couplings $tcZ/ tc \gamma$ in the production vertex
for the reaction $e^+ e^- \rightarrow t {\bar c} + {\bar t}
c$ and concluded that at higher energy colliders with $0.5
-1$ TeV center-of-mass energy, the resulting sensitivity to
FCNC couplings will be
better than the present constraints \cite{zhang}. In this
paper, in the minimal supersymmetric standard model (MSSM)
we study the
process $e^+ e^- \rightarrow t {\bar c}
+ {\bar t}
c$
and perform an detail calculation of the contribution from
the FCNC
couplings in the vertex
of gluino-squark-quark
to the production cross section. We will point out that
at higher energy $e^+ e^-$ colliders
the cross
section could be as large as 0.1 fb
which is at least eight order of magnitude larger than the
prediction of the SM $\sim 10^{-10} - 10^{-9}$
fb \cite{sm}.
The MSSM is arguably
the most promising candidate for physics beyond the SM.
Beside many attractive features of supersymmetry in
understanding the mass hierarchy, gauge coupling unification,
the weak scale SUSY models in generally lead to a rich flavor
physics. In fact, SUSY models often have arbitrary flavor
mixings and mass parameters in the squark and slepton sectors
and these mass matrices after diagonalization induce FCNC
couplings at tree level in the vertex of
gluino-squark-quark ${\it etc}$.
Phenomenologically one would have to assume certain
symmetries or dynamical
mechanisms to prevent large FCNC among the first and second
generations. On the other hand the
flavor structure, especially among the second and third
generations in the SUSY sector motivates us to seek for
new physics and any experimental observation on the FCNC
processes beyond the SM would undoubtedly shed light on our
understanding for flavor physics. In this paper we take
model of Ref. \cite{Ellis,Duncan2} where the FCNC couplings
relevant to our calculation is given by:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal L_{FC}}=-\sqrt{2}g_sT^aK\overline{\tilde g}P_Lq\tilde{q}_L + h.c.
\end{eqnarray}
In (1), K is the supersymmetric version of the
Kobayashi--Maskawa
matrix, which is explicitly expressed as:
\begin{eqnarray}
K_{ij}=\left(\matrix{1&\varepsilon&\varepsilon^2\cr
-\varepsilon&1&\varepsilon\cr-\varepsilon^2&-\varepsilon&1\cr}\right)
\end{eqnarray}
where $\epsilon$ parameterizes the strength of flavor mixing
and
is shown to be as large as $1/2$ without
contradicting with the low energy experimental
data \cite{Duncan2}.
In Fig.(1) we give the Feynman diagrams for the
process $e^+(p_1) e^-(p_2)
\rightarrow t(k_1) \bar{c}(k_2)$.
In
calculations,
we have neglected the scalar u-quark contribution since it is
highly suppressed
by $K_{12}K_{13}$; and we use
the dimensional regularization to control the ultraviolet
divergence.
We have checked that all divergences cancel out in the final
result with the
summing up of all of the diagrams.
The calculations are carried out in the frame of the center of mass system (CMS)
and Mandelstam variables have been employed:
\begin{eqnarray}
s=(p_1 +p_2)^2 =(k_1 +k_2)^2 \hspace{7mm} t=(p_1 -k_1)^2 \hspace{7mm}
u=(p_1 -k_2)^2.
\end{eqnarray}
After a straightforward calculations, one obtains for the
amplitudes
\begin{eqnarray}
M&=&{e \over S}\bar{v}(p_1)\gamma_{\mu} u(p_2) \bar{u}(k_1)
V^\mu (tc\gamma) v(k_2) \nonumber \\
&+& {g \over 2 \cos \theta_W (S-M_Z^2)}
\bar{v}(p_1)\gamma_{\mu} (g_V^e-g_A^e \gamma_5) u(p_2) \bar{u}(k_1)
V^\mu (tcZ) v(k_2)
\end{eqnarray}
where,
$g_V^e=1/2-2 \sin^2 \theta_W$, $g_A^e=1/2$, and
$V^\mu (tc\gamma)$ and $V^\mu (tcZ)$ are the on-shell quarks effective vertices
given by \footnote{For simplicity, we only give the results in the
limit of $m_c =0$. However in our numerical calculations, we use the
full formulas. }
\begin{eqnarray}
V^\mu(tc\gamma;Z)&=&
f_1^{\gamma;Z} \gamma_\mu P_R+
f_2^{\gamma;Z} \gamma_\mu P_L+
f_3^{\gamma;Z} k_{1\mu} P_R +
f_4^{\gamma;Z} k_{1\mu} P_L
\nonumber \\
&& +
f_5^{\gamma;Z} k_{2\mu} P_R +
f_6^{\gamma;Z} k_{2\mu} P_L.
\end{eqnarray}
The form factors, $f_i^{\gamma;Z}$ are
\begin{eqnarray}
f_1^\gamma &=&
\sum_{\tilde{q}=
\tilde{c}, \tilde{t}}
{(\pm 1)\epsilon e g_s^2 \cos (\theta_{\tilde{q}}) \sin(\theta_{\tilde{q}})
m_{\tilde{g}}
\over
12 m_t \pi^2 } [
B_0(0, m_{\tilde{g}}^2, m_{\tilde{q}_2}^2)
- B_0(m_t^2, m_{\tilde{g}}^2, m_{\tilde{q}_2}^2)]
+ R.R.
\nonumber \\
f_2^\gamma &=&
\sum_{\tilde{q}=
\tilde{c}, \tilde{t}}
{(\pm 1)\epsilon e g_s^2 \sin^2 (\theta_{\tilde{q}}) \over
24 m_t^2 \pi^2 } [
(m_{\tilde{g}}^2-m_{\tilde{q}_2}^2) B_0(0, m_{\tilde{g}}^2, m_{\tilde{q}_2}^2)
- (m_{\tilde{g}}^2-m_{\tilde{q}_2}^2+ m_t^2)
B_0(m_t^2, m_{\tilde{g}}^2, m_{\tilde{q}_2}^2)
\nonumber \\
&&+
4 m_t^2 C_{00} ]
+ R.R
\nonumber \\
f_3^\gamma &=&
\sum_{\tilde{q}=
\tilde{c}, \tilde{t}}
{(\mp 1)\epsilon e g_s^2 \sin(\theta_{\tilde{q}})
\cos (\theta_{\tilde{q}})
m_{\tilde{g}}
\over
12 \pi^2 } [ C_0+2 C_1] + R.R.
\nonumber \\
f_4^\gamma &=&
\sum_{\tilde{q}=
\tilde{c}, \tilde{t}}
{(\pm 1)\epsilon e g_s^2 \sin(\theta_{\tilde{q}})
\cos (\theta_{\tilde{q}})
m_{\tilde{g}}
\over
12 \pi^2 } [ C_0+2 C_2] + R.R.
\nonumber \\
f_5^\gamma &=&
\sum_{\tilde{q}=
\tilde{c}, \tilde{t}}
{(\pm 1)\epsilon e g_s^2 \sin^2(\theta_{\tilde{q}})
m_{t}
\over
12 \pi^2 } [ C_0+2 C_{11}] + R.R.
\nonumber \\
f_6^\gamma &=&
\sum_{\tilde{q}=
\tilde{c}, \tilde{t}}
{(\mp 1)\epsilon e g_s^2 \sin^2(\theta_{\tilde{q}})
m_{t}
\over
12 \pi^2 } [ C_0+2 C_{12}] + R.R.
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
f_1^Z &=&
\sum_{\tilde{q}=
\tilde{c}, \tilde{t}}
{(\mp 1)\epsilon g g_s^2 \sin^2(\theta_w)
\cos (\theta_{\tilde{q}}) \sin(\theta_{\tilde{q}}) \over
12 m_t \cos (\theta_w) \pi^2 } [
B_0(0, m_{\tilde{g}}^2, m_{\tilde{q}_2}^2)
- B_0(m_t^2, m_{\tilde{g}}^2, m_{\tilde{q}_2}^2)]
+ R.R.
\nonumber \\
f_2^Z &=&
\sum_{\tilde{q}=
\tilde{c}, \tilde{t}}
{(\mp 1)\epsilon g g_s^2 \sin^2 (\theta_{\tilde{q}}) \over
96 m_t^2 \cos (\theta_w) \pi^2 } \{
(-3+4 \sin^2(\theta_w)) [(m_{\tilde{g}}^2-m_{\tilde{q}_2}^2) B_0(0, m_{\tilde{g}}^2, m_{\tilde{q}_2}^2) \nonumber\\
&& - (m_{\tilde{g}}^2-m_{\tilde{q}_2}^2+ m_t^2)
B_0(m_t^2, m_{\tilde{g}}^2, m_{\tilde{q}_2}^2)]
+ 4 m_t^2 (-3 \sin^2 (\theta_{\tilde{q}})+4 \sin^2(\theta_w)) C_{00} \nonumber \\
&& -12 m_t^2 \cos^2 (\theta_{\tilde{q}})
\hat{C}_{00} \}
+ R.R
\nonumber \\
f_3^Z &=&
\sum_{\tilde{q}=
\tilde{c}, \tilde{t}}
{(\pm 1)\epsilon g g_s^2 \sin(\theta_{\tilde{q}})
\cos (\theta_{\tilde{q}})
m_{\tilde{g}}
\over
48 \cos (\theta_w) \pi^2 } [
(4 \sin^2(\theta_w)-3 \sin^2 (\theta_{\tilde{q}})) ( C_0+2 C_1) \nonumber \\
&& + 3 \sin^2 (\theta_{\tilde{q}})
( \hat{C}_0+2 \hat{C}_1) ] + R.R.
\nonumber \\
f_4^Z &=&
\sum_{\tilde{q}=
\tilde{c}, \tilde{t}}
{(\mp 1)\epsilon g g_s^2 \sin(\theta_{\tilde{q}})
\cos (\theta_{\tilde{q}})
m_{\tilde{g}}
\over
48 \cos (\theta_w) \pi^2 } [
(4 \sin^2(\theta_w)-3 \sin^2 (\theta_{\tilde{q}})) ( C_0+2 C_2) \nonumber \\
&& + 3 \sin^2 (\theta_{\tilde{q}})
( \hat{C}_0+2 \hat{C}_2) ] + R.R.
\nonumber \\
f_5^Z &=&
\sum_{\tilde{q}=
\tilde{c}, \tilde{t}}
{(\mp 1)\epsilon g g_s^2 \sin^2(\theta_{\tilde{q}})
m_{t}
\over
48 \cos (\theta_w) \pi^2 } [
(4 \sin^2(\theta_w)-3 \sin^2 (\theta_{\tilde{q}})) ( C_0+2 C_{11}) \nonumber \\
&& - 3 \cos^2 (\theta_{\tilde{q}})
( \hat{C}_0+2 \hat{C}_{11}) ] + R.R.
\nonumber \\
f_6^Z &=&
\sum_{\tilde{q}=
\tilde{c}, \tilde{t}}
{(\pm 1)\epsilon g g_s^2 \sin^2(\theta_{\tilde{q}})
m_{t}
\over
48 \cos (\theta_w) \pi^2 } [
(4 \sin^2(\theta_w)-3 \sin^2 (\theta_{\tilde{q}})) ( C_0+2 C_{12}) \nonumber \\
&& - 3 \cos^2 (\theta_{\tilde{q}})
( \hat{C}_0+2 \hat{C}_{12}) ] + R.R.
\end{eqnarray}
where $R.R.$ represents the replacement of
$\theta_{\tilde{q}} \rightarrow \pi/2+ \theta_{\tilde{q}}$
and $m_{\tilde{q}_1} \leftrightarrow m_{\tilde{q}_2}$.
The variables
of three point
functions $C_{i}$, $C_{ij}$ \cite{denner} and
$\hat{C}_{i}$, $\hat{C}_{ij}$
are
$(m_t^2, S, 0, m_{\tilde{g}}^2,m_{\tilde{q}_2}^2, m_{\tilde{q}_2}^2)$
and $(m_t^2, S, 0, m_{\tilde{g}}^2,m_{\tilde{q}_2}^2, m_{\tilde{q}_1}^2)$,
respectively.
In the MSSM the mass eigenstates of the
squarks $\tilde{q}_1$ and $\tilde{q}_2$ are related to the weak
eigenstates $\tilde{q}_L$ and
$\tilde{q}_R$
by \cite{MSSM}
\begin{eqnarray}
\left(\begin{array}{c}
\tilde{q}_1 \\ \tilde{q}_2\end{array}\right)=
R^{\tilde{q}}\left(\begin{array}{c}
\tilde{q}_L \\ \tilde{q}_R\end{array}\right)\ \ \ \ \mbox{with}\ \ \ \
R^{\tilde{q}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
\cos\theta_{\tilde{q}} & \sin\theta_{\tilde{q}}\\
-\sin\theta_{\tilde{q}} & \cos\theta_{\tilde{q}}
\end{array}
\right).
\label{eq1}
\end{eqnarray}
For the squarks, the mixing angle $\theta_{\tilde{q}}$ and
the masses $m_{\tilde{q}_{1,2}}$ can be calculated by
diagonalizing the following mass
matrices
\begin{eqnarray}
M^2_{\tilde{q}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
M_{LL}^2 & m_q M_{LR}\\
m_q M_{RL} & M_{RR}^2
\end{array} \right), \nonumber \\
M_{LL}^2=m_{\tilde{Q}}^2+m_q^2+m_{z}^2\cos 2\beta (I_q^{3L}-e_q\sin^2\theta_w),
\nonumber \\
M_{RR}^2= m_{\tilde{U},\tilde{D}}^2 +m_q^2+m_{z}^2\cos 2\beta e_q\sin^2\theta_w,
\nonumber \\
M_{LR}= M_{RL}=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
A_t-\mu \cot \beta & (\tilde{q}= \tilde{t})\\
A_b-\mu \tan \beta & (\tilde{q}= \tilde{b}),
\end{array}
\right.
\label{eq2}
\end{eqnarray}
where $ m_{\tilde{Q}}^2$, $ m_{\tilde{U},\tilde{D}}^2$ are
soft SUSY breaking mass terms of the left- and right-handed
squark, respectively; $\mu$ is the
coefficient of the $H_1H_2$
term in the superpotential;
$A_t$ and $A_b$ are the
coefficient of the dimension-three tri-linear
soft SUSY-breaking terms; $I_q^{3L}, e_q$ are the weak
isospin
and electric charge of the squark $\tilde{q}$.
From Eqs. \ref{eq1} and \ref{eq2},
we have
\begin{eqnarray}
m^2_{\tilde{t}_{1,2}}&=&{1\over 2}\left[ M^2_{LL}+
M^2_{RR}\mp \sqrt{
(M^2_{LL}-M^2_{RR})^2+4 m^2_t M^2_{LR}}\right] \nonumber \\
\tan\theta_{\tilde{t}}&=&{m^2_{\tilde{t}_1}-M^2_{LL} \over m_t M_{LR}}.
\label{eq3}
\end{eqnarray}
Now we present the numerical results.
For the SM parameters, we take
\begin{eqnarray}
m_Z=91.187 GeV, ~~~~m_W=80.33 GeV&&, ~~~~ m_t=176.0 GeV, ~~~~
m_c=1.4 GeV
\nonumber \\
\alpha=1/128 &&, ~~~~ \alpha_S=0.118
\end{eqnarray}
For the MSSM parameters, we choose $\mu=-100 GeV$ and
$\epsilon^2 =
1/4$.
To simplify the calculation we have taken
that $m_{\tilde{U}} = m_{\tilde
{D}}=m_{\tilde{Q}}=A_t=m_S$ (global SUSY).
In Figs. 2-5, we show the cross sections of the process
$e^+e^- \rightarrow t \bar c$ as functions of $m_S$,
$m_{\tilde{g}}$,
$\sqrt{s}$ and $\tan\beta$. One can see that
the production cross section increases as squarks and
gluino masses decrease, and it could reach $0.1 $ fb for
favorable parameters. This is an enhancement by a factor of
$10^8$
relative to the SM prediction.
Such enhancement could be easily understood as following:
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\sigma_{SUSY}}{\sigma_{SM}}
\sim \left( \frac{\alpha_s \Delta m_{\tilde{q}}^2}{\alpha m_b^2} \right)^2,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Delta m_{\tilde{q}}^2$ represents the possible mass square difference
among squarks. If $\Delta m_{\tilde{q}}^2$ varies from $100^2 -200^2 (GeV)^2$,
$\frac{\sigma_{SUSY}}{\sigma_{SM}}= 10^7 \sim 10^8$. At the same
time, this kind of enhancement could also be observed
in FCNC decay process of top quark
\cite{decay}.
Due to the
rather clean experimental environment and well-constrained
kinematics, the signal of ${\bar t} c$ or $t {\bar c}$
would be spectacular \cite{han}. We expect the
SUSY-QCD effects studied in this paper be observed at higher
energy $e^+ e^-$ colliders.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We thank Profs. Tao Han and Chao-Shang Huang for discussions.
This work was supported in part by the
National Natural Science Foundation
of China,
Doctoral Program Foundation of
Higher Education,
the post doctoral foundation
of China,
and a grant from the State Commission of Science and
Technology of China.
S.H. Zhu also
gratefully acknowledges the
support of K.C. Wong Education Foundation, Hong Kong.
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}
There is now a big interest in
studying strongly interacting matter
at high density and/or temperature
which is created in high energy nuclear collisions.
Indeed,
at high densities and/or temperatures, QCD predicts
the chiral symmetry restoration and quark deconfinement.
How can we create such matter ?
At present,
high energy heavy ion collision is considered to be a unique way
to create such dense and hot matter at laboratory.
In order to find such a new form of nuclear matter,
several heavy ion experiments have been and are being performed
with Si(14.6{\rm A GeV/c}) or Au(11.6{\rm A GeV/c}) beam at BNL-AGS
and with the O(200{\rm A GeV/c}), S(200{\rm A GeV/c}) or Pb(158{\rm A GeV/c}) beam at CERN-SPS.
Since high energy heavy ion collisions
lead to a huge number of final states,
many event generators have been proposed
to explore these high energy nuclear collisions,
with the aid of Monte-Carlo realization of complex processes.
In these event generators,
there are mainly three categories of models.
The models in the first category
assume Glauber geometry for the treatment of AA collisions.
For example,
FRITIOF~\cite{fritiof}, LUCIAE~\cite{luciae}, VENUS~\cite{venus},
HIJING~\cite{hijing}, DPM~\cite{dpm}, HIJET~\cite{hijet} and LEXUS\cite{lexus}
belong to this category.
Final interaction among hadrons are included in VENUS, HIJET and LUCIAE.
In these models, main quantum features during the multiple scattering
are preserved within the eikonal approximation,
and efficiently fast calculations are possible.
However, these approaches are mainly designed for the extremely high
energy collisions ($\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}>10{\rm A GeV}$).
The models in the second category (parton cascade models),
such as VNI~\cite{vni} and ZPC~\cite{zpc}, have been recently developed
to implement the interaction among partons to study space-time
evolution of partons produced in high energy nuclear collisions.
These models have been originally designed
to describe ultra-relativistic heavy ion collisions at collider energies,
such as BNL-RHIC and CERN-LHC,
and they have met some successes in describing heavy ion collisions
at CERN-SPS energies~\cite{kkg}.
The third category of models is a
transport model which is often referred to as 'hadronic cascade'.
For example, RQMD~\cite{rqmd1,rqmd2}, QGSM~\cite{qgsm}, ARC~\cite{arc},
ART~\cite{art}, UrQMD~\cite{urqmd} and HSD~\cite{hsd}
can be categorized here.
They have been successfully used to describe many aspects of
high energy heavy ion collisions in a wide range of incident energies.
For the description of AA collisions in hadronic cascade models,
the trajectories of all hadrons as well as resonances
including produced particles are followed explicitly
as a function of time.
Nuclear collisions are modeled by the sum of independent
hadron-hadron ($hh$) collisions without interferences.
Two particles are made to collide if their closest distance is smaller than
$\sqrt{\sigma(s)/\pi}$, here $\sigma(s)$ represents the total cross
section at the c.m. energy $\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}$.
As a result of the $hh$ collision,
secondary particles will be produced according to
the specific model with some formation time.
One of the most distinct difference among these models
may be in the way of implementing hadronic degrees of freedom.
In RQMD and UrQMD, many established hadronic resonances
are explicitly propagated in space-time, while ARC, ART and HSD
do not include higher hadronic resonances.
Although both modelings seem to give similar results
if we see the final hadronic spectra inclusively,
we expect thermodynamic quantities like pressure or temperature
before freeze-out predicted by those models
would be different from each other~\cite{YNOM}.
Another difference is the treatment of multiparticle production.
String model is adapted in RQMD, QGSM, UrQMD and HSD, while
in ARC and ART, final states are sampled according to the
direct parameterization of the experimental data.
The hadronic cascade model based on the string phenomenology
implies that some partonic degrees of freedom play
some roles in reaction dynamics implicitly.
In fact, the estimation of partonic degrees of freedom has been done
recently within UrQMD~\cite{urqmd2}.
ARC~\cite{arc} has shown that
'pure' hadronic model can describe the data at AGS energies.
At collider energies, however, explicit treatments of
partonic degrees of freedom will be necessary.
The main purpose of this work
is
to perform systematic analyses of collisions
from pA to massive AA systems at AGS energies,
for which high-quality systematic experimental data
are available~\cite{E802pA,E802b},
within the hadronic cascade model, JAM1.0,
which has been developed recently
based on resonances, strings and pQCD.
The main features included in JAM are as follows.
(1) At low energies, inelastic $hh$ collisions are modeled by
the resonance productions based on the idea from RQMD and UrQMD.
(2) Above the resonance region, soft string excitation is implemented
along the lines of the HIJING model~\cite{hijing}.
(3) Multiple minijet production is also included in the same way
as the HIJING model in which jet cross section and the number
of jet are calculated using an eikonal formalism for
perturbative QCD (pQCD) and hard parton-parton scatterings
with initial and final state radiation are simulated
using PYTHIA~\cite{pythia} program.
(4) Rescattering of hadrons which have original constituent quarks can
occur with other hadrons
assuming the additive quark cross section within a formation time.
Since these features of the present hadronic cascade model, JAM1.0,
enables us to explore heavy ion collisions in a wide energy range,
from 100A MeV to RHIC energies, in a unified way,
it is a big challenge for us to make systematic analyses in these energies.
In this paper, we focus on the mass dependence of the collision
system at AGS energies.
Other applications at higher energies are found elsewhere~\cite{jam1}.
The outline of this paper is as follows.
We will present a detailed description of cross sections
and modeling of inelastic processes
for $hh$ collisions in section~\ref{sec:hcm},
because elementary $hh$ processes are essential inputs for the hadronic
cascade model.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:results}, we first study the transverse momentum
distributions of protons, pions and kaons in
p+Be, p+Al, p+Cu, p+Au, Si+A, Si+Cu and Si+Au collisions
at the laboratory incident momentum of 14.6A GeV/c.
We discuss the role of rescattering by comparing
the cascade model results with the Glauber type calculations.
We then discuss the collision dynamics
for truly heavy ion colliding system Au+Au collisions.
The summary and outlook are given in Sec.~\ref{sec:summary}.
\section{MODEL DESCRIPTION}\label{sec:hcm}
In this section, we present the assumptions
and parameters of our model together with the inclusive and the exclusive
$hh$ data including incident energy dependence.
\subsection{MAIN COMPONENTS OF THE MODEL}\label{subsec:comp}
The main components of our model are as follows.
(1) Nuclear collision is assumed to be described by the
sum of independent binary $hh$ collisions.
Each $hh$ collision is realized by the closest distance approach.
In this work, no mean field is included, therefore
the trajectory of each hadron is straight in between two-body
collisions, decays or absorptions.
(2) The initial position of each nucleon is sampled by the
parameterized distribution of nuclear density.
Fermi motion of nucleons are assigned
according to the local Fermi momentum.
(3) All established hadronic states, including resonances,
are explicitly included
with explicit isospin states as well as their anti-particles.
All of them can propagate in space-time.
(4) The inelastic $hh$ collisions produce resonances at low energies
while at high energies
( $\mbox{\raisebox{-0.6ex}{$\stackrel{>}{\sim}$}}\: 4{\rm GeV}$ in $BB$ collisions $\mbox{\raisebox{-0.6ex}{$\stackrel{>}{\sim}$}}\: 3{\rm GeV}$ in $MB$ collisions
and $\mbox{\raisebox{-0.6ex}{$\stackrel{>}{\sim}$}}\: 2{\rm GeV}$ in $MM$ collisions)
color strings are formed and they decay into hadrons according to the
Lund string model~\cite{pythia}.
Formation time is assigned to hadrons from string fragmentation.
Formation point and time are determined by assuming yo-yo formation point.
This choice gives the formation time of
roughly 1 fm/c with string tension $\kappa=1 $GeV/fm.
(5) Hadrons which have original constituent quarks can scatter
with other hadrons assuming the additive quark cross section
within a formation time.
The importance of this quark(diquark)-hadron interaction
for the description of baryon stopping
at CERN/SPS energies was reported by Frankfurt group~\cite{rqmd1,urqmd}.
(6) Pauli-blocking for the final nucleons in two-body collisions
are also considered.
(7) We do not include any medium effect
such as string fusion to rope~\cite{venus,rqmd1},
medium modified cross sections and in-medium mass shift.
All results which will be presented in this paper
are those obtained from the free cross sections and free masses as inputs.
\subsection{Baryon-baryon interactions}
Let us start with the explanation of the
resonance model for baryon-baryon ($BB$) collisions
implemented in our model in detail.
We assume that inelastic $BB$ collisions are described by
the resonance formations and their decays below C.M. energy
$\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}<4$GeV
and at higher colliding energies,
string formation and their fragmentation into hadrons
are included based on a similar picture to that
in the RQMD~\cite{rqmd2} and the UrQMD model~\cite{urqmd}.
The total and elastic $pp$ and $pn$ cross sections are well known.
Fitted cross sections and experimental data
are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:nntotal}.
Inelastic cross sections are assumed to be filled up with
the resonance formations up to $\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}=$3-4GeV.
At higher energies,
the difference between experimental inelastic cross section
and resonance formation cross sections
are assigned to the string formation.
\FIGnntotal
The following non-strange baryonic resonance excitation channels
are implemented for the nucleon-nucleon scattering in our model:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(1)] $NN \to N\Delta(1232)$,
\ \ (2) $NN \to NN^* $,
\ \ (3) $NN \to \Delta(1232)\Delta(1232)$,
\item[(4)] $NN \to N\Delta^* $,
\ \ (5) $NN \to N^*\Delta(1232) $,
\ \ (6) $NN \to \Delta(1232)\Delta^* $,
\ \ (7) $NN \to N^*N^* $,
\item[(8)] $NN \to N^*\Delta^* $,
\ \ (9) $NN \to \Delta^*\Delta^* $.
\end{itemize}
Here $N^*$ and $\Delta^*$ represent higher baryonic states below 2 GeV/$c^2$.
The $pp$ and $pn$ cross sections are
calculated from each isospin components $\sigma(I)$
(in some cases we ignore the interferences between different amplitudes):
\begin{equation}
\sigma(h_1 h_2 \to h_3 h_4) = \sum_I |C(h_1h_2,I)|^2|C(h_3 h_4,I)|^2 \sigma(I)
\label{eq:crossres}
\end{equation}
where $C(h_i h_j,I)$ is isospin Clebsch-Gordon coefficients.
For $N^*$ and $\Delta^*$ productions,
the sum of production cross sections of several resonance species
($N(1440) \sim N(1990)$ for $N^*$
and $\Delta(1600) \sim \Delta(1950)$ for $\Delta^*$)
are parameterized, and resonance species are chosen afterward (see below).
The strength of each branches $\sigma(I)$ are determined from the exclusive
pion production data~\cite{CernHera}.
Isospin $I=1$ component for $NN$ collisions can be extracted
from the $pp$ reactions.
We assume that isospin $I=0$ components are determined from the $pn$ reactions,
then explicit form of cross sections in different isospin channels
can be written down as follows,
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma(pp\to p\Delta^+) &=& {1\over4}\sigma(I=1), \qquad
\sigma(pn\to n\Delta^+) = {1\over4}\sigma(I=1), \\
\sigma(pp\to n\Delta^{++}) &=& {3\over4}\sigma(I=1),\qquad
\sigma(pn\to p\Delta^0) = {1\over4}\sigma(I=1), \\
\sigma(pp\to pp^*) &=& \sigma(I=1) , \qquad
\sigma(pn\to np^*) = {1\over4}\sigma(I=1)+{1\over4}\sigma(I=0), \\
\sigma(pp\to \Delta^+\Delta^+) &=& {2\over5}\sigma(I=1) , \qquad
\sigma(pn\to \Delta^0\Delta^+)
= {1\over20}\sigma(I=1)+{1\over4}\sigma(I=0),\\
\sigma(pp\to \Delta^0\Delta^{++}) &=& {3\over5}\sigma(I=1) ,\qquad
\label{eq:dda}
\sigma(pn\to \Delta^-\Delta^{++})
={9\over20}\sigma(I=1)+{1\over4}\sigma(I=0)\ .
\label{eq:ddb}
\end{eqnarray}
The functional form for the non-strange baryonic resonance formation cross
sections is assumed to be
\begin{equation}
\sigma(\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}) =
{{\rm a}(\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$} / \mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}_{th}-1)^{\rm b} {\rm d}
\over (\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}/{\rm c}-1)^2 + {\rm d}^2} ~.
\end{equation}
All parameters
except one-$\Delta$ production cross section
are listed in tables~\ref{table:bbresa} and ~\ref{table:bbresb}
for each isospin channel
where all cross sections are given in mb and $\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}_{th}$ denotes a threshold.
One-$\Delta$ production cross section
$\sigma(NN \to N \Delta(1232))$ is
parameterized with the following functional form
\begin{equation}
\sigma_1(NN\to N\Delta(1232))=
{0.0052840\sqrt{\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}/2.0139999-1}\over (\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}- 2.11477)^2+0.0171405^2}
+{ 28.0401(\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}/ 2.124-1)^{ 0.480085} \over((\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}/ 2.06672)-1)^2+ 0.576422^2},
\end{equation}
in order to ensure correct threshold behavior.
Pionic fusion cross section ($pp\to d\pi^+$) has been fitted as
\begin{equation}
\sigma(pp\to d \pi^+)=
{ 0.14648(\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}/ 2.024-1)^{ 0.20807} \over((\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}/ 2.13072)-1)^2+ 0.042475^2}
+{ 0.12892(\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}/ 2.054-1)^{ 0.08448} \over((\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}/ 2.18138)-1)^2+ 0.059207^2}.
\end{equation}
In actual simulations,
we have effectively included the cross section of the $NN\to \pi d$
into the $\Delta$ production cross section for simplicity.
Similarly the s-wave pion production channels $NN\to NN\pi_{s}$
are simulated as the $N(1440)$ production.
\begin{table}[]
\caption[NNND]{Resonances cross section parameters for I=1,
$\pi_s$ denotes s-wave pion production.}
\label{table:bbresa}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lccccc}
Channel & a & b & c & d & $\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}_{th}$ \\\hline
$\sigma_1(NN\to NN^*)$ & 24.94700 & 2.48150 & 2.63330 & 0.425358 & 2.162\\
$\sigma_1(NN\to \Delta(1232)\Delta(1232))$ & 7.63181 & 1.41140 & 2.67784 & 0.311722 & 2.252\\
$\sigma_1(NN\to N\Delta^*)$ & 8.01615 & 2.74161 & 3.34503 & 0.259703 & 2.340\\
$\sigma_1(NN\to N^*\Delta(1232))$ & 13.14580 & 2.06775 & 2.75682 & 0.247810 & 2.300\\
$\sigma_1(NN\to \Delta(1232)\Delta^*)$ & 19.63220 & 2.01946 & 2.80619 & 0.297073 & 2.528\\
$\sigma_1(NN\to N^*N^*)$ & 11.67320 & 2.31682 & 2.96359 & 0.259223 & 2.438\\
$\sigma_1(NN\to N^*\Delta^*)$ & 2.99086 & 2.29380 & 3.54392 & 0.090438 & 2.666\\
$\sigma_1(NN\to \Delta^*\Delta^*)$ & 35.13780 & 2.25498 & 3.14299 & 0.215611 & 2.804\\
$\sigma_1(NN\to NN\pi_s)$ & 15.644100 & 1.675220 & 2.07706 & 0.658047 & 2.014\\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[hbtp]
\caption[]{Resonances cross section parameters for I=0,
$\pi_s$ denotes s-wave pion production.}
\label{table:bbresb}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lccccc}
Channel & a & b & c & d & $\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}_{th}$ \\\hline
$\sigma_0(NN\to NN^*)$ & 166.60600 & 2.10128 & 2.34635 & 0.284955 & 2.162\\
$\sigma_0(NN\to \Delta(1232)\Delta(1232))$ & 39.99770 & 1.83576 & 2.40348 & 0.288931 & 2.252\\
$\sigma_0(NN\to \Delta(1232)\Delta^*)$ & 56.32490 & 2.00679 & 2.71312 & 0.362132 & 2.528\\
$\sigma_0(NN\to N^*N^*)$ & 2.14575 & 0.21662 & 3.40108 & 0.252889 & 2.438\\
$\sigma_0(NN\to \Delta^*\Delta^*)$ & 4.14197 & 1.67026 & 3.75133 & 0.476595 & 2.804\\
$\sigma_0(NN\to NN\pi_s)$ & 78.868103 & 0.746742 & 1.25223 & 0.404072 & 2.014\\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\FIGnninel
In Fig.~\ref{fig:nninel},
We show the contributions of non-strange baryonic resonance cross sections
for different partial channels as functions of c.m. energies.
The upper panels of Fig.~\ref{fig:nninel}
show the one-resonance production cross section $NN\to NR$ (solid lines),
two-resonance production cross section $NN\to RR$ (dotted lines),
the sum of $NR$ and $RR$ cross section (long dashed lines)
for $pp$ (left panels) and $pn$ (right panels) reactions.
Total inelastic cross sections are filled up by the resonance productions
up to about $E_{cm}=$4GeV, while at CERN/SPS energies, string excitation
is dominated.
The dot-dashed lines in the upper panels of Fig.~\ref{fig:nninel}
express the string excitation cross sections for $pp$ and $pn$.
At AGS energies corresponding to the
invariant mass \mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}$\sim 5$GeV,
the contributions of the resonance productions and string productions
are approximately the same in the first nucleon-nucleon collision
in our parameterization.
The collision spectrum in $BB$ collisions, however, are spread in broad
energy range for Au+Au collision as shown in Ref.~\cite{urqmd},
due to the high baryon density achieved at AGS energies.
Low energy cross sections, therefore, is also important
in order to treat the dynamics correctly at AGS energies from first chance
$NN$ collisions to the final hadronic gas stage.
The cross section for the resonance productions may be written by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:cross}
{d\sigma_{12\to34}\over d\Omega}=
{(2S_3+1)(2S_4+1)\over 64\pi^2 s p_{12}}
\int\int p_{34} |\Mx|^2 A(m_3^2)A(m_4^2)d(m^2_3)d(m^2_4) ~,
\end{equation}
where $S_i, i=3,4$ express the spin of the particles in the final state.
Mass distribution function $A(m_i)$ for nucleons is just a $\delta$-function,
while that for resonances is given
by the relativistic Breit-Wigner function
\begin{equation}
A(m^2)={1\over \cal N}{m_R\Gamma(m)\over (m^2-m_R^2)^2 + m_R^2\Gamma(m)^2}.
\label{eq:rlorentz}
\end{equation}
where $\cal N$ denotes the normalization constant.
In this paper,
we use simply take ${\cal N} = \pi$ which is a value in the case of
a constant width.
The full width $\Gamma(m)$ is a sum of all partial decay width
$\Gamma_R(MB)$ for resonance $R$ into mesons $M$ and baryons $B$
which depends on the momentum of the decaying particle~\cite{rqmd2,urqmd}:
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_R(MB)=\Gamma^0_R(MB) {m_R\over m}
\left({p_{cms}(m)\over p_{cms}(m_R)}\right)^{2\ell+1}
{1.2 \over 1+0.2\left({p_{cms}(m)\over p_{cms}(m_R)}\right)^{2\ell+1}}
\label{eq:width}
\end{equation}
where $\ell$ and $p_{cms}(m)$ are
the relative angular momentum
and
the relative momentum in the exit channel in their rest frame.
The Monte Carlo procedure is as follows.
First, final resonance types $\Delta(1232)$, \mbox{$N^*$} or \mbox{$\Delta^*$} are chosen
using parameterized cross sections
and then
we determine each resonance production channel
according to the equation Eq.(\ref{eq:cross}).
To do this, we need to know the matrix element $|\Mx|^2$ for all resonances.
In the present model, we make a simple assumption that
each resonance production cross sections can be selected
according to the probability:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:resprob}
P(R_i,R_j) \sim (2S_i+1)(2S_j+1)\int\int
p_{ij}A_i(m^2_i)A_j(m^2_j)d(m^2_i)d(m^2_j)~.
\end{equation}
Namely, the partial cross section for each resonance state
is only governed by the final spins and mass integrals
ignoring the resonance state dependence of the matrix element.
Once types of resonances are chosen,
we generate the resonance masses according to the distribution
neglecting the mass dependence of the matrix elements in Eq.~(\ref{eq:cross})
\begin{equation}
P(m_3,m_4)dm_3dm_4 \sim 4m_3m_4p_{34}A(m^2_3)A(m^2_4)dm_3dm_4 \ ,
\end{equation}
in the reaction $1+2 \to 3+4$, where mass distribution function $A(m_i)$
should be replaced by the $\delta$-function
in the case of stable particles in the final state.
In the case of the collisions involving resonance states
in the ingoing channel,
we use the approximation that the inelastic cross sections
for resonance productions
as well as
the elastic cross section are the same as the nucleon-nucleon
cross sections at the same momentum in the c.m. frame,
except for de-excitation processes, $NR \to NN$ and $RR \to NN$,
whose cross sections are estimated by using the detailed balance
described in the next subsection, \ref{subsec:detbal}.
\FIGnnex
Fig.~\ref{fig:nnex} shows
the energy dependence of the exclusive pion production cross sections
in $pp$ (up to five pion production) and $pn$ (up to two pion production)
reactions.
We compare the results obtained from our simulation
with the data~\cite{CernHera}.
Overall agreement is achieved in these exclusive pion productions
within a factor of two with the above simplification of
the common matrix element in Eq.~(\ref{eq:resprob}).
Smooth transition from the resonance picture to the string picture
at $E_{cm}= 3\sim4$ is
achieved since no irregularity of the energy dependence is
present in the calculated results.
String excitation law will be described later in section~\ref{sec:string}.
In order to get more satisfactory fit, for example, we can improve the model
by introducing different values for the matrix elements
for different resonance channels.
For example, in Ref.~\cite{Teis}, the matrix elements are fitted to reproduce
the pion production cross sections up to two-pion productions
as well as $\eta$ production cross section
assuming that they are independent of masses but dependent on species.
\subsection{Detailed balance}
\label{subsec:detbal}
In the processes of resonance absorption,
we use a generalized detailed balance formula~\cite{detbal1,detbal2,Wolf2}
which takes the finite width of the resonance mass into account.
The time-reversal invariance of the matrix element leads to the
principle of detailed balance. If scattering particles are all stable,
the formula is given by
\begin{equation}
{d\sigma_{34\to 12}\over d\Omega}=
{(2S_1+1)(2S_2+1)\over (2S_3+1)(2S_4+1)}
{p^2_{12} \over p^2_{34}}
{d\sigma_{12\to 34}\over d\Omega}
\end{equation}
where $S_i$ denotes the spin of particle $i$ and $p_{ij}$
corresponds to the c.m. momentum of the particles $i$ and $j$.
The differential cross section for the reaction $(1,2)\to(3,4)$
for the stable particles may be written by
\begin{equation}
{d\sigma_{12\to 34}\over d\Omega}=
{|\Mx_{12\to34}|^2 \over 64\pi^2 s}
{1\over (2S_1+1)(2S_2+1)}
{1 \over p_{12}}
\int \int\ p_{34}\,
\delta(p_3^2-m_3^2)d(m_3^2)
\delta(p_4^2-m_4^2)d(m_4^2)
\end{equation}
where $|\Mx_{12\to34}|^2$ represents the spin-averaged matrix element.
If the particles have a finite width, we should replace above $\delta$
functions to the certain normalized mass distribution functions $A(m)$.
Using the $|\Mx_{12\to34}|=|\Mx_{34\to12}|$,
we obtain
\begin{equation}
{d\sigma_{34\to 12}\over d\Omega}=
{(2S_1+1)(2S_2+1)\over (2S_3+1)(2S_4+1)}
{p^2_{12} \over p_{34}}
{d\sigma_{12\to 34}\over d\Omega}
{1\over \int\int p_{34} A(m_3^2)A(m_4^2)d(m_3^2)d(m_4^2)}\ ,
\end{equation}
where we use the relativistic Breit-Wigner function
Eq.(\ref{eq:rlorentz}) for mass distribution function $A(m^2)$.
The extra factor compared to the usual detailed balance formula
increases the absorption cross section.
It has been proved that
this formula plays an essential role
in order to understand
the $\pi N \Delta$ dynamics~\cite{detbal1,detbal2,Wolf2}.
In the case of one-\mbox{$\Delta(1232)$}~ absorption cross section,
we can write down the following formula:
\begin{equation}
\sigma_{N\Delta\to NN'}={1\over2}
{1\over 1+\delta_{NN'}}
{p^2_N\over p_{\Delta}}
\sigma_{NN' \to N\Delta}
\left(
\int^{(\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}-m_N)^2}_{(m_N+m_{\pi})^2} p_{\mbox{$\Delta(1232)$}}A(m^2)dm^2
\right)^{-1} \label{delbal} \ .
\label{eq:detbaldelta}
\end{equation}
$p_N$ and $p_{\Delta}$ are
the final nucleon-nucleon c.m. momentum
and the initial c.m. momentum, respectively.
The factor $1/(1+\delta_{NN'})$ in Eq.(\ref{delbal})
arises from the identical nature of the final states,
and $1/2$ comes from spins.
There are some versions of the extended detailed balance formula,
which are slightly different from each other.
For example,
Danielewicz and Bertch~\cite{detbal1} use the formula
\begin{equation}
{d\sigma_{34\to 12}\over d\Omega}=
{(2S_1+1)(2S_2+1)\over (2S_3+1)(2S_4+1)}
{p^2_{12} \over p_{34}}
{m_3 \over m^R_3}
{m_4 \over m^R_4}
{d\sigma_{12\to 34}\over d\Omega}
{1\over \int\int p_{34} A(m^{'2}_3)A(m^{'2}_4)dm_3^{'2}dm_4^{'2}} ,
\end{equation}
here $m_i^R$ denotes the pole mass of the resonance $i$,
while Wolf, Cassing and Mosel~\cite{Wolf2} use
\begin{equation}
{d\sigma_{34\to 12}\over d\Omega}=
{(2S_1+1)(2S_2+1)\over (2S_3+1)(2S_4+1)}
{p^2_{12} \over p^2_{34}}
{d\sigma_{12\to 34}\over d\Omega}
{1\over \int\int A(m_3^2)A(m_4^2)dm_3^2dm_4^2} .
\end{equation}
We have checked that these formulae give similar results to ours.
Fig.~\ref{fig:detbal} shows the comparisons between the different
formulae of the cross sections
for the reaction $\Delta^{++}n\to pp$.
\FIGdetbal
\subsection{Meson-Baryon, Meson-Meson Collisions}
\label{subsec:MBMM}
We now turn to the explanation of meson-baryon ($MB$) and meson-meson
($MM$) collisions.
We also use
resonance/string excitation model for $MB$ and $MM$ collisions.
\FIGxpin
Total cross section for $\pi N$ ingoing channel is assumed to be decomposed to
\begin{equation}
\mbox{$\sigma_{tot}(s)$}^{\pi N}=\mbox{$\sigma_{BW}(s)$}+\mbox{$\sigma_{el}(s)$} +\mbox{$\sigma_{\mbox{s-S}}(s)$}+\mbox{$\sigma_{\mbox{t-S}}(s)$},
\end{equation}
where \mbox{$\sigma_{el}(s)$}, \mbox{$\sigma_{BW}(s)$}, \mbox{$\sigma_{\mbox{s-S}}(s)$}, and \mbox{$\sigma_{\mbox{t-S}}(s)$}~ denote
the $t$-channel elastic cross section,
the $s$-channel resonance formation cross section
with the Breit-Wigner form,
the $s$-channel and $t$-channel string formation cross sections, respectively.
We neglect the $t$-channel resonance formation cross section at a
energy range of
$\sqrt{s}\mbox{\raisebox{-0.6ex}{$\stackrel{<}{\sim}$}}\: 2$GeV.
The $t$-channel elastic cross section \mbox{$\sigma_{el}(s)$}~ was determined so that
the sum of the elastic component of
the $s$-channel Breit-Wigner cross section \mbox{$\sigma_{BW}(s)$}~
and $t$-channel elastic cross section \mbox{$\sigma_{el}(s)$}~
reproduces the experimental elastic data for $\pi N$ interaction.
Above the $\Delta(1232)$ region, $t$-channel elastic cross section
becomes non-zero in our parameterization
(Figs.~\ref{fig:xpip} and \ref{fig:xpin}).
String formation cross sections (\mbox{$\sigma_{\mbox{s-S}}(s)$}~ and \mbox{$\sigma_{\mbox{t-S}}(s)$}) are
determined to fill up the difference between
experimental total cross section and $\mbox{$\sigma_{BW}(s)$}+\mbox{$\sigma_{el}(s)$}$.
We calculate the resonance formation cross section \mbox{$\sigma_{BW}(s)$}\
using the Breit-Wigner formula~\cite{Brown,rqmd1}
(neglecting the interference between resonances),
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bw}
\sigma(MB \to R)= {\pi(\hbar c)^2 \over p_{cm}^2}
\sum_{R} |C(MB,R)|^2 {(2S_R+1) \over (2S_M+1)(2S_B+1)}
{\Gamma_R(MB)\Gamma_R(tot) \over
(\sqrt{s}-m_R)^2+\Gamma_R(tot)^2/4} \ .
\end{equation}
The momentum dependent decay width
Eq.~(\ref{eq:width}) are also used for the calculation of
decay width in Eq.~(\ref{eq:bw}).
$S_R$, $S_B$ and $S_M$ denote the spin of
the resonance, the decaying baryon and meson respectively.
The sum runs over resonances,
$R=N(1440)\sim N(1990)$ and $\Delta(1232)\sim\Delta(1950)$.
Actual values for these parameters are
taken from the Particle Data Group~\cite{PDG96}
and adjusted
within an experimental error bar
to get reasonable fit for $MB$ cross sections.
The results of the fit are shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:xpip},\ref{fig:xpin}.
It has been shown that
inclusion of resonances
play an important role to study strangeness
productions in AGS and SPS energies~\cite{rqmd1}
and $(K^-,K^+)$ reactions~\cite{NOHE97}.
In fact,
strangeness production cross sections
for resonance-$N$ ingoing channels
are found to be much larger
than that for $\pi N$ channel.
This would be effective to explain
the strangeness enhancement observed in heavy ion collisions
within a rescattering scenario.
\FIGxakn
Since the $\mbox{${\bar K}$} N$ interaction
has some exoergic channels
such as $\mbox{${\bar K}$} N\to \pi Y$,
we need to include additional terms:
\begin{equation}
\mbox{$\sigma_{tot}(s)$}^{\mbox{${\bar K}$} N}=\mbox{$\sigma_{BW}(s)$}+\mbox{$\sigma_{el}(s)$}+\mbox{$\sigma_{{\rm ch}}(s)$}+\mbox{$\sigma_{\pi Y}(s)$}+\mbox{$\sigma_{\mbox{s-S}}(s)$}+\mbox{$\sigma_{\mbox{t-S}}(s)$},
\label{eq:xakn}
\end{equation}
where \mbox{$\sigma_{{\rm ch}}(s)$}~ and \mbox{$\sigma_{\pi Y}(s)$}~ denote $t$-channel charge exchange reaction
and $t$-channel hyperon production cross sections
which are also fixed by the requirement that
the sum of $t$-channel contributions and
Breit-Wigner contributions reproduce experimental data.
Breit-Wigner formula enables us to calculate
experimentally unmeasured cross sections
such as $\rho N \to \Lambda K$.
For the calculation of \mbox{$\sigma_{BW}(s)$},
we include hyperon resonances,
$R=\Lambda(1405)\sim\Lambda(2110)$
and
$\Sigma(1385)\sim\Sigma(2030)$.
The total and elastic cross sections for $\mbox{${\bar K}$} N$ interactions
used in JAM are plotted in Figs.~\ref{fig:akn1} and \ref{fig:akn2}
in comparison with experimental data~\cite{PDG96}.
\FIGxkny
The symbol $\sigma_{\pi Y}(s)$ in Eq.(\ref{eq:xakn})
is the sum of $t$-channel pion hyperon production
cross sections $\mbox{${\bar K}$} N\to \pi Y$, $Y=\Lambda,\Sigma$.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:xkny},
we plot the cross sections of
hyperon productions and charge exchange cross sections
as well as Breit-Wigner contributions
fitted in our model.
The cross section for the inverse processes such as $\pi Y\to \mbox{${\bar K}$} N$ are
calculated using the detailed balance formula.
\FIGxkaon
$KN$ ingoing channel cannot form any $s$-channel resonance
due to their quark contents. Therefore
the total cross section can be written within our model as follows,
\begin{equation}
\mbox{$\sigma_{tot}(s)$}^{KN}=\mbox{$\sigma_{\mbox{t-R}}(s)$}+\mbox{$\sigma_{el}(s)$}+\mbox{$\sigma_{{\rm ch}}(s)$} +\mbox{$\sigma_{\mbox{t-S}}(s)$},
\end{equation}
where \mbox{$\sigma_{\mbox{t-R}}(s)$}~ is $t$-channel resonance formation cross section.
Total, elastic and charge exchange cross sections used in our model
are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:xkaon}.
In the present version of JAM,
only $K N\to K\Delta$, $K N\to K(892)N$ and $K N \to K(892)\Delta$
are explicitly fitted to experimental data~\cite{CernHera}
and fitted results are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:xkaonD}.
\FIGxkaonD
In meson-meson scattering, we also
apply the same picture
as that in meson-baryon collisions:
\begin{equation}
\mbox{$\sigma_{tot}(s)$}=\mbox{$\sigma_{BW}(s)$} + \mbox{$\sigma_{\mbox{t-R}}(s)$} + \mbox{$\sigma_{el}(s)$} + \mbox{$\sigma_{\mbox{s-S}}(s)$} + \mbox{$\sigma_{\mbox{t-S}}(s)$}.
\end{equation}
The difference between experimental inelastic cross section
and resonance cross sections at energies above resonance region
for the meson-baryon and meson-meson collisions
are attributed to the string formation cross section
where $1/\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}$ energy dependence of \mbox{$\sigma_{\mbox{s-S}}(s)$}~ is used~\cite{rqmd2}.
For the cross sections for which no experimental data are available,
we calculate the total and elastic cross sections by using the
additive quark model~\cite{goulianos,rqmd1,urqmd}.
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma_{tot} &=& \sigma_{NN}\left({n_{1}\over3}\right)\left({n_2\over3}\right)
\left(1-0.4{n_{s1}\over n_1}\right)
\left(1-0.4{n_{s2}\over n_2}\right) ~, \\
\sigma_{el} &=& \sigma_{tot}^{2/3}
(\sigma_{el}^{NN}/ \sigma_{NN}^{2/3}) ~,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\sigma_{NN}$, $\sigma_{el}^{NN}$ express nucleon-nucleon total
and elastic cross sections and $n_i$,$n_{si}$ are the
number of quarks and $s$-quarks contained in the hadron respectively.
This expression works well above resonance region where the cross section
becomes flat.
For the $t$-channel resonance production cross sections \mbox{$\sigma_{\mbox{t-R}}(s)$},
we do not fit experimental data explicitly in this work
except for $NN$ reaction and one and two pion productions in $KN$ reaction,
because of the vast body of the possibilities for the final states.
Instead, we simply determine the outgoing resonance types
according to the spins $S_3$, $S_4$ in the final state and phase space
for the production of resonances $R_3$ and $R_4$
\begin{equation}
P(R_3,R_4) \propto (2S_3+1)(2S_4+1)p_{34}(s)^2 ~.
\end{equation}
where $p_{34}(s)$ denotes the c.m. momentum in the final state.
If the ingoing channel involves resonances, their ground state
particles are also considered in the final state.
Once the outgoing resonance types are determined,
we generate masses according to the Breit-Wigner distribution.
For the angular dependence in the processes of
$t$-channel resonance production \mbox{$\sigma_{\mbox{t-R}}(s)$},
we use
\begin{equation}
{d\mbox{$\sigma_{\mbox{t-R}}(s)$} \over dt} \sim \exp(bt),
\end{equation}
and the slope parameter $b$ for the energy range of
$\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}>2.17{\rm GeV}$
is parameterized by
\begin{equation}
b=2.5 + 0.7\log(s/2),
\end{equation}
with invariant mass squared $s$ given in units of GeV$^2$.
We use the same parameterization presented in Ref.~\cite{niita}
for the energy below $\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}<2.17{\rm GeV}$ for the $t$-channel resonance
productions.
The elastic angular distribution is also taken from Ref.~\cite{niita}
for $\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}<10{\rm GeV}$
and from PYTHIA~\cite{pythia} for $\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}>10{\rm GeV}$.
\subsection{String formation and fragmentation} \label{sec:string}
At an energy range above $\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}>4-5$GeV,
the (isolated) resonance picture breaks down because
width of the resonance becomes wider and
the discrete levels get closer.
The hadronic interactions at
the energy range 4-5$<\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}<$10-100GeV where
it is characterized by the small transverse momentum transfer
is called "soft process", and
string phenomenological models
are known to describe the data for such soft interaction well.
The hadron-hadron collision
leads to a string like excitation longitudinally.
In actual description of the soft processes,
we follow the prescription adopted in the HIJING model~\cite{hijing},
as described below.
In the center of mass frame of two colliding hadrons,
we introduce light-cone momenta defined by
\begin{equation}
p^+ = E+p_z, \qquad p^- = E-p_z\ .
\end{equation}
Assuming that beam hadron 1 moves in the positive z-direction
and target hadron 2 moves negative z-direction,
the initial momenta of the both hadrons are
\begin{equation}
p_1 = (p_1^+,p_1^-,0_T), \qquad p_2 = (p_2^+,p_2^-,0_T)\ .
\end{equation}
After exchanging the momentum $(q^+,q^-,\bold p_T)$, the momenta will change to
\begin{equation}
p'_1 = ((1-x^+)P^+,x^-P^-,\bold p_T),
\qquad p'_2 = (x^+P^+,(1-x^-)P^-,-\bold p_T),
\end{equation}
where $P^+=p_1^++p_2^+=P^-=p_1^-+p_2^-=\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$}$ (in c.m. frame).
The string masses will be
\begin{equation}
M_1^2= x^-(1-x^+)s-p^2_T, \qquad M_2^2=x^+(1-x^-)s-p^2_T,
\end{equation}
respectively.
Minimum momentum fractions are
$x_{min}^+=p_2^+/P^+$ and $x_{min}^-=p_1^-/P^-$.
For light-cone momentum transfer for the non-diffractive events,
we use the same distribution as that in
DPM~\cite{dpm} and HIJING~\cite{hijing}:
\begin{equation}
P(x^{\pm})= {(1.0-x^{\pm})^{1.5}\over (x^{\pm2}+c^2/s)^{1/4}}\ ,
\end{equation}
for baryons and
\begin{equation}
P(x^{\pm})= {1\over (x^{\pm2}+c^2/s)^{1/4}((1-x^{\pm})^2+c^2/s)^{1/4}}\ ,
\end{equation}
for mesons, where $c=0.1 $GeV is a cutoff.
For single-diffractive events, in order to reproduce
experimentally observed mass distribution $dM^2/M^2$,
we use the distribution
\begin{equation}
P(x^{\pm})={1 \over (x^{\pm2}+c^2/s)^{1/2}}.
\end{equation}
The strings are assumed to hadronize via quark-antiquark
or diquark-antidiquark
creation using Lund fragmentation model PYTHIA6.1\cite{pythia}.
Hadron formation points from a string fragmentation
are assumed to be given by
the yo-yo formation point~\cite{bialas} which is defined by the
first meeting point of created quarks.
Yo-yo formation time is about 1fm/c assuming the string
tension $\kappa=1$ GeV/fm at AGS energies.
The same functional form as the HIJING model~\cite{hijing}
for the soft $\bold p_T$ transfer at low
$p_T<p_0$
is used
\begin{equation}
f(\bold p_T) = \left\{ (p_T^2+c_1^2)(p_T^2+p_0^2)
(1+e^{(p_T-p_0)/c_2}) \right\}^{-1} ~,
\end{equation}
where $c_1=0.1{\rm GeV/c}$, $p_0=1.4{\rm GeV/c}$ and $c_2=0.4{\rm GeV/c}$,
to reproduce the high momentum tail of the particles
at energies $E_{lab}=10\sim20$GeV.
\FIGppxa
In Fig.~\ref{fig:ppxa}, the calculated rapidity distributions of
protons, positive and negative pions for proton-proton collisions
at 12GeV/c and 24GeV/c are shown with the data from Ref.\cite{pp1224exp}.
The proton stopping behavior and the pion yields
are well described by the present model.
Within our model,
fast protons come from resonance decays
and
mid-rapidity protons from string fragmentation of
Lund model (PYTHIA6.1~\cite{pythia}) with the default parameter
which determines the probability
of diquark breaking at these energies.
Anisotropic angular distribution in a resonance decay is
taken into account assuming Gaussian $p_T$ distribution ~\cite{rqmd2}
with a mean value of 0.35GeV/c$^2$.
\FIGppxb
As reported in HIJING~\cite{hijing},
an extra low $p_{T}$ transfer to the constituent
quarks is important to account for
the high $p_{T}$ tails
of the pion and proton distributions at energies $\mbox{$p_{\rm lab}$} \sim 20$GeV/c$^2$.
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:ppxb},
the present model also reproduces
the proton and pion transverse momentum distributions reasonably well
at \mbox{$p_{\rm lab}$}=12GeV/c$^2$ and 24 GeV/c$^2$.
\FIGppx
In addition, the present model also describes well the energy dependence
of the particle production cross sections, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:ppx}.
Here we show the incident energy dependence of
the inclusive data
for $\pi^+$, $\pi^-$, $\pi^0$, $K^0$,$K^+$,$\Lambda$, $\Sigma^-$
and $\Sigma^0$ productions
from proton-proton interactions in comparison with the experimental
data~\cite{CernHera}.
The comparisons shown until now in Figs.%
2 -- 13
show that
the combination of particle production mechanisms by the resonance decay
and the string decay enables us to explore a wide incident energy region
from a few hundred MeV to a few ten GeV,
with reasonably well fitted inclusive as well as exclusive cross sections,
which are essential inputs in cascade models.
\section{RESULTS}\label{sec:results}
In the following,
we systematically apply our hadronic cascade model (JAM1.0~\cite{jam})
to proton, silicon and gold induced reactions at AGS energies
and investigate the effect of cascading by comparing
the results obtained by the cascade model with the Glauber
type calculations.
\subsection{COMPARISON TO E802 DATA}
In this section,
we first focus our attention on the proton transverse distributions
to check the detailed examination of the collision term
and its space-time picture (formation time) used in our model
and also to see the transition of the reaction dynamics from proton induced
collisions to heavy ion collisions.
\FIGproton
We show in Fig.~\ref{fig:proton}
proton invariant transverse mass distributions
calculated by our cascade model
for the proton induced reactions, p+Be, p+Al, p+Cu, p+Au,
and silicon induced reactions, central Si+Al, Si+Cu, Si+Au
at 14.6GeV/c in comparison to the data from the E802
collaboration~\cite{E802pA,E802b}.
In each figure, spectra are plotted in a rapidity interval of 0.2
and are displayed by multiplying each by a power of 10
from bottom to upper.
Si+Al, Si+Cu and Si+Au data correspond to the central collision
with 7 \% centrality.
For the calculations of Si+A (A=Al,Cu,Au) systems,
impact parameter are distributed $b<1.797{\rm fm}$ for Si+Al,
$b<2.2{\rm fm}$ for Si+Cu and $b<2.9{\rm fm}$ for Si+Au.
Our calculations show good agreement with the data in proton induced reactions.
In silicon induced reactions,
our calculations well account for the experimental data in general.
However, we can see some overestimate
at low transverse momenta, in particular for Si+Au system.
As a result, our cascade model gives larger proton stopping than the data.
\FIGprotong
Now we compare the cascade model results with the Glauber type calculation
in order to see the effect of pion rescattering, nucleon cascading,
and the consequent deviation from the linear extrapolation
of sum of binary nucleon-nucleon collisions to proton-nucleus and
nucleus-nucleus collisions.
The Glauber type models such as the FRITIOF model~\cite{fritiof}
have been widely used at higher energies, i.e. more than 200 AGeV.
We use the same method as the FRITIOF model with some modifications.
The wounded nucleons
become resonances or strings in each nucleon-nucleon collisions,
and strings can interact again before they fragment.
Resonances can be converted to nucleons,
and strings are allowed to be de-excited to the minimum string mass.
After all binary collisions are completed,
strings and resonances are forced to decay.
Rescattering of produced particles are not considered.
In a present treatment, we have used our parameterization
in calculating the probability to excite nucleons to resonances or strings.
Figure~\ref{fig:protong}
shows the results obtained by this Glauber type calculation.
In beam rapidity region,
for all systems,
good agreements can be seen
because the effect of rescattering would be small as expected.
For proton-induced reactions,
the Glauber type calculation gives steeper shape in comparison to the data
at mid-rapidity and target regions.
In heavy ion reactions,
this deviation is significant at around the mid-rapidity.
Rescattering, therefore, is necessary to account for
transverse momentum distributions
of protons for reactions involving heavy nuclei.
\FIGpip
\FIGpin
We now turn to the mass dependence of the pion transverse distributions.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:pip} and Fig.~\ref{fig:pin}, we show the calculated
$\pi^+$ and $\pi^-$ spectra by histograms together with
the E802 data~\cite{E802pA,E802b}.
Agreement between the cascade model and the data is very good
for all the combination of projectile and target,
and for both of the slope parameter and the absolute value
of the cross section.
On the other hand,
as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:pipg} and Fig.~\ref{fig:ping},
Glauber type calculations
well reproduce
the data for small mass systems p+Be, p+Al, p+Cu and Si+Al,
and give similar slopes to the experimental data,
while the multiplicity of pions in heavy systems
are larger than those of the data.
This is due to the effect of rescattering in which
pions are absorbed during the evolution for the large mass systems.
\FIGpipg
\FIGping
\FIGkp
\FIGkn
\FIGkpg
\FIGkng
Let us study the kaon and anti-kaon transverse mass spectra of E802.
The calculated transverse mass distributions of $K^+$ and $K^-$
in cascade model
are compared
with the E802 data~\cite{E802pA,E802b}
in Figs.~\ref{fig:kp} and ~\ref{fig:kn}.
Figures~\ref{fig:kpg} and ~\ref{fig:kng}
are the results with the Glauber type calculations
for $K^+$ and $K^-$ invariant transverse momentum distributions.
We find more significant differences
between the cascade and Glauber results of kaon productions
than those in proton and pion spectra.
This fact shows the importance of the rescattering:
As discussed in \ref{subsec:MBMM},
some of the exoergic $MB$ reactions, which involve resonances,
have very large strangeness production cross sections,
and they contribute to $K$ and $\bar{K}$ productions,
especially in heavy ion reactions~\cite{rqmd1,NOHE97}.
Enhancements due to these meson rescattering
are clearly seen in $K^+$ and $K^-$ spectra,
except for the reactions of p+Be and p+Al,
because there is no meson-baryon collision in Glauber type calculation.
\subsection{Au+Au COLLISIONS}
\FIGAuAumtp
We continue our comparison to E866 experimental data~\cite{E802AuAu} with
the truly heavy ion collision Au+Au at 11.6AGeV.
Our cascade model calculation
with impact parameter $b\leq 3.338$fm
is compared to E866 data~\cite{E802AuAu}
in Fig.~\ref{fig:AuAumtp} from c.m. rapidity of $y=0.05$ to $y=1.05$
with the rapidity bin of 0.1 scaled down by a factor of 10 from
the top to the bottom spectrum.
The cascade model results show good agreement with the data
at the transverse mass above $0.2$GeV/$c^2$.
The cascade model, however, overpredicts again
the proton spectrum in the low transverse momentum region.
\FIGAuAurapmt
In Figs.~\ref{fig:AuAurap} and \ref{fig:AuAumt},
we compare the cascade model results with the experimental data
by E802 collaboration~\cite{E802AuAu}
in central Au+Au collisions.
Pion multiplicities are in good agreement with
data as well as the slopes of both $\pi^+$ and $\pi^-$.
However, the present cascade model does not describe the suppression
of protons having low transverse momenta,
and consequently it gives stronger stopping of proton than the data.
This proton rapidity spectrum for central Au+Au collisions
shows a similar amount of stopping as those with other cascade models
like RQMD~\cite{rqmd1}, ARC~\cite{arc} and ART~\cite{art}.
In addition, Glauber type calculation gives the same results for
the proton rapidity distribution.
Therefore, this defect is not a consequence of the cascade model.
Since the deviation of the transverse mass spectrum of heavy hadrons
from a single exponential behavior is generally considered as a result
of the radial flow, it may be influenced by the nuclear mean field.
In fact,
it has been found in the works of RQMD~\cite{mattiello} and ART~\cite{art}
nuclear mean field significantly reduces maximum baryon
densities of the hadronic matter,
and consequently the midrapidity protons becomes small.
In this work, we have assumed that the elastic and inelastic cross sections
involving baryon resonances, except for the de-excitation processes to $NN$,
are the same as that in $NN$ channel at the same c.m. momentum.
However, since the de-excitation cross sections are enhanced due to
the generalized detailed balance as explained in Section~\ref{subsec:detbal},
if other cross sections is smaller than those of $NN$,
stopping power may be reduced.
\subsection{Mass dependence of the collision dynamics}
In this section, we study the mass dependence of the
collision dynamics within the hadronic cascade model.
First we present the cascade model results of $BB$, $MB$ and $MM$ collision
number as a function of system mass ($A+B$) in comparison to that
of Glauber type calculations.
\FIGncoll
Figure~\ref{fig:ncoll} displays the total collision number
of $BB$ (open squares) and $MB$ (open circles) and $MM$ (open crosses)
obtained from cascade calculation
together with Glauber type calculation (open diamonds)
for the p+A (left panel) and Si+A (right panel) collisions.
When system becomes bigger, $BB$ collisions are
much more frequent
in cascade model than in the Glauber predictions
even in the proton induced collisions.
This indicates that
there are successive nucleon cascading in the nuclear medium
in the cascade model picture.
It is interesting to see that
the number of $BB$ and $MB$ collisions are almost
the same in heavy ion collisions.
This seems to be the origin of
the pion number suppression, the increase in proton transverse momentum slope,
and the increase in kaon yield.
\FIGmesons
Indeed we can see the reduction of produced pion multiplicity in cascade model
compared to the Glauber type calculations as shown
in Fig.~\ref{fig:mesons} where the number of total produced mesons
are plotted as a function of system mass number.
Pions are absorbed mainly in the two-step processes in the cascade model.
For example, the most important pion absorption path
at AGS energies is
\begin{equation}
\pi N \to \Delta\ , \qquad N\Delta \to NN \ .
\end{equation}
Therefore, large number of $BB$ and $MB$ collisions are necessary
to describe appropriate pion absorptions.
\FIGcolls
In order to get more detailed information on the mass dependence of the
collision dynamics at AGS energies,
we display in Fig.~\ref{fig:colls}
the colliding energy spectrum of $BB$, $MB$ and $MM$
given by the cascade model together with those
from the Glauber typer calculations.
The $BB$ collision distributions as a function of invariant mass
are very different between the cascade model and the Glauber type model.
The Glauber type calculations predict the collisions
which are spread around the initial $NN$ c.m. energy,
while the $BB$ collisions occur at all available collision energies
in the cascade model.
In both p+A and A+B reactions,
the $MB$ collisions are pronounced
in the resonance region ($\mbox{$\sqrt{s}$} \leq 2$GeV).
It is interesting to note that
in p+Au system, the number of low energy $BB$ collision
is much larger than that of p+Be, p+Al and p+Cu systems.
In A+B systems (bottom of Fig.~\ref{fig:colls}),
collision number grows very quickly, however,
the shape of the collision spectrum is similar in all the systems.
\section{SUMMARY}\label{sec:summary}
We have systematically studied the system mass dependence of
the particle distributions at AGS energies with
a newly developed cascade model (JAM1.0).
The cascade model is shown to provide
a good description of the observed data
for various combination of projectile and target
without any change of model parameters.
The effect of rescattering of produced particles and
nucleon cascading are found to be important
to explain both the pion yield and the transverse slope,
which are demonstrated by comparing the cascade model results
with the Glauber type calculations.
Those effects increase the transverse momentum slopes of protons and pions,
and reduce the pion yield.
The importance of the rescattering among particles
is more visible in kaon spectra.
One of the problems in the hadronic cascade model JAM
is that it gives much larger stopping of the protons
in nucleus-nucleus collisions.
This large stopping is not the consequence of the rescattering
because Glauber type calculation also gives the same amount of baryon
stopping.
This problem of strong baryon stopping in cascade models
has been reported
that proton spectra can be fitted by the inclusion of nuclear mean field
in RQMD~\cite{mattiello} and ART~\cite{art}.
Another possible solution may be to suppress the cross sections
such as $\sigma(N^*_1 N^*_2 \to N^*_3 N^*_4)$,
which is assumed to be the same as that in $NN$ ingoing channel
at the same c.m. momentum in a present model.
These interactions among resonances become important at AGS energies
where we have sufficiently dense matter in heavy ion collisions,
and the baryon stopping is sensitive to the cross sections
in the resonance ingoing reactions.
In fact, we have checked that
if resonance-resonance (BB) cross sections are reduced from nucleon-nucleon
cross section, we get less proton stopping than the present results.
Detailed study in this line will be interesting.
\section*{ACKNOWLEDGMENTS}
One of the author (Y.N.) would like to thank BNL for the kind
hospitality where a part of the calculations are done
Y. N. also would like to thank Prof. H. St\"ocker and Dr. H. Sorge
for their encouragements and useful comments.
We acknowledge careful reading of the manuscript by Prof. R. Longacre.
|
\section{Introduction}
High surface brightness blue galaxies have been a curiosity in samples
of nearby galaxies for more than 40 years (e.g. \cite{Z57},
\cite{S63}). While these types of compact galaxies were often
excluded from traditional samples of galaxies that chose objects on
the basis of angular size (see \cite{A66}), they can be readily found
in surveys that select for blue colors or strong optical emission
lines. Follow-up studies to the Markarian survey, for example, have
shown that these high surface brightness galaxies consist of systems
with AGNs and/or with extraordinarily high star formation rates (SFRs),
i.e. the starburst galaxies (e.g., \cite{S1970}, \cite{H77}).
Recently interest in blue high SFR galaxies has been stimulated by their
spectroscopic and morphological similarities to classes of galaxies
which are commonly found at moderate to high redshifts (see
\cite{GHB89}, \cite{G1990}, \cite{CHS1995}, \cite{E1997}, \cite{Getal98}).
Hence, studying
nearby starbursts can further our understanding of rapidly evolving galaxies
observed at moderate to large lookback times.
High surface brightness starburst galaxies with blue optical colors
comprise about 5\% of the local
galaxy field population with optical luminosities of $L_B$ $\; \buildrel > \over \sim \;$
3$\times$10$^9 {\rm\,L_\odot}$ (e.g. \cite{H77}). The origins, structures, and
evolution of these luminous blue galaxies (LBGs), however, are not
well-understood. We therefore have undertaken a new study of nearby
LBGs with the objectives of obtaining better information on their
structures, characterizing spatial patterns of star formation,
and measuring internal kinematics. The dynamics of these systems are
particularly important for predicting their subsequent evolution.
Many of these galaxies are optically peculiar at the moment we see them,
due to enhanced SFRs, but their appearance at later times may be determined
by the present locations and kinematics of their stars and gas, which in
turn influence future star formation processes.
In this paper we report results from a study of emission line kinematics
and optical imaging with the WIYN\footnote{The WIYN Observatory
is a joint facility of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Indiana
University, Yale University, and the National Optical Astronomy
Observatories.} 3.5m telescope in the archetypal ``clumpy irregular'' galaxy
NGC~7673\footnote{The RC2 (\cite{DDC1976}) and Huchra (1977) classified
NGC 7673 as a disturbed spiral, while Casini \& Heidmann noted that large
star forming clumps in an envelope are characteristic of luminous UV bright
galaxies which they called 'clumpy irregulars', of which NGC 7673 is a
prime example.} (\cite{CH1976}, \cite{TH1986}, \cite{BCH1982}). This galaxy
has
a highly disturbed optical structure, which leads naturally to the question
of its dynamical state. Is this a disrupted system, or an example of unusual
star formation processes within a dynamically normal disk galaxy?
A second paper in this series focuses on star formation patterns and timescales
from high angular resolution imaging of NGC~7673 obtained with the Wide
Field Planetary Camera 2 on the {\it Hubble Space Telescope} (\cite{Getal99}).
\section{Properties of NGC~7673}
The unusual optical structure of NGC~7673 ($=$ IV~Zw~149, Mrk~325) was
initially described in terms of the presence of multiple bright knots (e.g.,
\cite{ML1971}, \cite{BK1975}). High quality ground-based images,
primarily obtained by J. Heidmann and his collaborators, indicated
this galaxy consists of giant star-forming clumps embedded in a
diffuse halo, and thus NGC~7673 was classified as a clumpy irregular
galaxy (\cite{CH1976}, \cite{Cetal1982}). The superb ground-based
images of Coupinot et al. (1982) also showed the spiral
pattern that was noted in the RC2 and by Huchra (1977),
which becomes clearer in images taken with WFPC2 (\cite{Getal99}). The
hyperactive star formation within the clumps deduced by
Heidmann and collaborators was confirmed by Gallego et al. (1996); their
data indicate that L(H$\alpha$) for the three largest is 2-8$\times$10$^8
{\rm\,L_\odot}$. These are each comparable to the total L(H$\alpha$) seen in many
starburst galaxy nuclei.
Emission line kinematics were measured in NGC~7673 by Duflot-Augarde
\& Alloin (1982; hereafter DA), who found a remarkably constant
velocity across the galaxy. The lack of
internal velocity spread led DA to conclude that NGC~7673 is rather
quiescent, and they therefore rejected a merger model, but noted that
an interaction with its neighboring galaxy, NGC~7677 (Mrk 326) at a
similar radial velocity (3554 ${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$ versus 3405 ${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$), is
possible, as suggested by Casini \& Heidmann (1976). Further
observations of the emission lines in NGC~7673 by
Taniguchi \& Tamura (1987) taken at higher spectral resolution showed
the presence of a broad line component beneath the narrow emission
line in clump B, the northwestern clump. They suggested that this broad
feature, for which
they measured a full width zero intensity (FWZI) of 420${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$, is due
to mass motions powered by supernova activity.
NGC 7673 appears to be a member of a small galaxy group that is relatively
isolated, possibly located on the outskirts
of the Pegasus I cluster and in front of the Pisces-Perseus chain.
The immediate environment of the NGC~7673-7 pair was mapped in the HI
21~cm line by Nordgren {\it et al.} (1997), who find an H~I mass of
3.6 $\pm$ 0.5 x 10$^{9}$ M$_{\odot}$ for NGC~7673. Both galaxies contain
extended HI disks; NGC~7673 is apparently nearly face-on with a modest
HI-asymmetry to the west. NGC~7677 contains a small outer HI
irregularity that points towards its neighbor, and is at nearly its
radial velocity. Thus while an interaction is not excluded, there is
no striking evidence for an on-going event in this system.
In this paper we assume H$_0 =$75${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$ Mpc$^{-1}$. The recession
velocity of 3405~${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$ for NGC~7673 then implies a distance of
46~Mpc, and a linear distance of 222 pc per arcsec. Other parameters
in the NASA/IPAC Extraglactic Database\footnote{The NASA/IPAC
Extragalactic Database (NED) is operated by the Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.} are B$^0_T =$12.81
implying M$_B=-$20 and blue global colors of (B$-$V)$_0=$0.34 and
(U$-$B)$_0=-$0.38.
Our observations and reductions are detailed in \S 2. In \S 3 we
present our results, which are discussed in \S 4, while \S 5 contains
a summary and conclusions.
\section{Observations \& Reductions}
All observations were made with the WIYN 3.5m, f/6.5 telescope at the
Kitt Peak National
Observatory. All data reduction was performed with IRAF\footnote{IRAF
is provided by the courtesy of the National Optical Observatories,
which are operated by the Association of Universities for Research in
Astronomy, Inc., under cooperative agreement with the US National
Science Foundation.}.
\subsection{Optical Imaging}
Images were obtained using a Tektronics 2048 x 2048 pixel CCD with a field of
6.7 x 6.7 arcmin and a scale of 0.195 arcsec per pixel. On November
13, 1996 a 500 s exposure was taken with a Harris R filter, and a 700 s
exposure with a Harris B filter. The images were corrected for bias
and zero level and flat-fielded with the `ccdproc' task; cosmic rays
were not removed. The seeing in these images is 0.''8.
Narrow band imaging was undertaken on July 24, 1997, a non-photometric
night with moderately poor seeing. We were able to get 2 exposures
taken with a redshifted H$\alpha$ filter, 1000 s and 631 s
(cloud-dodging), and a 300 s exposure taken with a Harris R filter. The
redshifted H$\alpha$ filter is centered at 6618 \AA$\;$ and has a
width of 72 \AA. Thus our H$\alpha$ narrow band images also include
emission from [N~II].
These H$\alpha$ and R images were processed in the same way as the
earlier data, except that we removed cosmic rays from the pair of
narrow band images. Both the combined H$\alpha$ and R image were
scaled in such a way that subtracting the R image from the combined
H$\alpha$ image canceled out field stars, producing a
continuum-subtracted H$\alpha$ image. The seeing in this final
H$\alpha$ image is about 1''.4.
\subsection{DensePak Optical Spectroscopy}
On October 23, 1997, two 1500s exposures were taken with the fiber array
DensePak (see \cite{BSH98}) on the WIYN Nasmyth port. DensePak is a
fixed array of 91 red-optimized fibers arranged in a 7 x 13
rectangle. Each fiber has a 3'' diameter, and the fiber centers are
each separated by 4'' to form a 30'' x 45'' array. The fiber cable
feeds the Bench Spectrograph, which for these observations was
configured with a 316 line mm$^{-1}$ echelle grating and a grating
angle of 62.581 degrees. We used the Bench Spectrograph camera and
the 2048 x 2048 T2kC CCD detector with 24$\mu$m per pixel, for a
wavelength coverage of approximately 6300 to 6730 \AA\ with a reciprocal
dispersion of 0.13 \AA\ per CCD pixel.
A DensePak schematic is shown in Figure 1. There are 4 fibers placed
off the corners of the array: numbers 8, 32, 68, and 90. We were able
to use these for the intended purpose of sky subtraction because these
fibers were not covering the H$\alpha$ emitting regions of the galaxy,
so we did not have to move the telescope for a separate sky
exposure. Also note the gaps in numbering; 23 and 28 have been
skipped. Fibers 46 and 59 are dead.
Bias frames and dome flats were taken at the beginning and end of the
night and combined during reduction with the IRAF task `dohydra'. For
wavelength calibration, comparison spectra were taken with a ThAr lamp
after each exposure. The 4 spectra from the sky fibers were combined
to make a single sky spectrum and subtracted from each of the other
fibers as part of the 'dohydra' procedure. Combining the 2 final
zeroed, flat-fielded, sky-subtracted spectra was accomplished with
`scombine' with reject=`crreject' to remove cosmic rays.
To estimate the error in our measurements, Gaussian profiles were fit
to the night sky lines in the combined sky spectrum with the IRAF task
`splot'. The observed wavelength of the H$\alpha$ line is close to
6638 \AA$\;$ over the entire galaxy, so comparison night sky lines
were chosen near this wavelength. The FWHM resolution determined in
this way is 32 ${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$. The statistical uncertainty in central
wavelength for a bright sky line refers to the scatter about the
absolute wavelength, and is $\leq$ 0.05 \AA, which corresponds to 2.3
${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$ at 6638 \AA. However, in some cases the complex profiles or low
signal-to-noise ratios of the H$\alpha$ emission lines makes the
determination of accurate radial velocities difficult, yielding a greater
uncertainty.
Gaussian emission profiles were assumed and fitting done with the IRAF
task 'splot'.
\section{Results}
\subsection{Imaging}
The deep R-band image is shown in Figure 2a.; an unsharp mask of the
same image is shown in Figure 2b. Surrounding the bright central disk
of NGC~7673 are several wispy, low-surface brightness features. In Figure
2b one can see a broad 'bridge' extending to the northwest connecting
the inner disk to the first arc at 36'' (8 kpc) from the galaxy
center. The next arc, or ripple, can be seen in Figure 2a, located to
the east at 52'' (11.5 kpc) from the center. The most striking ripple
is located to the west at 1'.55 (21 kpc) from the center of the bright
optical disk. This sharply defined arc was first reported by Dettmar
et al. (1984), who suggested this feature either could be stars or an
emission line region. In Figure 2b. there are several extensions to
the main disk, most noticeablely two on the eastern edge and one in
the southwest corner. The linear feature north of NGC 7673 is a background
galaxy, which is confirmed by its extreme redness in the B$-$R image and the
Gallagher et al. (1999) WFPC2 images.
The R-band image is shown again in Figure 2c., with a stretch that
shows the structure of the inner disk, including the central bar. That the
light gray smudge in the SE corner is a background galaxy is confirmed from
its B$-$R color and the WFPC2 images which reveal it to be a distant
(and beautiful) spiral galaxy. A B$-$R color map
is shown in Figure 2d. The B and R images have not been
photometrically calibrated, so the color map is a B/R ratio map after
standard reduction and sky subtraction. The spiral nature of the inner
disk is clearly visible; there are prominent red dust lanes and bright
blue clusters in this image. Unfortunately, we were not able to get
color information on the outer ripples; they are too faint for
reliable color measurements from these data. However, the ripples are
present in both B and R images with comparable intensities, indicating
that they are composed of stars.
A continuum subtracted H$\alpha$ image is shown in
Figure 3. There are 3 main H~II regions: the central 'nucleus', the large clump
to the NE, and a smaller clump situated between the two. These
correspond to clumps A, B, and C, respectively, as referred to by DA
and Taniguchi \& Tamura (1987). In the SE corner there is a fainter
H$\alpha$ ring, where it is possible to identify smaller H~II
regions. A bright cluster of stars seen in the B and R -band images is
located on the northern side of this crooked 'arm', nestled between
edges of ionized gas visible in the H$\alpha$ image. The gas directly
between us and the cluster does not appear in the H$\alpha$ image, but
the gas in the surrounding galaxy plane is brightly lit. The diffuse
outer features are not detected in our narrow band H$\alpha$ image,
consistent with our interpretation that they are starlight.
\subsection{Spectroscopy}
We performed a kinematic study of NGC~7673 using the DensePak fiber array
and the H$\alpha$ emission line redshifted to near 6638
\AA. To find fiber placement on the galaxy, the narrow band
H$\alpha$ image, Figure 3, is compared to the DensePak map with flux in
gray-scale, shown in Figure 4. The approximate placement of the DensePak array
is marked with a box in Figure 3. Figure 4 was produced with the
IRAF task 'sbands', taking the flux in a 10~\AA$\;$ wide band centered
on 6638~\AA$\;$ and using 6~\AA$\;$ wide bands to the blue and red for
continuum subtraction. The fiber diameter of 3'' covers a linear
distance of approximately 650 pc at NGC~7673, but we were not able to
cover all of the main body of the galaxy with our single DensePak
pointing.
\subsubsection{Emission Profiles}
No emission was detected in 29 of the 89 working fibers; the fiber
illumination pattern is consistent with our H$\alpha$ image. Of the
remaining 60 fibers, 32 had emission fit by a single Gaussian, and 28
were deconvolved into two Gaussian components, one broad and one
narrow. It became clear that deconvolution was necessary when a single
component fit left large, broad, asymmetric shoulders of emission;
most of these broad lines are found in the northern half of the
galaxy. Sample spectra are displayed in Figure 5.
Fibers on the southern part of the galaxy were fit by a single
Gaussian, but in most cases small shoulders, or wings, of emission
often remained. These wings are similar in shape to those in the middle of
the array, but much less pronounced. Even in
spectra with similar peak emission, the wings were smaller in the
southern part of the galaxy. A deconvolution of these spectra into two
components improved the fit, but with one or both of the components having a
FWHM at or below the
instrumental resolution. Therefore, these spectra were fit with a
single Gaussian. Figure 6 is a plot of FWHM, corrected for the instrumental
profile (FWHM$^{2}$=(FWHM$_{obs}$)$^{2}$-(32 km s$^{-1}$)$^{2}$), versus
position, which
shows the distinct widths of the two components, and some scatter, but
no systematic variation $>$ 10 km s$^{-1}$ in the FWHM of the narrow
emission component over the galaxy.
Some spectra show what appear to be multiple peaks, perhaps due to
emission from two or more individual H~II regions, or splitting from
expanding shells or bubbles. Since most of these spectra have low S/N, a
single-Gaussian fit was forced to recover a mean central velocity and
a FWHM of dubious meaning. Such profiles were observed in 12 fibers; 6 had
FWHMs consistent with the narrow component, and 6 had FWHM $>$
90 km s$^{-1}$.
\subsubsection{Velocity Field}
The velocity field as measured by the heliocentric velocities of the
narrow components is shown in Figure 7, where the velocity is in km s$^{-1}$
and grayscale shading is used to help visualize the velocity field. Filled
polygons indicate
spectra with no narrow emission component. Fibers with broad emission but not
narrow are thus represented by filled polygons; this includes fibers 55, 62,
72, 79, and 81. Fibers which were fit by both a narrow and a broad Gaussian
are marked with a small cross above the velocity.
We find the narrow component velocity field to be fairly
constant, with a radial velocity difference of only $\sim$ 60 ${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$
across the galaxy
regions covered by DensePak (the western side of the galaxy was not
sampled). The maximum velocity is 3444 km s$^{-1}$ in the SW corner,
and falls to 3403 ${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$ at the northern edge. The minimum, 3392
${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$, occurs near the nuclear region, and the recession velocity of
the nucleus itself is $\sim$ 3407 ${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$. These results agree with
previous measurements by DA. This also agrees with the H I data
(\cite{Netal1997} which shows the peak emission to be at a
heliocentric velocity of 3410 ${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$. The precision of the DensePak
absolute radial velocities is similar to that obtained from HI 21-cm
line measurements.
The shallow velocity gradient across NGC~7673 indicates that the H~II
regions are confined to a dynamically cold rotating disk that
is nearly face-on. The optical and H~I morphology of NGC~7673 also suggest
the presence of a disk, whose existence is confirmed by these emission
line measurements showing rotation about its barred nuclear region.
Although the disk shows signs of perturbation, such as copious star
formation and a disturbed spiral pattern, it has survived the event
which triggered the starburst and appears to be rotating smoothly.
The velocity gradient measured by optical emission lines (here, and by
DA), although modest due to a small angle of inclination, differs
from that of the H I disk (\cite{Netal1997}). The western edge of the
optical disk is approaching and the eastern receding, but the H~I
velocity gradient is in the opposite sense. This may be a signature
that moderate-scale kinematic disturbances remain in the disk of
NGC~7673, and high angular resolution H~I maps would provide a useful
diagnostic of the state of this galaxy.
\section{Discussion}
\subsection{Kinematics}
In regions of low flux, the emission line profiles are usually Gaussian
in shape; however, as previously mentioned,
12 fibers contain spectra with large asymmetries.
Over the central regions of the galaxy where the flux is highest, we find
H$\alpha$ emission
lines with a relatively narrow core and broad wings, very similar to the
integrated profiles of giant H~II regions found in many previous studies
(\cite{SW1970}, \cite{GH1983}, \cite{SB1984}, \cite{AR1986},
\cite{RAJ1986}, \cite{AR1988},
\cite{Retal1998}). Some of these emission lines are well fit by a Voigt
profile, but most have asymmetric shoulders, and thus are best fit with
two Gaussian components. We therefore assume that the emission line profiles
which resemble Voigt profile are a combination of two Gaussian components with
negligible velocity offset, and fit all such profiles with two Gaussians,
leaving the central wavelengths and line widths free to vary. Taking the
emission component(s) in each fiber, we find the mean FWHM of each
kinematic component is 56 and 149 ${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$,
respectively ($\sigma$ $\sim$ 24 km s$^{-1}$, $\sigma$ $\sim$ 63 km s$^{-1}$).
Fibers with emission lines which were fit with two profiles
are marked with a small cross in Figure 7. Most of the broad
components are at a slightly lower velocity relative to the narrow
line in the same spectrum, but never by more than 10 ${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$. Taniguchi
\& Tamura (1987) also found a narrow and a broad component in the
H$\alpha$ emission line from clump B; they
measured the broad
component as having a FWHM $>$ 200${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$, and found it was redshifted
by 13 ${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$ relative to the narrow component of FWHM $\sim$ 70 ${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$.
The mean FWHM of the narrow component is much broader than emission
from typical H~II regions in our own galaxy (typical FWHM $\sim$ 25${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$, see
\cite{M58}, \cite{FTD90}).
The origin of ionized gas with supersonic velocity dispersions is still a
subject of debate, and thus a generally accepted model for this
phenomenon does not yet exist. An L-$\sigma$ (luminosity-velocity dispersion)
and D-$\sigma$ (size-velocity dispersion) correlation
for giant H~II regions
has been firmly established (see \cite{M1977}, \cite{TM1981}, \cite{AR1988}),
but it is still not clear what this relationship means.
L and D should correlate with mass; therefore one expects the velocity
dispersion to also increase. However, the energy
input to the ISM in the form of ionizing photons, stellar winds, and
supernovae should also correlate with L and D, increasing the amount
of ionized structure (expanding shells, filaments, etc.) and
turbulent motions, both of which may broaden the integrated emission
profiles.
There is evidence that apertures which
include multiple ionized structures
at various velocities can create a smooth Gaussian
profile with a broadened core (\cite{CK1994}, \cite{Yetal1996}). In
a study of NGC 604, the brightest H II region in M33, Yang et
al. (1996) showed that although some of the broadening in the
integrated profile is due to averaging over many emitting regions, the
mean corrected FWHM still shows a substantial velocity dispersion
above that expected from purely thermal broadening. They concluded
that the extra 30 ${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$ could be explained as virial motions. This is
in contrast to the case of the 30 Doradus giant H II region as
examined by Chu \& Kennicutt (1994), where even a tenfold increase in
the estimated mass of the region yielded a gravitational velocity
dispersion that was negligible in comparison with the observed
dispersion. In this case the conclusion was that the dominant contribution
to the global velocity dispersion in 30 Dor is from shell motions, but with
turbulence also playing a role.
It is not clear what is causing the width of the narrow emission cores
in the case of
NGC~7673. If it is due to gravitational motions, we should expect to
see wider lines in connection with the more massive H II regions as
shown in the H$\alpha$ image. Broadening due to averaging over many
bubbles and filaments should also produce a spatial variation in the
line widths, as some fibers cover a greater number of H~II regions than
others. Due
to the low spatial resolution of our observations and the uncertainty
in fiber placement, we cannot rule out either of these
possibilities. The observed scatter of approximately 10 km s$^{-1}$in the
total FWHM about the
mean value implies an extra velocity component of width $\sim$ 35 km s$^{-1}$
(FWHM, or $\sigma \sim$ 15 km s$^{-1}$) is possible.
We also see a broad emission component underlying the (relatively)
narrow cores, which have been previously observed in H$\alpha$
emission lines, but are not well-understood.
Broadened cores produced by averaging over many emitting areas have been
found accompanied by
low-intensity wings (\cite{CK1994}), presumably from expanding shells
and bubbles. The recent study of NGC 604 (\cite{Yetal1996}) also
showed broad wings in the integrated profiles, again, from the
inclusion of many expanding shells. It would be interesting to see if
these integrated profiles can be deconvolved into narrow and broad
components, and how the width and/or shape of the lines change as one
averages over a larger area.
There are three leading explanations for the broad wings: they may be the
result of integrating over many ionized structures at different velocities,
or a broad emission component may be present from hot, turbulent gas confined
to large cavities carved out by massive stars, or they could be due to some
type of break-out phenomenon, such as a
champagne flow or a starburst-powered galactic wind.
Massive outflow phenomenon is highly unlikely because of the
absence of double-peaked emission profiles and/or a substantial velocity
offset between the narrow and broad components, both of which are
characteristic
of superwinds (\cite{HAM1990}, \cite{LH96}). This leaves us with the first
two explanations as listed above. Given the results of the studies by
Chu \& Kenicutt (1994) and Yang et al. (1996), we favor the first
explanation, where the line profiles are the result of integrating over
many shells, bubbles, and filaments, which can also explain the highly
supersonic line widths of the narrow component.
\subsection{Starburst Trigger}
NGC~7673 is a close projected companion to NGC~7677, which has a
similar radial velocity; therefore these two galaxies are probably a
physical pair (\cite{CH1976}, \cite{Netal1997}). The surrounding
area is free of
small H~I sources. A few minor appendages to the main disk of NGC~7673
are seen in the low-resolution H I map of Nordgren et at. (1997), but
there is an absence of
classic interaction signatures, such as H~I tails. Given the disturbed
optical appearance of NGC~7673, its overall H~I morphology is surprisingly
symmetric. No H~I peculiarities near the location of the outer optical shell
were detected, although this may be due to the low resolution of the H~I map.
As mentioned previously, there is a warp in the disk of NGC~7677 and an H~I
extension pointing towards NGC~7673, but the outer H~I envelopes are
widely separated. The H~I structure in these galaxies displays no
indications of a significant on-going interaction between the two; any serious
interaction would need to have taken place long enough ago for the outer
H I disks to recover to their observed relatively normal states.
The discrepancy between the morphology of NGC~7673 and NGC~7677 is
apparent on the Digital Sky Survey\footnote{The Digitized Sky Survey
was produced at the Space Telescope Science Institute under
U.S. Government grant NAG W-2166. The images of these surveys are
based on photographic data obtained using the Oschin Schmidt Telescope
on Palomar Mountain and the UK Schmidt Telescope. The plates were
processed into the present compressed digital form with the permission
of these institutions.} frames; NGC~7677 looks relatively regular,
with a
bright nuclear region and grand design spiral arms, in dramatic contrast to
NGC~7673, whose high levels of star formation create giant H II
regions and a remarkably clumpy appearance. If the
starburst in NGC~7673 is due to an interaction with NGC~7677, then the
interaction scenario must be able to explain why NGC~7673 is so
disturbed, and NGC~7677 relatively unscathed. We conclude that an on-going
interaction with NGC~7677 is not the starburst trigger. Even though no strong
collision is currently in progress between NGC~7673 and NGC~7677, the
disturbed outer optical disk of NGC~7673 does seem to be the signature of a
past interaction.
The sharp outermost
arc, along with the wispy extensions and faint ripples that surround
the bright inner optical disk, are features usually associated with
merger candidate E, S0, and a few Sa galaxies (\cite{SS1988}). These
structures are
rare in later-type galaxies, but have also been found around another
spiral starburst galaxy, NGC~3310 (\cite{MvD1996}). There are striking
similarities between NGC~7673 and NGC~3310. They are both starburst
galaxies with inner spiral structure surrounded by faint arcs and
ripples, and their H$\alpha$ emission lines are strong and asymmetric
(\cite{GS1991}). The general consensus is that NGC~3310 has gone
through a minor merger with a dwarf companion, which accounts for
the starburst, peculiar arc, and ripple features in its outer parts
(\cite{GS1991}, \cite{MvD1996}, \cite{Setal1996},
\cite{MvDB1995}, \cite{Ketal1993}). The minor merger model therefore
is also attractive for NGC~7673.
Theoretical work concerning ripples and 'shells' around galaxies has
shown that they can be formed in a variety of circumstances around
both elliptical and disk galaxies (\cite{Q1984}, \cite{WS1988}, \cite{HQ1989},
\cite{HS1992}, \cite{H93}). Observationally, it is often difficult to
distinguish
between the models, and thus the origin of ripples in any particular object
is often a subject of
debate. Thus while mergers are the preferred model for the production of
ripples and related features, their origin in other types of interactions
cannot be excluded.
We therefore have two possible models: the NGC~7673
starburst could have been triggered by a past interaction with NGC~7677 that
occurred long enough ago that any tidal streamers are gone, or a small galaxy
could have merged with NGC~7673 in the past and the nearby presence of
NGC~7677 is simply fortuitous. In either case the collisional event must have
occurred long enough ago to allow the outer disk to mostly recover, and have
been mild enough to avoid serious disruption of the main disk. Any interloper
must therefore have been much smaller than the accreting galaxy,
probably $<$ 10 $\%$ of the mass of the disk (\cite{HM1995}),
making NGC~7673 a minor merger candidate.
\section{Summary and conclusions}
We have obtained moderate resolution optical images and echelle spectroscopy
of the luminous blue galaxy NGC~7673. Our B-R color map shows red dust lanes
and blue star
clusters in an irregular spiral pattern, and the H$\alpha$ image confirms
that these bright clusters
are also giant H II regions. The deep B and R -band images confirm the
presence of the previously reported ripple 1'.55 west of the galaxy
center (\cite{Detal1984}), as well as revealing several other faint
extensions and ripples surrounding the bright optical disk. These features
are composed of stars, probably in the outer disk of NGC~7673.
Our fiber array measurements of the H$\alpha$ kinematics demonstrate that
the H~II regions are embedded in
a smoothly rotating disk that we are viewing near a rotational
pole. Despite the presence of a large-scale starburst, the disk
velocity field appears to be remarkably regular. In areas of low flux,
the emission profiles are often highly asymmetric, and are not well
described by a single Gaussian profile. We may be seeing line
splitting from isolated ionized super-shells, or the lines may be a
combination of
two or more H~II regions with different radial velocities. Double
Gaussian fits were performed on emission lines from the central
regions of the galaxy to investigate the nature of the broad wings of
emission. We find that a two component model, one narrow and one
broad, fit the observed spectra rather well. The narrow component of complex
emission line profiles have
the same width as the single component lines, FWHM $\sim$ 55 ${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$,
and the broad component has a FWHM $\sim$ 150 ${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$. The broad lines
often have a slight velocity offset ($<$ 10${\rm\,km\,s^{-1}}$), blue-ward of the
narrow lines.
We can exclude an active interaction with NGC 7677 as the starburst trigger,
but we cannot rule out a past interaction. If NGC 7677 is the culprit, then
the starburst phase must be sustained well after the main encounter. The other
possibility is capture of a dwarf companion, as in the case of NGC 3310, the
leading candidate for a major starburst induced by a minor merger. The
morphological similarities between NGC~7673 and NGC~3310 and NGC~7673's
symmetric outer H I disk (\cite{Netal1997}) lend support to the minor
merger hypothesis. High resolution H~I observations may resolve this issue.
\acknowledgements It is a pleasure to thank the many people who make
the WIYN 3.5-m an outstanding research telescope, and especially Sam
Barden and Dave Sawyer for bringing DensePak online. We would like to thank
Chris Dolan and Chris Anderson for their help with DensePak data reduction.
We would also like to thank an anonymous referee for comments which improved
the paper and for pointing out the possibly rather isolated location of
NGC~7673. This project is a component of WFPC2
Investigation Definition Team studies of luminous blue galaxies, and
is supported in part by NASA contract NAS 7-1260 to the Jet Propulsion
Laboratory.
\newpage
|
Subsets and Splits